The Instigator
PoeJoe
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
crabjuicer
Con (against)
Losing
18 Points

Adopt China's Planned Birth Policy Globally

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2007 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,700 times Debate No: 783
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (11)

 

PoeJoe

Pro

-----
Note to the voters: Please vote based on who provided a stronger agrgument. Not what you personally believe. Thanks!
-----
The following is taken from my site, which can be found here:
http://politicaljoe.net...
-----

I know that there are other factors that increase this number, but to keep things simple. In theory, for the world population to go up, on average, each person on this Earth must make more than two babies. Truth? Yes. Another truth? The world population is increasing. Therefore, people on this earth on average create than two babies. QED.

You aren't asking by now, but I'm going to pretend that you're asking, "But what does this matter?" And I'm here to tell you that that's a very good question. My answer? It matters because there is already too much people on this fragile planet of ours, sucking up our natural resources, and eventually leading to our eventual doomsday. This leads me to the subject of doomsday.
Yes, it's quite the Hollywood subject, but in fact, it really is a generally accepted theory that's highly credible in the scientific community. Now, skipping all the technical yip-yap that comes along with the Doomsday Theory and getting to the bone of it, the Doomsday Theory states that within the next 9120 years, there is a 95% chance that humans will become extinct.

I'll come back to Doomsday later, but lets go back to those pricks who make more than two babies, pun intended. If you really take some time to reflect upon the problems that we face today, and if you keep asking the question of, "...then what caused that?", you'll soon realize that most of those problems originate from the fact that there are just too many human beings. World hunger, global warming, the loss of our precious fossil fuels, religious wars, corruption in governments, and yes, George W. Bush, all originate from there being too many people. And now I want a turn in asking, "Why?". Why do people feel the need to spawn more people? And what's more, "Why On Earth would anyone want to have three or more children?". Once again, pun intended.

By the year 2050, not even a generation and a half away, the human world population is at least supposed to break nine billion and a half people. I want to make this absolutely clear, the world CAN NOT handle 9,500,000,000 people. We've all heard the shocking stories about how many percentage of the world is starving, and how much of our world is at war, but I want to leave all with this question. Why are we trying to stop these problems with sending food to Africa, and trying to liberate people in Sudan and Darfur if we don't stop people from making more people? The situation will only get worse!

You hear about how a lady found a finger in her Wendy's cup of chili, and how in Virginia Tech a psychotic kid killed thirty-two people. And you bitch that your parents won't give you a PlayStation 3, or about how your job sucks. And you get depressed when your girlfriend breaks up with you. And you hate when your computer gets a nasty virus. But what will that matter in a few generations when the world simply cannot handle the billions of people. When food is in on so many more peoples mind. When suffering in Africa is no longer as issue in our minds because it happens so much. When there is so much competition in our education system that a state school becomes a dream. When we become immune to problems around us, that we just shake them off. What will you do then? Cue Doomsday.

The Doomsday Theory predicts that with the next 9120 years, there is a 95% chance that humans will become extinct, but "extinct" is a very loose word. To quote Green Day, "To live, but not to breath/Is to 'die' in agony." I will support this quote to my death. The act of being alive is in fact, a really easily-done, trivial matter when you really think about it. If you take a look at Ethiopia or Darfur, you'll discover what I mean. Becoming the crazy man yelling down the street, "The world is going to end," for a moment, I think I can safely predict that within just a few generations of people, life will no longer be what you think of life today. Just look how tense things have gotten over the past thirty-five years when two billion more people walked this earth.

The fact is, with just our measly six billion people, we've already long run out of food for everyone, and it has resulted in mass pain and suffering. If you've ever been to a PETA meeting and it made you sick, then you really have to look at the human suffering out here. Listen to the stories of Christians who've been to Africa and try not to cry. And if you've already heard them, and haven't cried. We've already hit the point where we become immune to problems around us, where we can just shake it off. And the sad truth is, we have.

We have gotten to the point where food is in on so many more peoples mind. We have reached the point where suffering in Africa is no longer as issue in our minds because it happens so much. We have arrived at the point where there is so much competition in our education system that a state school becomes a dream. But saddest of all, we have become immune to problems around us, that we just shake them off. And this is why humans are screwed. Pun intended.

But we can fix this. China has adopted a Planned Birth Policy (also known as the One-Child Policy), where it makes it really inconvenient to have more than one baby. It's gotten so harsh, that in some places in China, it's considered a crime, where you may be fined mass amounts of money.

I say, we should adopt this making it world wide, but instead, tweak the punishments. The punishment for first time offenders should be imprisonment for five years (no congenial visits). The punishment for second time offenders? Death. This will therefore cover the life of the third child to make our perfect number that I spoke of at the beginning of this ramble, two. I'm pretty certain that if executives started enforcing this law universally, that the human population of this Earth of ours, would gradually drop to a sane level.

