RE: Cash for vasectomy....
October 22, 2010 at 3:56 pm
(This post was last modified: October 22, 2010 at 3:58 pm by Autumnlicious.)
(October 22, 2010 at 3:24 am)Existentialist Wrote:(October 21, 2010 at 8:30 pm)theVOID Wrote: That simply does not follow, the fact that I am paid for work does not mean that I did not go to work voluntarily.The difference is the particular vulnerability of the person with a drug problem, which introduces a particular debate about ethics that goes beyond that of normal wage labour.
I have a vulnerability to money. Specifically the lack there of.
Habitual drug users are continually relapsing - that's part of the definition of being a habitual drug user. Would you sacrifice an innocent child to satisfy your ideology? A lot of them who are borne by these broken (yes, broken as in aberrant, uncontrolled, a danger to self and others) people and taken care of most poorly, beyond the normal bounds of society's views of child care.
Preventing that would save both the druggie and potential children harm. The druggies who really intend to have children will have them anyways and not get vasectomies. The ones who aren't fried enough and realize that their faults, answering their question of would they make a good parent and noting their continual relapses and dependencies honestly - will knowingly make the appropriate decision for voluntary vasectomies.
Yes, people will make stupid decisions. But stupidity and chance of failure was never a reason not to try to make things better.
Or we could shout out eugenics and do nothing.
Just because the current system is flawed in some manner doesn't invalidate the entire system entirely. Fix it. If it is irreparable and the results are out of acceptable bounds, trash it and try again.