North Carolina Compensates Victims of Forced Sterilization

Credit: flickrCredit: flickr

North Carolina has approved plans to pay compensation to victims of forced sterilization. The measure was included in the state budget and was championed notably by Mark Bold, a Liberty University law student and director of the Christian Law Institute. The reform was also pushed for by the N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation, which was established in 2010 in order "to provide justice and compensate victims who were forcibly sterilized by the State of North Carolina" by former N.C. governor Bev Perdue.  

From Fox News

North Carolina sterilized 7,600 people from 1929 to 1974 who were deemed socially or mentally unfit. Victims were as young as 10 years old and nearly all were sterilized forcibly or with inadequate consent, according to the state. The Legislature this past week approved a $10 million compensation fund that would begin paying out in June 2015. So far the state has identified 177 living victims. The amount of compensation each receives will depend on the number of verified claims, according to the state Department of Administration. If 200 people are verified, for example, each would receive $50,000.

The sterilizations were conducted under the authority of the Eugenics Board of North Carolina. North Carolina was one of the nations most ruthless states in pursuing the agenda of the Eugenics movement. So much so, that the state granted authority to social workers and welfare officials to petition for the sterilization of their clients. The last recorded forced sterilization was in 1981. The program led to close to 65,000 people being sterilized in 33 states. North Carolina House Speaker Thom Tillis said, “I hope this provides some closure to what I believe is one of the darkest chapters in the state’s history.”

The decision to award reparations to the victims of one of the most horrific programs conducted by state authorities, will come as only a small comfort to those whose dignity and autonomy was so grossly violated. Elaine Riddick, once a 13-year-old rape victim who was forcibly sterilized said of the decision, “People need to know that injustice was done towards them and they need to be compensated for that. You can’t put a price on someone taking your womb or castrating you, it’s humiliating.”

North Carolina is not the only state to be experiencing controversy over forced sterilization. California's prison system has come under severe criticism, after reports that close to 150 female prisoners were sterilized without their consent between the years 2006 and 2010.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Warrren||

    Can they pass this money on to their heirs?

  • Live Free or Diet||

    Sterilized people have heirs?

  • ||

  • PS wanders the Wasteland||

    Microwaves frizz your heirs

  • marguerite63||

    my co-worker's aunt makes $84 an hour on the internet. She has been laid off for eight months but last month her pay was $17533 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read more on this site.... www.cnn13.com

  • Tonio||

    Many of these people were sterilized after having one (or more) out of wedlock children. Also, adoption, colateral descendants, etc.

  • Sevo||

    "North Carolina is not the only state to be experiencing controversy over forced sterilization. California's prison system..."

    OK, it's sort of fun to joke about CA's one-party rule and the financial disaster slowly unfolding, but for pete's sake!
    Who in hell is in charge and who in hell decides some people should be sterilized? THAT is pathetic.

  • Nazdrakke||

    THAT is pathetic.

    You misspelled "fucking evil"

  • Jose Chung||

    Eugenics was one of the Progressive movements pillars. With California being one of the most progressive states in the country, it's really a no brainer. Rememebr the Progressive Motto: "Because we know better than you!"

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Headline you *won't* see in the NY Times: "Republican legislature votes compensation to victims of Democratic sterilization program."

  • Anonymous Coward||

    "If the eugenicists were around today, they'd totally be republicans rather than democrats!"

    TEAM Blue: Good
    TEAM Red: Bad

    Just because you got a hat tip, you think you can forget the rules.

  • Hyperion||

    Who got a hat tip? I thought that hat tips were banned, aka, the sarcasmic rule.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Link

    Krayewski will just give an h/t to anybody.

  • Hyperion||

    The Anonymous Edward Van Halen?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Stop disrespecting his Dutch heritage!

  • Hyperion||

    I'm not. I just don't know why he's anonymous. I have a confused...

  • PS wanders the Wasteland||

    THE Anonymous, show some damn respect.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Eh, whatever. That Dem legislature scored 90% on Shreek's Libertarian Purity Test (whatever that means).

  • Jose Chung||

    I think you mean "victims of Democratic FORCED sterilization program."

  • Hyperion||

    Isn't this same thing going on right now, in Cali?

    Eugenics is a major part of the Proglodyte platform. I wish they would all just hurry up and sterilize themselves, although I have no idea who would want to have sex with a Proglodyte woman. Have you ever seen one of them? Hint: Melissa Harris Perry... FUGLY!

