Like in China they have a 1 kid Policy.
However we all live on the same planet and have excceded the 5 Billion mark (are over 6 billion) which the United Nations have said is a maximum sustainable level.
its not even about food, its about space, housing, consumption of NON-Renuwable resources, and Pollution (air and other pollution)
Also what about people who have kids on welfare, shouldnt there be laws that if you cannot afford to have kids you shouldnt be allowed to have them?
Looking for Input by intelligent people, having too many kids is being SELFISH. (its even selfish against your own kids since every birth makes life harder on those already born and in 20 years will be a real problem when all todays born kids start looking for houseing/jobs/clean air)
haveing LOTS of kids is SELFISH becuase you are only thinking of yourself wanting kids – NOT of the rest of the world and the impact of those extra people.
People are NOT dying as fast as they used to, people are living longer, if this were not true our population would be leveling instead of growing.
What about welfare people who cannot afford their own kids?
Long term: In a wealthy and advanced country like ours or those in Europe people naturally stop having so many children. Some countries actually have negative growth. So I think perhaps these poor countries with exploding populations need some wealth, hope, etc. in order to just not want to have so many kids.
Short term: Though I am not particularly against sneaking an IUD into some people, just because they don’t have enough education, human rights (for women) and/or income to properly use birth control, and I don’t like that kids are being born to only die shortly from AIDS or starvation.
Comment by linav88 — May 20, 2005 @ 2:01 am
Your opinions are extreme but they are yours so as long as you do not procreate, the world will be a better place. And people who have a lot of kids are not selfish they are the exact opposite SELFLESS because being a parent is the hardest job in the world.
Comment by hollyberry — May 22, 2005 @ 1:32 pm
That’s your view. Though, just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make them less intelligent. Unless you counted the people yourself, you’ll have to evaluate if the statistics you’ve read are reliable; not only that, but if in the grand scope of planetary thinking- is that overpopulation?
Like floods, famine, and war- nature (yes, war is considered a natural phenominon like famine because both produce the natural effect of death due to lack of reasources, or the idea thereof) has a way of cleaning itself of waste and over abundance.
I think overpopulation is the least of our worries, and in no way the cause of our problems.
Comment by Aloha — May 23, 2005 @ 7:31 am
It’s certainly debatable, but likely the stronger arguments for such a law would be supported more by people who don’t have/want kids. I have one and I’m completely happy with one. When he was born, I thought to myself how you have to apply for a job to see if they’ll even let you work at McDonald’s, but anybody can have a baby…there should at least be some sort of test about who you are as a parent before you’re allowed.
Then again, how do you police it, and how do you get away from the China Girl syndrome, where everyone wants a boy, so they throw away their girls like trash.
Definitely more education is required, but I think outlawing people having kids would be strongly opposed by many in the developed world.
Good question!
Comment by dazedandconfused — May 25, 2005 @ 10:21 pm
yes! yes! yes! and i say bring back court ordered sterilization. in SOME cases it is necessary. in my county there is a 15yr old girl pregnant with her THIRD child. her aunt is raising the other kids (ages 18months and 4 months). now the family is drawing straws to see who will have to take this one
Comment by mp3 — May 26, 2005 @ 6:59 pm
No. There should not be a law. Don’t forget that people are going to die too. Plus, even if some families choose to have five children, as long as other choose to have none, it balances out.
Comment by Ashley — May 28, 2005 @ 7:50 pm
Look at china, only one kid,and they are one fo the top greenhouse gas emitters on the planet.
Comment by Lucky Man. — May 29, 2005 @ 5:57 pm
Some people can’t have kids at all – some people have 14 kids (most only have 2-3)
Who are you to decide who can have kids, how many they can have etc?
China is a country ruled by Communism – they can only have one child and because of that rule the women hide pregnancies and abandon baby girls all the time to try and have a boy they can keep – there law doesn’t prevent them from getting pregnant over and over and over and delivering – if they want a boy they just try and try until they get one…so there law about 1 only is part of the reason there is such an over population in the world (that’s why people in the US and Canada adopt little girls from china so much to help reduce the number in orphanages over there)
mankind will over time will either (as a whole) learn to be more environmentally friendly or we will ultimately destroy the world and find a new way to live.
Just do what you can now to help prevent it – recycle, reduce, reuse, car pool , walk, use a bike, use public transit, don’t waste water or electricity. etc.
But don’t even go to the point where you try and control how many kids a person has, you never know who will give birth to the man or woman who will cure aids, or even solve our environmental issues, or will cure cancer, or heart disease etc.
Comment by Finchy — May 31, 2005 @ 12:20 am
Welfare should not pay for more then 1. Either get fixed or get off welfare.
