There is no longer any use for high populations as we move into a post industrial society. It's childish to presume that all people are born with the right to reproduce. These are ideas from a more primitive, selfish society of greed and assumed self importance. It's time for people to grow up. We're owed nothing, we owe everything to this blue planet.
You humans are the #1 cause of loss of life to biodiversity and you pesky humans are also the leading cause of pollution. The ONLY way for humanity to survive for the next century is to embrace education and use technology for the better good. Humans who contribute to waste by a factor of 18 times more than they contribute to cleaning up should be euthanized. Also repeat violent criminals should be honorably euthanized as well. Parents should have 2 children, if they do not produce a male the first two times then they can go for a 3rd, but after that no more babies, unless the parents can prove that they are well beyond their means in the ability to support the family.
Sorry but this is a clash of freedoms... This is a war! Those who value nature more than the selfish and futile desire to have "huge families" are going to support a limit for human population... Those who put any selfish desire above nature are going to support the acceleration of population growth... Go ahead and call me an autoritarian if you will but be aware that I think the exact same thing about you... Those who are against limits always come with emotional blackmail about freedom... But what do you understand about freedom? So being obliged to agree with the acceleration of human population growth is being free for you? I have the freedom to state what I really think and yes I do like nature and I don't want it to disappear... I don't want an 100% human world... I hate emotional blackmail... Such thing does not work against me!
If you could boil down what is wrong with the world to just one thing, what would it be? It would be people having children who should not. Nothing is more dangerous than an adolescent w/o knowledge, or with the wrong knowledge. Nothing.
Unfortunately, it very, very hard to determine who can and can not have children. But, we are to live in a society together, and promise each other to take care of each other, we must somehow figure this out. We must start a discussion, like this.
I've just recently finished a degree in Architecture and have a particular interest in Urban Design. I simply cannot understand the logic behind building taller and more dense buildings as part of an urban designer's plan to improve our living environments. This solution is purely the government's short term solution to reducing homelessness, and provide an even more risky short term boost to the economy by providing work for the construction industry. It is obvious to me that in this plan, no consideration has been given to the quality of the lives of the people living in these 'dense' (another word for too small) high-rise prison towers that cut people off from all form of urban interaction and more importantly interaction with a connected environment. I can see and understand the argument for not imposing restrictions on the number of permitted births, but i feel the risk to the standard of the future built environment in which this new sprawling generation will have to live, morally, far outweighs any such argument.
The current population of the planet is around 7.2 billion. By 2050, the U.N. Department of Social and Economic affairs already predicts that there will be an estimate of about 9.6 billlion people on th planet. Most of the population will most likely occur in countries like China and India. As the population now sours, food and nessities will be a must needed factor to suport the population of the people on earth, resulting to deforestation of the planet.
I believe we need to limit the population on planet Earth to 10 billion. Not because of oil and gas usage, but if food usage. Oil and will be replaced by electricity by 2025 if the electric trend continues. But food is a different story; according to studies, the uppermost population limit is 10 billion, anything past that number will result in feeding problems. Today though, food is not a problem. The reason why people think that it is, is because of Africa. Because Africa has food growing difficulties because of the planet heating up due to the CO2 we release in the atmosphere while driving gas cars, whichs heats there crop fields. But as I stated earlier, gas cars should be replaced by 2025 if the electric trend continues. Humanity will not stop at this number; if everything continues as planned with the space program, we should begin colonization of the planet Mars by 2050 (the first landing should occur by 2035). That is well within our lifetimes! Since Mars is about half the size of Earth, then Mars should be able to hold just under 5 billion people. Which brings up the population to nearly 15 billion! It it will continue growing as we reach out for the stars.
...Not quantity but quality is necessary for this planet to survive! Don't you see it?
The world is overcrowded already and full of hungry innocent kids born in ultimate misery.
The planet is not an endless space full of goods for another 10 billion of hungry throats.
Very soon the human life will become nothing else than terrible existence in hunger and misery.
Human population has increased at an almost exponential rate. With this growth comes an increase in demand for land, food, water, energy, and other resources. As human numbers grow species and their habitats diminish. The bulk of evidence suggests that human population growth is an important underlying cause of biodiversity loss. According to the most recent projections, by the end of the 21st century human population could reach as high as 16 billion or as low as 5.5 billion.
