Any Homo Sapien that is opposed to the one child policy is an uneducated, ignorant animal. HERE IS YOUR FREE EDUCATION:
This is not dreamland, this is a biosphere. A biosphere is FINITE, not INFINITE, idiots. This biological sphere has been generating life for 3,540,000,000 years, and suddenly this animal evolves and begins wiping out all other lifeforms and converting the living sphere into a dead sphere composed of CONCRETE AND STEEL. Go into the mountains and sample how peaceful and wonderful you feel in the natural world. Then go and stand next to a superhighway and attempt to attain the same tranquil state of mind. You foolish humans of the 'no' camp are preachers of the concrete and steel takeover of this living world. You are enemies of all that is good and pure. The Homo sapien sapien is the most destructive animal on the planet. Like it or not, that is you. Falsely, you believe that the human is some sort of sacred device to be worshiped above all other forms of life. Your ignorance is disgusting. If there were 1,000,000,000 Homo sapiens on the Earth all humans would have plenty, all would be wealthy. This possibility grows farther and farther from reality with each added Homo sapien sapien. You simpleton blockheads who think the human can reproduce at will while everything stays 'hunky dory' are quite obviously scientifically illiterate and possess utterly mindless and childish perspective of reality. If you want to understand what the Homo sapien sapien is to this planet, study what a cancer is to the body of an organism. Here, I will help you:
"Cancer cells do not respond normally to the body's control mechanisms"
Now compare that statement to the following statement-
Homo sapiens sapiens do not respond well to the biosphere's control mechanisms.
Again, the cancer cell:
"They divide excessively and invade other tissues. If unchecked, they can kill the organism"
Now, the Homo sapien sapien:
They reproduce excessively and invade other biomes. If unchecked, they can kill the biosphere.
Every time you hear of someone getting cancer, remember that your planet is infected with such an entity. Homo sapiens sapiens DO NOT have the right to destroy this biosphere. If there were diamonds lying all over the ground, how much value would they hold?
I believe that limiting the number of citizens by encouraging a lower child birth rate is essential in an over populated area. It's important to note that China's policy doesn't force abortions or sterilization. It doesn't arrest those who have multiple children, it simply only provides aid for one child (its still socialized), while other children are not covered. Now this system is not without problems, but an attempt to prevent people from consuming all of the resources is essential for our times. As long as it isn't extreme, then I am for encouraging this, and only wish that jobs were more evenly distributed amongst the sexes so that people weren't tempted to abort females, or only choose to educate their sons, or the reverse.
Because we need to respect that there is lot of people in the planet and if the population won't stop growing, there will not be space for us in this planet. So we need to respect it, and people need to have fewer kids. I think one child policy is good.
Some research that I have come across states that if a female child is born in China, the family will kill or abandon it because it is only boys that these families desire. I don't understand why a government would have control over such basic human rights as reproduction. Also children who have siblings tend to be less self-centered, which definitely makes for better adults.
I'm going to answer the question "was China's one-child policy sensible?". I'd suggest it was the only option while extreme and regrettable - it may be essential for other countries to start to consider also if they want to avoid insurmountable suffering. We must not ignore the history preceding it and focus on the one-child policy ignores a major contributing factor. The communist party's nation building exercise that preceded it which resulted in an estimated 30 million people starving to death. I don't think there's anything humanitarian about starving to death.
But even now it must also be remembered that China's population is still growing at 8 million a year (around 10% of the global increase in population). China are buying up resources globally (particularly farmland) to ensure food security for their own almost without exception to the exclusion of those who's farmland is being sold-out from under them by the globalist ideology that ever thinks that more and more humans can be nothing else but wonderful.
The ideal would of course be access to family planning and education, but we also need to be realistic of what was achievable at the time for a very poor China. Bear in mind that there are institutions diametrically opposed to women having any choice over whether they have children, how many they have and when they have them.
So, in the context, it wasn't as though China had much choice. Is it still sensible now? I'd say no, there should be global mobilization to ensure access to family planning and reproductive health and in particular tying population to resources such that the global population of humans gradually decreases to a point where environmental markers are stable. But is the world ready to have a serious conversation on population or are we still dominated by the inability of humans to understand the exponential function?
Law enforced in 1979.
China population in 1979 was 972 million
India population in 1979 was 671 million
China population in 2012 was 1.34 billion(138% increase)
India population in 2012 was 1.205 billion(180% increase)
This means that if china didn't introduce this law the chinese population would be approx. twice India's today. India's population is growing so fast it will be high than China in 2027
The favoring of boys over girls in a traditional agrarian society such as China will continue even without the implementation of the one child policy. For example, look at India, which does not have a one child policy but at the same time has one of the world's highest gendercide rates. The issue is not the policy itself, but the mindset established by Chinese parents that boys will contribute more monetarily then girls.
