I don't wanna...

[icywind1980]

LorienLlewellyn

icywind1980

Over population is not an issue in the US.

"The human population stands at 6.8 billion and is projected to reach at least 9 billion by 2050. 'Without universal access to free birth control and engaging public education about the serious consequences of overpopulation, the global population could reach 15 billion by mid-century,' said Serraglio. 'The Earth simply can’t sustain that many people and provide a high-quality life for all species, including humans.'...

'Through the empowerment of women, universal, free access to birth control for everyone who wants it, and education of all people, we can stabilize global population at a sustainable level,' said Serraglio. 'The United States, which has the highest population growth of any developed nation and extremely high consumption levels, is a key factor in this problem. We should be taking the lead in promoting policies that will stabilize global population.'
http://biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/condoms-02-11-2010.html

Yes that is true we produce a lot of people but as a nation that has enough room for the people we produce, it is not a problem.  

[icywind1980]

Additionally, I'm never ever going to agree with anyone who wants the government to regulate a function of my own body. I am 100% for sex education, promotion of condom and birth control use, education and aid for 3rd world countries and most every other humanitarian effort out there, but I cannot and will not allow myself to give up such a basic freedom. If the government starts regulating birth, what's next we have to sign up in order to have sex? Do we have to petition the government to marry? What happens if they say no?  

[LorienLlewellyn]

icywind1980

Yes that is true we produce a lot of people but as a nation that has enough room for the people we produce, it is not a problem.

The problem is that we don't actually have enough room. It seems like we do. But that is only because we take advantage of other countries in order to make it seem that way.

For example, we clear the forests in other countries to make way for many of our crops because we don't have the room for all our food needs here. So we destroy the land there and endanger the animals there.

I'd recommend watching Blood, Sweat, and ___ shows. Blood, Sweat, and Takeaways just finished up on Planet Green a couple of weeks ago. Now they're showing Blood, Sweat, and T-shirts. The shows are about how a great deal of our food and clothing come from Asian countries. The show explores the way we devastate the land, animals, and people (the show focuses mostly on the people) in order to live the way that we do in developed countries.
http://planetgreen.discovery.com/tv/blood-sweat-takeaways/takeaways-show.html

Stuff Happens is another good show that explores the environmental consequences of our actions, consequences that we don't always see. The show talks about how forests are cleared and orangutans are endangered in other places for simple things that we demand here, like coffee and palm oil.
http://planetgreen.discovery.com/tv/stuff-happens/  

[LorienLlewellyn]

icywind1980

Do we have to petition the government to marry?

The government does have a hand in marriages. That's why there is a big debate right now about whether they're going to allow same sex marriages.

And like I said, we regulate how many animals we can kill. We regulate how much companies pollute. We don't let people walk around shooting each other. So if a family is infringing on every one's right to live happy and healthy, why should we allow that?

Basically it sounds like you don't understand the environmental impact that we are making here in American due to both our size and our lifestyle. I don't think most people understand it, so that's not something to be ashamed of. But I do hope you'll look into it.

And if you never agree with me on forced sterilization, that's fine. It's an extreme idea that I don't necessarily expect everyone to agree with. But I hope that everyone will someday at least be educated about the effects of our actions. And hey, if that happens we wouldn't need forced sterilization because everyone would be motivated to limit their reproduction on their own anyway. 3nodding  

[icywind1980]

LorienLlewellyn

icywind1980

Do we have to petition the government to marry?

The government does have a hand in marriages. That's why there is a big debate right now about whether they're going to allow same sex marriages.

And like I said, we regulate how many animals we can kill. We regulate how much companies pollute. We don't let people walk around shooting each other. So if a family is infringing on every one's right to live happy and healthy, why should we allow that?

Basically it sounds like you don't understand the environmental impact that we are making here in American due to both our size and our lifestyle. I don't think most people understand it, so that's not something to be ashamed of. But I do hope you'll look into it.

And if you never agree with me on forced sterilization, that's fine. It's an extreme idea that I don't necessarily expect everyone to agree with. But I hope that everyone will someday at least be educated about the effects of our actions. And hey, if that happens we wouldn't need forced sterilization because everyone would be motivated to limit their reproduction on their own anyway. 3nodding

I certainly will look "into" how we live and what we do as it affects the world, however my stance is solid. I am not a mere animal, I am a human, I deserve better. If animals had the ability to reason, do you not think they would group up and come against us? (cows with guns).

And it is more simple than forced sterilization. I do not believe the government should have a hand in marriage at all. I feel that everyone has the right to marry, bear children, adopt if eligible after testing done by public companies, and live as they please in a lawful fashion.

I also believe with more education and better access to condoms and health care our impact on the world will be in a more positive way, but this is a long standing goal of many free nations.  

[LorienLlewellyn]

icywind1980

I am not a mere animal, I am a human, I deserve better.

Why should you deserve better? Shouldn't all living things deserve to be treated well?

icywind1980

If animals had the ability to reason, do you not think they would group up and come against us? (cows with guns).

Animals actually do have the ability to reason. It's difficult for us to know exactly to what extent because they think in such a different way than we do. But recent studies on dolphins show that they are at least as smart as toddlers and have the ability to think about the future. The researchers went so far as to say that dolphins should probably be thought of as "non-human people."

icywind1980

I do not believe the government should have a hand in marriage at all.

I think the government should have some say in marriages. For example, I like that the government doesn't allow 40 year old men to marry 5 year old girls. And I like that forced marriages aren't allowed. But when it comes to consenting adults, yeah, I don't see why the government would care.

icywind1980

I also believe with more education and better access to condoms and health care our impact on the world will be in a more positive way, but this is a long standing goal of many free nations.