Daily, there are a greater amount of people born into poverty than comfort, human nature strives and claims to be about equality however we seem incapable of ever being able to achieve it. We should stop the rate of births for a few years and allow those already born to achieve a higher potential. But we may as well try to stop the Suns rise.
It includes abortion and killing children, which is crime! If giving birth to a child that is illegal, killing them and aborting their future is a larger crime. Where do you see humanity. Also 50% of the land on earth is covered up with human, what about the other 50? Also to control the population, proper education is needed to provide but can the world bare to educate people? No, so no sense in blaming people for giving birth to a illegal or third child.
A government or other authority can not impose limits to human rights. That being said I do agree with population control. There are ways to enact these limits without the authoritative restraints. We should make all forms of birth control easily accessible and free. It is much cheaper to pay for a pregnancy prevented than to pay for an accident. We should also stop giving tax benefits for having a child. In that same spectrum we need to end assistance to families. If the family has too many kids, let them all starve or learn to live off the land. We need to get back to survival of the fittest.
Some couples like to have a lot of children, because they feel happier and more comfortable with more members in the family. It’s somebody’s freedom to decide what they want for their family. The family is a couple's decision to make. Government should not control the decisions in a family.
There is no good, legal way to do so. The only effective way, would be to institute a limit on how many children you can have, which is a violation of human rights. If I wish to have only one child, thats my right. But it's also my right to have 10 children, if I so choose. The government should not be in the population control business. They have no right to tell me or anyone else how many children we can have.
In our modern world, freedom is highly regarded. Having children is a freedom that should not be deprived from people. However, it is true that the unimpeded growth of human population is created enormous problem.
Since limiting human population growth is ethically unjust, thus wrong to legalize, we can only limit human population growth through social methods. If government resources are put into spreading scientific info to the general public, and encouraging people to think of environmental implications of their lifestyle when making decisions, I think a portion of people would actually refrain from having big families, or choose to adopt instead.
Since we all know how much media affect us, I also wish more TV shows like Bones would surface (or similar influence in media), instead of ones like Vampire Diaries or those reality TV shows. Bones has been great at raising odd topics of society, especially at touching those topics from a delicate objective viewpoint. It inspires thought while delivering entertainment.
I do not agree with limiting population growth. It is wrong to me You are basically telling people that they can have a certain amount of kids. What if people want a big family? That is something many people of the world want and it is wrong to tell them they cannot.
No government or any other such ruling body should limit human population growth. Having children is a cherished moment in one's life, and so long as the individuals having children are responsible parents, they should not be restricted from having them. In addition, many of the results attributed to overpopulation such as resource strain and pollution are really the result of neglect, carelessness, and greed on the part of other humans. Instead, governments or similar ruling bodies should advocate better decision making. In addition, studies show there is a correlation between education and a lower birth rate. More education and a lower birth rate is a solution that benefits multiple parties rather than just one or a few.
If overpopulation were to be achieved, it will either A) not be a problem, or B) cause many people to eventually die because of there is no way for the people to live a sustainable life since the population limit has been supposedly exceed. A) if it is not a problem there is no need to control it. B) In that case there is still no need to control it because it will ultimately control itself. even though there is suffering from route B) there is still suffering caused by controlling it.
Mandel thought an overpopulation crisis would happen about a hundred years ago. It didn't. Technology always keeps up. Even famines aren't caused by overpopulation/not enough food. They're caused by economics and the fact that many governments don't have a social safety net in place to deal with problems like this and some can't afford it. Talking about overpopulation makes it easy for people to dismiss problems like world hunger. The fact is we could abolish world hunger by the end of the year if wealthier nations came together and agreed to it.
There are problems with every proposed means to hinder the natural expansion of mankind. Condoms dull sensation, have problems of poor fit, semen backpressure, and multiple modes of "failure." Many people have practical or "religious objections" to especially "artificial" methods of "family planning." Pulling out is said not to work very well. Each drop of precum can contain up to 50,000 sperm, and often more than a few drops oozes out of the penis head long before ejaculation. It seems humans were designed to steadily multiply.
As a pro-lifer, I very much favor a greater spread of human life, and a much stronger flow of babies into the world.
As the world population grows, the numbers of parents yearning for more children can also easily grow. Yet another compelling argument for the continuing natural enlargement of the human race.