I agree people should not have kids they cant support. But the people on welfare have larger families. Its very selfish to have children you cant support.
I myself have 3 children but i SUPPORT them myself.
I know a woman that has 6 kids…….. all diffent dads…. she gets over 1200 a month in child support ( which she blows and never buys anything for the kids) and gets 900.00 a month in food stamps…. she works 1 day a week for 6 hours and acts like it kills her………….. her (new) husband works under the table and they are trying for baby 7………… Thats what is wrong with the US. Too many dead beats looking for a handout…. and cheating the system.
Comment by tammer — June 1, 2005 @ 8:54 pm
Agreed…
However many people are ignorant about the problems with over population, or in denial that the earth is currently over populated.
Many are selfish and feel “my 2-3 kids wont have an impact” yet of course if everyone felt that way then obviously there would be an impact.
Our lifespans are longer … having more even 1 child is contributing the the problem as since neither you nor your spouce is probably dead that 1 kid is an addition. In fact that 1 kid probably isnt even replacing your parents as very likely they are still alive.
We are facing a catastrophy at it is our kids who will have to pay the price. Its predicted in 50 years even people in North America will be eating cat and dog simply becuase most farm land will be consumed as cities or will be raising food for people rather than food for beef cattle, as such beef will be hard to come by and very $$$…
Its predicted that in 50-100 years we will have to impose manditory life sentenses for people who simply “live too long”
it is the selfish actions of people today that will make these things a reality
and correct people on low income should be responsible enough to limit their having kids… if you cant afford them – dont have them…
Comment by CF_ — June 2, 2005 @ 5:57 am
I agree 100% with you. I know too many people around here that have 3-4 kids and couldnt even afford/take care/or manage 1…and then shes just sucking up welfare because she cant keep her legs shut! come on i agree. But if you can afford it then all power to you have kids- their the future of the world. I have this neighbor who has 3 boys under the age of 6…after the first one she was so determined to have a girl she made her BF try 2 times again…. and she doesnt work to take care of them……errrrr i could go on forever, people like that suck!
Comment by Jettica Waits... — June 2, 2005 @ 3:37 pm
Well who is going to police this 1 kid policy?
We happen to live in a Democracy and can make our own decisions.
However you are welcome to relocate and move anywhere else in the free world if you do not like the poilicies here.
JMO
Comment by Sharon F — June 5, 2005 @ 4:00 pm
I agree with you to a point. I was married had my children and than things happened with my relationship that we ended it. I was than a single mom I had nothing so I had to live off of government assistance. I put myself through school and I got a job and I worked my butt off but the more I made the more the housing that I lived in was increased. I could not get my head out of the water no matter how hard I tried honestly it would of been easier for me to sit at home and do nothing than it would of me busting my butt and not even getting ahead. I am remarried now and I have finished my education for now and have a great job to where I don’t need assistance anymore. But for those who go through situations to where they need it I don’t mind my taxes helping them. When it comes to those people who want to sit there and put all there money up there nose and every where else and think that something is owed to them yeah I have a problem with it and they don’t need to have children. Also life is going to throw many curves at you and one day you may be the one asking for help. So nobody has the right to judge someone until you know them…
Comment by ladybug — June 6, 2005 @ 5:06 am
In my opinion such a law would not really be enforceable. China may have a “1 child law” but families there keep having children until they get a boy. These girl children end up abonded and placed in overcrowded orphanages until the get adopted or sadly die. If the child is not abandoned they end up being killed by the mother or father. China is also a communist country whereas we are a democracy take away a persons rights to procreate and what will be next…our freedom of speech so that people like all of us cannot express our own opinions and thoughts?
I get frustrated when I hear people complain about no housing. I drive around my town and there is so much new construction being done when in my neighborhood there are 7 houses sitting empty and rotting away because people selfishly want “new” houses. Why do you need something new to keep up with the Joneses? Why do you need that big gas guzzling SUV? Because your friend has one? I think thats selfish!
As for people on welfare I agree that women who keep having babies with different fathers at young ages should be urged to have tubal ligations. But there is a huge misconception about Welfare in America being all single moms or people who don’t work. This is untrue! The majority of people on welfare are families who are struggling to make ends meet due to low paying jobs, job loss, and the economy. The second largest amount of people on welfare are women who have gotten divorced from their spouses and the fathers do not pay child support…make these men pay for their part in “overpopulating” the world! The system needs an overhaul I agree but more people need to do research about the actual state of the welfare system befor ethey jump to conclusions.
