Sterlization for welfare?

**DOGMAN** · 05-19-2009, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by trax

Can anyone here tell me where the next Einstein, King,Jr, Schweitzer or Ghandi is going to be born? Of course not. Can't tell me when and where the next Hitler or Idi Amin is going to be born either.

This is pretty interesting conversation...

In dog breeding, and in animal sports/breeding in general, Champions create champions. Thats not debatable.

A very wise mushing mentor of mine ( a brilliant guy with a 4th grade education- who has owned over 2,000 sled dogs in his life) once explained it to me like this...(paraphrased)

"If your trying to create a solid Iditarod team, you have to start with the best genetics you can get- get 50-60 puppies and then train/condition them to the highest level they can handle. Of the huge number you started with, only about 15-20 of them will be able to mentally and physically handle the mileage and be able to make an Iditarod team, only 2 or 3 of them will ever be "great" athletes, that other good mushers will want to breed to.

So, keep this in mind when you are wanting to breed...out of 60 top bred puppies only a couple of them will be truly exceptional athletes.

If you think you can get a solid team, from just collecting a bunch of mutts or culls- you are fooling yourself. The sheer number of dogs you'll have to go through will be overwhelming. Sure, you could take-in every husky from shelters in Anchorage and Fairbanks, and the rest of the world, and eventually find a solid dog or two, but, even then you really don't know how that dog will perform when things get really, really tough, because you don't know how their hardwired.

So, when you want to get serious about putting together a race team, spare no expense at getting the best foundation dogs you can get. Because 1 out of 30 pups will probably be exceptional- but you'll still get a fair number of team dogs. It'll save you a lot of work, and time- going this way. Sure, you could eventually get a great dog from a shelter- BUT, THINK OF HOW MANY KIDS ARE PRODUCED IN GHETTOS, BEFORE YOU GET AN OPRAH WINFREY. If you want greatness, you've got to start with greatness.

**Ken** · 05-19-2009, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by nell67

........ and no one could come back on him for reimbursement of any kind.

Why? I've done it. The last time was for a mom who's youngest was around 35 years old. Poor dad - had to refinance the house. The original weekly support order wasn't that much, but it adds up with 15 years of no payments and interest accruing. In many states, you have up to 20 years to collect on a judgment. In Massachusetts, child support continues up to age 23 if the "child" is still in school or otherwise "unemancipated." That's when the 20 years begins.........

**trax** · 05-19-2009, 12:51 PM

Two notes of interest. Most votes in so far say, yes but only in a few circumstances. Who decides what circumstances? Who gets to make that call that you're changing someone else's life forever, without their consent. Taking control of that person's life because of whatever circumstances they happen to be living in. I don't want that responsibility personally. I like sleeping at night.

J_M's post about the Iditarod teams. How many people here have dogs? How many of your dogs are race team quality? I know WonderMutt sure isn't, they don't make traces that small for starters. But I really love that dog. Should your dog never have been born because it isn't star athlete quality? But humans...yes?

**DOGMAN** · 05-19-2009, 01:13 PM

Trax,
I was just responding to the question,
"Can anyone here tell me where the next Einstein, King,Jr, Schweitzer or Ghandi is going to be born?"

I am not going down the road of "Who should be born" or what worth a person or animal has. Because, really that is a relative question.

But, I will say, that there is a connection between breeding and success- both in dogs and humans. I know a lot of people, will attribute that to the nature versus nurture debate, and cycles of disfunction, etc... But, there is alot of evidence that there are predisposed genetic dispostions. So, what I am getting at is, we may not know where the next "great leader" is coming from....but, we have a pretty good idea of where they won't be coming from. Statisically speaking champion sled dogs arent born in shelters, and Presidents aren't born in ghettos.

That doesn't mean that people or dogs from less fortunate circumstances don't have value.

**jrock24** · 05-19-2009, 01:45 PM

Then should there be disability, SSI or any type of government assistance?

