Is getting a vasectomy the best way to help save the planet?

Well I'll be frank. Some of you people are nuts. If you're worried about the planet not being green enough committ suicide. Sounds horrible doesn't it? Yeah well it also essentially solves your problem. Not only would you be stopping an new lives from being born you would also be removing your own life and consumption on the planet.

Sounds reasonable to me.

That's funny that some people think population control is a fascist idea, when it was the communists who came up with a "one child policy". But the communists don't bother to sterilize people, they just made up rules and expect people to fall in line. So China still has the largest population in the world. Because just making up rules is not an effective method of birth control.

IIRC from history lessons, the fascists actually largely encouraged reproduction. Only amongst the people they find "desirable", but still. Prominent Communist Chairman Mao also encouraged reproduction when he was in power, so there would be more workers for the motherland, which is what led to China having a population problem and needing to set up a "one child policy".

Plus, unless I'm mistaken, there is a difference between killing people en masse (which the fascists did) and sterilizing them then letting them go on with their lives (which the fascists did not do, as far as I know, unless someone can point me towards some historical accounts of fascists tying people's tubes and/or passing out birth control).

I don't know if everyone feels the same way, but I find sterilization much more preferable to killing. Much more humane. And the more people get sterilized voluntarily, the less chances there'll ever be government mandated population control. Good news for everyone!

Well, obviously the person who told someone to go kill themselves like killing better. So... according to this person, people should reproduce more so that there'll be more people to kill. Interesting choice. Not the way I would go, but it is certainly interesting to hear different points of view.

don't worry they already do it to cats and dogs won't be long before humans will be snipped at birth

It's so much easier for a man to have a vasectomy, OpinionOnly, than for a woman to have a tubal ligation. We bounced this idea around for a while (we're 25 and 26) before I discovered the copper IUD. If you know you don't want [more] kids, why take a chance? Get sterile - or as close to sterile as possible - and enjoy the incredibly gift of sex while protecting the world.

Dear None,
I agree with your opinons, and as I read your thoughts I couldn't help hearing my mother agree with you. I was about 13 years old, and I can hear her saying almost the same thing. She's been dead for 4 years; however, obviously this has been a long time problem!
Snowing eh? Well Oregon's coast is having an Indian summer and it's wonderful, last year I froze my butt off. So where you from-snowflake?

im sorry, but thats messed up.

i think he might be taking the "green" thing a little to far on this one.

Wow...I am appalled at the morally superior posts by None. Who actually will decide if a person should be sterilized? You, who can't write a cohesive sentence with proper punctuation. Should I nominate you because you evidently didn't better yourself through education? No? What the difference? Do you get my point?

None: Your response makes my point. If I can assume you are uneducated based on the way you write, how is that different from you making an assumption that a person being on welfare or public assistance is unfit? I also agree with you that something has to change and, no, I am not an advocate of people having babies if they can't adequately care for them. I do not think the world is doing well in the way in which we care for each other. My reaction is to your suggestion that a law dictates who can or can not have children. Hitler sterilized Jews, and then gassed them, in a effort to erase them from the planet. China's one child law resulted in the murder of baby girls since they were perceived to be of lesser value to society. Who will set the criteria for what you call a 'just' solution? While you say that you are not suggesting the government decides, by suggesting a law you are, in fact, endorsing government involvement - and that is a slippery slope to the invasion of individual rights that I am not willing to support. We agree that the world is a mess. We don't agree with how to fix it.

I remember a man (but not his name I'm sorry to say) who called for everyone to be temporarily sterilized at birth and the ones who wanted children would apply to a board to be unsterilized. Although this sounds like something from China or worse, it would guarantee only people who wanted children would have them.

One other thing has anybody seen statistics of pregnancies after vasectomies but before the man has depleted his remaining sperm, I would bet it is high.

yes, i completely agreed. we have an overpopulation problem. i am not going to have children in this lifetime......it's wrong. my brother wants a ton of kids. and i say shame on you! i for one will adopt an african AMERICAN child when i graduate school and get a real job.

Mysterious Gryphon: When I got my tubes tied back in the 80's it was a probe through my navel and a cut above my pubic bone. I was sent home the same day, took a day off and was back at work the next. 20 years later, a friend recently got her tubes tied and another friend's husband got a vasectomy. Both were outpatient and both were back at work in two days. Tubals are not that complex anymore, especially for healthy women.

