3 ms·
From the article, among the points is that this is a slippery slope that led to uninformed sterilization of black and native people: > It is rarely acknowledge
by sethammons 5y ago
From the article, among the points is that this is a slippery slope that led to uninformed sterilization of black and native people:
> It is rarely acknowledged that this decision also made possible the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 1927 case of Buck v. Bell, in which the court determined: “The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.” This ruling legitimized eugenics laws and led to 70,000 forced sterilizations in the United States
Many people still don't trust forced medical proceedings.
- generj 5y agoThat’s a fair point, and I hadn’t heard of that Supreme Court ruling. Without being too flippant, I believe the pro-Eugenics society the court came from would have found a way to twist any precedent or lack thereof to justify eugenics. Some of the same members of that court went on to sanction imprisonment and property theft from thousands of people without even the pretense of crime other than their race. I also want to point out the current rules (and what most ppl are advocating for) aren’t forced medical proceedings. Truly involuntarily medical proceedings have almost exclusively been abused. Everyone is free to not receive a vaccine, they just have some negative consequences for doing so. It turns out the inconvenience of not being able to go to a restaurant was hugely compelling in France, for instance. I’m sensitive to the fact that threats to livelihood don’t feel very voluntary. In the US, the threat to livelihood isn’t from the government. There is no national vaccine mandate - just an annoying testing mandate the vaccinated get to skip out on.