:
|
I think before we worry about the rights to have children, we should worry about the right to choose NOT to have children... seems people get offended when you wanna make choices about your own body.
|
Hey look! Another problem that we can trace back to religion
.
True, people should be free to do what they want with their bodies. But while eradicating religious believes would certainly help with overpopulation and do me a world of good personally, I do not believe it would make much of an impact on the current global birthrate. People getting pregnant unplanned isn't the problem. The problem is the couples who think it's a good idea to have 4 kids for no reason, they plan it out and do it on purpose.
As for it being a human right to have children, I think this rule should be reconsidered, if not taken out completely. The sole purpose of breeding is to make sure the species stays alive. In its most basic form, breeding is not a right but a duty. If certain animals don't breed at a certain rate they will die out.
The irony here is that if we keep on breeding like this we're going to hit problems which could actually mean the end of our planet and thus our species and all other species on it. So in order to preserve ourselves, in order to stay alive we need to stop breeding or breed less at least.
The right to have children is something that does not make any sense to me. Yes, we need birth to carry on with the species but should that mean that, in this day and age, everyone should be able to be a parent? Some people are just not suited to raise a child or responsible enough to even think about having them.
As for what Nate said about the third world countries, yes those countries form a big part of the problem. But the current approach of trying to make something decent of those countries has been failing since the dawn of time. African countries have received so much charity money from all over the world, I think they could pay off America's debt if they had saved it all over the course of the last 50 years. They received billions upon billions of dollars from all around the world and what do you see there? Some tribe gets a waterpump and a school? Gee, that's one damn expensive school.
The approach to take with third world countries is a different discussion all together, but Nate is right that it would be of significant impact if those countries would stop being third world and start being developed nations.
However, on the flip side, if they were to become developed nations that would mean that in the long run there would be more room for more people. Cities start to develop and more living space is created. In the long run would this not be counterproductive to the population cause? Just a thought.
Worldwide Breeding Restriction
