If you’re looking for a contentious issue, consider this one: Should those convicted of a specific set of crimes receive shorter sentences if they agree to sterilization? This is not a case of court-ordered sterilization. This involves offering shortened sentences if the convict agrees to the sterilization procedure.
Perhaps the first issue to be addressed is the purpose of this policy. What is the state attempting to accomplish? Next would be the designation of the crimes to which this would apply. Finally, one would want to know to what degree it would accomplish its purpose. In other words, would it do any good?
Our Constitution is interpreted to circumscribe what punishments can be ordered by courts for crimes. People are not taken out and beaten. They are either incarcerated in what might be very spartan, but still humane prisons, or in rare cases and some states, executed.
So what are the circumstances surrounding the debate on this issue? More on page two.
If they are going to be getting out, it would be a good idea. Less responsibility for them. No surgery for reversal.
Sterilization does not stop them from raping again. In fact it might even facilitate it them knowing they could not impregnate anyone while committing the crime again. Sterilization does not stop the desire. When imprisoned they are given a drug to stop the desire for sex. So i dont see this as a solution
Frank Quintero
perfect for the globalist depopulation agenda
Can we do this to liberals too? They already have plans in the works for us.
p
q