Amazon.com Widgets

Should countries limit the amount of children couples can have?

  • Environmental impact is a humane population problem.

    Whereas our environment necessarily controls wildlife population levels, human proliferation has grown beyond environmental capacity by way of manipulating our environments to the point where nature's ability to compensate has been impeded. Our use of our technologies is really the natural exploitation of our environment, however as we continue to utilize our technologies with an over population we exceed the natural boundaries of influences that balance resource sustanability, that moderates climate and maintains overall environmental homeostasis. As our populations continue to burgeon we will experience food, water and environmental conditions being the primary agents of war.

  • We are already over populated and at a tipping point.

    We need to at least start the discussion about over population. Something will need to be done in the near future with population growing faster then ever and people living longer then they ever have. Resources are already becoming limited and environmental effects on the earth are seen everywhere. If we don't do something to control our population Mother Nature will be sure to do it for us. Dense population is perfect breeding ground for plague and disease and it is just a matter of time :(

  • Yes, they should!

    I believe countries should be allowed to limit child birth per person in the short term you may be able to pay for your child's need but in the long run more people per family means less space, more pollution, less resources. Children are dying in 3rd World countries due to starvation, sure upper class families could afford to live in a 3rd world country and have children but that means less goods, wealth, etc... For the lower class families, if we could keep a solid population we might just be able to keep the world green, whilst still being able to have families.

  • Limiting Children Population

    I think yes for multiple reasons. The more kids that the other countries are going to have means that the more jobs there will need to be, more food able to eat and most important, fresh water to drink. Most countries today do not have any fresh water what so ever, and if the United States does not do anything about the population control I think that we too will fall into that category. The more children you have the harder you are going to have to work to support your family, and with today's economy it is very hard to find a job depending on where you live. Most foreign countries such as China do not make having children a need early in their lives whereas in India everybody wants you to have at least 4 to 5 kids and mostly just wanting boys. If you want to have more then the limit of children then fine, but there should be modifications as to being fined if you exceed over the limit of children. In today's world having people who work for a living support those who do not have a job an for example use an access card to buy all their food I just do not think is fair. You should have to work for you family to support them not somebody else's family support your family. I think the government should take action about this issue and soon because if they do not then they and us people will pay for it in the long run.

  • Yes I think they should

    I believe countries should be concerned about the number of their population. I think they have the right to limit the amount of children they can have. There is a concern for the amount of resources that the country has. So they need to take action to support the people that are already living in the country. The only thing I do not agree upon is abortions for limiting the number of children a couple can have.

  • I do believe countries should limit the amount of children.

    If things are not done the country will begin to run out of limiting resources. What will they do then? If the population were to reach its carrying capacity mass starvation could occur. The country would not have to worry about air pollution or about the unsafe water supply as much as. There are so many issues that will happen if people have more children then the country can support.

  • They should limit the number of children

    I think they should because if the population is high they need to keep it from growing. The country is trying to save its resources and lower the pollution. Another example they should limit the amount of children is that the country wants to keep their population low so they do not over use resources.

  • Yes I believe so

    I do believe countries should have the right to limit the amount of children a couple has. The population keeps growing and the more people there is, the more the resources are being used up. The more children a couple has, the more the population grows and soon enough the Earth isn't going to be able to support all of these people. Plus the less children a couple has, the better off they may be.

  • Yes, to an extent.

    Countries should be allowed to limit the amount of children couples should have, but only to an extent. Couples may cling to religious or traditional beliefs, blocking out the problems that may be plaguing their countries. Mainly in LDC's, boys are favored as well, so couples keep having children until a boy is born. The governments of these countries should not have a bias, and therefore can set a limit based on the major problems of the country.

  • Yes They Should Limit

    1. The world would become way too overpopulated. The population now is already in the billions. That's a ton of people living on Earth.
    2. If other countries allow families to have a lot of children, it causes problems. Poverty erupts, crime, and people do not become educated. Higher population means more problems.

  • Should countries limit the amount of Children

    Countries should not limit the child population because it is dumb because it is a sin and we she be reperduseing because one day the world will end and no one is prepared and two children could survive because they like to play and are smarter than us at hiding so they may survive but as they get older they can reperduse and may more people just like adam and eve so no child limit and parents prepare your children and have them prepare theres.

