Population is too high!
Debate Rounds (1)
Earth does have 7 billion people, but I'm sure we can manage. I'll start with my rebuttal against my opponent.
"Too many stupid people, more abortions need to happened." Abortion is the killing of an unborn baby. Pro hasn't identified any sources suggesting we have "too many" people.
" The world can't keep up with the amount of pollution we're doing." Actually, the most polluted country (that I know of at least) is China. https://en.wikipedia.org... I'm pretty sure America and Australia aren't at that point yet, thankfully for us. I'm sure America can manage a long time.
"We don't have enough jobs for these people." Proof is not present. I went to Google, but all I saw was employment websites (Vacant Jobs), and the world running out of resources (Is the world running out of vacant jobs?). I don't think we're at that point until hundreds of years from now.
"Crime is going to go up." Proof is not present. How are you so sure that people will become thieves, murderers, hackers, or rapers? Sure like 1/80 of people may be a criminal, but that doesn't really count as "crime going up", since it's not significant.
"Teenage pregnancy is out of control too!" I have heard of this being an issue, and found a source. But what does this have to do with overpopulation? Sure a 15 year old girl could get pregnant, but her body isn't ready to handle the birth. She could die from the birth. That would be 1 (baby) - 1 (teen mother dies) = 0 net increase of population. This doesn't affect much.
Now that my opponent's case has been refuted, I need to fulfill my own Burden of Proof.
Point 1: We're actually declining in population.
We're not dealing with overpopulation. Underpopulation is what humanity's facing. http://www.realclearpolicy.com...
Go to the halfway point of the site. "The United States is the only large industrialized country with a birthrate above the replacement level (2.1 children per woman). Populations in the rest of the developed world, from Europe to Japan, are shrinking. The same thing is happening in the Middle East. "Muslim countries with a high literacy rate -- Iran, Turkey, Algeria, Tunisia -- have already fallen below replacement fertility," Goldman says." Europe, Japan, Turkey, Algeria, and more areas of the world (US is fine) are declining in population.
Sadly, Pro only chose 1 round, which is a terrible idea unless you're very confident your only argument stands. If someone was to accept a 1 round debate, like me accepting this one, you have to be lucky to have your argument survive. 3 rounds is the recommended minumum, so you can refute your opponent's argument and counter his rebuttals. In this debate, however, you weren't so lucky. Vote Con!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Sciguy 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Con had more of a convincing argument because he had more reliable sources such as http://www.realclearpolicy.com... and wikipedia. Sadly it was only one round long so there could be no reason to give any other points.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.