  • ||

    A few quarters ago I was taking a class on the Bill of Rights. The class immediately before ours was a discussion section for a global women and gender studies class (they always left the desks in a giant circle and never put them back for the next class).

    Anyway, it was full of women and I swear only one or two out of the 30 were decent looking. I try to avoid stereotyping but it's experiences like that tempt me to draw conclusions.

  • Hyperion||

    they always left the desks in a giant circle and never put them back for the next class

    Giant proglotard feminazi circle jerk?

    Ewww, I feel nauseous...

  • Sevo||

    "Giant proglotard feminazi circle jerk?"

    C'mon; drum circle.

  • ||

    I'm actually friends with one of them. She's nice enough, but it took a lot of self-control not to comment on the Che Guevara banner she had hanging in her apartment.

    And by comment I mean make a snarky comment on how Che would have made her black best friend sit outside.

  • ||

    Pft, Che was a mensch, there was some movie about him and a motorcycle that told me so.

    /idiot college students

  • ||

    Well she's from Venezuela, so I'm more understanding of that given that she was practically raised worshiping Che and Castro.

  • Killazontherun||

    I got over the pro union democratic environment I was raised in, it should be even more easy for her to get over attachment to something as destructive and immoral as communism and its leaders.

  • Hyperion||

    My wife had a couple of class mates from Venezuela, a couple years ago, and they hated Chavez with a passion. The main reason they were here, was Chavez and his policies. So I assume, they weren't big fans of Che and Castro, either.

  • Killazontherun||

    At least she serves the useful purpose of ending the racist myth that all mulattoes are God's chosen beautiful people. They are not all Beyonces, Halle Barry's, Lisa Lopes, Rihannas (post what ever surgery or process that turned her into something gorgeous over the last few years), or our very on HM who I don't know what he looks likes in person but has a beautiful soul. Some are fugly inside and out.

  • Hyperion||

    There's a lot of them in Brazil. Not all of them are attractive. There's just as many white chicks that are attractive, so I think that is a myth.

  • Killazontherun||

    They have a few things that are unique to them that set them apart like red heads do. Is there anything more adorable than a wee lass with kinky blonde hair? But I agree, beauty is pretty evenly distributed.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    You left out Amerie (Not technically "mulatto", actually Korean/Black, but I would still get after it).

  • John C. Randolph||

    Never heard of her before you posted that link, but Oh My God.

    -jcr

  • Killazontherun||

    I originally was going to include about thirty examples of beautiful mulatto women in order to collapse my thesis on itself, but had other things on my plate.

  • Calidissident||

    "At least she serves the useful purpose of ending the racist myth that all mulattoes are God's chosen beautiful people."

    At least in mainstream American culture, I don't think this is a popular belief. In terms of pop culture, I would say mulatas are generally considered more attractive than black women, but less attractive than white women. Personally, IMHO (I think it's stupid for anyone to try and force their preferences on everybody else, beauty is ultimately subjective) mixed race women (not just mulatas, but also mestizas, hapas, etc.) are beautiful, generally speaking, compared to most other groups. Not saying they don't have their share of ugly people, and I'm one of those people of the opinion that every race has beautiful women, but I do think mixed race women in general are really attractive.

  • Gladstone||

    Wouldn't the "progressive" and "populist" NC Dems have implemented this?

  • Hyperion||

    Proglodytes, from my historical knowledge, were the pushers of Eugenics, and other bad policies, like income taxes and prohibition.

  • Killazontherun||

    Irving Fisher, the progressive economist, was the head of the nation's leading eugenics institution. They were the propagators of so much terrible policy, and that wasn't by chance. The movement was a reaction against classical liberalism, and they wished to tear down what it protected, the sanctity of the individual, as an impediment to the progress of the state.

  • Sevo||

    He/they were not alone:
    "Scandinavian eugenics: Nordic historians provide new approaches"
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15461971
    There's 'way more; that was a first grab off Google.
    (and now my NSA monitor is just noting that Sevo is checking out eugenics!)

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Progressive darling Sweden had a National Institutie of Racial Biology (which still exists) and administered a widespread sterilization program until the late 70s.

  • Sevo||

    If you read any WWII history, it's real easy to find the reason that Norwegians claim the difference between them and the Swedes is that the Swedes have decent neighbors.
    The Swedes supplied the Nazi's with SKF bearings and high quality ore because they'd be invaded if they didn't! Right up until the spring of '45 when the chance of invasion was a year long gone.
    It took threats of post-war embargoes to get them to quit.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Yep. At least the Finns had a damn good reason to be cooperating with the Germans...

