The Instigator
its.chandler
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ReasonFirst
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Human population needs to be controlled

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2016 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 657 times Debate No: 91072
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (0)

 

its.chandler

Con

First round is for acceptance :)
I will be taking the con side of the argument, saying that the human population does not need to be controlled.
ReasonFirst

Pro

I accept the debate on the pro side saying the population needs to be kept in control
Debate Round No. 1
its.chandler

Con

Do we want this world to be like China? China can only have 2 kids. Sure this is monitoring the population but what is they want to have more kids, they can't. When I get married I am planning on having 4 kids. If the human population is controlled my dream of a big family would not come true. What if someone has more than the kid limit? They will have to get an abortion and kill an innocent child.
ReasonFirst

Pro

First off our world is a lot like china in some aspects. But in terms of the kid law we don't have that yet. However it should be stated that China is facing a problem. They have a swollen population because individual people wanted big families. They do not have sufficient resources to provide for there entire population. That is a grave problem that i dont want to see here.

One must accept that we live in a world of Finite resources. As it currently stands, with the growth of health care and the almost nonexistent rate of child birth deaths, humans have swelled 7 billion in just less that 150 years and live longer than ever in history. These are the two biggest reason the population is as high as it is. But that is okay. I have a plan to get the population under control.

Now I don't want you to think i am just going to say, kill people and get the numbers right. NO. What i do think we need to do is look at the Fertility rate for wanted vs unwanted pregnancy world wide. Almost unanimously unwanted pregnancy happens at a higher rate than wanted pregnancy's. Unwanted sits at roughly 3.1 and wanted is roughly at 2.1. What this means is people who want children are reproducing at a sustainable rate. At this rate you would be able to have 4 children because that 2.1 means a lot of people are only having 1 child.

However the problem is that 3.1 unwanted, that is where our growth is swelling into uncontrollable levels. How do we fix this? How do we get all the unwanted pregnancies down to 0? Contraception for one. We need to provide long term contraception to all women who want it or need it. There are many ways to control your body to prevent pregnancy. Unfortunately there is not a lot of options for men just yet that are temporary, so most advertising would be geared to women until more options become available for men in the future.

My second solution is a very divisive one. I believe that the world needs to allow abortion to any women who wants one. By allowing abortion you empower women, giving them total control over their body. You set up a way for unwanting parents to go and not put themselves in a position they don't want to be in. Lastly this options helps get the 3.1 even lower getting our population to the sweet spot of 2.0 also know as the replacement rate.
Debate Round No. 2
its.chandler

Con

"live longer than ever in history."
This statement is false. People lived longer back then that they do now.

"However the problem is that 3.1 unwanted, that is where our growth is swelling into uncontrollable levels. How do we fix this? How do we get all the unwanted pregnancies down to 0?"
We won't be able to, there is no way. Contraception? Sure, but with the amount of teens getting pregnant every year. There's no way that anyone is going to stop the amount of teen pregnancies.

"Reports indicate that there are approximately 1 million teenagers in America that become pregnant each year. Of those, 78% are unintended. Of all the teenage women that become pregnant, 35% choose to have an abortion rather than bear a child."(I'm not quoting you, I'm quoting someone else)

Teens are having abortions, which is murder, but from previous debates I have found out that you do not think that abortion is murder. So we will continue to disagree with this statement. Therefore I will have no comments on your abortion statements because I don't want to get off topic.

I believe that our country has enough resources to provide for anyone who comes. If we have the resources, why bother controlling the population.
ReasonFirst

Pro

Unfortunately you are mistaken. People live longer now than at any point in history......at one point the average age of death was in the 30's. it was extremely rare to live to the age the average human lives to in this day in age.

weather we will get the unwanted down to 0 or not is not what's important. What is important is that we try. even reducing that number in half will make a drastic improvement in the population crisis we find ourselves in.

the quote about teens actually provides a good stat for me to use..78% is a large percentage. and that is how many of them don't want to have the child. This is even further evidence that we have to do something to try and solve the problem.

