Should we decrease the population growth rate by introducing a one-child policy?

  • Tgugugoghjjk njbnjnjn hgj

    Fjj ekneke ekehekne ejeheh h hh h h hhh h h h h h h h hk k l ; o;; p m j n bv v v v vgjg ggjhf gjfhg hj jhjnj jnjhm jhj g g g g g g f f ff f f f ff f y y

  • People Have Right to Procreate

    People, even stupid people, have the right to procreate as they see fit. The problem is that so many single mothers in America today start out on welfare and never get off it. They end up in menial jobs because they can't afford to get an education because tuition has gone up. A one-child policy isn't the problem. A lack of education and irresponsible men are the problem with too many children on the planet.

  • One Child Policy Is Bad

    I do not believe we should introduce a one-child policy to decrease population growth. Population growth isn't increasing at an astronomical rate and you can see the effects of such policies in countries like China and Japan, where one gender is preferred over another. I think limiting the number of children someone can have is too restrictive.

  • No, there's no need to implement a one child policy.

    Families in the United States are already often choosing to have just one child, so some experts are worried that over time, our population may not maintain its level. It should really be a personal decision as to how many children people have. What has happened in China with the one-child policy is that their population is skewing largely male, and it will no doubt lead to problems with jobs and finding spouses for their country in the future. It's an unnatural thing to limit the number of children people have.

  • There should not be any child limit.

    I don't think there should ever be a limit as to how many children a family decides they want to bring in. They will know when enough is enough and they have all they can deal with. You will never know what potential a new born has until they have a chance to show it.

  • A one child policy is not needed to decrease the population growth rate.

    I believe that we should not decrease the population growth rate by introducing a one-child policy. The decision on how many children to have is an individual decision, and should not be one decided by "policy." Many people don't want to have only one child who could be spoiled and anti-social by not having any siblings.

  • There is no practical nor moral means to impose restrictions upon childbearing. The world needs less corrupt government and MORE people.

    We should be growing even faster. Humans enjoy powerful reproductive urges, best relieved by responsible marriage and reproducing within stable, and possibly-large families.

    "Mad scientist" Big Pharma contraceptives are unnatural and seek to disrupt the natural spread of human life, that God designed to benefit humans.

    Families come in all sizes, and it is not easy to just "stop" at some arbitrary number that pagans scheme to impose. Family size should be determined by God.

  • Population Growth Issues Should Not be Solved by a One-Child Policy

    No, we should not decreace the population growrth rate by introducing a one child policy. One of the most basic human rights is the right to reproduction, and taking away that right would be a gross violation of human rights. In addition, the population rate is decreasing in developed nations, not growing.

  • No, the one-child policy only leads to different social problems.

    China's one-child policy being the example for the world to use, it's easy to see that, while the effort may be a noble attempt to prevent the world's most populous country from continuing to spiral out of control, it has lead to other problems that might end up being inherent to any society instituting such a policy, regardless of culture. One such problem is the familial imperative to have a male child over a female child, given the idea of "perpetuating the lineage". By normal marriage conventions, the family name follows the father, so a family line that wishes not to be concluded in the current generation will hope for a male child, and in the face of a one-child policy, families with such concerns may turn to abortion over having a daughter. Another problem, related to the aforementioned one, is that, in a society where sons are preferred to daughters, female children will be in high demand, leading to intense competition among the families who opted to have a male child, so that their families may continue further. A better solution, and one that can be seen as effective even here in the US, is to focus on education. If you look at the average number of children a family has in various parts of the US, predominately the Northeast has fewer than the South. And, if you compare the average level of education in the two areas, you will also notice that the Northeast is, on average, more educated than the South. (We could bring religiousness into this as well, noting similarities, but that is hot water...) So, in conclusion, the one-child policy causes more harm than good, and societies would be better off educating their people.

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