I think you are intelligent and well spoken but I don’t feel that just because I don’t agree with you that I’m not intelligent and I certainly do not think I’m selfish because I chose to have a larger family that my husband and I support without welfare! We live in a modest 3 bedroom home thats older, we have 1 car, walk or ride our bikes whenever possible, we are raising our children to reduce, recycle, reuse, we conserve energy and water. We don’t need to keep up with the joneses by having a bigger house, car etc. Most families in our area live in new 5 bedroom homes and drive SUVs and they have 1 or 2 children…now thats a waste and selfish IMHO!
Comment by girlzmommy — June 9, 2005 @ 1:46 am
I absolutely think they should limit anyone on welfare from having more children…If you can afford them, want to love and take care of them,,,go for it,,,but if you are using them to suck money out of the state…quit it, and if you are just an animal having sex without protection,,,let the state protect the unwanted children but sterilizing one or both parents..
Comment by madsmaha1 — June 10, 2005 @ 7:56 pm
Well, in some places, there is no access to birth control, so how exactly do you plan on enforcing this law Against procreation? Even if birth control is availible, traditional laws and/or culture may prohibit access to using it, creating babies that the families don’t want to begin with. Why is there an AIDS crisis in many parts of Africa even when condoms are availible? Men refuse to use them even when women beg and plead. Babies obviously result. A law won’t help. And it’s not as if a now-widowed woman with AIDS and 6 kids can afford the one she’s pregnant with, but abortion is going to leave 6 orphans and then what? Let’s get real.
Forced sterilization? (by drug, surgery, or other method) And then, of whom? The women or the men or both? Either carries risks, even in countries with great medical care, but in places with lousy care and poor sanitation, death is more likely to result than anything. Good, you say? Less people to worry about? We might as well line people up and begin mass exterminations if that’s the attitude we’re going to take.
How do you select who is worthy of having children? A lottery? Genetic testing to weed out the “undesirables”? Anyone heard of the Nazis? They tried it. Global uproar. How many children is too many? One per currently living person who lives to the age of 24.6 years of age? How is someone supposed to enforce that? Baby farms? Nazis did that too. And what about people who choose not to have choldren? Are they messing up the scheme of things and throwing off the balence?
Then there are the attitudes that it is the duty of a woman to have sex with a man whenever and where ever he demands it, no matter what. Ever heard of the multitudes of women slaughtered because they resist rape in war-torn Dufar and the thousands of babies that result from the women who manage to survive? Who is going to stop the rapists? What law can possibly control them? They’re already rapists! Is another law going to make them stop and think “gee, I’m wrong for making more babies”? Not hardly.
So, given all this- no birth control, unwillingness to share responsibility for controlling birth rates, unrelenting rape, complete disregard for the laws that already exist, culture, tradition, attitudes, healthcare and lack there-of, and the face that humans are really just mammals-animals- in the end… no law will ever control the human population. We are foolish to think it possible.
Law? No. Education and choices and enabling people to do things to help themselves live better lives, yes.
Comment by sandostrich — June 11, 2005 @ 8:48 pm
I think as long as you can afford them then you can have as many as you want.
I don’t agree with someone popping out a new kid every 2 years to stay on the system, its done. I think there should be some kind of limit to that.
Comment by Gin A — June 14, 2005 @ 2:23 am
money isn’t the issue. the people who are morons and do not teach their kids any morals or let them do whatever they want or don’t care what they do or just yell and scream at them … these are the people that shouldn’t keep having kids. Yeah-some of those people are the people who are on welfare but the welfare itself isn’t the real problem. ya gotta look at the big picture. The KIND of people in the world has much more to do with how the world will be in 20 years MUCH MUCH more than if they had money. Many kids who grew up with little money go on to college and have wonderful jobs. Many of the kids who grew up with an alcoholic father and a slut mother will be depressed, have many problems with anxiety, and will much more likely to drop out of school, end up in jail, and be depressed. This does not mean they WILL b/c some overcome these things but they are more likely. It doesn’t matter if you have money or not. That has nothing to do with how you raise your children and what you teach them as they grow up
Comment by jon jon's girl — June 15, 2005 @ 4:26 am
That’s a ridiculous question
People should be able to have as many kids as they want if they want to
Just because ppl can’t afford it doesn’t mean they aren’t going to be a loving family
either/or
there will probably never be a law like that!
Comment by ~*~AcBiEri~*~ — June 18, 2005 @ 8:04 am
Think about it. In China some people still have more kids anyway. And those poor kids are being kept secluded somewhere, never allowed to come out. Don’t you see? There’d be way more crime if a law like that was made. If we wanna have cleaner air, we need to make better cars and use better fuel. And I’m sure eventually some time in the future people will be moving to the moon and stuff.
And I don’t think people on welfare should have a limit to how many kids they have, I think the welfare should just have a limit on how many kids they pay for. They can still have as many kids as they want, but the welfare will only pay for a few of them.
Comment by Princess — June 19, 2005 @ 7:04 am