Mandatory vasectomies worldwide.

Author: Alec

Posts

Total: 101
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
Oh wow ignore post 59 please. I thought that was Alec making post 58, didn't realize it was you. Naturally I was pretty skeptical when I thought he claimed to have a Y axis score of less than 8 lol.

I feel so dumb.

Mine was around +4/+4 ish iirc. That was years ago so I probably am not remembering correctly. I'll take it again soon when I have time.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
My score is in the link below https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=2.63&soc=-2.36.  I'd say that I'm a moderate libetarian.  I lean right as predicted.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Vader
 And these stats can vary and there isn't strong data correlating to this.

The data is in the links.

Wanted pregnancies and such
If a pregnancy is wanted, you just get the vastectomy reversed when your ready for it.

They need to be mature and do it. If they don't, they deserve to have a baby when options are available.
The thing is, they would have abortions illegally.  It's better to prevent these abortions by contraception, like mandatory vasectomies.  Then abortions are virtually gone.

No, you have to pay doctors more than a minimal fee if they are going to perform surgery and they cost a lot.
They would get paid adequately.  But since they would be doing so many vasectomies per day, the doctor cost can be more spread out amongst the public.  10 vasectomies per day per doctor would make the cost about $150 per vastectomy, yielding a $1500/day pay for the doctor, all while there would be an 85% discount.  This is why vasectomies would be cheaper if everyone in the US gets them.  If they cost $150/male or $75/person, it would cost about $24 billion, about 5% of what we spend on the military per year.  It would also be a one time expense, with nominal extra fees for making sure the youth are sterilized until they are ready to not be.

The same will need to be done with this. It will cost a lot of money and the government can't buy this. 
Above shows how cheap for the government it would be to fund.

Yet they are very close behind us catching up quicker and quicker. The only way to stop them is to keep spending where we at now, so we can secure our spot
If China increased their military budget 11% per year for 10 years, it would take about 50 years to catch up to where the US currently is.

Then here is the problem, Russia and NK joins in, along with Iran. Turkey leaves NATO and joins Russia and then boom, a World War started and we all die.
NK isn't a super big threat to NATO.  Not even Russia is.  Their GDP is less than the state of Texas.  So we have a country less than Texas GDP wise, with a stagnant population, and North Korea vs all of NATO, the US, Turkey is probably going to stay in NATO.

Yea but there is that SLIGHT risk that it may happen. Again, that's why Plan B is in effect, so that means that instead of wasting money, you can just buy Plan B
We can't count on Plan B though, even if it's made mandatory.  It's easier to dodge a Plan B pill than it is to dodge a worldwide campaign for vasectomies, especially if females, once they find out, decide to go on a sex strike until their boyfriends/husbands get vasectomies.  Then guys would get the vasectomies just to be able to have sex with their females.

Wasn't talking about abortion numbers
What numbers were you referring too?

This would take over 17 years to implement and get fully done
How did you get 17 years?  I think it can be done in 5 years.

people can bypass this too
How would they bypass this if the females are like, "Hey you know, it's a good idea to prevent pregnancies.  Lets require vasectomies of our males before we have sex with them".  Then the males can't legally have sex without getting the surgery done.  We can't count on people being responsible.  Otherwise, abortions would barely exist.

His(Hitler's) authoritarian style with his "Utopian society," failed miserably
Hitler killed innocents.  My policy doesn't kill a single innocent person.  If anything, it dramatically reduces a different genocide; the genocide of the unborn.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
But if they neglect your laws and have kids, you kill them

No I wouldn't.

I don't see how you are going to impose this on other countries peacefully. 
We lead by example, and we state it's to eliminate abortions, which given that the countries that are poor are pro life (by coincidence), they want to eliminate abortions and they ought to support this policy to eliminate the abortions that happen illegally.

Forcing people to do things with their bodies (you know, the whole reason the Libertarian party supports abortion)
Pro life libertarians exist, they have a whole website for them.  On abortion and preventing it, it has to be done, so I would be statist on that issue.  I'm libertarian-conservative in general though.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@ethang5
Everything I say on DART, it's what I actually believe at that time.  In terms of invading Africa, I'm not alone in terms of my desire to do that.  Bmdrocks21 also agrees with me on invading Africa.



bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Alec
Not for invading them, but aggressive foreign direct investment to control their economy would be fine. 
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
Oh.  I thought you said on messaging that you wanted to invade them.   Did you change your mind on it?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Alec
That link says that you have a negative authoritarian score.

Lol yeah I'm going to call bullshit on that one.

Take it again and this time transcribe your answers so I can point out where you lied on the test.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Alec
Everything I say on DART, it's what I actually believe at that time.
Ok. Nice to know.

In terms of invading Africa, I'm not alone in terms of my desire to do that.
A million people joining you makes it no less loony.

Bmdrocks21 also agrees with me on invading Africa.
Yeah, I could have guessed that. It is still a startlingly loony idea.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Take it again and this time transcribe your answers so I can point out where you lied on the test.
How would I transcribe my answers?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Alec

Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
Bmdrocks21 also agrees with me on invading Africa.
Yeah, I could have guessed that.

