Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by Liebling, Feb 10, 2009.
Hahaha! Priceless! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Now that would be extinction. I'm talking about birth-restrictions that lead to a much smaller population and then maintain it.
I'm not sure I care Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Something has to be done.
Oh damn.. I hope I didn't give you the impression that I thought that it wasn't horrible..
I don't know what you mean.. what on Earth are you referring to ? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The first world is already at zero or even negative population growth. Shall we invade the third world so as to impose your birth restrictions? Or what do you propose?
I'm not denying that it's a difficult problem, but something has to be done sooner or later, and preferably sooner.
And I do not see anyone offering a better solution.
But your "solution" would require a tyranical government to force people to not have children. Worse yet, a tyranical government imposed by an invading force. Your solution is worse than the problem, IMO.
Something has to be done.[/quote]
Agreed. I'd like to see more encouragement for people NOT to breed if they don't want to. A childhood "friend" of mine can't even be bothered to buy her child clothing. I buy the kid clothes because I'm a garage sale and flea market junkie. I will not tell you how embittering it is that she's so ungrateful. She gets state aid, food stamps, WIC, and she doesn't even spend it appropriately.
That was for Pronatalist, though no matter how much you beg, I'm not having 20 babies. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Yeah, in the Netherlands the man just does his business in the bathroom and leaves it in a cup for a woman, right? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
We seem to have forgotten how the larger families of the past, may have gotten by.
Yeah, they are connect. But in what way? Correlation doesn't equal causation. And in which direction? Does A cause B, or does B cause A? Or does some 3rd factor C, cause both A and B? Large families don't cause poverty, but poverty does encourage people to breed more. For they say of the poor that children are their only wealth. Also that sex is the only recreation they can afford. And contraceptives aren't affordable. Food grows on trees. Condoms don't.
Mormons say to have as many children as you can afford. You really want just as many children as you can handle? But I've heard of God expanding people's income to better match their "too many" children, which I would expect to often happen, since it's God who commanded people to Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. I don't think that means multiply willy-nilly, giving no thought to the future. But more like, budget far ahead for the possible prospect that someday your family may have grown quite large. That's one reason I have been so frugal, I would rather have more for my future wife and children to spend, and not just consume my income upon myself for little benefit. What can I take to heaven? My material possessions? People joke they never see a U-haul trailing behind the hearse. But we can take our friends and children to heaven, when it is their time. How can I worship God better? By gladly accepting all the children God entrusts to us.
Of course children can sometimes seem expensive. But they are worth it.
My Dad sometimes bought expensive things for me. Helped me with the down payment on my home. Paid most of the cost for my last car. Bought my gas log set along with the cool hallway wall thermostat. A big bookcase. He was far from perfect, but has in so doing, taught me to sometimes be more generous, and I have bought a few somewhat expensive things so my sister could have them. Sometimes people think they can't afford nice things I want them to have. Solution: Buy them a gift of the item. If I can currently afford it.
Within our family, we helped back and forth, lending a few grand, to help everybody have their cars debt-free.
If my sister was to end up having "too many" children, I would be happy to help them out, if I can. When she had her 2 boys, I decided not to go with the typical going rate of what? $20. It's the thought that counts? Yeah, that works for people who already have plenty of money. So I gave $300 each time. To buy something "real." She said something about it going towards their circumcism. Cool. Gave them a $300 Sony Playstation 2 also, plus accessories and a few games, as I didn't want to lend them my console, because I also use my PS2 as a DVD player.
I just have a few questions which don't require much time or much of an answer. In your estimation is there a point at which there would be too many people? If no then why, if yes then what might that point be (not specific, just guess 50 billion, 500 billion, 1000 billion...)? If the point exists, would we be better served to do something like what the Chinese did or something else entirely?
First of all, I don't think that would be worse than the problem. You seem to be grossly underestimating the problem.
Second of all, it doesn't have to be done by an invading force at all. Ideally, there will be a global agreement between all, or at least most, governments. perhaps something like how the European union was intended.
But I am realistic enough to see that it will either never happen or that it will happen too late.. Thank human nature.
Here, you work out the doubling time:
Any ideas of why they flattened the curve near the end ?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Yep, that would be nice for starters.
Huh ? Leave what in a cup ?
And, please, don't crush my feigned innocence.. lol
Semen, honey. Semen.
human nature i should imagine.
at the current rate you look at countries like india, china and shrilanka.
what do i mean by human nature ?
over crowding causing a rise in crime and mania, while advanced countries that can actually think and process will control their own population growth as the citizens respond to government advisers recommending more or less breeding the poor countries all have a couple of things in common.
corruption right through their government at all levels down to a high level of corruption in their people.
violent behaviours and a violent government.
extreme gaps between the "haves" and the "have nots"
(gap between rich and poor)
what is not measured into the mix is also extreme classicist social systems.
also... countries like the middle east it is religious fundamentalism that they follow giving no consideration to future generations or others sharing the earth who may have different belief systems.