  • A Big Population Does Not Lose Resources

    Believing that by having lots of children and lots of family that the world is going to run out of resources is the incorrect, terrified of the world view. The world has enough resources to share with every human being. It is our responsibility to cultivate it.

    Children are the best expression of creation we have on this earth. If someone is worried about all the starving children in other places (who are only starving because of the RICH preying off of the poor) then they can adopt.

    Not having enough money to raise children, leads back to earning a living wage. No one can take care of their family on $7.25 a hour. You can't even raise one child that way, but does that mean you should be deprived of that joy of parenthood, just because you are poor?

    Most of the those who answered YES are only thinking of themselves. Classic individualistic and egocentric thinking. Maybe they should try thinking about the community. Maybe if they worked more with children they would understand what it is all about.

  • No it is not the countries business

    If an individual can afford to have 30 children legally it should be their choice. It is a private matter that should not be limited. If the individual can't afford those chilldren then it becomes a different matter. Take for example Philip Rivers of the Chargers. He makes good money and is in a loving marriage. They have at least 7 kids which he has no trouble providing for. What is the harm being done?

  • No countries should not limit the amount of children couples can have.

    If a couple wants to have a lot of children, they should be aloud to. They are the ones that will struggle to support their children. People should have their own rights to do what they want. They will just have to struggle to pay for school and to raise each one of there children.

  • A Big Population Does Not Lose Resources

    Believing that by having lots of children and lots of family that the world is going to run out of resources is the incorrect, terrified of the world view. The world has enough resources to share with every human being. It is our responsibility to cultivate it.

    Children are the best expression of creation we have on this earth. If someone is worried about all the starving children in other places (who are only starving because of the RICH preying off of the poor) then they can adopt.

    Not having enough money to raise children, leads back to earning a living wage. No one can take care of their family on $7.25 a hour. You can't even raise one child that way, but does that mean you should be deprived of that joy of parenthood, just because you are poor?

    Most of the those who answered YES are only thinking of themselves. Classic individualistic and egocentric thinking. Maybe they should try thinking about the community. Maybe if they worked more with children they would understand what it is all about.

  • No they shouldnt

    Document J talks about how China’s government changed the one child policy to two children per family. Document J states that, “The decision to allow families to have two children was designed ‘to improve the balanced development of population’ and to deal with an aging population [...]” It is important to think about what will happen when the children of this age grow up.Not only does the two children policy loosen up the strains on the population but it also it freeing the economy. This is because not all families are financially stable enough to care for multiple children, if any at all. It is not the government taking care of the children it is the parents. If the couple is financially stable enough to have more than two children and they so choose to, then it should not be a problem. If however, the couple is not financially stable and continuously ask the government for money and support for the children, that is a different story.

  • No no NO

    The government don't care for our children the parents do we support in any way we can now while they grow up to get a job they can grow up to support you. So lets say you are poor and you only have one child that one child is only gonna support you with all they can and it won't probably even be enough

  • No, they should not deny the right to life

    Earth isn't facing an over population problem, it is proven that Earth can be home to many more humans and many more creatures and species with available carrying capacity of food and resources, our major problem as a human species is that we don't have any environmental education. We use up all of our resources, and we don't know how to save them and preserve them. If we would focus more on in educating people to have a better future, our present would be much more different by reducing and only using what we truly need. Instead of having a small population of overly wealthy and wasteful people, we could all have a large population were diversity is celebrated, respected and accepted where wealth is distributed evenly and we use only what we need for a happy life amongst sharing with other and taking care of our planet and resources. WE ARE NOT OVERPOPULATED, we are uneducated, we are within a sick society of over consumption and capitalism, but nothing will stop us if we continue to be selfish.

  • Should countries limit the amount of Children

    Countries should not limit the child population because it is dumb because it is a sin and we she be reperduseing because one day the world will end and no one is prepared and two children could survive because they like to play and are smarter than us at hiding so they may survive but as they get older they can reperduse and may more people just like adam and eve so no child limit and parents prepare your children and have them prepare theres.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.