I propose making contraception available to all humans. This is the front line on the defense against unwanted pregnancy.

Next would be to educate the masses on how those contraceptive devices can be useful and how they are used.

Last you have to legalize abortion. Abortion is the last resort to preventing unwanted pregnancy and I believe that choice is up to the mother 100 percent.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Heirio 1 year ago
Heirio
""live longer than ever in history."
This statement is false. People lived longer back then that they do now."

Erm... no...
Where did you get this information?

"Teens are having abortions, which is murder, but from previous debates I have found out that you do not think that abortion is murder."

Because simple definitions disprove it.

"I believe that our country has enough resources to provide for anyone who comes. If we have the resources, why bother controlling the population."

Oil supply is dramatically lower than the demand. With more people, the demand will be even higher and our oil supply shall run out sooner.
Also, we'd have to import more food for the extra people, which'd strain our economy.
Education as well as healthcare will also do this.
Posted by its.chandler 1 year ago
its.chandler
Oh my fuckin god! I give up! Haha that was supposed to be a D haha
Posted by its.chandler 1 year ago
its.chandler
Sorry I put emojis and it put numbers hahaha! @Bebater12345678910
Posted by its.chandler 1 year ago
its.chandler
Hi😂😂
Posted by Debater12345678910 1 year ago
Debater12345678910
Sup
Posted by ReasonFirst 1 year ago
ReasonFirst
It's whatever I really don't care! I just like to argue so do what you will
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
So, let's start with the standards themselves. Where are they? Well, every voter whose votes get removed get sent these links to voting guides, one written by a former vote moderator and one written by the current site president:

http://www.debate.org...
https://docs.google.com...

In terms of where the standards are posted for easy access and understanding before a vote is removed, you could look at the "NEW MEMBERS READ Me!!" stickied thread:

http://www.debate.org...

Or you could look at the policy guide we drafted here:

http://www.debate.org...

So yes, this information is made available. The rules of the site are pretty blatantly spelled out in that stickied thread.

Now, as for the rest of your post, I think this basically comes down to a disagreement over whether there should be standards at all. You're hardly alone in that view, and certainly you could find common cause with a good number of people on the site. I'm not going to argue with you over whether or not they should exist, as that's based somewhat on opinion and the question of quality versus quantity. Nonetheless, the site requires a certain standard of voting. I'm sure we could also go back and forth as to what a reasonable standard is, though that's yet another matter that can generally be considered to be a matter of preference. Suffice it to say that these standards are the ones that we've landed on as a result of a lot of trial and error. Competitive debate in real life does include standards for judging, even if they're rarely enforced, and from personal experience, I know many people wish they were enforced more often.
Posted by ReasonFirst 1 year ago
ReasonFirst
Not to mention people on here are not claiming to be Master debaters. In fact I use this site for the back and forth dialogue and could care less about the details of debating. which is another reason I think its wrong you hold voters to some unwritten criteria for casting there vote. Show me in the sites bylaws or rules and regulations or terms of service where it defines how a voter should judge a debate when casting a vote. and if those are not in the rules then you dont have the right to do it weather your a Admin or not
Posted by ReasonFirst 1 year ago
ReasonFirst
mainly the outcome, and the fact that your name has popped up on like 2 or three of my debates removing votes.....I didn't know this site had voter police..I mean once someone votes that should be that weather you agree or not. who is to say your opinion is anymore valid than there's. not to mention people can be short in explaining their vote, and the site says nothing about your reasoning being of a sound nature. So yes I have a problem that you manipulated the outcome, and two I'm upset that you feel you should have the authority to remove people's votes after they have voted.....Can you imagine if that were allowed in real life?
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
What do you guys find disagreeable about it? I understand that it changed the outcome to a tie, but do you have a disagreement with the decision itself, or just the outcome?
No votes have been placed for this debate.