Oh dear. The clitterati are up in arms because some charity bint is trying to get druggies to get sterilised to stop having kids that they can't take care of.
I had several nearly identical discussions on twitter with people who were all clearly of the opinion that drug addicts were worthless imbeciles who couldn't be trusted to find their own arseholes with both hands because they were so drug-addled. But at some point, they might turn round and become solid, upstanding fellow-statists who would raise more unquestioning cattle to feed the state, so their balls and ovaries deserved protection.
Now, I think that Barbara Harris's Project Prevention is a pretty disgusting thing. It's judgemental and has some very nasty undertones. But the fact of the matter is that this is all an entirely voluntary transaction. The addict gets some money in exchange for submitting to a (probably reversible) surgical procedure. At no point is anyone threatening the druggie with jail time.
I think it sounds like a patronising, demeaning, almost nasty deal. I wouldn't want to undergo it it. But crucially, I don't think it's my place to tell druggies how to live their lives, nor do I think it's any of my business to tell Barbara Harris how to spend her privately-raised charity money that other people have given freely knowing what the charity's objectives were, nor do I think I have all the answers for other people.
It is, in a sense, like defending neo-nazis' right to talk loads of bullshit. I don't agree with it, but it's their right to say things other people don't like, just like it's my right to call people cunts.
It's people's right to enter into voluntary transactions that they believe are mutually beneficial. And it's nobody else's business but those of the people transacting.