You could, but it would have been a really stupid guess.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If I need to transcribe my answers, prepare for a very big comment I guess.
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Alec
Make it easy on yourself. Do something like this:

1 - SA
2 - D
3 - SD

Et cetera. No neet to c/p the question or write out "strong disagree" or anything.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Bmdrocks21 also agrees with me on invading Africa.
Yeah, I could have guessed that.

You could, but it would have been a really stupid guess.
What would have been a really stupid guess? That he would believe that  Bmdrocks21 agrees with him? Or that  Bmdrocks21 agrees with him?

And either way, why?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
What would have been a really stupid guess? That he would believe that  Bmdrocks21 agrees with him? Or that  Bmdrocks21 agrees with him?

The second, though the first is plausible. The first interpretation didn't even cross my mind when reading your post. Which of these more closely matches your intended meaning?

And either way, why?

Bmd is a sane person. Randomly invading countries has been out of fashion for sane people for quite some time now.

Now, I know bmd is a sane person because I have interacted with him before. If this is not the case for you it would still be dumb for you to guess that he is not sane without any justification due to the ratio of sane to non-sane people.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Which of these more closely matches your intended meaning?
The second.

If this is not the case for you...
Well, all of us have had experiences with him. Alec claimed BMD told him in a PM. But no, I have never known him to behave insanely.

...the ratio of sane to non-sane people
That ratio may not be as low as you think.
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
But no, I have never known him to behave insanely.
<br>

So then is it more likely that Alec was mistaken about bmds opinion or that bmd is insane and has simply never shown symptoms of insanity?

Again, the question begins with the words "Is it more likely that Alec was wring or..." Any question starting with those words should be an easy question to answer.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If I wired bmd, it wasn't on purpose.
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Alec
If I wired bmd, it wasn't on purpose.
<br>

I believe you. That is actually what I was saying, that you probably made a mistake. No sweat, everyone fucks up sometimes.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Do you have beef with Alec?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
Not that I know of.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I didn't feel like taking the test again, so I've decided to list some of the ways that I'm libertarian:

-I support recreational weed legalization.
-I support homosexuality legalization.
-I support legalized polygamy.
-I support legalized prostitution.
-I support open borders.
-I support the 2nd amendment, including legalizing AR15s.
-I think porn should be legal, even for minors.
-I want to abolish the income tax and replace it with a sales tax and a capital gains tax.
-Pro private prisons.

Do I agree with the libertarians on everything?  No.  I disagree with them on abortion and I'm willing to do a lot to prevent abortions, including enforcing mandatory vasectomies worldwide.

9 libertarian policies vs 2 that happen to be right wing.  I'd say I'm pretty libertarian.

I think gay married couples should be able to defend their homegrown weed plants with AR15s if they wanted too.

bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Bmd is a sane person
Thanks, bro. You are sane as well.

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-I support legalized prostitution.
but mandatory vasectomies for those who do it?

Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Basically.  This is necessary to prevent 56 million worldwide abortions per year.
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@dustryder
Vasectomies still have a failure rate.
Only for the first 2 months.  After that, the unintended pregnancy rate is 0%, unless it grows back, which is super rare (about 1/2000 chance in a lifetime).  Vast majority of abortions don't happen under this plan, and unintended pregnancies are gone too.

I suggest removing the penises of males at birth.
How would guys pee out then?  Pee poisoning might be an issue if guys can't pee out.  Why remove the whole penis when that is not necessary to achieve the goal of sterilising the male to prevent abortions?  Just a mandatory vastectomy ought to do it.
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@Alec
Only for the first 2 months.  After that, the unintended pregnancy rate is 0%, unless it grows back, which is super rare (about 1/2000 chance in a lifetime).  Vast majority of abortions don't happen under this plan, and unintended pregnancies are gone too.
1/2000 is still significant

How would guys pee out then?  Pee poisoning might be an issue if guys can't pee out.  Why remove the whole penis when that is not necessary to achieve the goal of sterilising the male to prevent abortions?  Just a mandatory vastectomy ought to do it.
Penis removal does not imply bladder, urethra or kidney removal. Pee need not necessarily come out of a penis. You'll note that women have no problem peeing despite completely lacking penises.

The removal of penises completely negates the ability to have sex (and therefore natural pregnancies and abortions). Clearly, there is a higher imperative to save lives than there is for carnal pleasure, hence this trade off is worth it.

As stated before, mandatory vasectomies aren't a perfect solution, while penis removal is. There is still the chance that the vas deferens will grow back. And when it does, 1 out of every 2000 men in their lifetime will find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy. Given the current world population and assuming for a 1:1 ratio of men to female, this means that there will be 1.875 million unintended pregnancies, of which many will lead to abortions because they were all unintended.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@dustryder
Removing Fallopian tubes is also a fool-proof way to achieve his goals.
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@bmdrocks21
That's true enough. However the removal of the fallopian would be an invasive surgery while the removal of the penis would be non-invasive. Hence clearly we should opt for the penis removal.