The American Spectator : Mass Sterilization

Text Size

Mass Sterilization

By Daniel J. Flynn on 1.31.12 @ 6:09AM

A Massachusetts judge revives a favorite old practice of the state's elites.

Can a judge, without even holding a hearing, order a woman sterilized in a state where compulsory sterilization has never been the law?

As North Carolina prepares to pay reparations to victims of its decades-long eugenics campaign, Massachusetts strangely enters a sterilization debate that most had thought long over. Norfolk County Probate and Family Court Judge Christina L. Harms earlier this month ordered that a bipolar and schizophrenic woman be "coaxed, bribed, or even enticed…by ruse" to abort her pregnancy and undergo sterilization. If the mentally ill woman were sane, the judge determined, she "would not choose to be delusional" and therefore, she would choose abortion.

Does "our bodies, our choice" still apply when we are not in our right minds?

The Michael Dukakis-appointed jurist abruptly retired following the controversial decision and a state appeals court overturned part of her ruling. "We reverse that portion of the order requiring sterilization," wrote Judge Andrew R. Grainger. "No party requested this measure, none of the attendant procedural requirements has been met, and the judge appears to have simply produced the requirement out of thin air." The reversal crucially noted, "In ordering sterilization sua sponte and without notice, the probate judge failed to provide the basic due process that is constitutionally required." The abortion order was also subsequently overturned by a separate court.

Another, more influential Massachusetts jurist sided with Judge Harms and not Judge Grainger. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. pointed to written briefs examined by hospital directors as evidence that "the rights of the patient are most carefully considered," and that, combined with subsequent appeals to actual courts, ensured that the sterilized "had due process of law."

Though the representatives of the people of Massachusetts never fell for eugenics, the state's elites and institutions played a leading role in popularizing, legitimizing, and codifying it.

In the futuristic Boston of 1887's Looking Backward, Edward Bellamy celebrates that "the principle of sexual selection, with its tendency to preserve and transmit the better types of the race, and let the inferior types drop out, has unhindered operation." A century ago Harvard University offered eugenics courses and educated the movement's most fervent servant, Charles Davenport of the Eugenics Records Office. Even Great Barrington's favorite son, W.E.B. Du Bois, five years after Hitler had ascended to power, echoed the racialist language of the social hygiene crusade. Harvard's first African-American Ph.D. observed that "the mass of ignorant Negroes still breed carelessly and disastrously," and that "among human races and groups, as among vegetables, quality and not mere quantity really counts."

But the most pernicious influence regarding eugenics in America was the Bay State's Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. "One decision that I wrote gave me pleasure," he reflected, "establishing the constitutionality of a law permitting the sterilization of imbeciles." The Boston Brahmin spoke of 1927's Buck v. Bell, the 8-1 decision that stamped the high court's imprimatur upon state-directed sterilization.

"We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives," Holmes infamously ruled. "It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

Starting with Indiana in 1907, and concluding in Oregon in 1981, forced sterilization claimed upwards of 60,000 American victims during the 20th century. From California to Connecticut, eugenics won over most state legislatures. The period between the world wars experienced the highest hopes that science could perfect humanity. Then the experience of Nazi Germany shattered such illusions.

What happens when the imbeciles are the sterilizers rather than the sterilized? Justice Holmes never considered that.

The citizens of Massachusetts can be proud to have never elected a government so naïve in its faith in government that it made law of the eugenics fad. But the state's elites, from novelist Edward Bellamy to jurist Christina Harms, haven't always exhibited such healthy skepticism of empowering the powerful.

The people of Massachusetts can't say they we weren't forewarned. The judge's name is Christina Harms, after all.

About the Author

Daniel J. Flynn is the author of Blue Collar Intellectuals: When the Enlightened and the Everyman Elevated America, forthcoming this fall from ISI Books. He blogs at www.flynnfiles.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (67) | Leave a comment

oldfart| 1.31.12 @ 6:17AM

Perhaps Judge Harms should be be sterilized so that her stupid genes are not passed on. She would have made an excellent judge at the Salem witch trials, or perhaps operating the control valves for the gas chambers at a Nazi concentration camp. I don't see any difference.

Jack in Wi.| 1.31.12 @ 7:06AM

Marge Sangor and Adolf Hitler would love this judge and his reasoning. The elites of this country love abortion and sterilization. That is perhaps why they are dying out themselves.

Robert Pinkerton| 1.31.12 @ 6:25AM

"Perfectibility of Manking" is the highest stupidity to which the educated mind can attain.

