Well having such a horrible thing happen to her at such a young age. It does not seem likely that she will ever return to normal. How would you even begin to treat/rehabilitate a young girl from such a thing?
My definition of "dead weight" is someone who can not function in society without constantly using more than they produce. A semi retarded high school drop out that becomes a grocery store clerk for the rest of his life is NOT dead weight. A woman who constantly needs meds and therapy just to live each day with out a nervous break down without a job IS.
I raise the question; why NOT remove the dead weight from society to make it better?
Again I am just stating my opinion which is open to change. If you disagree, explain why without resorting to insults. If you do and your point(s) are valid, chances are I will revoke my statements.
All right, I'll try not to insult your, eh, rather draconian viewpoints.
The biggest problem with your line of logic is that it requires taking a snapshot in time and making judgments based on that snapshot. What if the woman in your example is only in this state for a year or two, and after considerable therapy and meeting with the right people she goes on to become a high profile director of an institute which services women who had similar plights to hers? If we just take that snapshot of yours, we'll kill her, and instead keep a "semi retarded high school drop out" who, we'll say to further my argument, is going to be working in the grocery store, in the same position, until he's too old to work anymore.
The other problem is that such a government would be unsustainable in the long run. I think you'd find that the process involved in 1) trying to find out who's "worthy" of living, 2) Assessing thier overall situation, and 3) killing everyone who fails to meet standards would be cumbersome, costly and wouldn't really help you that much in the end. You'd be so wrapped up in paperwork and bureaucracy that you'd have a long line of "unworthy people" dying before they could get killed. (Hey, this is starting to sound like death row...) Remember, Albert Einstein didn't do well in his younger years in school; by your standards, he would've been killed off and we would've lost so much.
Besides, don't kid yourself: Most (I would even guess all) Americans use resources above and beyond what they produce. I don't think even you would be stupid enough to think that 310,000,000 people ought to be killed for this, although I guess I could be wrong.
Also, although I wouldn't argue that rehabilitation isn't impossible, I would also point out that our current system for dealing with prisoners leaves little room for rehabilitation. Our prison system is HORRIBLE at making people better members of society. If we're not sticking them in a cell, beating them all the time and feeding them lousy food until their time is up, we're giving them soft beds, television, gyms, computers, and more resources than some of them will ever enjoy outside of "the pen." Not to mention it's notoriously difficult to find a job or an apartment after being released from prison (even after a false conviction!).
Gaming World Forums
Boy, 15, gets 60 years for StL County sex attack of girl, 6