  • Sevo||

    "Yep. At least the Finns had a damn good reason to be cooperating with the Germans..."

    And then the Soviets and then the Germans and then, and then, and then....
    Why the Finns didn't end up like Poland is prolly a result of geography; where you gonna go if you walk over Finland?

  • Nazdrakke||

    Plus the fact that the Finns were ornery, tenacious, probably mostly crazy, and had a habit of given five times worse than they got. Of all the bad guys in WW2, the Finns are the ones I feel some sympathy for, given the situation that they found themselves in vis a vis their predatory Soviet neighbors. It's remarkable, really, that they came out of the war in the shape they did.

  • Sevo||

    "Of all the bad guys in WW2, the Finns are the ones I feel some sympathy for"
    In the case of the Finns, I'd use 'confused guys'.

  • Calidissident||

    I don't consider the Finns "bad guys" in WWII (of course, I don't hold everyone in any country responsible for the actions of the government and military). They didn't really have a choice, unless you consider voluntarily giving your country to Stalin a choice.

  • ||

    Calidissident| 7.29.13 @ 10:54PM

    I remember as a child a family friend who fought in the Danish resistance talking about Western hypocrisy towards the Finns.

    He basically said that in early 1940 the English were praying in Westminster Abbey for the Finns to be delivered from the Bolshevik hordes and the in late 1941 they were praying in Westminster Abbey for the Finns to be crushed by the Bolshevik hordes.

    This was a guy who never shrank from killing Germans. His big one was being called to fix the heating system at Gestapo Headquarters in Copenhagen (he was a plumber by trade and later in Australia made a fortune at it). He "fixed" the heating system allright. After he left the whole building exploded and everyone in it was killed.

    But still, he recognized the Communist menace for what it was. And he recognized Allied hypocrisy as well.

  • ||

    I suppose by modern American terminology he was a terrorist.

  • ||

    Sevo| 7.29.13 @ 9:11PM

    The Swedes were certainly pro-German in WWII and there is a case to be made that they were pro-fascist as well. What threw many of the pro-German types (Lindberg and many American Swedes) off in the end was Hitler's bizarre race theories.

  • Hyperion||

    The movement was a reaction against classical liberalism

    Our new enemies, are the same old enemies.

  • Jose Chung||

    Don't forget the "Living Constitution" interpretation. That's the root of the problem to begin with.

  • PapayaSF||

    You can’t put a price on someone taking your womb or castrating you

    I think this actually involved various tubes being snipped or tied, not castration or womb removal.

  • Killazontherun||

    Before the late nineteen seventies, I think they actually did. I recall a St. Elsewhere episode talking about the change up.

  • Sevo||

    "Before the late nineteen seventies,"...

    That alone is a sad statement.

  • ||

    North Carolina was one of the nations most ruthless states in pursuing the agenda of the Eugenics movement. So much so, that the state granted authority to social workers and welfare officials to petition for the sterilization of their clients.

    Remember, folks, the government and its workers are not your friend.

  • Killazontherun||

    In the 90s I had a black single mother coworker with a kid with downs syndrome who came to me crying a lot about the harassment and threats social workers were giving her for being too slow to comply with their hoop jumping threats. They are not in it for humanitarian reasons.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Compensation of the victims is all well and good, but are they doing anything to find and prosecute the perps who may still be alive?

    -jcr

  • Sevo||

    "Compensation of the victims is all well and good, but are they doing anything to find and prosecute the perps who may still be alive?"

    Same question re: The CA prisons. That should not be a difficult investigation; someone's signature is on the form.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    In Saudi Arabia, with its eye-for-an-eye jurisprudence, it wouldn't be hard to guess what punishment these sterilizers would have received. HINT: Singing soprano.

  • Sevo||

    Not sure Eduard.
    Does the ME culture tolerate those who don't measure up in mental capacity? Anybody got a hint on how they deal with the folks two bricks shy of a load?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Make them kings, Presidents or ministers. That was easy.

  • Tonio||

    John, I suspect that this is only going forward at this time because all of the perps are dead or close to it, or that the statute of limitations has run out. That's the way things happen.

    As satisfying as it is to bring the perps to justice, sometimes we have to settle for making it right (as can be) for the victims.