WRTolkas| 1.31.12 @ 9:50AM

"Mankind?"

Robert Pinkerton| 1.31.12 @ 10:35AM

Thank you for your correct understanding.
My apologies for the typo. Too early in the morning.

Paul| 1.31.12 @ 11:36AM

Actually "manking" is an appropriate "slip of the tongue." Is this not man's idea that he is king rather than submissive to God?

Skippy| 1.31.12 @ 3:30PM

"Manking?"
I thought it was the neighborhood in Peking where all the single men(in the millions thanks to the ChiCom's one baby rule, which included forced abortions and sterilizations)resided.
My new book is "The Manking of the President 2012".

Darin| 1.31.12 @ 7:08AM

Margaret Sanger would be proud. She too favored forced sterilization for "undesirables." Why not take the next logical step and escort them to the gas chamber? When life is devalued so much (as all supporters of abortion do), there can be little argument against this.

Appleby| 1.31.12 @ 7:14AM

A local "family" has recently made the news as the poster children for sterilization (although people say so behind their hands with furtive glances around first): they have had six children removed from their care after abandoning their 8 month old daughter in a freezing stairwell (which fortunately had security cameras in it). They then went back to the mother's home country of Jamaica, where they produced another child. The neighbours noticed that they hadn't seen the child lately; the police would do nothing; and the neighbours broke into the house while the family was there and discovered the mummified, decomposing remains of the two-year-old in a suitcase in their spare room.

Bad cases make bad law, we all know that. But the increasing publicity for cases like this make otherwise rational people pause and go "Hmmm."

Richard Baker| 1.31.12 @ 7:21AM

Margaret Sanger and Heinrich Himmler have a new compatriot in this Harms "jurist". Sanger referred to the least desirable as "human weeds" and everyone knows the loony ideas of Herr Himmler and his merry band. That Mr. Justice Holmes agreed with even a part of this nonsense yet again proves Orwell correct about intellectuals and foolishness.

gearjammer| 1.31.12 @ 8:02AM

More imbeciles=more democrat voters=bigger government and taxes and every other item on the democrat agenda. The imbecile majority = end of USA as we know it. Conservatives are the imbeciles.

Timothy L. Pennell| 1.31.12 @ 8:12AM

What is it, about the Left, and Sterilization? Actually, what is it, about the Left and DEATH, period? It's simple, really. They don't believe in GOD.

They fight our Founding Fathers, and our Founding Documents, all the time. Because, they don't believe in them. They don't believe that we "Are endowed by our Creator". They don't believe in GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. They don't believe in God Given anything. Maybe that's why they never seem to be happy? Maybe that's why they seem so Empty inside?

The Father of the Left - Karl Marx - dreamed of Eliminating 300 Million People, (MURDER THEM) because he figured that it would be "Easier" to create his Perfect World, if the Road he had to Hoe, was less populated. The Lefts' Favorite Poet - Robert Frost - envisioned a POISON GAS, of sorts, that could be used to Eliminate the Wheat from the Chaff. (So to speak) You know - The Upper West Side, from the rest of us. In his Sick Mind, the world would be a better place.

The Empires of the LEFT, have always been a good place to hang out, if you're DEATH.

The Soviets used Starvation, Forced Labour, and the Barrel of a Gun, to Cull the Herd, and maintain Order.

Hitler used the same Techniques. And, if you were a Jew? You got to experience all of them at the same time. 1st you were put in a Concentration Camp. Then they Starved you, while you participated in Forced Labour.

Mao used the Bullet, and then demanded the Cost of the Bullet, from the Dead Man's Family.

Pol Pot copied Mao. (Who wouldn't?)

In the Civilized Countries of the WEST, the Lefts' preferred method of Pissing on the Lord, is Abortion, to go along with the occasional Crucifix in a Glass of Urine, and the Portrait of the Virgin Mary covered in Sh*t. They want it to be On Demand. They want it to be PAID FOR by the Government, and they want it for Little Girls, whether HER PARENTS want her to have one, or not. It used to be a "First Trimester" murder. Then it was 1st and the 2nd. Then it was 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Trimester. Now, even after 9 MONTHS, as long as the Baby's Head is still in the Womb, a State Licensed Inhuman Monster, can slice open the base of its' Skull, and Suck Out its' Brain.

We used to call this - "A Slippery Slope."
Now it's called: "The Health of the Woman."

