Although most countries, like America, are completely overpopulated, I believe that to start this global change we would have to kill 50% of most countries populations. Also, the one child policy could be the death of the world because of natural diseases such as cancer, HIV, aids, and many more. When the population is dramatically decreased because of this policy that means young birth would be influenced because for every death there needs to be life it helps to balance the world out. Although there are some pros there are multiple cons so I have to disagree with this.

I don't think so because no matter how many kids someone haves, i don't think it's fair to kill all of the children until there's one left. Everyone deserves to live. If that's China's way of life, so be it. I don't think it's a good idea for every nation to do it. The population will shrink dramatically, and i don't think anyone will want that

Eh, I am not sure. Both answers have their pro's and con's. I agree about over population being a problem, but it seems kind of unfair to limit people to only having one child. I recall a book series that takes place in a world where people can only have two children, and it does show what could possibly happen. I think it is called the Shadow Children saga/series/chronicles/something.

Eh, I am not sure. Both answers have their pro's and con's. I agree about over population being a problem, but it seems kind of unfair to limit people to only having one child. I recall a book series that takes place in a world where people can only have two children, and it does show what could possibly happen. I think it is called the Shadow Children saga/series/chronicles/something.

 

About the overpopulation thing i meant like they would have to kill a lot of ppl

About the overpopulation thing i meant like they would have to kill a lot of ppl

 

Oh, sorry. I forgot about that part when I posted. That I would almost definitely be against.

I don't think most people fully understand human life and population.

 

One of the many aspects of a living object is its space capacity. When it far extends of the reach of that, it means either two things: migration to another area that contains all the qualities of surviving, plus being manageable, or the human population will decrease (otherwords, die off). What people don't understand is that they think once the planet is overpopulated, we'd have to move to another planet or something to continue living. That's not entirely true. If in fact the planet was overpopulated with humans, food/water suplies would go short. That means humans would slowly die off. However, because of our intelligence, a being with the ability of thinking and reason, language, and our body functions, we would still be able to survive. Basically, once the human population gets low enough, the food and water supply will increase again (that is if we humans can stop polluting our enviornment and ruining our chances of survival), and reproduction can start again. Once humanity hits the brink of low population (not extinct), we can then bring ourselves back up to full speed. It's not the quickest or happiest time of humanity, but it'll have to do.

 

But the One Child Policy? Unexceptable. It's not only just immoral, but not fair. Why should they be able to choose to lives or who dies? Why should they get to choose who gets to be born or who gets to be aborted? That's just not right.

 

Force on decreasing overpopulation is unnatural and just not needed. If we're going to be overpopulated, so be it. Scientists are doing everything they can to actually promote growth of human and other species population as well. China can stop with this whole, "I CAN HAZ CHANGE IN WORLD". Their shenanigans are unnecessary, especially since they only allow, what, 2 kids per family, if my memory serves me right.

 

Just plain not right

Seriously, certain people have no money and still have 7-10 kids. That's just an example. I think that's when the one child policy should be active.

But what will the families that already have 2+ children? What will those families do if they were only allowed 1 child.....

 

I don't wanna lose my bro who always gets on my nerves, i still love the lil bastard c:

 

I don't wanna lose my sis, she may be a little brat but she is so adorable and innocent!

well accally their permited 2 kids and no it shouldnt plus for here in the good old usa it could be seen as unconstitutional to permit people to have a sertan amount of kids

But what will the families that already have 2+ children? What will those families do if they were only allowed 1 child.....

 

I don't wanna lose my bro who always gets on my nerves, i still love the lil bastard c:

 

I don't wanna lose my sis, she may be a little brat but she is so adorable and innocent!

 

Nothing you can do about it. It's just going to be for new parents and for parents that have 1 child already.

As some some what far from first born, I have a personal distaste for this policy. But, for now it is better to look at this objectively.

1st problem: If you only get one kid, you are going to want that kid to be what you want. In China, it is better to have a boy than a girl. This means that many little girls are abandoned or aborted in favor of having a boy. While there's all kinds of moral problems with these two opinions, there is all another problem. In China, there are more males than females. If there are less girls. their population is going to decrease to levels below what China would need to function well as a country.

