Agnostic.com

33 6

Do you think that population needs to be regulated?

How about who has children?

atheist 8 Jan 3
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

33 comments (26 - 33)

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

Long ago I thought up the idea of having birth control in the drinking water. Just think - no more "accidents". No more pet animals dying because they outnumber available homes.

In order for humans to reproduce, they would be required to have a "common sense" degree - maybe 1-2yrs. It would include things like money management, couples counseling, cooking and eating healthy, major emphasis on child care, basics of auto and home care etc.
Only then would they be eligible for the antidote !
Families making more than two children would be highly taxed. But there would be subsidies given for adopted kids.

And you should have seen the faces of some folks that I've told this to ! Not thrilled, to say the least ...

1

First step voluntary birth control.

1

Yes, and yes.

In today’s age of medical accomplishments, we are reproducing faster than we are dying off.

People don’t need five kids. Even three kids. Two hundred, and more, years ago, only one or two children lived to a reproductive age. And as we needed more bodies to help with supporting survival interests (food and animal fodder, building homes, etc), it was a better practice.

I am a negative, and zero, population growth supporter and believer. Negative population growth is where you (as a couple) have only one or no children. Zero population growth is where you (as a couple) only have two children, to replace yourselves.

I think the majority of convicts should be sterilized.

I know this is hypocritical with my ‘If it’s not your body, not your choice’ stance, but I truly believe there has to be control over some things.

Also, we are the only animal to overpopulate.

1

cut back more like big time

1

You need to somehow offer incentives to people not to have kids. There is no way to other way to regulate without taking away the basic rights of reproduction.

@atheist what circumstances would those be?

@atheist science is not my religion either

@atheist I think we are already at that point. What would the threshold be

0

Not necessarily. Consumption rate, recycle/reuse technology, and social methodology need to be re-evaluated. But it's easier just to say there's too many of us. Who wants to do any actual work to sustain an organized society.

0

The population is regulated by nature. It doesn't really have anything to do with choice. When there is stress in a given population...potential for rape is higher. Also, when there is famine...more females are born than males. Nature doesn't care. If humans choose not to conceive...we will slowly and surely become irrelevant.

0

Aaaah but who decides who ???

Im bit more skeptical than that...

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:12526
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.