The Instigator
HeavenlyPanda
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
Kernel
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Is the one child policy a good way to control the population?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
HeavenlyPanda
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/25/2016 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 486 times Debate No: 93069
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

HeavenlyPanda

Con

Round 1-Accept
Round 2-Debate
Round 3-Debate
Round 4-Debate
Round 5-Debate
Kernel

Pro

I accept the debate and I look forward to hearing your arguments. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
HeavenlyPanda

Con

The one child policy was introduced to China back in 1978 to 1980. What followed was disastrous and one of the greatest policy errors that the communist group who ruled China ever committed. More than fifty million girls disappeared and the difference between the ratio of boy:girl was astonishing. The policy led to normal families like yours and mine aborting or killing their baby if it was a girl. It also restricted what a family could be and took away the brother or sister that a sibling could have had. The one child policy was definitely not a good way to control the population.

The definition of good in this context is "that which is morally right." Was the one child policy morally right? No. The one child policy was not at all morally right. Nothing about restricting freedom of innocent people is morally right. Every single newly wed couple in China and everyone who wanted to have a family was now confined to only having one child. That created a mad scrambling dash to get a son. Not a daughter, a son. Chinese parents were normal just like mine and yours but in a world where your retirement rested on the shoulders of your child, having a son was of the up most priority. Women who gave birth to daughters were actually shunned by society for the supposed "infraction" that they had committed. Imagine being the outcast of your town or city all because you had a baby daughter instead of a son. It got to be that desperate to have a son that ultrasounds which were illegal were being done. And all of this was because of a one policy. And that's not even the worst.

More than fifty million girls disappeared because of this policy. Either into human trafficking, because they were killed when they were born, etc. Having more than one child back when the policy had just started was a serious infraction and the parents were suppose to get rid of the child by any means possible. Imagine yourself if you had brothers or sisters or both. If you're the oldest and you're a boy then you would be alive but you wouldn't have your brothers or sisters. If you are a girl you're either dead, or being trafficked, or in an orphanage if you're lucky to have survived, or on the rare occasion your family keeps you, etc. if you have an older brother then you wouldn't exist and if you had an older sister she would either be dead or gone. Imagine knowing that your parents had killed what could have been your sibling. Now imagine that those parents are just like yours except that they were placed in a situation like that. That was reality. The ratio of boys:girls was so big it was once recorded being 300:100 when the normal gap should be 105:100. That would be three boys to every one girl. That means two thirds of China's young men would most likely not be able to marry. That not only is a big portion if the population unmarried but that also raised the crime rate in the city.

Finally the one child policy has gone on for too long and even though China has lifted it, the scars that it left behind will never go away. Especially for all those families who had to kill or abort their babies just because they were girls. The ratio gap between boys and girls will take a long time to fill and as more become retired in China, there won't be enough workers to replace them. It will take a long time to heal from the mental wounds that the policy inflicted and it was definitely not worth all the pain it caused. The one child policy is not morally right, therefore it was not a good way to control the population.
Kernel

Pro

Kernel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
HeavenlyPanda

Con

I stick to my points since there is nothing to refute.
Kernel

Pro

Kernel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
HeavenlyPanda

Con

I stick to my points since there's nothing to refute.
Kernel

Pro

Kernel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
HeavenlyPanda

Con

I stick to my points since there is nothing to refute.
Kernel

Pro

Kernel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by BrandonHyde 1 year ago
BrandonHyde
This should be a piece of cake for con. Just like communism, the one-child policy has been almost defaulted as a bad idea - morally but more so in terms of practicality.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
health
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Define good.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
HeavenlyPandaKernelTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con. Con also was the only one who made an argument, so arguments to Con by default.
Vote Placed by RonaldTrumpkin 1 year ago
RonaldTrumpkin
HeavenlyPandaKernelTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to CON due to Pro FF'ing multiple rounds. Arguments given to CON as well. He properly set up definitions as well as interpreting his side from a moral standpoint as well as a factual one. He adequately lays out the negatives of the one child policy and states how useless it has been.