2nd problem: To much wasted potential. Thomas Edison, Nikola Tesla, and Mother Teresa. All names of famous people who impacted the world. All not the first born of there families. How do you know that the next kid you have isn't the next scientific genus, the next great artist, the next great world leader? There is a flip side to that argument. The next kid you have could be the next Adolf Hitler. But either way, it's better to give those kids a chance.

No I don't think this should go global, there are highly populated areas but It would be so wrong on diffrent levels to deny life to someone.

Yes, or 3 billion people have to die. Simply put our population is at the max before the planet can sustain us no more. Either we colonize a new planet (which doesn't seem likely before we hit 9 billion people), or the rest of this century will be full of wars, disease, and disasters, more than usual at least.

I don't think so because no matter how many kids someone haves, i don't think it's fair to kill all of the children until there's one left. Everyone deserves to live. If that's China's way of life, so be it. I don't think it's a good idea for every nation to do it. The population will shrink dramatically, and i don't think anyone will want that

 

I don't think most people fully understand human life and population.

 

One of the many aspects of a living object is its space capacity. When it far extends of the reach of that, it means either two things: migration to another area that contains all the qualities of surviving, plus being manageable, or the human population will decrease (otherwords, die off). What people don't understand is that they think once the planet is overpopulated, we'd have to move to another planet or something to continue living. That's not entirely true. If in fact the planet was overpopulated with humans, food/water suplies would go short. That means humans would slowly die off. However, because of our intelligence, a being with the ability of thinking and reason, language, and our body functions, we would still be able to survive. Basically, once the human population gets low enough, the food and water supply will increase again (that is if we humans can stop polluting our enviornment and ruining our chances of survival), and reproduction can start again. Once humanity hits the brink of low population (not extinct), we can then bring ourselves back up to full speed. It's not the quickest or happiest time of humanity, but it'll have to do.

 

But the One Child Policy? Unexceptable. It's not only just immoral, but not fair. Why should they be able to choose to lives or who dies? Why should they get to choose who gets to be born or who gets to be aborted? That's just not right.

 

Force on decreasing overpopulation is unnatural and just not needed. If we're going to be overpopulated, so be it. Scientists are doing everything they can to actually promote growth of human and other species population as well. China can stop with this whole, "I CAN HAZ CHANGE IN WORLD". Their shenanigans are unnecessary, especially since they only allow, what, 2 kids per family, if my memory serves me right.

 

Just plain not right

 

But what will the families that already have 2+ children? What will those families do if they were only allowed 1 child.....

 

I don't wanna lose my bro who always gets on my nerves, i still love the lil bastard c:

 

I don't wanna lose my sis, she may be a little brat but she is so adorable and innocent!

 

The question towards where would the children go... Possibly they could go to an Advanced Adoption Service in which parents will give up all children till the eldest is left unless the oldest is over the age of 21 in which they would get a child, a policy they could have is family for family meaning you get a family member that was put in as your "child." I hope this answer works

A government has no right to tell people how many kids they should have. Period.

 

And for the topic starter: the USA isn't overpopulated. Some areas are, but with overpopulation they look at general population density throughout a country. Look up Bangladesh and the Netherlands, some of the most crowded nations on the planet.

that's the problem, the world shouldn't be. There should be some sort of limit of like 6 kids and you have to be able to provide for them

that's the problem, the world shouldn't be. There should be some sort of limit of like 6 kids and you have to be able to provide for them

 

There is a system for that. Women die if they give birth to too many children.

Although it is absolutely true that some people shouldn't even be able to procreate

 

There is a system for that. Women die if they give birth to too many children.

Although it is absolutely true that some people shouldn't even be able to procreate

 

that's what they said about octomom and Feodor Vassilyev but look at them.

that's what they said about octomom and Feodor Vassilyev but look at them.

 

That's what I said. Some people shouldn't have children in the first place.

 

That's what I said. Some people shouldn't have children in the first place.

 

Not that first sentence.

Not that first sentence.

 

That's why you need to read the full post before blurping stuff out

Hellz NO!

 

That's why you need to read the full post before blurping stuff out

 

I meant the first sentence of your post. And I did read it, that's how I could comment on it.

I meant the first sentence of your post. And I did read it, that's how I could comment on it.

 

OK, my mistake, then you just don't get my point I was talking about people conceiving in a natural way, preferably thought through (first get married, get some financial security, THEN start making babies).

I'm not gonna say say anything,