Guns for Vasectomies
Nick Gillespie | March 18, 2008, 4:07pm
Because this modern world just isn't fucking weird enough:
Officials in central Madhya Pradesh state's Shivpuri district decided to adopt the policy—already tried out by some neighbouring states—to increase the low vascectomy rate.
"I came to know that it had to do with their perceived notion of manliness," said Manish Shrivastav, administrative chief of Shivpuri district, part of the Indian Chambal region, which is famed for its lawlessness and bandits.
"I then decided to match it with a bigger symbol of manliness—a gun licence," he said. "And the ploy worked."...
"I never bothered to apply for a licence before because I knew it was not so easy to get," said Shivpuri resident K.K. Saxena, 55, who recently underwent the procedure. "But when I heard about this then I decided to apply."
Saxena was provided with a medical slip confirming his sterilisation to attach to his gun application.
About 10,000 to 15,000 people apply each year for gun licences in Shivpuri, but only about 500 permits are granted annually.
More here.
Here's hoping the Supreme Court, currently hearing its major gun-control case since 1939, doesn't read about this.
Mad Max | March 18, 2008, 8:43pm | #
Once again, let me call attention to Pope Piux XI's 1930 encyclican *Casti Connubii,* which denounced compulsory sterilization at a time when progressive, right-thinking people were all hot for it:
"68. Finally, that pernicious practice must be condemned which closely touches upon the natural right of man to enter matrimony but affects also in a real way the welfare of the offspring. For there are some who over solicitous for the cause of eugenics, not only give salutary counsel for more certainly procuring the strength and health of the future child - which, indeed, is not contrary to right reason - but put eugenics before aims of a higher order, and by public authority wish to prevent from marrying all those whom, even though naturally fit for marriage, they consider, according to the norms and conjectures of their investigations, would, through hereditary transmission, bring forth defective offspring. And more, they wish to legislate to deprive these of that natural faculty by medical action despite their unwillingness; and this they do not propose as an infliction of grave punishment under the authority of the state for a crime committed, not to prevent future crimes by guilty persons, but against every right and good they wish the civil authority to arrogate to itself a power over a faculty which it never had and can never legitimately possess. . . .
"70. Public magistrates have no direct power over the bodies of their subjects; therefore, where no crime has taken place and there is no cause present for grave punishment, they can never directly harm, or tamper with the integrity of the body, either for the reasons of eugenics or for any other reason. St. Thomas teaches this when inquiring whether human judges for the sake of preventing future evils can inflict punishment, he admits that the power indeed exists as regards certain other forms of evil, but justly and properly denies it as regards the maiming of the body. 'No one who is guiltless may be punished by a human tribunal either by flogging to death, or mutilation, or by beating.'"
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii_en.html