This issue is the most important problem of our time, but it is the least addressed because we as a human race are too scared to face it. We need to do something now before a Doomsday of civil life is upon us. We need to start acting now and hopefully stop overpopulating this Earth. Overpopulation is the most important problem we face today. All matters aside, if we don't start facing overpopulation as a serious issue, the fact that McDonalds is making us obese. Will not matter.
crabjuicer

Con

You are right in thinking that over-population is a very difficult challenge that we face. However, I would search for alternative solutions to China's Planned Birth policy for the following reasons.

1. State or government limitations on children is unnatural. China's policy will virtually eliminate the very traditional concept of siblings and aunts/uncles. It will also greatly reduce the likelihood of family survival.

2. Certain families depend on their children as a work force. (i.e. rural farming)

3. More minds equal more solutions. From what I can gather, people are smart. With good education, billions of minds can and probably will find population solutions like eco-building, space sustainability, and ocean dwelling.

4. Families could face the dilemma of abortion vs. prison. A woman who would have the liberty of choosing to be pro-life should not be punished in a world where no birth control is 100%, short of invasive operations.
Debate Round No. 1
PoeJoe

Pro

Thanks for accepting this debate, and for (sort of) arguing my arguments. They gave me a good laugh. Let's go through them paragraph by paragraph to critically analyze them.

-----

First paragraph:
You so soundly say that overpopulation is a serious issue, but then say that you would instead find other solutions. Well, what other solutions besides birth control prevent more births? Is that not the definition of birth control? You yourself said that abortion shouldn't be used, so again. If my plan is ineffective, and abortion isn't either, how else can we prevent overpopulation? I find this argument rather ridiculous therefore debunking the rest of your support for it. However, I am considerate so I will see to responding to your following paragraphs.

Second paragraph:
Yes, perhaps prevention of children is unnatural now, but to that I provide two arguments. One, should unnaturalness mean the extinction of the human species? And two, why is China not revolting to this policy? John Phillip Sousa denounced the record player and Bill Gates once thought the personal computer to be intangible, so perhaps now it seems odd. But you yourself do not refute the grave seriousness of overpopulation, so would a small pay in, really not be expected to survive?

Another point you make, is that family survival would be "greatly reduced". What happened to human survival that you so soundly supported? And to add to that, in a modern society, family survival is no longer a real question in many people's mind.

Third paragraph:
Are you honestly stating that families run our modern day farming society? Modern agriculture is actually run by machines, illegal immigrants, and truckers. I doubt the hundreds of people working in the fields in a farm are all blood related. Heck, I doubt that more than a few are related to the owners if that. We live in this thing called the twenty-first century. Please remember that next turnaround.

Fourth paragraph:
What crabjuicer does here, is provide no evidence or logic. We already are vastly approaching the big seven, and we have yet to find an answer. As stated before, by 2050 we'll have a third more minds. Yes significant, but do we really want to postpone half a century just to increase the chances of one genius getting an epiphany no one has thought about before? Why not act now, and NOT gamble with our chances? It's only logical.

Fifth paragraph:
You are correct that no method is perfect. However, if the girl takes the pill, the guy uses a condom, and they both have had sex education, at most, there is only a .04% chance they could possibly get a baby for a whole year using the highest statistics to be found. Combine this with other methods, and it is virtually impossible for the girl to get pregnant. So again, nothing is perfect, but things can be prevented to save the human species.

-----

Here is where the debate stands:

1. We both agree on the point that overpopulation is a serious issue. The only difference lies that I believe action needs to be taken, while crabjuices believes that we should take other actions besides abortion and birth control. He has not provided what actions besides waiting half a century.

2. Other minor jabs have been made including the discovery that crabjuices is not knowledgeable about modern agriculture.

-----

In conclusion, I have provided evidence to show that overpopulation is a serious issue that needs to be addressed. I believe we need birth control, while crabjuices believes that we should take other actions that our as of now secret to himself.

Voters, realize the argument that is baseless here.
crabjuicer

Con

Thanks for taking the time to engage my arguments. Let me remind you that you are arguing in favor of China's Planned Birth Policy to be adopted globally. I am simply proving why this policy will not work globally.

Response to your rebuttal:

Overpopulation is a big problem and I do support birth control. I never said abortion shouldn't be used. China's plan may be effective but at the cost of natural human rights. Again, I am only arguing why China's plan will not be adopted globally.

Why is China not revolting to this policy? My guess would be fear of imprisonment and a willingness to follow the collective rules. In other nations, say America, we have certain liberties like free speech that leads to more individuality.

You are completely right in thinking that commercial-based farming involves machines, illegal immigrants, and truckers. Thanks PoeJoe, for bringing me up to speed on the current century. However, I was using farming only as an example and had small sustainment-based agriculture in mind.

We are not waiting for one mind to come along with the answer to overpopulation. We are waiting for enough collaborations between humans to develop a winning solution that is both humane and fair.

