Many bred animals are faced with culling as practice to strengthen the herd and to allow the entire species to survive. Many new pieces of media are focusing on the the problem of overpopulation that humanity is currently faced with. We're draining our natural resources and will eventually run out. Mass starvation, war, etc. It's hard to say one life is worth more than another and where do you draw the line... but thoughts? I do believe overpopulation is indeed a problem. I also believe some people should not be allowed to have children. I believe giving birth should be a PRIVILEGE and not a given right. Not all people are appropriate parents and may not raise a child properly. If there were guidelines to giving birth only those who truly wanted it would actually raise a child. No more abandonment, poor child-rearing, etc. Of course defining those guidelines would have to be left to better minds than myself. Regulating it would be an entirely different matter. Government controlled vasectomies at birth? I don't think there should be mass genocides, but war has always been one way of human population control. I feel that we're fated to another world wide war if things don't shape up. As resources become scarcer and scarcer... well everyone for themselves, right? Not saying I believe in that sentiment, but anyone can look at history and see that humans rarely change. I love people, but I kind of hate us as a whole honestly. We need to shape up.
Worldwide, we have more than enough food and supplies to serve earth's population multiple times over. Our problem is the allocation of resources, wastefulness, and the dismissal of the consequences that will come from the prior problems. Prohibiting child birth for on a massive scale would be unnecessary, infeasible, ineffective, and immoral. EDIT: I want to make it clear I'm not trying to be hostile in my post. I don't sense any animosity in your post and it's good that you are willing to question things.
The best form of birth control world wide? Wealth. And I don't mean extreme wealth, just enough to get by. Most countries with developed economies have a birth rate insufficient to even sustain their populations without significant immigration. (http://www.economist.com/node/14164483) So instead of becoming more oppressive and setting up a system that would be a violation of bodily autonomy AND a total bitch to enforce, how about we look at addressing poverty issues and finding ways to distribute global wealth more equitably? As Ben points out, this would have the added benefit of making it possible for us to feed and take care of all the people currently alive!
The best way to control over-population would be providing knowledge and education for women. Unfortunately, the parts of the world with the higher population rate are usually the ones where women don't have any rights at all, don't work, don't receive even the most basic education and are expected to have 10 or more kids during their life time. Religion, as well as poverty, as BayView said, are often connected with this. I think that in developed nations it's more education and self-awareness that make people have less children, but again, that comes with some sort of wealth (cultural, economical etc.). Although, there are some parts of the world which are poor but still have a low population rate, even the negative one (my country, for example). I think that's because of the available education (free and mandatory elementary education for all, as well as high literacy rate), and the position of women. Also, religion doesn't have much influence around here. Generally, wars, deseases and natural disasters are balancing this population rate a bit, but not enough. We have definitely become a great burden for this poor planet.
Mmh, I didn't really start thinking much about overpopulation until a pregnancy scare. I understand that we have the resources, if managed properly, to sustain a much larger population. We could even destroy the seas and make more liveable land space for ourselves. However, what would the effects be on the ecosystem? We are already developing man-made islands and even resorts underwater. I understand that the poor have more children than others due to the primitive idea that the more you have, the more possibility that some will survive. The problem is that I don't see it as very likely that we'll begin managing our resources more effectively. keep produ I get the whole birth-vasectomy thing was completely immoral and unrealistic, it was just an idea that popped up. Was just thinking of different societies and how they might deal with it. It was just a stronger example, but what if everyone was made sterile through their food? People could be remade sterile through X process. Again, I do honestly believe some people do not DESERVE to have children. I don't differentiate between race, age, sexual orientation, social status, or anything along those lines. However what if a man beats his children? He shouldn't even be able to have a child. Child molesters? The same. People who abandon their children? Sure, let a teen have a child. It may not be an ideal situation, but they can develop as a person for the whole experience. It could all work out and who am I to say they shouldn't get a chance. But you have a history of domestic violence? I wouldn't care less if you were made a eunuch. That aside, what do we, as humans, need to do to make more of a difference? Environmental laws? Increased awareness? Energy restraint laws? Less consumerism? China limits the amount of children its citizens are allowed to have. Is that wrong? What about the show 19 and counting? Isn't that just incredibly excessive? What if a persons religious beliefs conflict with population control? The disbelief in birth control meaning having an insane amount of children. With every child born, less is available. Simple mathematics. Those families with an insane amount of children are almost always middle or lower class. It also only increases the numbers of those classes creating further discrepancy. They have to SUPPORT all of those children. This often means in government assistance. Is it fair that other tax payers have to support your choice of producing more and more spawn? With more and more people specialty jobs become harder to obtain. Take writing for instance, the more that is produced the harder it is to make it in the market. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, since it leads to competition (Capitalism has its merits) but it does mean less and less will have their specific dreams come true. Those musicians that forsake everything, well... lot of street musicians now-a-days. Sure, you can open up more dead-end jobs. Let's all work fast food and flip burgers. I mean, we're not really able to support the educational costs for everyone if they simply keep producing over and over. Those who don't have children still PAY for children. I just don't think our system is correct. There should be limits and strictures set, I just don't personally know what. Having 19 children is horrible in my opinion. What possible need would you have for that? Are you trying to create your own society? If you own your own island, sure who cares. Do what you want.
@ToBeInspired What you are suggesting is so extreme and out there, I'd like to make you a counter offer. 1. Use internet to (truly) educate everyone www.oneworld/onenation/thefutureisnow/orsomeotherbullshit.org 2. Use internet to create true democracy 3. Use 1 and 2 to allocate resources fairly and administrate fair and realistic policies 3. Use 1,2 and 3, to create more space research 4. Send me up to space to with 1,000 of the world's most beautiful females so Earth can start a colony somewhere else
It's not like the idea of using Eugenics in the process of culling human population is a new thing. Anyone ever heard of the Georgia Guidestones?