Population is 7 billion and will probably be 8 billion by 2025. A billion more people means a lot more resources. Where will the resources come from? Are we at or past earth's carrying capacity? The US Govt and local govt needs to educate people about population and sustainability and tax people who insist on having lots of kids. Population explosion is coming - not Jesus.
There seems to be misunderstanding that Chinese nation and government kill baby girls because of one child policy. As a person living in China, I can say that the assertion is very incorrect. First of all, neither Chinese nor the government performs killing of daughters. When a second baby is born from a couple, the couple will just pay certain amount of fine. Secondly, even if Chinese farmers in agrarian regions have practical motive to kill their daughters who cannot work as well as sons, the assertion is still false since Chinese government allows farmers to have more children so they can inherit the agricultural business from their parents.
The meaning behind one child policy is to combat problems derived from overpopulation in China. Though there are advantages in China having the highest population on the planet, there are troublesome problems that follow. Regulation of the population becomes difficult. Fair distribution of welfare and wealth is nearly impossible since there's just too many to deal with.
Having one child also helps individual families. A child costs massive amount of money to nurture. By having families have one child, government can provide environment for these children to be raised with more concentrated support and resources from their parents.
Regardless of this policy, many Chinese still do have siblings. The status quo in China is not nearly what people outside of China might think. Many families still pay the fine to have second child. Many of my Chinese friends and teachers have brothers and sisters. Please don't be judgmental towards the policy by its title.
Many married couples risk the fine and give birth to their second child anyways. Chinese wants more than one child. When there is no such policy, the population will just skyrocket. Do not view this policy from the perspective of US citizen. China face totally different problem with the US or any other countries.
Imagine, a world of almost all Chinese people. No other cultures, just China's. A dictatorship rule until our ancestors come. Eventually, where do we keep these people? We need as much time as possible to find out where to put more people before enacting this law. Also, many girls are not killed, just imprisoned. If you want to have a world of problems then go ahead, just think before you choose!
Being over populated is understandable, but they shouldn't be able to abort a child just because the child is female. China isn't really thinking about this because sooner or later they're going to run out if females in China. It would be a lot better if they had the chance to have 2 or 3 children. One reason why they even have the one child policy is not just because they don't want to be over populated, but they also wanted to make sure they knew their stance of being under rule of a communist country.
No, China's "one child" policy is not sensible, because you can not control how many children a woman gets pregnant with at a time.
There would be general loss of biodiversity,deforestation, extinction of species,marine and ocean would be polluted. Animals would lose their habitat because people would need tons of space to build buildings,houses,malls,stores,condos,apartments etc... therefore it would eliminate forests and farmlands. Also it would be really unsustainable because people would keep using the resources until there would be none left for the future generations. Future generations would have less resources to work with therefore the economy would most likely to go down because of the limited amount of resources that supplies the industries in some countries for trading and selling.
First of all, people should have their own rights to be able to have as many kids as they ever want to. However, the whole abortion issue if they have twins is completely wrong. For one thing, its a sin and you are basically killing a poor little child who didn't even get to breath or see how the world is. Who cares about how big China can get, great for them! So, basically this is not fair at all!
There are less girls, not enough wives, not big happy families and it is inhumane, killing innocent poor children because of the way that they were born. It's horrid. Absolutely horrible! Chinese people need to decrease discrimination and sexism, and maybe girls would have equal rights and no more female infanticide.
China's one child policy is bad because they are only allowed one baby boy. If a woman has a baby girl they are forced to have an abortion or send it to adoption. I think this is extremely bad because number 1, you have to abort the baby girl, and number 2, you should have freedom to have more then one baby.
People in china are being forced to only have one baby boy, if they get a girl then they are forced to have an abortion or get rid of it once it is born, i think this is totally wrong and this should be changed immediately! Also people should be able to choose weather they want a boy or girl even though boys can carry on the family name and can work harder then boys but this is still wrong and think of how many babies out there that have been abandoned because they are girls, this should be banned!
No one - or country - should place limitations on the number of offspring a person should be able to create. This goes against religion, biology and human nature. Humans were created to procreate and should be allowed to have as many children as God will allow. For a country to place limitations on this is totally against all human rights!
Why does China continue this reputation of denying people of basic rights, such as marrying and having as many or as little children they bloody want! What if a couple where so child friendly and all they wanted was a large family of around five? They wouldn't be allowed to even fulfill their life dream!
Deng Shiao Peng has five children but his subjects have only one. Killing baby girls doesn't make sense. Taking away a poor farmer's one year's earnings will leave him cold and hungry. Of course this is only the tip of the iceberg. Involuntarily sterilizing young men and women and forcibly aborting the second and third foetus is very cruel and has to be brought to the international court of justice. Charge these criminals in a Chinese court of law.