Capitol Hill Blue Forums Life and Moral Issues Morality & Society Permanent birth control

Harv3 wrote:

My first question: What is an "illegal child?"

Perhaps an illegal child is a child born out of wedlock...It is interesteing that Harv3 seems to think sterilization is perfectly humane. I might be tempted to point out that many authoritarian regimes in history have promoted sterilization as policy...such as a small, northern european nation once ruled by something called the "National Socialist German Worker's Party", but that might be too much...

No, that can't be what he means, because a child born out of wedlock is not at fault and, anyway, couldn't possibly be considered responsible for his parents' failure to wed.

Well, I don't have any idea what was meant by "illegal child." A very unusual turn of phrase.

No need to go that far afield, Allen. It was all the rage in early 20th century America. It was considered quite progressive by the progressives of the day. Why, even a supreme court justice, O.W. Holmes, Jr. got into the act.

SOURCE:

But to be fair to Harv3, he did not say anything about mandatory sterilization -- he suggested that in voluntary exchange for going on the dole and having her child and herself financially supported by her neighbors (only one of whom may be the father) a female could elect to undergo sterilization so as to not add anymore to the dole.
Yours,
Issodhos

So would you advocate the same for males?

It's less than truthful to place the whole blame for the Eugenics movement in general, and the Virginia sterilization laws enacted in the early 20th century specifically at the doorstep of progressives alone. It did have some of its roots in genetic scientific theory of its time, but not Darwinism. It was instead the work of Mendel. It was also embraced by racists and xenophobes. I'm surprised that you did not cite the actual case, nor the famous O.W. Holmes quote from it, which is taught in first year University Con Law classes.

The case was Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200, 1927 and the famous quote:

The case has fallen into ill repute, yet has never been overturned, nor has it ever been explicitly repudiated by the Virginia State Legislature. In his decision, Holmes accepted the lower court's findings of fact without question:

The actual facts were indeed much different that the court findings though, and the article you linked to clearly mentioned these failings:

Carrie Buck's defense attorney colluded with the State of Virginia, and did not challenge the errant findings of fact. The Virginia Institution that Buck was interred in had become largely a place for Virginia's poor folk. The projected fear was that the poor folk were breeding like rabbits, and something had to be done in order to prevent it. Reality was of course much different, and sterilization looks like it was performed on institutionalized women before contracting them out as indentured servants to Virginia's well-heeled wealthy families:

It seems that the real problem was not that these poor women were genetically feeble-minded and promiscuous, but were instead being thrust into a servile situation in which they were liable to be raped by the genteel.

Progressive? Hardly.

I guessing that slut Hester Prynne would know all about the stigma of un-wed sex and know all about what an "illegal child" is.

(Didn't she "do it" with a preacher man?)

...and that impish, testy, little bastard daughter Pearl was something else. Tsk, tsk...

No, Hester would understand illegitimate, but that's not the same, as you clearly already know.

Actually, folks, since this thread was begun as an offshoot of another thread, and since there doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in pursuing (seriously) the idea of permanent birth control, I am considering closing this thread, unless someone has a real interest in keeping it open.