State of California Spays Human Herd

State of California Spays Human Herd July 9, 2013

Fortunately, it was just subhuman female prisoners who were forcibly sterilized so no big deal.  The State will never, of course, start telling citizens who does and does not get to breed or forcibly arrest and sterilize Catholics and other undesirables.  And if it does, hey!  It’s just Catholics.  They have it coming.  The less money for those snot-faced kids, the more available to pay for other people’s contraceptives.  It’s not Orwellian, it’s green!

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • James H, London

    ” It’s not Orwellian, it’s green!”

    As in, Soylent.

  • Greg

    The state doesn’t have to sterilize most people. Well over 90% do it to themselves willingly (at least temporarily, but often permanently). That’s the great thing about libertarianism and the mass media, the elite can convince the mass of men to happily do to themselves what despots had to do to them by force.

    • Newp Ort

      are you talking about contraception?

      a general question: if you’re already fornicating or adultering does it matter if your contracepting?

      • D.T. McCameron

        Yes, actually! The possibility of conception, and therefore life, allows for some good to arise from what would otherwise be a dead act of selfishness. Which is what places adultery/fornication slightly above masturbation and sodomy.

  • Irksome1

    To be fair, the article says the sterilizations were performed without the state’s knowledge. That said, I think this actually is an endightment of the state’s gross negligence as to the welfare of those in its custody. I think further it’s an endightment of the rest of us since we’ve consented, through indifference and a vague sense of vengeance, to make prisons as close to a living horror as man can contrive.

    • MarylandBill

      Umm, the sterilizations were done by state employees and the state paid for the sterilizations; the state claiming it didn’t know about them does not absolve it from responsibility for its actions.

  • katedaneluk

    Also, in fairness, some of the women were bullied into consent, but not “forcibly” sterilized as stated. They did give consent. I’m against sterilization and these practices, but lets be careful not to sensationalize and twist the facts for our argument’s sake.

    • MarylandBill

      Yeah, the women only live in prison where failure to comply can get you placed in isolation. Frankly by any reasonable standard, they were not in a position to actually give consent.

    • Newp Ort

      Is this satire? Or just trolling? Cause if not, WOW.

      • katedaneluk

        Newp, if you read the article, you should have a more substantive reply than that.

        • Newp Ort

          Yes I did. you said they were bullied into consent. are you sure you meant consent? one can be bullied into compliance but not consent.

          maybe you just meant matters of degree? yes, being illegally coerced into sterilization is not as bad as being forcibly sedated and sterilized, but either way its monstrous abuse. your comment had a no big deal sort of tone.

          or was that your intent? do you believe like the good doctor in the story they’re looking for a payout?

          • katedaneluk

            I would argue that you are reading “no big deal” into my comment. If you reread my comment with a less confrontational approach, I believe that it is clear that I am not defending the actions of the doctors, or any of the staff involved, but am complaining about the questionable journalism. To post a link to an article with the words “Forcibly sterilized” in a world where sterilization, mutilation and even abortion are forcibly enacted by governments, and then to read the article I read was misleading and a tabloid tactic. The situation is horrible enough without this sensationalism. Equating it with forced sterilization undermines the very argument, as if it isn’t enough. This tactic may get more click throughs, but it invalidates our stance in the eyes of those who disagree.

            Incidentally, I’ve never been the one misunderstood before, but, I’ve seen this kind of misunderstanding in com boxes before. Generally, its a good idea not to rely on a “tone” of a comment to determine what it is really saying because it is a quickly written comment with no actual tone of voice or expression to help you interpret. I recommend trying to read with the benefit of the doubt toward the best possible interpretation of the author or at least rethink in that way before you reply. And it is more constructive to ask a specific question, not just throw out an insult.

            I realize this may easily be read with a tone of condescension, but that isn’t my intention. I do mean this in a spirit of Christian brothership, and I think it is a good thing to bring up when misunderstandings like this arise for all of our benefit. It is very easy for any of us to get riled up when on the internet which dehumanizes us to one another, and fail to treat each other with the same Charity we would to another in person. And I am not specifically directing this to Newp, but to all of us, including myself, since the moment presented itself.

            • Newp Ort

              Sorry I jumped the gun on you. And yes you are correct, it appears from the article it wasnt done forcibly.

              Still, “bullied into consent,” is that possible? Giving you the benefit of the doubt perhaps you meant it was coercion as opposed to outright physical force.

              Critiquing sensational journalism…you must be new around here! Mark is no journalist, which isn’t meant as an insult – he doesn’t claim to be. (Could accuse irresponsible blogging, but that’d be a bit redundant.) Yeah he can be sensational, but if you can look past that he’s a good read.

              Christian kinship and charity are great, sure, but remember it’s the internet. We don’t need things getting boring.

            • Clare Krishan

              I’m with Newp – the incarcerated lose the capacity to exercise free acts of the will their having being radically curtailed by penitentiary authorities, as it should be if they have been handed a proportionate sentence for their crimes — but as soon as I heard California, where incarceration is one of that bankrupt state’s largest and most lucrative industries, all bets are off re: “moderation” on sensationalism. For-profit warehousing of felons may fear the bottom line’s at risk if sexual favors result in new life one of the few signs of hope left to such destitute souls. Coercion or bullying equals “forced” most especially in the slammer. Even St Joan of Arc recanted so as to preserve her feminine dignitity when stripped of her militia garb (the only clothes made available to her, but material evidence of the then-crime of impersonating a male). Between a rock and a hard place she freely chose the martyr’s pyre, her soul released from unrelenting persecution through a heroic gift of faith. Not all ladies are thus blessed, pray for them and the physicians who “care” for them.