I agree. The teen pregnancy rate actually increased here in America the past year. That's the first time we saw an increase in a while. And many people are blaming the abstinence only programs. So I'd love to see better sex ed programs in some of these schools. Combing the sex program with some environmental education would be even better. I really lucked out in high school. I got to take both Environmental Studies and Sex Ed. But it sounds like most kids are not that lucky.  

[archbaker]

We probably all agree that a worldwide ratio of 1-2 children per two adults would be ideal given our current ability to sustain the race, right?

So the question is whether a one-child policy is necessary to achieve this. I think we owe some gratitude for China for dealing with the issue, albeit not in the best possible fashion, but I don't think we need to go that far. And I don't think it would be fair and just to do so, either.

I think we can encourage a smaller population growth by having strict child labor laws and by making prophylactics more widely available.  

[icywind1980]

1. Because this is a discussion on the welfare of humans, not that of animals. Of course I do not believe they should be treated poorly, but I don't care if they have sex or if they produce. If they get too populous, we hunt them or other beasts do. We as humans, have thought past that and decided that we can make those choices on our own. We also have longer gestation periods than most animals, so that cuts down on our breeding.

2. Animals do not reason like we do. They are easily controlled by their basic needs. I suppose we are too, but we can think beyond them.

3. Marrying a 5 year old is not marriage, it is rape. There are laws about such things which are regulated by local authorities, as it should be. I agree with your stance on marriage between consenting adults of any gender and sexual orientation.

4. Oddly enough, teen pregnancy was normal not even 100 years ago. It's funny how quickly we "evolve" with some things and "devolve" with others.  

[LorienLlewellyn]

icywind1980

Animals do not reason like we do. They are easily controlled by their basic needs. I suppose we are too, but we can think beyond them.

It is true that they do not reason like we do. But that does not mean that they do not reason or that our minds are better. Animals could certainly be just as smart as people are but in a completely different way that we can't even comprehend or measure right now.

Animals can think beyond their basic needs too. Have you ever seen a dog ignore a treat because his owner told him to? Have you ever seen an ape comfort or offer food to another? Have you ever seen dolphins engage in foreplay? Have you seen an elephant play? They do many of the same things that we do, things that are not directly needed for avoiding predators, getting food, or finding shelter.

icywind1980

Oddly enough, teen pregnancy was normal not even 100 years ago. It's funny how quickly we "evolve" with some things and "devolve" with others.

Yes, it's funny how much some things change in a fairly short amount of time. I think it's due to the fact that college is becoming more expected, the economy has changed to the point that most couples can't afford a baby right out of high school anymore, and the fact that we now know that babies born to teens have more health problems. So I think in that case, it was a change for the times and a change for the better.  

[archbaker]

I think #3 is more related to the ability to legally enter a contract than statutory rape. Marriage does not imply sex according to US law.

I know there have been requirements that the marriage be "consummated", but I don't think they still stand, and I think they only made the union voidable and not actually void. Anyway I'm no lawyer and i could be wrong.  

[Alarias]

I personally don't understand why you don't need a license to have children...or at the very least to raise them. You need a license for everything... I think you even have to be licensed to work with children. So, it just seems to me that there oughta be more restrictions regarding who is bringing these kids into the world and who is bringing them up and teaching them.

I would never agree with forced abortions as a means of enforcement. However, I am all for means of prevention such as mandatory sterilizations/hysterectomies...if having failed to meet the requirements for a child bearing license, or once you reach a certain age which would increase the health risks for the baby and the mother, etc.

As for enforcement, I'd just say that if you break the law and have the child without a license, you pay a fine for the penalty or repeat offenders may serve prison time. The person could then be tested to attempt to become licensed but, if they fail the child is taken into custody.

This is my ideal world. Not necessarily a realistic one. Just...how I would do it if it were up to me.  

[icywind1980]

LorienLlewellyn

icywind1980

Animals do not reason like we do. They are easily controlled by their basic needs. I suppose we are too, but we can think beyond them.

It is true that they do not reason like we do. But that does not mean that they do not reason or that our minds are better. Animals could certainly be just as smart as people are but in a completely different way that we can't even comprehend or measure right now.

Animals can think beyond their basic needs too. Have you ever seen a dog ignore a treat because his owner told him to? Have you ever seen an ape comfort or offer food to another? Have you ever seen dolphins engage in foreplay? Have you seen an elephant play? They do many of the same things that we do, things that are not directly needed for avoiding predators, getting food, or finding shelter.

Dogs can be trained not to go for the treat but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand.  

[archbaker]

Alarias,

I think legislation should always be the last solution. Especially legislation that turns something natural into a crime.

If I may use your country (which I assume is the USA) as an example, it is already easier to go to prison than anywhere else in the western world, and in most countries world-wide. And that's quite a burden for a society.

Are we sure that current legislation on the subject would still be insufficient if enforced better? Perhaps if whatever money it would cost to issue and enforce the licensing was instead given to foster care programs and family courts?  

[LorienLlewellyn]

icywind1980

Dogs can be trained not to go for the treat but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand.

You said that animals are controlled by their basic needs, while humans can think beyond those basic needs. I was pointing out that animals are certainly capable of thinking beyond those basic needs as well. A dog can ignore food (a basic need) just to make his owner happy (not really a basic need).  

[icywind1980]

LorienLlewellyn

icywind1980

Dogs can be trained not to go for the treat but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand.

You said that animals are controlled by their basic needs, while humans can think beyond those basic needs. I was pointing out that animals are certainly capable of thinking beyond those basic needs as well. A dog can ignore food (a basic need) just to make his owner happy (not really a basic need).

I'm not sure how we got on the topic of animals. On a similar topic, I feel having sex with animals should be unlawful since the animal cannot speak up for itself to determine if it is enjoying the act.