    Plus, going after the perps only creates an incentive for perps of other, similar crimes to destroy evidence and STFU.

    South Africa's Truth and Reconcilation Commissions are a good model.

  • Jose Chung||

    Sorry, but according to a standing Supreme Court decision (Buck v. Bell) the state is within it's rights to forcibly sterilize those it deems "unfit." After all, in the immortal words of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, "Three generations of imbeciles is enough."

    Add this decision to increasingly affordable genome testing (especially now that your DNA can be forcibly taken from you during a simple arrest, thanks to the SCOTUS of 2013) and you have a recipe for a resurgence in this sort of social engineering.

  • Tonio||

    As is often said here, SCOTUS sometimes gets it wrong and it often stays wrong for at least a few decades.

  • The Hyperbole||

    Are the people directly responsible for these atrocities getting fucked sideways with a petrified pineapple or are a bunch of people who didn't do shit to anyone getting fucked sideways with bogus reparations claims? Sure bad shit happened in the past. Why should anyone but the transgressors pay for any damages done?

  • Killazontherun||

    No, they get new buildings going up at colleges named after them.

  • Nazdrakke||

    Dude, wasn't there a thread just earlier today talking about the honors given to law enforcement agents defending slavery? And you want them to be held accountable for a silly little thing like forced sterilization in the name of eugenics? I mean, that was practically SCIENCE! Mistakes may have been made but this can't possibly reflect badly upon these noble civil servants trying simply to make the world a better place for all of us.

  • Frank_Carbonni||

    Sadly, this is the view of a lot people. Most technocrats really see the world that way. If their policies backfire or get people killed it is, "We tried our best. The world's not perfect. You all would be worse off without our amazing intellect. We'll get it right this time around."

    However, those same fuckers will gladly destroy anyone else who fucks up regardless of the consequences.

  • Frank_Carbonni||

    Argh. Replace "the consequences" with "their intentions".

  • Tonio||

    How are these claims bogus?

  • Hyperion||

    This shit is infuriating:

    FBI responds to Rand

    Extant Supreme Court rulings suggest that such surveillance does not qualify as a “search” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment, Kelly added, and so does not require a warrant

    This is pure fucking bullshit. So if I fly a drone over your house, which has a fence around it, you shouldn't expect privacy because I have the technology to see you without actually being on your land? What about technology that can see you through walls? Do we all give up our rights, because if I can be seen through a wall, and they think I have some drugs or whatever, I lost my 4th amendment protections?

    “I disagree with this interpretation,” Paul said in a statement. “However, given the fact that they did respond to my concerns over drone use on U.S. soil, I have decided to release my hold on the pending FBI director nominee

    No, it's not fucking ok because they answered you, Rand. Come on, man, grow a bigger pair.

  • ||

    No, it's not fucking ok because they answered you, Rand. Come on, man, grow a bigger pair.

    I got to go with Rand on this one. It's about picking your battles. He can bring the issue up again on his terms by drafting legislation with some bipartisan support.

  • Hyperion||

    I don't always agree with campaign mode Rand. Ok, I pretty much never agree with campaign mode Rand.

    Which is why I like Amash and Massie much better right now, they aren't in pandering mode.

  • SweatingGin||

    I can see some reasons to do it that way. Make the administration or FBI or whoever go on the record with something, let it pass. Repeat.

    Make it a pattern, that he'll hold stuff up temporarily, but release it if you give him some information. Pretty soon just the threat might get information out.

    Also, I wonder if that method gets more things out.

  • Irish||

    Which is why I like Amash and Massie much better right now, they aren't in pandering mode.

    Earlier today Paul went after the neo-con wing of the Republican party and criticized disaster relief programs. Neither of those things are exactly pandering.

  • Hyperion||

    You don't really think that I missed that?

    I don't want to see Rand give up that Senate seat, where he can be very effective, to chase after the POTUS prize. I don't think that the country is yet ready for a Libertarian president. We still want a lying war monger, so we get Hitlary next.

  • Nazdrakke||

    Agree with you that Paul helps us out far more in the senate. Not sure that Hillary is going to be the next POTUS, though.. age and baggage and the Obama machine hates her. That said I'd love to see the 2016 race be Palin/Bachmann vs. Clinton/Warren. That would be EPIC.

  • Hyperion||

    Palin/Bachmann vs. Clinton/Warren. That would be EPIC

    Oh for Christs sake, you sadistic fucker.

