Government Control of Sex and Procreation - Essay Example

erance of potentially damaging sexual crimes and sexual deviance forces upon the government a responsibility to assume some degree of control in the situation. E. Point One: It is the responsibility of governments to protect the individual rights of its citizens, which includes a voluntary exposure by one to another to the HIV virus which is fatal in most cases. If it prosecutes voluntary exposure of all dangerous chemicals to the public, then surely the HIV virus would be no different. Along these lines, everyone should be compelled test for their status as infected or uninfected, and a database will be kept on this information (THT Policy Statement).

Point Two: Given the low recidivism rate of sex offenders, it is not out of the question to mandate sexual castration for all convicted of related crimes. It is unlikely that such individuals can be rehabilitated for their deviant behavior, and the only effective means of preventing the extremely damaging and traumatic crimes of child molestation and rape is to enforce law (CSOM Summary). Point Three: Some individuals exhibit extreme irresponsibility in handling their reproductive life. Individuals like Nadia Sulaiman, even while being assisted by government programs, ought not to burden society with the costs of raising children that come from such irresponsibility (Reuters).

Jencks, Christopher and Kathryn Edin. Do Poor Women Have a Right to Bear Children? December 1994. February 2009 . D. The problem with allowing government the responsibility of regulating private citizens’ sexual and reproductive affairs is that doing so contradicts everything which is just in the modern world. Forcefully castrating and preventing people from reproducing takes us back to more uncivilized times in which reproductive organs were treated as means to ensuring the public good. Class differences and economics do not provide sufficient