Should we limit the number of children born in order to reduce pollution and conserve resources?

Question

Should we limit the number of children born in order to reduce pollution and conserve resources?

Answer 1

If we truely want to conserve resources and reduce pollution, then YES, we should limit the number of children who are born.  Humans have few natural predators, so our numbers do not thin out like other species.  We have developed ways to combat diseases, predation and starvation to such an extent that our population continues to grow.  At this rate, we will eventually run out of resources to support ourselves, or will pollute our way to a global disaster.

If each couple had only 2 children, then our population would slowly decrease due to natural accidents, sicknesses, etc.  

If each couple had only 1 child, then our population would decrease more quickly.  China has had success with their program, though the way they implement it is problematic regarding human rights.

Maybe we could begin by rewarding people financially for every tax year that they do NOT have a child via tax breaks.  This is probably the best way to get the ball rolling, as it will meet with the fewest protests.

Answer 2

By order of law?   NO

But the Pope could certainly help matters by giving contraception the church's blessing.

Here in US I firmly believe one welfare baby with no means of supporting the child.....Ok

Second welfare baby with no means of support...tie the tubes.

and if dad can be ID-ed, snip his too.

Illegal immigrants from down south are mainly faithful Catholics. They also believe in large families.

Welfare mommas get more money per child born.

Both classes of people are exploding and taxing the resources of the rest.

But we all need to somehow limit the world's population if mankind wishes to survive. It is exponentially exploding and as disease and such are conquered, it is worsening.

Answer 3

This would be very difficult to enforce, but perhaps people should really think twice before they bring another human being into this world. I know loads of people who have kids for all the wrong reasons: their partner pressured them into it, the kid was a 'mistake', they thought having a baby would keep them with their partner (it didn't), they wanted someone to take care of them in old age (no guarantee that will happen!) etc etc.

I personally have made the choice not to have kids for two reasons: their eco footprint would be too big for me to justify, and because I don't think that the planet will be a very nice place to live in the next 40-50 years, to say the least. Overpopulation, especially in the west, is the main cause of environmental destruction, bar none. Anyone who points the finger to India or China forgets that one western child consumes far, far, FAR more resources than any child born in a poor nation. For example, one Canadian child will use over 6,000 diapers in 2.5 years, all of which contain bleached cotton and plastics, and will take 500 years EACH to biodegrade. That's just what ONE kid uses in less than 3 years!

Answer 4

China does that and it's against human rights,  we can't even stop people from coming into our country... you know if a Mexican woman comes across border illegally and drops baby on US soil it's American.. What we need to do is stop all these people from other countries coming in all the time..not just Mexico but every country.  that would stop a lot of pollution...people who do not have generations of families here don't care about us...it's not our children and grand children who will even have a clean cjountry if we don't stand up and do something now...

Answer 5

WOW! Talk about a violation of human rights!  Although I'll be the first to admit that there are families out there, on the "welfare" rolls, bleeding the system, that keep on having babies that "we" can't afford.  But, a limit on the number of children a person can have is not an option.  That would be like placing a limit on how long a person can live..........anybody remember the '70's flick Logans Run??????  If it was possible, I would think the states financial aid programs would have already placed a "limit" on the number of children per family that would be eligible for assistance - and that hasn't happened because it's a violation.  But..............how about placing a limit on the amount of fuel a person can buy - you know, a gas ration.  That would not only be better for the environment, but also stick it to the oil companies!  Sounds like a "win win" to me, huh?

Answer 6

No, but we should give everyone who can't afford a kid- birth control so they aren't making more pollution by having to buy older cars that are run down, and  them receiving free healthcare and food.

Answer 7

Like they do in China?  Maybe...

Answer 8

yes in certain countries though like china and india due to the fact that last time i heard those two countries account for one third of the worlds total population.

Answer 9

We should be very careful about how much government regulation we wish upon our personal lives/choices - it will affect not only our own lives but those of ANY children born.  Better to wisely govern ourselves than to rely on an entity to take over.

Answer 10

Yes. There are a lot of children in need of a good home as it is! A cap on children might also make parents treat their children right because they only get so many chances to do it right. What would be done about people who come into this country with more than the amount of permitted children??