My point is that women still have to justify sterilization more than a man. My friend had to endure her doc asking if she was sure before he set the surgery, medical staff at the hospital asking the same thing and the doc asking one last time before she went under. The guy was asked if his wife was okay with it...that's all he was asked. I support stressing the relative permanancy of sterilization (another friend had her tubes untied and had two more kids), but why the disparity? That is what I question.

Haha that is great, now I have another excuse to use when people ask me why I don't ever want to have children. Most people don't realize that Vasectomy's are also covered under your insurance plan, not sure about tubals but I would think they would be too.

I personally think people should have to pass a test and meet certain income requirements in order to have children lol.

To Penny Lane, not everyone believes in God so that arguement has no effect on me.

There's a cliche that says you need a license to get hunt, a license to fish but you don't need a license to get a child.

I understand that procreation is a basic human freedom but I agree with None. People need to be held accountable when they produce children, not pop out babies then run to the government to care for them or throw these kids in foster care. I personally would like would be parents to at least prove they can care for the child, I'm not talking about immense wealth just the ability (and the good sense) to be able to provide the child with 3 square meals, a roof over their heads and some parental love, discipline and attention.

Though my fiance and I can more than afford to have a child or two, we've decided not to have children. We are invested in many other more important things (to us) and understand the economic and emotional investment of a child. We would never choose to bring another person into this world until we are fully committed to caring for them and raising them to be decent contributing members of society.

Now they can put a clamp on the tubes that can be easily reversed if you later want to have children. Very facinating. Its too bad that they don't provide these services to people on welfare (like you said None). But on the other hand, something like that has to be decided by the person getting it, we can't force people, it is against their inherent rights... And its proabably really expensive.

I know what every one is saying. I know that there are too many unwated kids and kids who dont get cared for. There are kids up for adoption and kids that are in foster care. Because of that I have decided that I dont need to bring another one in to this world. If I want a kid I will adopt or do foster care. I am going to help the kids that really need it. I dont think that we can say who does or does not have kids. I do think that not having kids to be green though is silly. I understand what he is saying but is that what green has come to? What do I know though I am only 21.

Interesting that a woman in her late 20's or early 30's who wants her tubes tied needs to jump through so many hoops to prove she is clear about her desire to not have kids, but a man in the same age range can access sterilization with few hassles. I have no problem with anything that will reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. However, the double standard regarding sterilization is appalling. While I don't question the doctor's concern about unwanted pregnancies, he has discovered an interesting way in which to increase his own wealth under the guise of evironmentalism.

"Your way to a 'greener planet' is population control!?!?!? "

Do you think there could ever be a point in time when this would be warranted? Do you think that when there are too many people for this planet to feed (and indications are there are already, just not in the USA) that population should not be controlled? How about when the carbon footprint of the race has already raised the temperature causing Gore-esque catastrophies? How about when there simply isn't enough room? And while you throw around the word "fascist' as a pejorative, there are some things that each political philosophy has right, and this might be one for the fascists.

"This is appalling that people would think the way to a 'greener planet' is to control the amount of people. "

You are sounding like you object to voluntary population control. The truth is, each person or couple who chooses not to reproduce is doing great good for the planet, and for our species, and for every other species.

"God intends for every life on this planet."

So if someone chooses not to reproduce, that is one fewer life on the planet, and so, by your logic, one fewer life that God intended. So it all works out.

"If you're worried about the planet not being green enough committ suicide."

You're an ass. Suicide is a sin. Choosing not to reproduce is not.

penny lane that is soo lame. for one thing, you must not know much about biology, because there isnt enough food, living space, and water to support life once the population surpasses its carrying capacity. then people will start dying in miserable conditions. i dont see how thats good for anyone.

So wait...let me get this straight. Your way to a 'greener planet' is population control!?!?!? That is essentially what this is. Restricting the amount of babies in the world. How incredibly fascist!!!

This is appalling that people would think the way to a 'greener planet' is to control the amount of people. Who are you to decide how many children are born onto the planet?

I'll flat out say it, because I don't care what the rest of you think, but God intends for every life on this planet. No one is a mistake or unintentional. He knew everyone of us was going to be on this planet.