    As long as Palin and Bachman have a disagreement on stage and get in a cat fight and rip each others clothes off, and then Clinton and Warren get into a ... ummm ... rat fight? And kill each other one way or other, I'm in.

  • Nazdrakke||

    As long as Palin and Bachman have a disagreement on stage and get in a cat fight and rip each others clothes off

    That's what you want? Have you ever looked into their eyes as their doing their thing on Fox? What would a clothes tearing catfight turned into a smoldering soul-gaze of desire between those two do to the fabric of space-time? I shudder to think.

  • Irish||

  • Irish||

    age and baggage and the Obama machine hates her.

    Who cares if the Obama machine hates her? Are you really telling me that if Hillary was the candidate the Obamites wouldn't immediately toe the line and do whatever the party needed?

    You clearly don't understand how much the Democrats are willing to give up for the cause. The Democrats would sell their children for an opportunity to maintain power. The Democrats managed to convince Democratic women to ignore the fact that they knew the mayor of a major California city was a sexual predator. Women who grew up doubtlessly claiming to be feminists sold every principle they have to keep a Democratic molester in a fucking mayoral office.

    What do you think they'd do for the presidency?

  • Nazdrakke||

    I get what you're saying, Irish, truly, however what I think of making the statement I did is that the level of enthusiasm that will exist for her will not be the same as for Obama. Elections in the US still turn on a small axis, however much the two parties may resemble each other, and I think that the Dems would be foolish to run her and take that chance.

  • Tonio||

    Sure, they'd tow the lion if she got the nomination. But it's the getting to the nomination that's the issue.

  • Calidissident||

    "Agree with you that Paul helps us out far more in the senate."

    Than he would in the presidency? Sorry, but I don't see how that's the case. Although I will say that if Rand was an unpopular president, which is possible (especially with the MSM today) even if he doesn't do a bad job, that could be a major blow to the future of libertarianism (of course, the future isn't all that bright at the moment, and a libertarianish president would be one of the few ways to actually bring libertarianism into the mainstream). Also, I believe Rand can run for president (even if he wins the nomination) and still run for re-election in the Senate. Didn't Biden do that (as vice president, but I don't see why that would be relevant) in 08?

  • Nazdrakke||

    Than he would in the presidency?

    I suppose it's because I think that it's premature. I love the idea of a Libertarian(-ish) president, but right now he can affect legislation in a way that he would not be able to as president. That power will continue to grow with time if he can hang on to his seat and keep the statists' feet to the fire. If he were elected president it wouldn't be because the GOP rank and file suddenly had a come to Libertarianism moment and the MSM would pull out every bit of insanity they could dream up to destroy such an existential threat to their ideology.

  • Calidissident||

    "I suppose it's because I think that it's premature."

    I would agree that ideally, the country would be more libertarian, and Congress would have more libertarians, which would allow a libertarian president to accomplish more. That said, I disagree, and think that even in the current context, the president has far more influence than a senator. As president, he can block any legislation that doesn't have 2/3rds approval in both houses, and can end or limit (at least temporarily) all sorts of abuses by the executive branch. He also gets to make Supreme Court appointments (albeit with Senate approval), stop unnecessary wars, etc.

  • Nazdrakke||

    All fair points Cali, and I agree with a lot of that. I think, however, with some kind of real support in congress that it could be a PR disaster for libertarians. (as you alluded to above) I believe that the media onslaught from both team red and blue would be like nothing we've ever seen, and they are still powerful. A patient approach, with a bit broader support would make a more lasting impression on the direction of the country. The narrative is starting to falter a bit, but unfortunately I think that the people are not ready to throw off their chains quite yet.

    I could be wrong, of course, and a lot can happen in three years. Just how I see it at the moment. I'd love to be wrong.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Picking a fight with the FBI while planning to run for president might not be the wisest plan. Even if Rand is squeaky clean, the feds have many tactics and few scruples.

  • Hyperion||

    Libertarians don't know much fear. But you already knew that. When there are enough of us, which only needs to be a significant fraction of the teams, we will kick the shit out of them, because they are all spineless pussies.

  • Bryan C||

    Eh. He's already on their short list. They'll target him just the same no matter when he runs or who he's fighting, just to set an example for the rest of us. It's the new normal.

