The Instigator
NJW0123
Pro (for)
The Contender
KJnonviolentresistance
Con (against)

World Population Sterilization

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
NJW0123 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 361 times Debate No: 109773
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

NJW0123

Pro

Anthropogenic population woes cannot be efficiently addressed while population continues to grow. The law of diminishing returns will keep adding barriers to progress as resources dwindle and pollution advances. Should international effort support sterilization to properly manage ecological source and sink function?
KJnonviolentresistance

Con

Well, my first point is a bit obvious. The human species can't continue if everyone is sterilized, so I'm going to assume you don't mean exactly everyone. If so who would determine the group of people not being sterilized? If a select group of people weren't sterilizing so they could produce the next generation to continue the species, the genetic diversity of the world would decrease dramatically. This means that future generations would more likely to become deformed and more prone to diseases and illness.

Speaking in realistic terms an overwhelming majority of the human population would not agree with this extreme measure, but public opinion and politics aside it wouldn"t be logical to take such an extreme measure when the population naturally is going down in some parts of the world.

Before 1600, the global average population growth rate was typically below 0.1 percent per year, meaning that the time it would have taken for the population to double was more than 700 years. Then, technology, health care, and sanitation improved, the growth rate increased. By 1965, the doubling time for the global population was 42 years. Since then, the global population growth rate has slowed down, and most likely to level off by 2100 without ever doubling again.

Demographers needed to understand why the rate of the population growth fluctuated so much in the past and whether there were lessons to be learned from those fluctuations to help us understand the future, and through developing and testing the Theory of Demographic Transition was born.

Historically, nations that have gone through similar processes of economic development have experienced similar patterns of population growth patterns. Scientists who studied the population growth patterns of European countries in the early 1900s described a four-phase process they referred to as the Demographic Transition.

Now for a brief explanation of the Demographic Transition. The theory says that as the country moves from a subsistence economy to industrialization and increased affluence, it undergoes a predictable shift in population growth.

At the beginning called phase 1 the country experiences slow or no growth. This phase is followed by rapid growth in phase 2. Many countries in Africa and some Asian countries, such as China and India are classified as being in phase 2. Countries such as the United States, Canada, and Australia are in phase 3, which is characterized by population stabilization. In phase 4, the population declines. Some western European nations are already in this phase like Germany. The population decreases when the birth rate is lower than the death rate, and it will not continue to decrease though. It will stabilize until the birth rate and death rate is the same.

To stabilize it takes a couple generations and this can be viewed in age structure diagrams which display on a graph the percentage of females and males and their ages and depending on the country there will be three trends in the graphs. There could be a graph that has a bigger youth population which is mostly shown in developing countries like Venezuela and India this is also known as a population pyramid. Another graph is when it looks more like a column and this would be a kind of graph that Germany has. The third kind of graph looks like an upside triangle, and this means the population is decreasing, but a big shift generation to generation is bad for the economy, This is because the smaller population of youth would have to support a huge older generation who need social welfare programs to take care of themselves, and this is what started to happen when China put in place its one child policy.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.