China's One Child Policy

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by Crouton, Apr 3, 2013.

  1. S.J. Faerlind

    S.J. Faerlind Flashlight Shadowhunter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    5,672
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Canada
    Ratings:
    +298 / 2 / -1
    Ahhh AA, you are a gem, and so is Jim who often lightens the tone of these debates with a well-placed quip or two. :)

    After reading all the responses here I have to say that I agree with Overread. Limiting the birth of children should be voluntary to avoid all of the ethical issues attached to it. Education and giving couples the tools and social support to do it are the best way in my opinion. It isn't a bad thing that the cost of living means it is expensive to have and raise children. I'm not keen on the idea that it's a good thing to delay having children for the sake of gaining an education though. Biologically, it's not a good idea as the quality of reproductive cells apparently declines with age. Also, as parental age increases so does the possibility of conditions like Down's Syndrome occurring in the baby. Having two kids myself, I happen to know that having a baby is also really hard on a body. I think it's physically easier on women to heal after that when they are younger. Personally, I think it would be better biologically for women to have their children younger and then finish their education afterward. Plenty of women balance work with raising a young family already so why should balancing studying with raising young kids be any different? I had way more free time as a student than I ever did working full time anyway. If families had societal social support to facilitate having children in their early twenties (free childcare services for students and the option of part-time education schedules for parents for example), they could be entering the workforce as university/college graduates about the time when their youngest child was entering school. By putting a time limit on the window of childcare benefits, society could discourage the birth of additional children later without needing draconian population laws forbidding it. Those couples or individuals who didn't want to have kids could opt for a full-time schedule and just enter the workforce sooner. They'd still have the option of having kids later if they ever changed their minds... just without all the incentives and benefits of having them earlier. The expense and disadvantages of doing that would automatically limit population without the need for draconian laws dictating if, when and how many kids people should have. They'd be free to do what they wanted, so long as they accepted the consequences of their decision to do it that way.
     
  2. Midnattblod

    Midnattblod Ranger of Shadow

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    6,002
    Likes Received:
    365
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Ulfgard
    Ratings:
    +528 / 3 / -0
    so not sure exactly when it happened, but China has officially dropped the one child policy.
     
  3. Daughter of Hell

    Daughter of Hell damosel in distress

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2015
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Thailand
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2
    One child policy drags the evolution of our species down. It makes equals where there aren't any. It isn't hard to see the damage it could do. All contraceptives are like that, though. The future will be populated by the descendants of those who find ways around and reject these policies and practices, I hope. The alternative is humans become a species of obedient conformists, not unlike ants, which is what contraception is doing. Its sad people don't realize the dangers of interfering with breeding. Condoms, contraceptive pills, one child policy, it should all be scrapped and replaced with responsible behavior. I for one won't be having sex until I intend to get pregnant, then I'm considering having several children...
     
  4. Overread

    Overread Wolfing it up! Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,537
    Likes Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +342 / 1 / -0
    You do realise that in order for your plan to work one of three things has to happen;

    1) Abandonment of most modern medical practices along with a general lowing of food availability to promote significant stress within the human population. At present (and many 3rd world nations are a good example) human populations (without effective contraception) expand exponentially because through food and medicine its possible for the greater proportion of children born to survive to adulthood and breeding age and to in turn breed and reproduce.
    With no natural predators, a capacity to VASTLY exceed the carrying capacity of a natural ecosystem and the ability to cheat death in many many ways medically the human reproduction system is too efficient at reproduction.

    2) Massive population reduction - which is part why the 1 child policy was introduced.

    3) We find the magical material that allows us to inhabit space/generate infinite resources from air - or something that suddenly allows us to vastly boost our capacity to support human life without further degradation to the ecosystems we live in.



    Whilst it can be argued that women's rights; career women and the general rise in women in positions of power has resulted in the western nations having reduced population growth due to many women holding off on pregnancy until later in life; its also been proven that abstinence as a means of birth control doesn't work. It's been tried and in general its a lot easier to use a barrier or contraceptive pill than it is to try and convince people not to have sex - having sex is hardwired into us and whilst the drive varies from person to person; in general its a very hard thing to avoid.
     
  5. Daughter of Hell

    Daughter of Hell damosel in distress

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2015
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Thailand
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2
    I'm not necessarily suggesting abstinence or even birth control. I'm suggesting girls be told that sex = babies and then do as they wish. A major problem modern girls face is statutory rape law. See, the traditional solution to the conundrum is to get married, but statutory rape law prevents girls from finding a suitable husband. This has gone on to shape modern culture and is the reason "abstinence" doesn't work. The problem is modern culture artificially excludes optimal mates from a newly sexually mature girl's environment. A collapse in optimal human reproduction strategy was inevitable.

    Natural selection is watching us closely now. Contraceptives can mean 2 things.

    1. The new species that emerges will be populated by women who needed to be convinced to stop taking them in order to have babies. This means, the new species sexual reproduction strategy will be designed around achieving this goal. It will replace sex drive. Humans will definitely no longer be so horny, because sex itself no longer results in babies. I also think males will lose their size and strength here.

    2. The new species that emerges will be populated primarily by those who REJECTED contraceptives. This is the one I'm hoping for. Traditionalists need to be convinced to out-reproduce others. The drive that pushes women to take contraceptives and men to support contraceptives will be bred out. The new species will shudder at the mere thought of using them. Also, however, I see this species as greatly simplified. Diversity will also die out.

    In either case, it's a simplified version of humanity. Our biology isn't equipped to deal with so many external variables affecting our reproduction strategy. Our biology, regardless of our consciousness, is trying to do one thing: maximize reproduction output. Our consciousness is somewhat an enemy of this goal in modern times, so it's reasonable to assume it'll be simplified to bring it back in check. In any case, you cannot radically alter a species' reproduction strategy without eliciting radical consequences. Our species is about to change rapidly because of what modern culture is doing. Complexity in environmental factors, such as contraceptives, statutory rape law, one child policy, women having to work, so on, will all be rejected and weeded out by natural selection one way or the other. You know natural selection cannot cope with them because of the drop in reproduction output they elicit. Our biology is not infinitely flexible. It cannot cope with having to process unlimited environmental factors. So finding a way to discard excess factors from the equation whilst promoting positive reproductive traits is inevitable. It's already happening.

    [- The human species and modern society may actually literally collapse due to modern humans being unable to reproduce effectively in our current environment. From this collapse, the new species would emerge, outnumbering humans and culling them. That's typically how it happens, though previous collapses were caused by ice ages, but modern society is no less catastrophic than any ice age when you look at how it challenges our biology.]

    As to what happens when the world is overpopulated and resources are stretched, it'll be the same thing that always happens under conditions of limited resources: the men will start killing each other. Problem solved.

    Try not to over-think the population problem. I'm more concerned with the war modern liberals are waging against 4 billion years of evolution.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2016