The Instigator
Edwardclark
Pro (for)
The Contender
ISSASCHOLAR
Con (against)

Is compulsory sterilization acceptable in situations where offspring will suffer substantially?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
ISSASCHOLAR has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/17/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 200 times Debate No: 106789
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Edwardclark

Pro

Most people would agree that reducing the amount of suffering in the world would be the right thing to do, provided we were in a position to do so.

Therefore it is acceptable to sterilize people, even if it goes against their will, if it is extremely likely that their children will suffer exponentially in impoverished, war-torn, and just generally oppressive environments which prevent intellectual growth and an adequate quality of life. The potential offspring's suffering, will almost undoubtedly always be greater, quantifiably, than that of the parent being denied the ability to procreate. Therefore compulsory sterilization is not only acceptable, but the right thing to do.

For argument's sake, let's arbitrarily say this applies to just the 10,000 most underprivileged people in the world--the people who will likely die of starvation in their 30s.
ISSASCHOLAR

Con

UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO STERILIZE PERSONS AGAINST THEIR WILL??? That's a huge breach in Human Rights and veryyyy unacceptable......... Forced/ Compulsory sterilization is wrong and should not be condoned
Debate Round No. 1
Edwardclark

Pro

It's not always necessary. Some people will do so voluntarily. However, for the ones who lack the capacity to not consider the inevitable suffering of their future children, it's perfectly acceptable to intervene if we know that children are going to be harmed once they're brought into the world. How is it fair to not stop that, if he have the ability to do so? Granted it should always be done as humanely and fair as possible.

Is it ok to take children away from abusive parents? How is it any different? We recognize that people cannot be owned, and therefore it becomes a collective effort to look out for the voiceless.

It's in the best interest of the future non-existent person to not have to endure a life of unimaginable suffering. Wouldn't we be heroes for preventing it? Would it have been acceptable to procreate in a Nazi concentration camp?

People who starve to death exist. You're in a privileged position, relative to these people. Thousands of people die every day from starvation. How can we allow that to continue? It's cruel to let that keep happening when there is something we can do to prevent it.

So it is acceptable to allow this process to continue, knowing that the result is exponential suffering for thousands? Is it your right to allow that to happen? Shouldn't you intervene when you can to prevent suffering? Or is the arbitrary and socially constructed idea that procreation is a human right more important than the suffering of thousands?
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Edwardclark 1 month ago
Edwardclark
are you saying that starvation to the point of dying is relative? it's unquestionably suffering, and it's absurd to say otherwise. eugenics is not bad if it is intended to reduce harm.

if you knew a child would be born with Tay Sachs or Huntington's Disease, for example, would you say the humane thing to do would be abort the unconscious fetus, rather than have that person come into being and consciousness only to to feel pain and suffer for the duration of their short lives, IF YOU COULD PREVENT IT? Would you want to be born into that life? Wouldn't you resent the fact that something could have been done to prevent you from experiencing a short hellish life full of pain and suffering?
Posted by Arganger 1 month ago
Arganger
suffering is a very opinionated view of something. Only the individual can decide if they are suffering. Can people stop with trying to bring back eugenics? As someone who would likely be effected it is quite terrifying!
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.