We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by tho

Name86651	Tk!8pR6whaH[m$K(B>f♳\|.+c5;E⚗{☖'j-SFxt#r
Emailc)y⛿j\|⚵w(VQ4B+ak {T-q*FU93/g_A⛰⛿z5☶⚀?DX}Y!]^Z%'EdCJ`\<[67ubp⛔;o2~&v⚰1,OG>Hs$i=RMlK0	Spoiler Image_x4`f7JnGqUKrE⚽♛V&b\DZYA⛅tp⚵y<,8]S0kP%
Comment
Flags
File
Embed =b e⚓⛐^Cz(w♭-V,Yc)!⛼X/5T0SJoKW⚎[M'EIa♾>6Lj+☈y7G{Uh.<AR`1D]:Zi#%Hp2f9rnlqk☫Fm\|g}v~84
Password	(For file deletion.)♏=>bF`☋~dN2*o31^i9h6Srj;DRlYIBu'kx⚳]☙☾7&:<J5tX#L(T?M)vH-4gEU{⚑\|/PzwW ⛣Vf%,$K sce⚾

Anonymous 03/25/25 (Tue) 19:23:15 No.138928

We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

Anonymous 03/25/25 (Tue) 19:27:15 No.138929

text too long

Anonymous 03/25/25 (Tue) 19:28:26 No.138930

are you saying people on welfare should be prioritized for the draft?

Anonymous 03/25/25 (Tue) 19:39:53 No.138933

>>138930
It's a quote from the supreme court case Buck v. Bell (1927) where a judge argues that if good men can be called into war for the welfare of the states then there is no reason disabled people cannot be sterilized for the welfare of the state.

Anonymous 03/26/25 (Wed) 10:03:45 No.139033

>>138933
what do they consider disabled in that context/ear

Anonymous 03/26/25 (Wed) 18:47:08 No.139113

>>139033
In the court case the woman was declared to be mentally retarded with the mental age of an 8 year old, prone to promiscuity and immorality. She was actually an average intelligence woman who was committed to a mental institution by her parents after being raped by her brother to save face. Her defense lawyer was a eugenics advocate who worked for the mental asylum she was committed in so her legal defense was terrible (He didn't contest the prosecution's claims about her retardation at all). She was sterilized after the supreme court case. The supreme court was considering the legality of sterilization laws rather than the mental fitness of the defendant (which was considered in a previous case).

Anonymous 03/26/25 (Wed) 19:05:45 No.139114

File: 1743015944863.jpg (245.02 KB, 582x699, 17425330341070.jpg)

>Three generations of imbeciles are enough.