**trax** · 05-19-2009, 01:54 PM

J_M: And I, for one, think that the preponderance of evidence certainly supports your point. I don't disagree that genetics plays a huge part in any beings development. I was told for the first 2/3rds of my life that I was "exactly like my Dad" I barely knew the man, so it wasn't from following him around and copying his ways that I became like that. I can see my sons in me and my grandsons in their fathers. My point is, that if we follow that line of thinking, it leads us to a slippery slope.

Who makes the decisions if we start mandating sterilization, or abortion, or begin selective breeding? Perhaps that god-like figure will decide that neither a trax or a jason_montana are appropriate "siring" material, then what do we become?

**Top it off - let it idle** · 05-19-2009, 01:55 PM

Social institutions should reward responsible behavior. I'm one of those broken home poster children and had a mother that never accepted any sort of support. She had her first child at 16 (put up for adoption)... had me at 17 and my brother at 24. She has always been fiercely independent and self-reliant and has passed the good and the bad of that to me. Was her behavior responsible... from a reproductive standpoint not really. Did she have the attitude that society needed to bail her out? Absolutely not. Unfortunately there is a trend among recent generations that they are entitled to just about everything. I teach and see it in the classroom and I see it in younger coworkers. Constructive criticism is offensive to them and there is a sense that just by the very nature of their existence they deserve the good life and can do no wrong. Now I know that this doesn't cross all socioeconomic boundaries but it's common in middle class Gen-X and Gen-Y.

It is not unreasonable to require that people who receive support modify their behavior and take significant step to improve their situation so that they are able to become self sufficient. If that means being required to utilize some form of birth control that is effective, not prone to forgetfulness and is long term, then that may be a reasonable requirement if irresponsible reproduction is a significant part of the problem. Having two children that I want to provide security and stability to, I know the challenges. At the same time, some form of education should be required to give that person the skills needed to make positive changes in their situation. It is a fact that in educated, industrialized societies birth rates drop. It is also a fact that educated, working women have fewer children. Whether you are for or against birth control, there can be no dispute that education plays a significant role in reproduction.

Do I support forced sterilization? No. That's is indeed a slippery slope.

**DOGMAN** · 05-19-2009, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by trax

J_M: And I, for one, think that the preponderance of evidence certainly supports your point. I don't disagree that genetics plays a huge part in any beings development. I was told for the first 2/3rds of my life that I was "exactly like my Dad" I barely knew the man, so it wasn't from following him around and copying his ways that I became like that. I can see my sons in me and my grandsons in their fathers. My point is, that if we follow that line of thinking, it leads us to a slippery slope.

Who makes the decisions if we start mandating sterilization, or abortion, or begin selective breeding? Perhaps that god-like figure will decide that neither a trax or a jason_montana are appropriate "siring" material, then what do we become?

Unfortuantly, for my son. I realized to late in life that I'm not good "siring" material.

**Scoobywan** · 05-19-2009, 02:15 PM

I think maybe we should just sterilize everyone until the human population drops a bit. Then we wouldn't have to worry about welfare/assistance, because there would be enough jobs/food/etc. I mean, when the population of deer gets to be to much for the ecosystem, they have hunting season to keep the population in check....

In reality though, I have to say no, there have been a lot of great people that have come from poverty. I don't agree with the if you're born poor and on welfare you're destined to be the same way. I think a lot of good people come from it, just because the get it in their head that they don't want to live like that ever again. On the same note, I think there should be some guidelines when it comes to being on welfare/support and still poppin out little ones every year. Not necessarily sterilization, but maybe a flat rate of assistance or something similar so that having more kids won't improve your financial situation.

When it comes to government support, and government involvement, there are a lot of slippery slopes... we're still sliding down several of them from the past.

**trax** · 05-19-2009, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by Jason_Montana

Unfortuantly, for my son. I realized to late in life that I'm not good "siring" material.

I don't believe that, bro. Although, that may be the case with me too, but folks have just been too darned nice to tell me.

**DOGMAN** · 05-19-2009, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by remy

Obviously...i voted no.

