This one is pretty complicated. The implications of population control are great but, here is my argument for it:
Human beings have well exceeded the population at which we could find some equilibrium with the planet. Population control seems to be the only way to mitigate the lack of space a resources facing our species. Any thoughts?
Should you be allowed to have as many babies as you want, or should there be a world wide limit, as a consideration for future generations?
Personaly no one should be able to tell you how many children you can have, as long as you can support them with your current finincial situation. I think your looking at the question all wrong, we should looking for ways to make/extract new resources so we can become larger, for our civilization to become smaller would not be practial. The nature of Humans is to expand and conquer and to build things bigger, faster, and better.
I think population control is an ok thing. As long as you're just limiting the number of babies as opposed to killing off people that are already alive, then sure. It's a lot better than people having, say, six children and not being able to properly take care of them all because they have so many. Population control to say, two or three children per family would be agreeable to me. I think it's a responsible but difficult decision that has to be made. The more crowded the world gets, the worse and worse the conditions on the world will get and frankly, I think it's not that atrocious of a decision. Limiting the number of children a person can have is reasonable. Take you, for example, Pickle. According to your profile, you have a baby(congratulations on that, by the way). In your opinion, having taken care of him for a while now(as you are trying to explain words to the kid, meaning he or she can speak), do you think it's plausible that two people(not even counting single parents) can take proper care of five, six, or upwards children? Would these children get the same care they would if they were only children, or if there were a reasonable number of them? I think not. Therefore, I think that people who have lots of children are being irresponsible(including the ones who are doing it just because their religion says they should; LDS, I'm looking at you). On this train of thought, I therefore think that population control is a reasonable and responsible decision by the government. How they enforce it is another thing entirely, however. And I agree with Ben; expansion is what we really need, but if our population is ballooning out of our control, then obviously we're just going to keep expanding and expanding until we can't anymore. And besides, once Earth is filled up, where are we going to go? If the population continues to increase at this rate, then it is nearly impossible that we will be able to colonize another planet so that we can live on it. And even if we could, even if somehow we had the technology when we needed it, we still would not be as happy as we would be if we'd just stayed on Earth and kept our population down. Think about it. Excess children are not going to get the same opportunities as children whose parents had fewer kids, therefore having less children is actually more of a kindness.
Wow. I really would like to make a large post to state my opinion on this too, but I think your post already says it all Hypermnestra.
Anyway as resource shortage is getting more and more serious we will have to handle it some way, either by population control or by any kind of restrictions, for example concerning food. Or maybe both.
Wow. I really would like to make a large post to state my opinion on this too, but I think your post already says it all Hypermnestra.
Just Hyper or Nest would be fine. But thank you. I actually hadn't realized I'd written very much.
Anyway as resource shortage is getting more and more serious we will have to handle it some way, either by population control or by any kind of restrictions, for example concerning food. Or maybe both.
I don't think we will need population control for much time. The situation may become critical in the next decades, but when countries like India, china and Nigeria will become as developed as USA and Europe their birth rate will become as low as our and overpopulation problem will become less serious.
I say we have a massive cull - starting with all convicted/proven murders, rapists and terrorists THEN move on to people with genetic diseases and serious health problems and then maybe to ginger people (although I class that as a serious health problem).
i agree we need to limit the amount of children to like 3 or 2 and if they have more than that well >.> <.< they go to a special place and pro lifers i don't care if we take their lives if it makes it hospitable for your children in the future don't be so technically selfish
I say we have a massive cull - starting with all convicted/proven murders, rapists and terrorists THEN move on to people with genetic diseases and serious health problems and then maybe to ginger people (although I class that as a serious health problem).
ya im gonna shit a brick if overpopulation turned out to be the end of us, not that there is any end for us in the near or even far off future, but a planet can only support so much. btw what is the estimated capacity for Earth? i know it could technically hold way more tan now, but i mean have resources to boot.
I'm no nature hippy but we have been separating ourselves from nature a lot lately we could use more natural stuff instead of cement asphalt and concrete like using giant trees as dividers in roads >.>