  • Sevo||

    OT:
    The SF Chron discovers those who vote for the MIC get money from them! Commenters demand money get prohibited from politicos! And demand the sun rise in the west!
    http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05el.....ntractors/

  • Hyperion||

    Good article.

    Boehner the orange traitor, is pretty damn high up on that list.

    I like this comment:

    Get money out of politics. This is insane

    Yeah, no shit, I've only been saying this for 5+ years now.

    As long as Politics is about getting elected so you can enrich yourself and all your friends through all sorts of cronyism and graft, we are totally fucked.

  • Killazontherun||

    It occurred to me the other day as I read a lefty describing the banking problem of 2008, he seemed to be taking the 'Too Big To Fail' idea at face value, and I have scoffed at that from the beginning. I played golf with some junior rank guys at BB&T the summer before the collapse who knew of upper management plans to take advantage of the shit that was going to hit the fan by buying up assets on the cheap, those banks that got themselves in deep could fall and it would have been barely a hiccup, but then I realized when I re-read the guy's post, by 'too big to fail' he meant, 'too politically entrenched to fail', and when read that way, he did not sound naive at all.

  • ||

    But who is going to compensate the victims of those who were forcefully sterilized?

  • Sevo||

    Rhetoric?
    Easy; the people who had nothing to do with the decisions; the taxpayers

  • Tonio||

    The people who were paying taxes at the time that happened had something to do with it.

  • seguin||

    The Cleveland Browns?

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

    The left and eugenics have a long history together.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    This is an interesting bit of information:
    http://www.northcarolinahistor...../315/entry

    Many discuss whether the sterilization program was inherently racist or sexist. Until the 1960s, more whites were sterilized than blacks. From 1929 to 1940, for instance, whites comprised almost four-fifths of the sterilizations. During the 1960s, when social workers had the authority to recommend sterilizations, the number of African American sterilizations increased dramatically (approximately ninety nine percent).

    If the above is true, that would mean that more black people were sterilized at the hands of the professional, credentialed, and ever-concerned social workers than under the Eugenics Board.

    Interesting.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Same is true for the Germans when they had eugenics programs in place. Some 70-80% of recommendations came from social workers.

  • C. Anacreon||

    Yet every social worker you ever meet is convinced that he or she is personally the most empathetic, caring individual the world has ever known, and all of their motives are beyond reproach.

  • Nazdrakke||

    , that would mean that more black people were sterilized

    Well that's totally shocking. By which I mean entirely predictable.

  • Agammamon||

    ". . .to provide justice and compensate victims who were forcibly sterilized by the State of North Carolina" by former N.C. governor Bev Perdue. "

    Took me a couple readings to realize you didn't mean the Bev Perdue had forcibly sterilized people.

  • Hyperion||

    I almost asked, what is a Bev Perdue?, but then I saw:

    Bev Perdue

  • SIV||

    I was driving all day to get here in South Oklahoma, or DFW as the locals call it so I might have missed this tidbit from the story of the Dc green paint vandal. Woodrow Wilson is buried in the Washington National Cathedral? Like a fucking Pope or Saint of government?

    At least we know where to exhume the remains for the trial after we regain our liberty.

  • Almanian!||

    Please wave to the Street Outlaw racers if you happen upon them. PS They LOVE it when you pretend you're a cop there to bust them. LOL wut?

  • ||

    I was driving all day to get here in South Oklahoma East California, or DFW

  • kbolino||

    I see you haven't been to Austin...

  • Irish||

    Shut the fuck up, American.

  • Nazdrakke||

    I think

    Dude, nobody here cares what you think.

  • Sevo||

    "Actually, the women were sterilized without the approval of the state medical board. A few of the women claimed they "felt coerced." Emphasis on "felt.""

    Cite please. Emphasis on "cite"; you're really not due any 'please'.

  • Gene||

    He's not due or worth a reply.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    "Google it", translated from Idiot to English means, "I neither know nor am I able to argue the claim I just made."

    It's okay, Murikin. I forgive you for your ignorance. Go in peace.

  • Bryan C||

    Yeah, they're only in prison. Where their safety, medical care, meals, privileges, and the possibility of eventual freedom depend pretty much entirely on the goodwill of the people suggesting that they agree to be sterilized. Totally voluntary.

  • Bungle in the jungle||

  • ||

    Forced sterilization is always a bad idea.

    Next Question.

  • Frank_Carbonni||

    Okay, so you found American's blog.

  • RagingAlbino||

    I honestly had no idea they still did force sterilization.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement