Which of these is the most sensible for our population issue?
| 1-Child Limits | 8 | |
| 2-Child Limits | 19 | |
| 0-Child Limits for a period of 6-9 yrs or more | 3 | |
| All of the above | 3 | |
| None of the above | 30 |
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[
Report Post
]
Comments ( 17
)
-
[Old Memory]
-
Duck_Says_Quack
Education. The more educated a population is the lower their birthrate becomes.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
RomeoDeMontague
-
-
dinz
Why not income test potential parent/s? If they have the financial means to support more than one child, why not? This system would work well in the west.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
ⓥⓘⓟⓔⓡ!
We're not THAT overpopulated. I wish that if the world got overpopulated in the future, all of the extremely cruel people in this world would just drop dead for unknown causes. >:)
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
RomeoDeMontague
You know you are not the only who suggested getting rid of these type of people. However most people are very liberal and would gladly fight to save a peadophile who raped multiple children, and the rapist put away for multiple offenses. However some like you do not believe these type of people deserve to live anymore but people some how still defend them. Even if they had a child that was raped or they themselves know someone who was a victem of rape. They would want to let the madness continue by letting that person survive. So many have suggested this but the bleeding hearts simply would never let it happen.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
ⓥⓘⓟⓔⓡ!
-
-
-
RomeoDeMontague
Liberal
The death penalty should be abolished. It is inhumane and is ‘cruel and unusual' punishment. Imprisonment is the appropriate punishment for murder. Every execution risks killing an innocent person.Conservative
The death penalty is a punishment that fits the crime of murder; it is neither ‘cruel' nor ‘unusual.' Executing a murderer is the appropriate punishment for taking an innocent life.That is not a very liberal mind set you have.
Comment Hidden ( show )
-
-
-
-
-
wistfulmaiden
People shouldn't have babies they cannot take care of. Use condoms and quit paying welfare queens . If parents refuse to support their child, put them in jail and make them work to pay for the child till it's 18. And anyone who seriously abuses or neglects their child should be sterilized.
Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
wistfulmaiden
-
-
RomeoDeMontague
I think we should just do it by income. Only let upper class people have kids. Upper class has money to waste and they will not have a problem sending kids to college and giving them everything they need. If everyone has well off parents that can get them everything they need there will be no more "Im richer than you. haha look how much cool stuff you cant get that we have" kind of attitude that I use to get as a child. There would be no more snobs since everyone would be the same level and well taken care of.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
[Old Memory]
Actually...to maintain zero population growth, 3 children per couple is ideal.
A two child limit would reduce population.
That being said...no law should regulate people's personal choices. The eco-system will regulate itself.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
NeuroNeptunian
I don't feel like a child limit should be imposed although I feel it would be very beneficial to society if people who were unsuited to have children would just quit and people who were suited to raise and nurture children were given free reign to have their own and as many as they want (as they already do).
Think quality, not quantity.
Comment Hidden ( show ) -
thegypsysailor
Perhaps if a virus, a really nasty one, wipes out 2/3rds of the world's population we wouldn't need to worry about all that.
Wouldn't that be an easier solution? Because, if you honestly think the human race is smart enough to limit the population on this planet, then you belong in a nut house.
There is no hope for mankind; we are doomed to self-extinction.Comment Hidden ( show )-
-
-
wistfulmaiden
-