171
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
171 points (99.4% liked)
chapotraphouse
13782 readers
658 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
If he's just going to let them all die from preventable causes, then he shouldn't be allowed to have any more children. That's just straight up negligence.
Thats child abuse. Negligence is too soft a word.
no need to lower yourself to advocating for eugenics when a comprehensive health policy toward vaccines would be more effective.
I get where you are drawing from but I don't think this crosses over into eugenics. I interpreted this as being about cruelty/abuse not "too stupid to have kids" stuff.
The issue here I think is that any policy that seeks to prevent people like this from having kids will require things like forced sterilization, and something like that will inevitably result in innocent people that the government labels undesirable also being sterilized, which is where eugenics comes into it. It's much the same argument as being anti-carceral. Even in a communist utopia where the government in charge was 100% trustworthy I'd still be leery of forced sterilizations.
Still shouldnt be allowed to have kids.
As in, parent them.
Follow up question: if CPS takes away someone's kids, what happens if they have more?
Fair enough. Similar to the prevailing liberal thinking that kids are a luxury lifestyle that shouldn't be available to the poor.