Posted on 02/09/2005 12:33:39 PM PST by Kennesaw
GovernmentShrinker-(irony)-a mode of speech conveying the opposite of what is meant.
ooooh....I shouldn't be laughing:-)
Then again maybe we should give them an opportunity to be convicted of the their folly and repent. Some of the worst demorats turn out to be conservatives when the veil is removed.
How about abstinence?
Welcome to Free Republic. You know, if we just made it legal to kill children in the first year, that would have made a difference too! No crime, no foul. What matter if you cut it up 2 months before birth or two months after? Either way it'll hurt while it's happening, and when it's done, you have a messy little corpse. But no messy little trial! And that's what counts, really. Right?
someone who shakes her baby to death probably doesn't have the self control for abstinance.
They tend to do in their own before they ever take the first breath.
I agree. I should have focused more on my opposition to suggesting abortion to this situation.
The reality is that if people like this aren't prevented from having more children, the already huge government welfare and "child protection" bureaucracy grows ever more huge. It's not like they're going to become self-supporting, much less support their children. And of course, they won't bother to actually raise the children they have and don't quite manage to kill through violence and neglect, so when those children grow up, the government will have to provide yet more prison space.
Really, forcing them to get sterilized involves much smaller government than the alternatives.
I am mixed on this. Is there a reversable procedure?
If reversible how is this different than putting rapists on drugs to prevent penetration? Or putting people on house arrest with monitoring? Is that unconstitutional too?
You need to educate yourself a bit more on the history of the Nazi regime if you don't see the direct conmnection.
It is not some kind of inviolate right to get knocked up.
The right to have children is as inviolate as the right to eat, sleep or use the lavatory.
Sterilization is a form of torture.
Again, if she has intentionally murdered someone, execute her. Don't multilate her and keep her around for your amusement.
I wonder if the woman wanted an abortion?
Well, other than abstinence, there's the old cover the penis practice or spermicide method. But those take control.
How many other children does she have?
I disagree with this ruling. It is sexist.
I haven't heard of men who kill their children being sterilized.
Welcome to Free Republic. This is Jugdish, Sydney, Clayton, Mohammad....
What about men who father kids receiving welfare?
See my post #38
Umm, not really, the baby would still be dead after an abortion. Besides, who said that she didn't want to baby, lots of cruel idiots abuse the children they claim to want. This sounds like a case of shaking baby, which means that the idiot mom probably lost her temper and shook the baby.
"I haven't heard of men who kill their children being sterilized. "
Well, that's a good idea. Sterilize the men who beat their children too.
And sterilze the men on welfare who father children who are on welfare.
What about men who father kids receiving welfare?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.