Did you know that the Muslim has a Sterilization fan, in his Administration? Oh yes. His name is John Holdren, he's the Muslim's Science Czar, and if you look at him, you will see that he has DEATH written all over him. He wants to put STERILANTS in to the DRINKING WATER.

I wanna repeat what I just wrote: The Democrat President of the United States of America, has a Man in his Administration, who, IF HE COULD, would put Sterilants in to our Drinking Water, and nobody on the LEFT has a Problem with that. But then, we have a President who voted 3 times to Deny Medical Care to BABIES that survived the MONSTER'S KNIFE, and were BORN ALIVE.

In fact, as best I can tell, the only people who's lives they will fight for, are the ANIMALS who Murder the rest of us. The Human GARBAGE. The SCUM of the Earth.

What kind of people are they? What do they want? And, how did they get this way?

GOD help us.

Melvin| 1.31.12 @ 8:30AM

"They don't believe in GOD." How can the Left believe in God, when the Left's philosophy is, that they, "Are God."

Al Adab| 1.31.12 @ 10:28AM

We had a lot of this conversation yesterday concerning the health mandates. It is the mandates which are immoral for who selected these "elites" to rule us and decide our actions?

Thomas Sowell called them the "annointed" and they do seem to fit as they chose themselves to be our betters. We plebs must just follow their directions as clearly, "they know what's best for us".

If we continue to allow agencies, bureaucrats, and the self-annointed to direct every function of our lives are we not complicit in the creation of this mandarin tyranny? It is time for free men to state that we will not go quietly into the night ; that no matter what the rules may be or the courts dictate, we will not comply. Our Liberty is of greater value than government pottage.

VonMisesJr| 1.31.12 @ 11:45AM

Spot on, Al. I have read just about two dozen Sowell tomes, including "The Vision of the Anointed," "A Conflict of Visions" and "The Quest for Cosmic Justice." I am looking at "Basic Economics" and "The Thomas Sowell Reader" on my shelf next in line.
Levin's new book "Ameritopia" is also a must read.

Tony in Central PA| 1.31.12 @ 12:22PM

Sowell's " Basic Economics " should be the preferred High School econ text.
I also recommend " Intellectuals and Society ".

VonMisesJr| 1.31.12 @ 12:48PM

Tony,
Quote from page 2 of Intellectuals and Society from Orwell: "some ideas are so foolish that only an intellectual could believe them, for no ordinary man could be such a fool."

Al Adab| 1.31.12 @ 2:55PM

Sadly Tony, the textbooks you and Von Missus and I might select are not the ones in use. It is a distinct possibility that is part of the overall problem with self-government in America today.

Dave Williams| 1.31.12 @ 2:46PM

I'm sorry, I cannot let this stand. I am as passionate a believer in human life as could be found, and I absolutely do not believe in god....perhaps BECAUSE I believe in human enlightenment, achievement and dignity. And politically, I'm a solid Reagan conservative. You fundies need to watch out with the intemperate language and baseless accusations.

Skippy| 1.31.12 @ 3:41PM

Jeez Dave, lighten up.
The "fundies"(very respectful and temperate, pal)have as much a right to passionately believe as you do to passionately not-believe.
Tell you what; let's make a deal.
If you're right about God, then I'm a fool.
If I'm right, you're screwed.
Fair enough?
You atheists are the most intolerant true-believers on earth.
Next to the Muslims, that is.

Occam's Tool| 2.1.12 @ 12:32AM

I'm sure you are as nice, decent, and wonderful as the day is long, Dave.

However, find me one secular society where the prevading ethos is atheist or agnostic that has a birth rate above replacement. (New Zealand comes closest with 2.09---but the Maori are religious and significantly outbreed the European, secular "pakeha." By the way, even the pakeha refer to themselves as pakeha.)

Secularism, David, despite you and the numerous examples you can no doubt supply of high breeding atheists, breeds insufficently to maintain a society in the long haul. It is therefore an antisurvival trait for a society. Again, I respect you personally, and no doubt your ethics are better than mine---but just as a nuclear explosion proceeds despite what ever happens to an individual neutron if a critical mass is reached, so to with secular societies.

skip| 2.1.12 @ 2:01AM

Ironic that you, as passionate a believer in human life as can be found, passionately believe that when you die all your enlightenment and achievement and dignity will, in essence, differ not a whit from Hitler's; while the fundies' belief in human life is intemperate and baseless to such a degree that they believe human life is so valuable their Creator has made each of them, every one, godlike in their own right, in that they can exist, forever, with unimaginable enlightenment and achievement and dignity, should they of their own free will choose to be. And, on what 'fundamental' solid basis, do you suppose, did Reagan's conservativism derive from, when you get to the very heart of it?