I do support birth control. Also, I have many ideas of how to help sustainably support our rising population. However, this is outside of the scope of this debate. Once again, we are arguing over whether the world should adopt China's Planned Birth Policy, which I am proving against. I look forward to your informed response, PoeJoe
Debate Round No. 2
PoeJoe

Pro

You're welcome. You never know when you'll need to be aware of the present date!!!!! Smiles and kisses. But really, sarcasm doesn't help prove your point. In only makes you look like you lost the point. Not many businesses rely on a sole family anymore. Saying so is downright stupid, and no matter how much sarcastic glitter you want to put around it, you still failed to address the point. Hugs and happy holidays!

----

Let's again go paragraph by paragraph.

First Paragraph:
What crabjuices is doing here is completely twisting around what I've been saying. In his first turn, he directly states as his thesis, "I would search for alternative solutions". Then in my turn, I try to explain that this is hypocritical, because the only two realistically effective ways of preventing overpopulation, is by birth control or abortion. China's Planned Birth Policy would directly encourage people to do both. The only plan crabjuices has put out, is to wait, and hope for someone (or some people) to think of something. Crabjuices says that he would like to prevent overpopulation, but how can you without taking action? My plan is far more effective.

Third and Fourth Paragraph:
What crabjuices is doing now, is trying to disprove the effectiveness of my policy. However, the ONLY argument he makes for his defense is that it would be unnatural. When trying to provide evidence to back it up, he starts off his incoherent rant by saying, "My guess would be…" Great argument there!

Again, you say that you want to prevent overpopulation, but you fail to want to take any action. China's Planned Birth Policy is what we need to do. If it is "weird", fine, but you know (as you've stated), and I know, that if the current trends continue there will no longer be any human life left. Again, what other way is there of preventing overpopulation, then lessening the amounts of births? Should we start KILLING people??? No matter how long we procrastinate, there is no other way of preventing overpopulation. No genius(es) is/are going to save us. Putting this simply, the only way to prevent overpopulation, is to prevent overpopulation. And the best way to do this, is with China's Planned Birth Policy.

Sixth and Seventh Paragraph:
What crabjuices is doing now, is trying to push his idea of procrastinating. I think we've gone through this ridiculous thought enough to realize its idiocy.

----

This is where the debate stands:

Both crabjuices and I, understand that overpopulation is a grave issue. Is we don't address this, we both understand that it could mean the end of human life itself. However, I believe that we should take action, while crabjuices says we need to procrastinate. This is not right. I must give credit to crabjuices though, with his great flop. We do need birth control, and if a couple is one of the .04% unlucky ones, perhaps they may consider abortion.
Bottom line. Overpopulation is a serious issue and the way to resolve this issue, is with China's Planned Birth Policy.
crabjuicer

Con

crabjuicer forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Im_always_right 8 years ago
Im_always_right
I am voting pro, because he provided better arguements, and did not forfeit.
Posted by Scyrone 9 years ago
Scyrone
Also, I don't know who I should vote for. Pro did present many goods arguments, but some of them offended others and he made arrogant remarks at the Con, with his perfectly natural arguments.
Posted by Scyrone 9 years ago
Scyrone
There was a flaw that I saw in your argument. Illegal immigrants and machines are running farms all over the world? No. There is a good part of Canada (where MY family lives) and they and many other families around them all own farms. These farms are run by families. Not illegals. Some machines yes, but not all of it is machines. Have you ever seen a farm in Africa? I lived in Africa for 9 years. I know what it is like. Yes, people are poor, and a lot of people don't eat (and die of hunger), but not because of overpopulation, it is mostly because the governments in Africa are mostly corrupt, and the crime that goes on there is rediculous. Not to mention the ongoing War that happens all the time there. I think we should form a new plan rather than adopting a new policy.

I actually hoped the Con would use moral arguments too.

And I hoped he had used discrimination arguments too (think of offended the Masai would be or the Mormons would be if there was a global one-child policy?).
Posted by PoeJoe 9 years ago
PoeJoe
@ Rousseau,

Yeah, I kinda regret saying that. That's just my style. Regratablly, it's a bad habbit, but I wrote the argument in like 5 minutes...

Hey, your username based off the guy who wanted to bring Democrasy in the age of enlightenment???

Sure, what you want to debate about?? Also, it should be known as "Winter Break" Mr. Politically Incorect.
Posted by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
Just an Idea PoeJoe, you may be good, I don't know. However you sound really quite arrogant. "You points gave me quite the goo laugh"?? You urge people to vote on the arguments, yet you must realize that many people who may vote on arguments will be off-set by your supposed arrogance. Maybe I misinterpret what you say, but you come across as arrogant. Just something to fix!

P.S.: Are you interested in Debating? Christmas break always gives me some free time.
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
Poe joe , how many kids did your parents have? If more than you , where are you in that order????
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by grecherme 8 years ago
grecherme
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Statesman 9 years ago
Statesman
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by crabjuicer 9 years ago
crabjuicer
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Partyboat 9 years ago
Partyboat
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by garptarp 9 years ago
garptarp
PoeJoecrabjuicerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03