The Instigator
Jitters
Con (against)
Losing
17 Points
The Contender
rangersfootballclub
Pro (for)
Winning
20 Points

Mandatory Sterilization of Profoundly Mentally Handicapped Persons

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2009 Category: Health
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 11,158 times Debate No: 7140
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (6)

 

Jitters

Con

The sterilization of profoundly mentally handicapped people is ethically wrong. The government should have no say in the subject. Mentally handicapped people are capable of taking care of children at some points in their lives. It is a humans right to reproduce.
rangersfootballclub

Pro

I accept you feel strongly about this , but to an extent the human race has gone to far with having to be "nice" to everybody , its not a human right to reproduce , in nature the strongest survive , its triadic when somebody is born mentally handicapped but if they have children , imagine it , its a crime against nature ( now I say this in not a bad way ) imagine being the child , you might be born mantially retarded , or if you are not your mum or dad is.

It would bring a tear to my eye if I saw a mentally handicapped person , with two mentally handicapped parents . They are most likely unable to look after this child , who's life would be already over from being born mentally handicapped. Please come to your senses , disabled people deserve to be treated the same as us , but this is stupid . Sure its not the person fault for being mentally handicapped , but why make a child suffer so much ? from either being born mentally handicapped or having maybe both parents born handicapped.

* I would like to point out I have no problem with people who are mentally retarded , infact I have done some volunteer work looking after them , I have seen it all with my eyes how they suffer , but also how they are just human as well *
Debate Round No. 1
Jitters

Con

The argument that has been made suggests that two perfectly healthy parents can not produce a mentally handicapped child. Simple genetics proves that many mental disabilities are recessive. Therefore, a heterozygous mother and heterozygous father may produce a homogeneous recessive child. The recessive gene of the mother and father may contain the mental disablility which was simply over shadowed by the dominant gene. There is the first fallacy in your statement.

The second is that, from such a perspective, mental retardation prevents a person from continuing their lives as humans as they assumedly have no thought or feelings of their own. Essentially, the argument suggests that sterilization of mentally handicapped persons is justified as they are unfit to handle a child. Further in this argument, it is suggested that two mentally handicapped parents should have no justification for having a child as they are passing on a hereditary problem. If going this route, one may argue that to prevent the spread of such a hereditary malfunction, you must wipe out the problem by essentially wiping out a population. Therefore, AIDs, Huntingtons, Multiple Sclerosis, Cancers, etc. would all have to be "wiped out" as they are unfit to handle a child for they are passing on the disease and disablility, so the argument suggests. Hitler did the same thing.
rangersfootballclub

Pro

don't compare me to Hitler , that's a low blow you just delivered , your argument is just nonsense. Yes I am saying mentally handicapped people are unable to look after children because if they were fit to look after them why do they need carers for themselves ?? 24hr normally ... You are just jumping on the P.C bandwagon , disabled people have the same rights as us , they are human , but there is no human right for having children . You cannot justify allowing two mentally disabled people to have a child , as there is a very high chance it will be passed to the child and even if it isn't imagine being the child .

If you have aids , its already against the law for you to have unprotected sex . If you have cancer chances are you have not thought about having children , or have already had them , plus it has been proved cancer is not passed in the genes while , being mentally handicapped has , not always but quite often has .

Now come back to me with a real argument , not so much as for the rights of these people having a child , but for the child as well. Also don't bother comparing peoples arguments to Hitler's ideas , its an insult to the millions dead because of him.
Debate Round No. 2
Jitters

Con

In the event of a rape, the offender would usually not require the female/male victim to wear "protection". As unbelievable as it may sound to some people, there are exceptions. In this case, an exception reguarding AIDs may lead to a worldwide problem. That is why no one should have sex with a monkey. Certain forms of cancer, especially breast cancer, (which, guess what?, is the most common) have proven to be passed on hereditarily, usually in the form of a higher risk. True, environmental influences cause many other cancers.

Going back to the actual topic, no one is fit to have a child until they have one. If mentally handicapped people can't take care of children, surely high schoolers can't. Unfortunately high schoolers won't ever be sterilized as it would be "ridiculous" or "appaling" to people pulling the card of morality. Don't suggest that mentally handicapped people don't deserve as much recognition because they have no potential to ever make something of themselves. This is insulting to millions LIVING.
rangersfootballclub

Pro

oh get lost , you make rediculous statements , " people that rape aren't required to use protection , believe it or not " ......

high schoolers have children yet they are not sterilized , you idiot , if this high school pupil is I guess below 18 then its illegal ! But you cant sterilize them , or you wont have a next generation...

When will you realise I am not insulting somebody who is mentally retarded , but merely pointing out the facts ,
These people deserve a great life , we owe it to them I guess . One thign they should not be allowed to do I'm afraid to say is have children as for some reason you STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED ME why a child should be born into this kind of life , huh ? answer me . Why should a child suffer being born to two mentally retarded parents dn he himself might be also mentally handicapped ? Get off your political correct bandwagon and open your eyes , what are you going to say next , all blind people have the right to drive just like everybody else ?
Debate Round No. 3
Jitters

Con

I have not answered you, Sir, because no one said that the mentally handicapped person has an undesirable life! I will not pull Ad Hominem against you as that is unproffesional and a fallacy, but, it is infrequent to hear of a mentally retarded person on CNN crying about their life being stressful! This is suggesting to never give mentally handicapped people the oppurtunity to live their lives as everyone else. Perhaps having a child should be banned for everyone. As you may recall, I reminded you that two perfectly healthy parents can produce a mentally handicapped child. Who are you to assume that that child will be born perfect and not disabled? Who are you to propose that it is unthinkable for a mentally handicapped person to have a child when you yourself could just as well? An IQ below 80 is considered mentally retarded. As mentioned in an earlier argument, mentally handicapped people always need help with their lives, as you said, 24 hours a day. What guardian in their right mind would allow their paitient to have sex? A parent, as I'm sure you know, has the option of sterilizing their child if the child is found to have developemental disabilities. Maybe precedents to this argument have been brought up so that people in the District of Columbia can wear suits, however; some big-shot congressman will feel awful when they produce a mentally disabled child with their beautiful and perfectly healthy wife/husband only to find out that, by law, they are required to end their families legacy because of an inpersonal decision they made in Washington for a little extra publicity.
rangersfootballclub

Pro

Look your completley off the point you failed to answer my questions and changed the subjects .
I cannot argue with you if you are not going to answer me questions and go completely off poin we are not aruging about other conditions or perfectly healthly people having children born retarded , we are aruging about mentally handicapped people.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by rangersfootballclub 8 years ago
rangersfootballclub
darn 2 votes away from away from victory lol !
Posted by NItEMArE129 8 years ago
NItEMArE129
For Con:
a strong argument could've been made towards slavery, but you did do this to a certain extent. Pro's arguments are based on the assumption that all people with mental retardation are inferior to "normal" people. You could've also brought up savants as a strong case.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Jitters 7 years ago
Jitters
JittersrangersfootballclubTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Brian1228 8 years ago
Brian1228
JittersrangersfootballclubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
JittersrangersfootballclubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:43 
Vote Placed by trendem 8 years ago
trendem
JittersrangersfootballclubTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by Angrypants66 8 years ago
Angrypants66
JittersrangersfootballclubTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Vote Placed by sorc 8 years ago
sorc
JittersrangersfootballclubTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07