C. S. P. Schofield| 1.31.12 @ 8:18AM

Appleby,

The harsh answer is that such a "couple" is an argument both against forced sterilization and against the State having the power to take children from parents. Left to their revolting selves those two weren't going to produce a child that lived to pollute the gene pool. The argument for sterlilizing them only becomes forceful when you insist on saving their spawn.

And, of corse, the real problem with both sterilization and the taking of children from their parents is that they rely on the judgement of the State, which is historically vile.

Appleby| 1.31.12 @ 2:46PM

As a Catholic I am against any sort of interference with the natural procreative functions and as I said, bad cases make bad law. Nevertheless, if one considers children to be human beings (and of course, the Left does not -- they are merely "clumps of cells"), one does consider dismantling the sort of person who would leave a baby to freeze to death in a parking garage, or stick the mummified corpse of a toddler in a suitcase and stash it in the spare room...

C. S. P. Schofield| 1.31.12 @ 2:52PM

If you can show that they committed a capitol crime, then by all means let's execute them. If you can't, then let's keep the State's hands off their reproductive organs. If there is a God, I will trust him to deal with them. If there isn't, they are the least of our problems.

Kingofthenet| 1.31.12 @ 9:43AM

There is no need for permanent sterilization anymore with Depo-Provera and Implanon you can temporarily do the job by court order and of course it will wear off and can be removed.

cicero| 1.31.12 @ 9:45AM

Our fearless leaders seek to pass laws meant to solve problems residing with the vast minority of the people, but apply those laws universally. The beaurocracy of the aristocracy will always promise you that the law is not meant for you, but once they have it in their power, will enfoce it against all but themselves. Rather than kill the innocents, I suggest a registry of the sane who will take any such innocent into their hearts and homes, rather than have them slaughtered. I am sure the list of those willing to do will be more than adaquate for this task of love.

Al Adab| 1.31.12 @ 10:32AM

The more we tolerate the intolerable; the more we aquiesce in mandates the more culpable we become in the loss of freedom. Jefferson wrote that men are more disposed to suffer while evil is sufferable, but how close to the "destructive of these ends" and the "alter or abolish" clause must we get before action becomes necessary?

Boar Hunter| 1.31.12 @ 11:40AM

Tree of liberty?

Al Adab| 1.31.12 @ 12:21PM

...and the blood of patriots and tyrants? Is it come to that?

Are we actually about to witness the failure of our Republican (not the party) self-government institutions? If ballots fail, what next or do the citizens have the right to vote their freedoms away?

Boar Hunter| 1.31.12 @ 8:42PM

I hope not, but it appears we have Romney or Obama.

Either one is taking our plane down. One thinks it's OK to keep flying straight ahead with the tail on fire and the other is forcing the nose down with all his strength.

Occam's Tool| 2.1.12 @ 12:26AM

Boar, you were right---paul had 7%. I stand corrected.

As for this sterilization situation: in Minnesota, even AFTER we get a court order allowing us to INVOLUNTARILY medicate with antipsychotics a patient, we still cannot sneak it into their apple sauce, say. We have to give it to them openly.

Has this idiot judge considered involuntary medication instead of sterilization? Abilify, Seroquel, Geodon are all fairly safe in pregnancy. ECT can be used to stop a manic episode and is quite safe in pregnancy.

Judges and lawyers tend to be morons. There are some exceptions, but they tend to be few.

Kingofthenet| 1.31.12 @ 9:50AM

"Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

Yet people STILL vote Republican?

VonMisesJr| 1.31.12 @ 10:11AM

Hey King, Is this your internet? I thought your boy Algore invented it?

Almost all the articles recently have been about the GOP at war with the conservatives and TEA Party based on principles. But you are apparently such a swooning moron you can only think in Republican v. Democrat, Red v. Blue, ad hominem attacks to counter reasoned arguments. How is it that Democrats all think alike, argue the same bogus arguements, and keep repeating the same stupid mistakes? If you ever seek an original thought, don't look for it from a liberal. By definition, you are a collectivist. You cannot deviate from the platform and drone-like chants.

Tim the Enchanter| 1.31.12 @ 10:18AM

You meant "Democrat," of course. Bit of a Freudian slip there.

VonMisesJr| 1.31.12 @ 10:39AM

Thanks Tim. I really meant Democrap.

