Should there be a limit of children you can have?
Yes
Side Score: 10
|
 |
No
Side Score: 6
|
|
|
|
|
As many as you can responsibly care for both with time and money. I remember a story about some parents who left their two year old in a corn maze and didn't realize it until the next day. They had....I think 11 children and didn't even realize they left that poor child behind, not even when tucking their kids in at night. THAT is too many and irresponsible. Side: Yes
I was actually thinking about this yesterday, but overpopulation is a huge problem and it's not being recognized as much as it should be. If you remember taking biology, thereś something called carrying capacity. Right now, humans are at an exponential growth with no limitations. Eventually we will reach the carrying capacity, like a shortage of food, or space, or change in environment (global warming), that will end up with a mass number of deaths. The problem is that America wants everyone to be happy and free to do anything they want. China, however, is on the right track. Side: Yes
1
point
I dispute the premise that we are doomed to the Malthusian Trap unless we restrict family size. Fertility has dropped dramatically in the past half century, especially in the most developed nations. In fact, in 2010 about 48 percent of the world population had an average total fertility of less than 2.1 children per woman.The replacement rate is approximately 2.1 children per woman. Less than that means a shrinking population. I think what you need to argue is that the population that we will level off with exceeds the carrying capacity of earth. Side: No
There should be FAR more talk about this in the media. Limits should be voluntary, maybe even rewarded with tax breaks for fewer children. If you want to put a burden on the planet, like the Duggars, you should PAY for it ... the more burden, the more you pay. Likely that would start at a base limit, like, maybe two. We only have one planet for the foreseeable future .... and it's hard, at the moment, to see beyond Trump. Side: Yes
|
If you're referring to a hard limit then no. A rational limit, sure - but what that rational limit might be is based on so many individual factors that it's not reasonable to even assume limitations financially. In some poor countries, children work from a young age, and enable a family's survival...while they wouldn't be able to afford a single child in a typical US family. Side: No
0
points
To even ask such a question when America's abortion trade has reduced our birth rates to record lows. There are not enough children being born to support our retirees, or keep our economy going at full speed. This would suggest that there are issues with the social program within the society designed to help support retirees and other solutions may be necessary. However, this does not imply that there is an under-population problem. We have quite a substantial over-population problem accumulating both here (the US) and world-wide that is becoming increasingly dire Side: Yes
0
points
0
points
|
