Says a Twitter pal, “Why not just roll this into the new civil forfeiture regs, so the feds can come by your house and take your car and balls at the same time?”

Am I correct that the nationalist wing of the right is more or less okay with this while the conservatarian types are not? If you like it, it’s basic common sense: So long as the procedure’s not mandatory, there’s nothing wrong with incentivizing criminals not to have kids they can’t pay for. That’s one less little welfare recipient Tennessee’s taxpayers will need to support. If you don’t like it, it’s also common sense: The government is dangling 30 days of liberty at people in state custody if they’ll forfeit their right to have children. Yeah, the procedure’s reversible, but not everyone who gets it will have the cash or insurance later to undo it. And even if they do, you’re still setting a precedent here in which the state can coerce captive “undesirables” into choosing sterilization. Bad precedent. Almost certainly not going to fly in court.

Actual quote from the judge who instituted the policy: “I hope to encourage them to take personal responsibility and give them a chance, when they do get out, to not to be burdened with children.” “Personal responsibility” by definition excludes choices made under coercion, right?