Extended Life vs Procreation

[JustBusiness17]

Should people be forced to choose between extending their own life or creating new life by having children? The current human life span allows for 3 and sometimes 4 generations of offspring which is a major contributing factor to overpopulation. The question I pose is a rather straight forward trade-off between an extended life and having children.

:geek:

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Should people be forced to choose between extending their own life or creating new life by having children? The current human life span allows for 3 and sometimes 4 generations of offspring which is a major contributing factor to overpopulation. The question I pose is a rather straight forward trade-off between an extended life and having children.

:geek:

Translation:

Should our ideal communist government murder or sterilize people?

edit: Fallacy of excluded middle AKA false dichotomy.

 

[Predanator]

Should our ideal communist government murder or sterilize people?

That is unnecessary spam. There are issues related to the OP that rarely get scrutiny and are completely reasonable to explore.

 

[Nemesiah]

Should people be forced to choose between extending their own life or creating new life by having children? The current human life span allows for 3 and sometimes 4 generations of offspring which is a major contributing factor to overpopulation. The question I pose is a rather straight forward trade-off between an extended life and having children.

:geek:

Translation:

Should our ideal communist government murder or sterilize people?

edit: Fallacy of excluded middle AKA false dichotomy.

Sterilize after the first kid; you don,´t take away the oportunity to procrete, or to love a child, you just make sure the people who are actually here don't starve to death. Sterilization could be avoided of course by educating the people (has worked before) but I think people are too irrational for this to be an effective and lasting solution, humans are greedy by nature. I hope this can be done with education instead than forcing it since facism is not a good way to go but I doubt christians among others will get on th one baby waggon what with the pope prohibiting condoms and what not.

That's my opinion anyway

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Sterilize after the first kid; you don,´t take away the oportunity to procrete, or to love a child, you just make sure the people who are actually here don't starve to death. Sterilization could be avoided of course by educating the people (has worked before) but I think people are too irrational for this to be an effective and lasting solution, humans are greedy by nature. I hope this can be done with education instead than forcing it since facism is not a good way to go but I doubt christians among others will get on th one baby waggon what with the pope prohibiting condoms and what not.

That's my opinion anyway

Putting aside the morals of forced sterilization, you've just demonstrated one of the problems of central administration. You've just doomed the population affected by your policy to extinction. Do you even know why?

 

[Demojen]

I would say take a third route.

Inhabit more of the planet and construct a more earth friendly City. More self preserving with an environmentally educated culture. Create new jobs by adding more value to positions within the recycling industry. All this talk about over-population...

We're not over-populated. Over population has more to do with population density in specific areas of the world than the world itself. We're not developing enough food and that will *naturally* cull the herd. It really doesn't matter how long we live on paper. If we don't have a social hierarchy that values every link in the food chain, we'll die.

While I understand where you're coming from, understand that things are only going to get worse with the way government and economics work on this planet. The gap between the rich and the poor is going to widen and the middle class will disappear entirely. It is remarkable, watching it happen. We're one of a select few generations privy to the historical records of hundreds of years, capable of documenting these trends and seeing our own failure repeatedly occur.

 

[RichardMNixon]

I would say take a third route.

Inhabit more of the planet and construct a more earth friendly City. More self preserving with an environmentally educated culture. Create new jobs by adding more value to positions within the recycling industry. All this talk about over-population...

Agreed, we're using what, 20% of the Earth's surface? We need technology to effectively and environmentally utilize the other 80%.

Putting aside the morals of forced sterilization, you've just demonstrated one of the problems of central administration. You've just doomed the population affected by your policy to extinction. Do you even know why?

Because two die for every one born? I hope your problem isn't that simple, the program could obviously change when no longer beneficial.

The first problem with any kind of limits on reproductive freedom is the case study we've already seen in China, with baby girls being left for dead so the couple's only allowable child could be a man. Government involvement in reproductive freedom in general though is just a really scary thought.

 

[Nemesiah]

Sterilize after the first kid; you don,´t take away the oportunity to procrete, or to love a child, you just make sure the people who are actually here don't starve to death. Sterilization could be avoided of course by educating the people (has worked before) but I think people are too irrational for this to be an effective and lasting solution, humans are greedy by nature. I hope this can be done with education instead than forcing it since facism is not a good way to go but I doubt christians among others will get on th one baby waggon what with the pope prohibiting condoms and what not.

That's my opinion anyway

Putting aside the morals of forced sterilization, you've just demonstrated one of the problems of central administration. You've just doomed the population affected by your policy to extinction. Do you even know why?

Wait... you mean to tell me that you think this would be carried to extition?! No, hit one billion and then change to 2 kids then sterilization; come on! My fault really.. I wasnt explicit enough.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Wait... you mean to tell me that you think this would be carried to extition?! No, hit one billion and then change to 2 kids then sterilization; come on! My fault really.. I wasnt explicit enough.

Ok then.

Now we're back to the morality of forced sterilization.

... What the hell gives you the right to forcibly sterilize people? Don't have any illusions, it would have to be forcible. Along with the massive oversight and limitation of personal rights it would require to maintain such a system.

 

[Predanator]

Now we're back to the morality of forced sterilization.

Why do you find it necessary to block a hypothetical discussion about reproduction and overpopulation with a moral sound bite?
An issue has to be explored to discover the implications that are related to it. Just yelling Fascism is not constructive.

... What the hell gives you the right to forcibly sterilize people? Don't have any illusions, it would have to be forcible. Along with the massive oversight and limitation of personal rights it would require to maintain such a system.

... What the hell gives you the right to indiscriminately breed in an ecosystem with limited resources and capacity? Don't have any illusions, it is threatening the habitability of the planet. With the massive denial and screams of Fascism just for mentioning the topic, it is leading to a mass extinction within the ecosystem. An extinction much less moral than the moral quandaries that make this topic taboo.

 

[RichardMNixon]

Now we're back to the morality of forced sterilization.

Why do you find it necessary to block a hypothetical discussion about reproduction and overpopulation with a moral sound bite?
An issue has to be explored to discover the implications that are related to it. Just yelling Fascism is not constructive.

... What the hell gives you the right to forcibly sterilize people? Don't have any illusions, it would have to be forcible. Along with the massive oversight and limitation of personal rights it would require to maintain such a system.

... What the hell gives you the right to indiscriminately breed in an ecosystem with limited resources and capacity? Don't have any illusions, it is threatening the habitability of the planet. With the massive denial and screams of Fascism just for mentioning the topic, it is leading to a mass extinction within the ecosystem. An extinction much less moral than the moral quandaries that make this topic taboo.

His previous extinction remark was pointless, but you can't disregard these statements. Reproductive rights are a fundamental part of human rights.

I can more easily discuss the practical problems though. There's these for starters.

The closest thing I can think of to government-mandated medical treatment is immunization, and look at the stink that has raised. Americans are outraged at being taxed, how would they respond to the government snipping their jewels? And the government oversight is a real consideration. Even thinking of forced sterilization evokes thoughts of hoverpods carrying fathers through a gleaming white hospital to the vasectomy laser. It's not something that makes any sense in this era and political climate. And what of divorce? Can you not have a child by your second wife? Will prostitutes have their tubes tied?

And again, what of the gender discrimination practiced in China while couples were limited in their reproduction? How do you deal with that?

At some point in the future, this will likely be a reality. I'm essentially certain it won't be within my lifetime. I'd expect an essentially one-world government before this.

 

[Predanator]

His previous extinction remark was pointless, but you can't disregard these statements.

I was disregarding their utility at this point in the conversation, not the statements themselves. There are a lot of questions and issues and assumptions that can be discussed... and these statements seemed more geared to ending the conversation, without bringing up other avenues of thought, questions or possibilities.

Reproductive rights are a fundamental part of human rights.

I find this interesting... Why is this true? It is certainly historically been the norm, especially with the religious mandate to be fruitful and multiply. How does this mesh with the fundamental rights of the children?

 

[RichardMNixon]

Reproductive rights are a fundamental part of human rights.

I find this interesting... Why is this true? It is certainly historically been the norm, especially with the religious mandate to be fruitful and multiply. How does this mesh with the fundamental rights of the children?

Having and loving your children is one of those defining elements of being human. Try telling that Grandpa that's the only one he gets.

 

[Predanator]

Well, if we have to breed like rabbits what can we do besides colonize more and more planets?

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Well, if we have to breed like rabbits what can we do besides colonize more and more planets?

This sounds like a fine idea to me!

I find this interesting... Why is this true? It is certainly historically been the norm, especially with the religious mandate to be fruitful and multiply. How does this mesh with the fundamental rights of the children?

Well, go ahead and predict how people would react to your proposal. Reproduction is a right, in the most part, because it is what people want to do. It is a consensual act between two private parties in the vast majority of cases.

Children don't have rights until they actually exist (whatever that means for you). Once they do exist, they have the same human rights everyone else does.

 

[Predanator]

Well, if we have to breed like rabbits what can we do besides colonize more and more planets?

This sounds like a fine idea to me!

Then not funding the Space Program is an eventual violation of Human Rights?

Well, go ahead and predict how people would react to your proposal.

This is not my proposal. It is a line of inquiry.

Children don't have rights until they actually exist (whatever that means for you). Once they do exist, they have the same human rights everyone else does.

But that contradicts Parental Rights, doesn't it? Wouldn't the full fundamental Rights of the Children preclude them being raised under oppressive belief systems?

Anyway, I don't know what to make of the question... I admit overpopulation is an issue in the OP, but I don't know of a human-acceptable solution to overpopulation except for something along the lines of a Natural Disaster.

 

[borrofburi]

You all are unnecessarily dismissive to Predanator, these are very serious issues. I think the only reason people can possibly flippantly dismiss the problem of over population is if they do not seriously understand the very horrific consequences of it. Unless you really think that *nothing* could be worse than government intervention in reproductive practices (whether that be free lifetime supplies of condoms, or direct sterilization), then you must very seriously think and reflect upon the horrors of large swaths of people starving (or I guess, unless you think resources are truly infinite or that technology will magically come up with the solution some how).


@Predanator: yes, that's basically where I'm at. We know that we can't sustain this population or this population growth, which means that either we do something to try to prevent rampant starvation and misery due to limited resources, or we don't. It seems to me that leaves us with two choices: either cause rampant starvation and misery (just "allowing" it to happen is the same thing as causing it, in my opinion), or some sort of system that can only be undesirable to get people to have less children.

 

[Nemesiah]

Well, if we have to breed like rabbits what can we do besides colonize more and more planets?

This sounds like a fine idea to me!

I find this interesting... Why is this true? It is certainly historically been the norm, especially with the religious mandate to be fruitful and multiply. How does this mesh with the fundamental rights of the children?

Well, go ahead and predict how people would react to your proposal. Reproduction is a right, in the most part, because it is what people want to do. It is a consensual act between two private parties in the vast majority of cases.

Children don't have rights until they actually exist (whatever that means for you). Once they do exist, they have the same human rights everyone else does.

Well, if we have to breed like rabbits what can we do besides colonize more and more planets?

This sounds like a fine idea to me!

Please be joking, while planed colonization might be possible it hasn't proven to feaseble in the near future; even less as a way of distributing people since even if it worked, people here would re-over-poulate it without restrictions on reproduction.

Children don't have rights until they actually exist (whatever that means for you). Once they do exist, they have the same human rights everyone else does.

Exist? What about abortion? it would be hard to abort a non existing fetus wouldn,´t it? and I think life is one of these unanieble rights you are talking about and yet we do it because at that stage the rights of the woman superceed the rights of the fetus.

Concerning reproductive rights

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_rights

"reproductive rights embrace certain human rights that are already recognized in national laws, international human rights documents and other relevant United Nations consensus documents. These rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. It also includes the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence as expressed in human rights documents. In the exercise of this right, they should take into account the needs of their living and future children and their responsibilities towards the community."

So it would seem that people would have to agree to undergo these procedures of their own free will, but this can be done by educating people and showing that the mesure was the same for everyone (to stave off eugenics) and that it is the responsible thing to do.

People have renounced certain rights in times of need, I'm not saying I agree with the patriot act but it is an instance when the people decided to give away certain rights to be protected (It was a scam, it was a bad I dea, it was revoked... yes but it happened and that is my point)

The Idea that you'll have as many children as you want is not only selfish but self distructive, by putting such a strain on the environment you are condeming future generations to war for resources.