For the sake of completeness: the U.S. has also engaged in forced sterilization--definitely for the mentally ill and Native Americans. The former was based on false notions of how heritable various conditions were, but I don't know if the latter had any front put on it.
Krzysztof On Nov 29, 2007 8:14 PM, Laura Jodice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is a follow-up thought. It is not a scary thought that someone would > exert their free choice due to belief this will reduce their own impact on > the earth...it is however scary to think forced abortion or forced > sterilization are solutions to environmental problems. In china there are > currently reports of forced abortion as a means to keep populations low > among certain people and there was once compulsory sterilization in India, > all occurring among people who had no say or freedom of choice in many > ways because of poverty and prejudice (read A Fine Balance by Rohinton > Mistry - fiction but reflective of this history). > > > I must say that I am very disturbed by both posts below. I know this > is > > Ecolog and not an abortion debate forum, but to me the posts indicate > > that the woman in question did something "wrong" by exercising her > choice > > to terminate her pregnancy. Women all over the world make this decision > > for a variety of reasons. Further, I would argue that choosing to do so > > due to her deeply held environmental values is one of the more well > > thought out reasons for terminating a pregnancy that I have heard. > > Concern for the environment is hardly "a flippant justification for > > abortion", in my opinion. Especially considering the fact that the > woman > > had taken active measures to prevent a pregnancy in the first place. > > > > Marie Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I completely agree with > Laura. > > The fact that this woman had an abortion > > to reduce her carbon footprint is quite scary. I think her choice to, > > after this occurrence, search out a doctor to perform a sterility > > procedure to definitively prevent any future pregnancies was a very good > > choice to perpetuate her interesting but understandable desire to help > > reduce her carbon footprint. But, I do not think reducing your carbon > > footprint should be a flippant justification for abortion. When you > start > > putting "Being Green" and "Being Eco" above human life, the line gets > > really fuzzy. > > > > > >> While a childfree lifestyle may be a valid and important ethical choice > >> (though probably a freedom for only a portion of the female population > >> in > >> this world), the woman in the article that started this discussion > chose > >> to > >> terminate a pregnancy using the save the planet rationale (as I > >> recall). Using "saving the planet" as an incentive or rationale to > >> terminate a pregnancy is ethically and morally scary path. > Furthermore, > >> more could be accomplished by educating people, providing contraception > >> and > >> changing cultural practices in developing nations than terminating > >> pregnancies in nations where birth control is for the most part a > >> broadly > >> accepted and relatively easy practice. > > > > > > > > > "Never > > attribute > > to > > malice > > that > > which > > can > > be > > adequately > > explained > > by > > stupidity" > > (Hanlon's razor) > > > > >
