CreateDebate


Debate Info

0
6
Yes No
Debate Score:6
Arguments:6
Total Votes:6
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 No (6)

Debate Creator

Writingab0ut(6) pic



Should there be a global infertilisation because of overpopulation?

It is clear that for years the planet has had a boom in populations. It has been estimated that in 50 years we will finish 70percent of our resources. Do you want to cause an infertilisation so 80 percent of the population cannot have babies or let the overpopulation grow.

Yes

Side Score: 0
VS.

No

Side Score: 6
No arguments found. Add one!

By "infertilisation" I assume you mean sterilization. I would say doing that to people is going too far (unless they have some kind of hereditary disease). It just is too much to go around forcing people to go under the knife so they can't have kids.

Side: No
1 point

No. Who would decide the individuals or groups which should be sterilized? Such an activity could be tantamount to Nazi Germany's attempts to create a ''superior race'' by sterilizing those which this barbaric regime considered to be ''the lower orders''. The responsibility for the over population of the world is the result of many reasons including religion and ignorance, maybe both these conditions are more closely related than is realized. The Roman Catholic Church forbids it's followers to engage in any form of artificial birth control, i.e, the use of condoms.They do suggest that '' the rhythm method'' is acceptable, sex to dance music?, ha, only a wee joke. I think this means engaging in love making only at certain times of the month when the chances of conception are at it's lowest. The ignorant peoples from the world's backward countries, mainly the African ''Bongos'', and the under class societies of developed nations continue to mindlessly breed like rabbits without thought nor care how they're going to provide for the results of their short lived orgasms. Education is the answer and the installation into their thick skulls that; your baby= your responsibility.

Side: No
1 point

No, Big Oil and Big Chemical companies, like Exxon and Monsanto are doing that for us. Plastics (made from oil by products), GMOs and fertilizers are causing low sperm count and motility. Add cancer causing agents, wars and exterminating species, humans will probably be history in a thousand years.

Side: No
1 point

Though overpopulation is a big problem today, ethically it's wrong to sterilize people for the same. It'd be like promoting the Norms of eugenetics. Who'd get to decide whom to sterilize and whom not to? Overpopulation can be controlled by family planning and other contraception methods. But forcefully sterilizing people for the sake of population control is not justified.

Side: No
1 point

It is hard to know if there will even be an overpopulation problem. As we approach the carrying capacity (non-static by the way), resources will become scarce. There will be natural selection. Society will obviously compensate to prevent natural selection, but as resources become more scarce, natural selection will happen.

In terms of forced sterilization of a population, I believe that is as moral/justified as a war over resources.

Side: No

I don't think this action is necessary. There are other ways to curb overpopulation.

Side: No