Melvin| 1.31.12 @ 11:09AM

If you consider Conservatives, "Imbeciles," then why do you still need our taxes? Surely by your comment that we are so illiterate it would be beneath Democrats and Progressive elitist Republican Establishment types, to not accept our paid taxes, and fees.

Barn Cat| 1.31.12 @ 10:03AM

People need to know that the tactics of Planned Parenthood are the same ones that the Nazis used. That every child should be a wanted child.

Skippy| 1.31.12 @ 4:06PM

The Left wants children in general on a "Wanted:Dead" poster, and has since Sanger.

The Bruce| 1.31.12 @ 5:11PM

Planned Parenthood was a program borne of the Fabian Socialists' desire to rid the country of "useless eaters."

I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the majority of abortion clinics "happen" to be in minority neighborhoods.

Liberalism, looking out for the little guy, unless that little guy's a bit too little (unborn).

Sue| 1.31.12 @ 10:47AM

Well, the fact is Holmes, being the elitist, had the argument wrong because of his bias. The argument is that there are those in our society, through no fault of their own, cannot take care of children and have no capacity to take care of themselves. Holmes argued that "imbeciles" begat "imbeciles." Scientists knew at the time that just because a low IQ woman was pregnant, that did not mean that her baby was low IQ. However, by leaving the child to be raised by one who was not at least marginally intelligent, would cause irreversible consequences to the child.

The issue is one of women and men who have low capacity being allowed (right) to reproduce. The issue is also one of the supposed most intelligent among us making that decision and getting the argument correct. The offspring has just as much right to life as the intelligent one making the decision to end his life.

The elitists would scream hysterically over 24 hour ball and chain tactics to control sexual activities, then continue to scream hysterically about forced abortion, but are silent and unsupportive when it comes to adoption. I say the elitists are the schizos!

C. S. P. Schofield| 1.31.12 @ 2:59PM

The Elitists, all of them, are not schizos. They are, always and forever, in favour of whatever tactics and policies will further their power and comfort. Keep this in mind at all times, filter anything they say about their Moral Stance through it, and you will quickly see that the difference between the Plantation-Owner Elite of the Old South, the Social Darwinist Elite of the years between the Civil War and WWI, and modern Liberal-progressives and Republican-Establishment types is almost entirely cosmetic.

Morally they are all slime.

Occam's Tool| 2.1.12 @ 12:35AM

Since when is intelligence a survival trait in humans? For example, which group of people wins the largest number of Nobels per capita and did they end the 20th Century with more or with fewer people, thanks to people like Jack, than they had when the 20th Century started?

KyMouse| 1.31.12 @ 11:31AM

A thought-provoking article, Mr. Flynn. I would say, however, "abort her baby" instead of "abort her pregnancy" in the second paragraph.

Some years ago, pro-lifers circulated a list of famous people who many probably would have wanted aborted (or their mothers sterilized). Here are three:

"A baby is born crippled and a dwarf. Would you have recommended abortion?"

"A white man raped a 13-year-old black girl and impregnated her. Would you recommend an abortion?"

"The father is ill with syphilis; the mother has tuberculosis. They have had four children. One child has died, one is blind, one is deaf, and one has tuberculosis. The mother is pregnant again. Would you recommend an abortion?"

Those three babies grew up to be poet Alexander Pope, actress and Gospel singer Ethel Waters, and composer Ludwig von Beethoven.

I know several people who have Down syndrome but hold jobs (in fact, are upset when a holiday or sick day keeps them from working) and are beloved by their families and friends.

We just never know how anyone's life will turn out. Including our own. Thank God we were given a chance.

Al Adab| 1.31.12 @ 11:37AM

Mandatory contraception
Mandatory Sterilization
Mandatory abortions?
To the gas chamber go?

Kingofthenet| 1.31.12 @ 11:41AM

Channeling your 'inner' Post American I see?

Al Adab| 1.31.12 @ 12:23PM

Nope, different guy.

Willie Stoker| 1.31.12 @ 4:01PM

Liberalism has been determined to be a be a form of insanity, we should start there with the eugenics program and maybe it will be shortlived when that form of insanity has been wped out.

Bill| 1.31.12 @ 4:27PM

"If she weren't crazy, she'd get an abortion."

Hmmmm, interesting, very interesting...

Bill| 1.31.12 @ 4:29PM

Did you hear the news about the new "scientific" study that says that people of low intelligence tend to become conservatives. This judge sort of puts the lie to that finding, eh?

