Should Poor People Have Their Tubes Tied?
Do you thing people below the poverty line should have a limit on the amount of children they have? Will it solve the welfare issue?
Tie em' Up
Side Score: 6
|
 |
Go Forth and Multiply
Side Score: 5
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
|
1
point
No... this is a horrible idea in my opinion. What if someone is down on their luck for a little bit and make it out of poverty after a short bit, would it be fair if was incapable of having children? There will always be poverty, there will always be people less fortunate than others, however this as a solution would only tack on another reason why being poor sucks... essentially worsening the problem as much as solving it. Side: Go Forth and Multiply
1
point
1
point
Dude, they can untie tubes . Without any risk to consequence? Another thing is, that only WOMEN in poverty would not be able to reproduce, a rich man can pregnate a poor woman, and then not take responsibility... ok that might be a little farfetched. My main issue with this still stands I think though, and it is regulating someone's freedom based on their class. Side: Go Forth and Multiply
1
point
While I hate to vote on the 'Go Forth and Multiply' side, I can't really get behind mandatory tubal ligations, regardless of the reasoning for it. That's an extremely invasive procedure, and reversing it is difficult and not always successful. Something like that should be opt-in only. A better option would be to develop something akin to a birth control pill or shot for men, and make pills/shots for both genders free to all (hell, stick it in with ObamaCare!). This would be a large step towards preventing unwanted pregnancies in general, and would shoot the 'trap him/her with a kid' plan in the foot. Let them both take a pill. That way, if one of them "forgets" to take it, the other isn't completely unprotected. Side: Go Forth and Multiply
|
