World population is out of hand. China got it right with the 1 child law. The Earth just can't support what we're doing to her. So stop at 1 or less, ok? Source for chart below: wikipedia Numbers are in thousands.
I decided as a very young child that I never wanted to have kids. I never changed my mind on the matter. The decision was based on my observation of how cruel kids are to each other. Adults think kids are cute. But I saw how cruel they are, and I never forgot that. Later, I added to my reasons the apparent liklihood that nuclear war would estroy civilization, and turn Earth into a very literal hell for any survivors. And still later I added overpopulation to my reasons. The desire to have kids is as selfish as the desire to drive a big, expensive, gas-guzzling car.
I agree. That is why I don't have a problem with abortion. This planet can only handle so many people and I think we are already over the limit. Mother nature will do something to correct it if we don't. I also don't have any kids and never wanted any.
I agree that our population growth is unsustainable. We're growing unchecked, and that isn't really a good thing. However, i would argue that limiting our population, especially through laws like China's (have you seen what it's done to their population? People aborting fetuses and abandoning children just because they're female, and male children, in addition to carrying on a persons name, is considered a status symbol) isn't a real good thing either. The better solution is to pump more money into NASA and urge them to up their time table. As it is, they plan to start construction on a moon base in 2020, to use as a jumping off point for mars exploration and (hopefully) eventual colonization. Now, if we can get such a project underway, wouldn't it be great to have a billion or so people that decide it's too crowded on Earth and want to move to Mars when a colony is established? Yeah, i know... thats still a very long ways off, and by then the world population will probably double, if not more. That being said, i definitely support a person's right to choose how many children they want, for whatever reasons they have. If you want to abstain, thats perfectly fine, and i'll support your decision. If you want to have 20 kids, i'll check you into the mental hospital myself, because no one could be sane with that many kids running around and wanting more . I would even support educational programs that emphasize the problems associated with overcrowding and the potential dangers of our current population growth. I just won't support someone who tries to tell me that i need to limit my reproduction to a certain limit.
Is "stop having kids" REALLY the problem? I would argue it isn't. I blame medical science. ...for unnaturally extending our lives. Think about all the people, who with no medical care, would have been dead by now. While you might blame having children, I blame unnaturally long lives due to medical science. Perhaps the greater factor is having the average life expectancy go from something like 40 to something around 70.... h34r: <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Dec 8 2006, 12:23 PM) [snapback]359272[/snapback]</div> So is the desire of prolonging your life by seeing a Dr..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Dec 8 2006, 10:23 AM) [snapback]359272[/snapback]</div> Ummm...if this didn't have such a serious tone, I would have HAD to think you were joking. Frankly, that is just stupid. I know you're not stupid, but this phrase certainly is. Maybe you meant that the desire to have 12 kids is as selfish as the desire to drive a big, expensive, gas-guzzling car. There is a primal need to continue the species. It's what we do. If we don't, then humankind dies out. Conversely, if we have too many, humankind will eventually die out as well. There's a balance somewhere. I do believe that we need some education for the masses about what effect having too many kids can have on the planet. I think more than three is just ridiculous, but that's my own personal slant. These folks that have, like, 17 are RIDICULOUS!!! That's as selfish as driving a big, expensive gas-guzzling car. Like another poster, one of the reasons that I'm so very pro-choice is for this exact issue: world over-population. It keeps me up at night!
"The desire to have kids is as selfish as the desire to drive a big, expensive, gas-guzzling car." Lets change this to "The desire to have more than 1 or 2 kids is as selfish as the desire to drive a big, expensive, gas-guzzling car". I do agree with China's one child policy. I have implemented it in my own family. Life without any children at all would be the coldest, most selfish, inhuman, and frankly, depressing thing I can think of. Daniel, time to brighten up! I'm as cynical as they come about the state of the world, but I'm not depressed. I recommend you spend some time watching children in a daycare or park - they know how good life is.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ Dec 8 2006, 11:31 AM) [snapback]359309[/snapback]</div> My thoughts exactly, Jared! And I am limiting mine to two. I just haven't had the second one yet. Or frankly, found a father for that one, either!
kids are not for everyone and i think that judging a person who has decided to be childless is out of line. i'd much rather a person be childless than to have a child and either (all in the news this week, all fatalities) 1) feed him vodka by "accident" 2)beat him to death and report your car stolen to cover it up 3) microwave a two month old. (ok that was last week)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ Dec 8 2006, 12:31 PM) [snapback]359309[/snapback]</div> Though that's only if you're in a developed country with decent health care.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Dec 8 2006, 11:39 AM) [snapback]359316[/snapback]</div> Sorry, I'm taken.
Having no kids is like not driving at all, walking and taking a bicycle everywhere. Having one kid is like having a Prius. Having two kids is like having a Civic (or other low-MPG vehicle). Having three kids is like having a small 4x4. Having four (or more) kids is like having a Hummer. Having no kids but then marrying someone with kids I guess is like taking public transporation. So I guess that means I'm walking everywhere.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Dec 8 2006, 11:13 AM) [snapback]359333[/snapback]</div> That just has implications on so many levels... ewwwww
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Dec 8 2006, 10:07 AM) [snapback]359267[/snapback]</div> And hence we see the reasons behind the shifting demographics in favor of conservatives over liberals in the United States over the next several decades.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Dec 8 2006, 12:07 PM) [snapback]359267[/snapback]</div> You're preaching to the wrong people. The US birth rate fell to an all time low in 2002. Our population growth is due to immigration, not births. Without immigration, our population would be declining. You need to be telling all those developing countries with high birth rates to stop having children.
"You need to be telling all those developing countries with high birth rates to stop having children." Except that child born in America will consume 20 times the resources and generate 20 times the emissions of a child born in India.
Survival and propagation is a natural tendency. It's counterintuitive to think of *capping* procreation rate as a survival stragegy, but at this point, if we think we have any right to call ourselves "civilized", we understand objectively that we MUST do it. . Old societies that lived in a more tribal fashion all pitched in on the raising of children, and could experience the rewards [?] of watching them grow without necessarily being the parents. It worked fine for them. . _H*
"Survival and propagation is a natural tendency." In biological terms, it is the only purpose of life. As Richard Dawkins points out, bodies are just survival machines that genes build in order to survive to the next generation. The genes are immortal; we are nothing more than vehicles for them, to be discarded when we get old as easily as a tree discards leaves.
