I don't think breeding is a more fundamental right than the rights enumerated in the constitution honestly. Maybe it's baked into freedom of association or belief, and certainly the 9th amendment would be interpreted to cover it by any sane person. But I'm not sane.
Alright, I lose on the constitutional question then (barring the Supreme Court weighing in on it in my favor somehow anyway). Still think that if the choice is between not having technology and not having fools who would hurt others with technology, the second would be better.
-
-
you're not the first person to decide that coercive eugenics is a solution to the discontents of industrial civilization but you're not in good company either
-
I feel the same way about it as about abortion, in the sense that the ideal would be for people to not do it on their own, but the intervention of the state may not be appropriate even given this. But unlike abortion, the costs of careless reproduction are increasing over time.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.