The Bruce| 1.31.12 @ 5:07PM

Fabian Socialists... the gift that keeps on... um... giving???

shipley130| 1.31.12 @ 7:19PM

We cannot go on having lunatic women downloading children that they cannot effectively take care of. The only other option is to possibly implant some sort of medium term birth control. We cannot keep subjecting children to that kind of life. It's very cruel.

Occam's Tool| 2.1.12 @ 12:39AM

Why not? There are more than enough couples waiting to adopt them. The problem is the couploes are made to wait, and then the mothers sometimes try to "get the children back," and everyone sympathizes with the biological mother, and treats the adoptive mother who has done the heavy lifting, and didn't leave the kid, like crap.

That's why we adopted from overseas.

Rich Fisher| 1.31.12 @ 7:31PM

Just one question. Is it racist to agree with a black man? Du Bois seemed to be ahead of the curve on this one.

Richard Baker| 1.31.12 @ 9:19PM

Al Adab:
Mr. Jefferson was correct. Sometimes tyranny must be met with this. Sad that it may come to this but there it is.

POST American| 1.31.12 @ 10:45PM

"DO you realize, most of us in the west
are, IN FACT, technically extinct?"

DO YOU?

Occam's Tool| 2.1.12 @ 12:37AM

Yes, PA, I do. And, unlike much of your usual blather, you are painfully correct---the majority of Westerners are Europeans, and their breeding patterns make them technically extinct.

The Bruce| 2.1.12 @ 1:49AM

Occam, I believe that our extinction is technologically metaphorical, yet not metaphorical in the technical sense. However, that would make our technically metaphorical extinction metaphorically technical on the basis of [OMG, MY HEAD JUST EXPLODED!!!!]

Damn the both of you (PA and Occam) for parking the Delorian on my driveway. You could have at least turned the Flux Capacitor off.

But, NOOOOOO, you had to leave the keys in the ignition, the flux capacitor on, and a cinder block resting on the accelerator.

Um, I'm feeling much better now, and looking forward to my next CAT Scan.

scorfield| 2.1.12 @ 3:46AM

Rather than kill the innocents, I suggest a registry of the sane who will take any such innocent into their hearts and homes, rather than have them slaughtered.
http://www.theabercrombiefitchoutlet.com/

POST American| 2.1.12 @ 5:00AM

"And understand, breeding patterns,
like the rest of the culture, is authorized
and programmed ---from the TOP."

And what's the top?

The ultra-rich, USURY feuled, TAX FREE
'benny violent' NGOs and foundations.

"Thousands, literally thousands of
NGOs and foundations, operating with
bottomless funding and endless promotion
through the media, which they also own
---are workign on absolutely every aspect
of their agenda for world government,
cultural standardization and annihilation
---and FINAL EUGENICS."

AGAIN,

capital crimes criminalization of the
very, very highest order for stealth social engineering and tainting of food, water
and meds for EUGENICS.
(ie dumb down/ sterilization/population
extermination)

The most KEY and serious figures
should be put away for life without
parole.

For those like the late arch-EUGENIST
Dr Salk and his cancer filled POLIO shots
---------the DEATH PENALTY--------.

Surely this will 'quicken' the sense of the
moral once and for all regarding this
nightmare.

JP| 2.2.12 @ 2:36PM

The earth has too many people and will reach a point where it can no longer support the people living in it. Some countries have already reached this point and people are starving. Population needs to be level off and not grow or turmoil will surely happen. People of our country supported their families with the money they earned from working but since the sixties the poor have learned that the can get all sorts of benefits from having children from the government. Sterilization is a extreme measure but responsible citizens, as a general rule, only have children that they can afford to take care of and educate. I do not advocate sterilization but I do advocate some kind of limit on children for those that are on government aid. We the taxpayer, are paying not only to take care of our own, but are forced to take care of children of others. The government needs to get out of this mess by curtailing programs that I mentioned above. I do not have an answer to this problem that would satisfy all citizens but if something is not done to address this issue all citizens will ultimately suffer the consequence.

kraldiziler| 2.2.12 @ 6:53PM

The neighbours noticed that they hadn't seen the child lately; the police would do nothing; and the neighbours broke into the house while the family was there and discovered the mummified, decomposing remains of the two-year-old in a suitcase in their spare room.

facebook| 2.3.12 @ 9:27PM

We the taxpayer, are paying not only to take care of our own, but are forced to take care of children of others. The government needs to get out of this mess by curtailing programs that I mentioned above

The American Spectator