What is Oprah without the ghetto ?
What is a "great athlete" without "not so great athletes" ?
What is responsible, without the irresponsible ?
What is strong, without the weak ?
What is smart, without the stupid ?
What is night, without day.
What is brave, without cowardice ?
What is right, without wrong ?
What is good, without bad ?
What is sweet, without sour ?
What is victory, without defeat ?
What is peace, without war ?
What is overcoming, without challenges ?
What is beautiful, without ugliness ?
What is silence, without noise ?
What is you, without me ?

Remy, I am liking what you are saying...Am I getting this right?.. what your saying, is that words create distinction. And distinction from the other, is how we define things? So, good only has meaning- when there is a bad? So, our use of words and language to define what something is- works by seperating one thing from the next? Contrast?

**Ole WV Coot** · 05-19-2009, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by bulrush

Coot, sounds like you don't mind paying taxes for welfare abusers. Will you pay my portion of taxes that goes to welfare programs? I'm not trying to start a pissing contest, I'm just asking.

I agree there is too much gov't intervention. Gov't trying to support chronic welfare and ER abusers, nacrotic abusers, and baby daddies. Now that gov't has created the problems, only the gov't is big enough to solve the problems. Hence my concept.

We all know some people who shouldn't be allowed to reproduce, that I agree with as with drug testing, mandatory for me when working and for others that worked with me which would involve my safety. I agree that there are jobs, even picking up trash for your check. I can't hire a decent worker because they do better not working. I grumble just like you and paid enough taxes to claim a dozen recipients as dependents. Where we part ways is giving the government more power over us. These problems should be investigated on the state or county level and I doubt if anyone would object to that. No harm, no foul maybe I didn't make myself clear.

**Badawg** · 05-19-2009, 02:55 PM

I think sterilizing politicians would be more appropriate...

**mountain mama** · 05-19-2009, 03:24 PM

I would personally contribute to a hysterectomy for octomom
There has to be a limit and if some people are too foolish to figure that out for themselves, then maybe the government should step in. And SHAME on the doctors who helped that worthless heap get pregnant a second time! I think they should be the ones paying all the medical bills and social security to raise those kids.

**bulrush** · 05-19-2009, 03:42 PM

Please keep in mind that I clarified who this pertains to in the very first post. Sterlization would pertain to only CHRONIC WELFARE ABUSERS, whose sole purpose in life is to suck the lifeblood out of society and find things to complain about.

If Octomom doesn't go on welfare, then she would not be sterilized, and the kids would suffer for it too.

**mountain mama** · 05-19-2009, 04:08 PM

And as I already pointed out, she may not be receiving the form of public support you refer to as "welfare" but she is sucking the life blood out of social security by spitting out disabled kids (one is autistic, so I'll give her that one, but ADHD? PULEEZE)

I used to teach special education once upon a time. There was one family that everyone knew. The mother would intentionally drink during pregnancy so that she would be ensured a disabled child. A disabled child brings in much more income than a healthy child. This woman had 7 disabled children who will forever be a burden on society simply because she wanted more social security. Why should you or I have to pay for that?

**Rick** · 05-19-2009, 05:49 PM

Are you all kidding? I know tons of folks NOT on welfare I want sterilized. I'll even do it! For free!!! I'll use the two bricks method. You just slap those bricks together and Presto! problem solved. It only hurts if you get your thumbs between the bricks. So you have to watch out for that.

You can't legislate morality. If you want to stay on welfare, fine. If you want to go out and have 30 kids, that's okay, too. Only I don't want to pay for your lazy, sorry a88. Welfare should work just like unemployment. You get it for a set amount of time then you get to go to work like the rest of us or starve.

I think Jason has the right idea, too. I'm volunteering to be the stud on deck. If Jason is just too tuckered out and needs someone to stand in for him. I'm your man. I don't want to be primary, though. Too much pressure for an old guy like me.

Don't want that Canadian hospitalization plan either. We already have that in just about every big city emergency room.

**crashdive123** · 05-19-2009, 06:18 PM

Hey Rick - Jason said he was tuckered out.

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

**Rick** · 05-19-2009, 07:36 PM

Now that's what I'm talkin' 'bout! If all the sex will make me look like that. Okay then!!!!!! I could use the improvements!

Anyone know what I can get a hat like that?