CreateDebate


Debate Info

16
8
Yes No
Debate Score:24
Arguments:13
Total Votes:27
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (11)
 
 No (4)

Debate Creator

Robertgreen(22) pic



Are there any ethical ways to deal with overpopulation?

Are there any ethical ways to gradually reduce the worlds population, in order to save the environment and resources, for future generations?

Yes

Side Score: 16
VS.

No

Side Score: 8
2 points

Education. Teach children that the world is all ready overpopulated, so that they don't get massive families. Also, encourage people to adopt more children. And if there was a more widespread use of condoms, then they're wouldn't be as many unexpected pregnancies.

Side: Yes

Excellently put.

Since mine got downvoted, I'll put yours on top. :)

Side: Yes

As I am prochoice as well as pro sex ed (contraception etc.), I get a really easy answer here.

To me those measures are not unethical.

Side: Yes

Yep. Shut down immigration and let Bangladesh, India and China pile up ontop of each other. If they then do nothing about it, that's their problem.

Side: Yes
AlofRI(3294) Clarified
1 point

Better lift your faceguard! It wont let you see what is going on around you! The overpopulation problem is not national, it is WORLDWIDE and effects the WHOLE WORLD! The whole PLANET! Some people are blind in one eye and can't see out of the other!

By the way. The conservative plot to take away health care from millions WILL help "nationally", but then, it will cause MANY abortions before AND after birth, as well as the deaths of the mother! OH, The HYPOCRISY!

Side: Yes
1 point

The overpopulation problem is not national

I know. That's because we don't have 20 kids like families in other countries. Maybe they should quit breeding while in poverty. My solutions usually deal with people owning their own actions. I know, a novel illiberal idea.

it is WORLDWIDE and effects the WHOLE WORLD

Not really. Kim Jong Un's people are starving, no aide is allowed in, and yet the Earth continues on like magic. We can't save the world. We have millions here to help and worry about.

Side: Yes
1 point

Some people are blind in one eye and can't see out of the other!

Kind of like liberal atheists who believe a magic nothing spawned reality from its magical nothingness, believe that taking a knee is patriotic, believe that religion is the problem unless it's Islam killing Westerners in mass, and believe that there are 48 genders? Yes. That's what blindness looks like.

Side: No
1 point

By the way. The conservative plot to take away health care from millions WILL help "nationally", but then, it will cause MANY abortions before AND after birth, as well as the deaths of the mother! OH, The HYPOCRISY

1)Obama took away the healthcare of more people than he gave it to. Many with insurance quit going to the doctor because of high premiums, which is the same as having no insurance. How nice. Paying for something you can't use.

2)Half of those on Obamacare said they'd opt out if it wasn't mandatory to have insurance according to poles.

Side: No
1 point

Hey Al. Back off the exclamation points will ya? It makes you look like a raging lunatic.

Side: No
1 point

You can start with yourself. You can refuse to have children, live simply using few resources, and kill yourself relatively young. Maybe make a vlog about it to inspire others to do the same.

Side: Yes
1 point

Let all babies be born and then drown those we don't like.

Side: Yes
1 point

As they used to say when I was in school, "keep your thumb on it!"

Well, we knew the thumb wouldn't work but the message was do everything you could to not get her pregnant.

The more I think of it, the idea I had on a previous post was good. Pay a tax on any babies over two, to be paid into a fund to save the planet. Money talks and people don't like taxes, problem solved .... or at least minimized. What'cha think??

Side: Yes
1 point

The wealthier and more educated a society is, the fewer children they have. Promotion of a more egalitarian society, with an emphasis on education, would bring down the population - or at least the growth of the population.

Side: Yes
No arguments found. Add one!