"any idea" ... ?
yes... because humanity will implode.
mass starvation mass rioting mass poisoning mass pollution mass everything knocking out the high density areas as disease and violence spreads like wild fire which will tend to keep populations in high density areas in a constant rate of mass death.
Damn Pronatalist, how am I going to go kickboxing or mountain biking, or anything else fun, while constantly pregnant? I'll be too swollen to manoeuvre!
(this was sarcasm; I won't be converting to Pronatalist's ideology any time soon.)
well you poor born to be a victim women of procreational and domestic design...
you had better get used to not working for money and the clank of a chain around your ankle
nothing worse than women who expect to be treated equal to men Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
whats next ? contraception or something... damn heathens :bawl:
your callous selfishness has been noted Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!:bawl:
Semen and honey ? Why on Earth would you want to mix that up ?? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Agreed. Now we just have to wake up the dreamers.
I'm going to make you EAT IT if you don't play nice. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The Egyptians used honey as a contraceptive, mixed with crocodile dung.
And often large families "just happen."
With some people, the urge to have a baby just doesn't seem to diminish much, if any, even after having many babies. A reason why some seem to think that world population is "beyond control."
Seems like they will say most anything, to scare people out of enjoying having their children. Don't have babies too young, not too young, not too close together, not to many. Do we maybe see a theme here? Maybe "they" just don't like babies very much?
I don't know about your specific medical conditions. But I do know that quite many do well having many children.
And yet women of childbearing age are fertile for decades, and when not pregnant, have a period monthly, the natural sign of the failure of the body's attempt to achieve pregnancy. For married people, providing the necessary sperm should be easy and routine, as sexual relations are enjoyed naturally and routinely.
Are you saying to breastfeed until age 4? That seems a rather long time. I thought we are supposed to wean babies by about the time they can eat solid food, at about 1 year old. Some population website claimed the U.S. had about the worst record for breastfeeding, averaging only a month. No doubt due to too many working career Moms. The Stay-At-Home Mom is far more the ideal, for healthy families and children, and for not overpaying in taxes.
I thought I heard that a mother MIGHT not get pregnant, while breastfeeding, or it may be delayed for a short while. But I have a clipping about a Catholic family that had 16 children, births spread over a 20 year time span, including 2 sets of twins. Not adjusting for twins, I come up with only but 15 months between births average. I don't recall reading if they were breastfeeding. But with better nutrition that humans increasingly enjoy, I'm not so sure breastfeeding is so much a "reliable" means of child-spacing. But it is natural, and apparently God meant for most babies to breastfeed. So of course, I advocate breastfeeding without "birth control," as if the body gets pregnant anyway, generally it's because it can handle the "double-duty" of feeding both a baby on the outside and the inside. And I do believe in welcoming the natural flow of human life, letting babies push out as they come, welcoming people worldwide to have "baby after baby after baby," should they prove to be so fertile, which most people aren't quite so fertile anyway.
No, I wouldn't recommend going to the bottle, just to pop out another one right away, as that hardly seems to be God's design, since babies were meant to be breastfed. But there are other reasons for bottle feeding that may sometimes apply.
Many Catholics, or so some Catholic told me, not only believe in not using any means of "birth control," but also believe in avoiding infertility assistance, as also being against God's will. I don't believe that. But I do believe God can heal infertility issues that are no fault of our own, in place of seeking unnatural and expensive medical treatments to get pregnant more often than natural. Whether we want to "help out" the process, would seem to be a family choice, as it to adopt in addition to having biological children. But I do not believe in going against nature to practice a means of "birth control," but to keep the door to life wide open to any precious darling babies God may allow to come. That means not even using supposedly natural rhythm, and not "pulling out." Let babies happen as they happen, as most parents easily love ALL their children, no matter how many or few.
No, I don't set any "cap" upon world population size, for fear of exceeding it. Sure, we have lost the reason of filling an "empty" planet as a reason for having possibly many children. But what of the other 99 reasons to have children or more children? They still apply.
Not even a trillion people is "too many," for people can ADAPT. I would much rather live in rows of closely-space highrises in China or something, than not be born at all, because there was too few births.
No, I don't believe in tyrannical government overshadowing the most intimate of human relationships. Big Brother government shouldn't have the time nor ability nor interest in invading billions of people's bedrooms to make sure they don't reproduce "too much." Big Brother doesn't have time, nor jurisdiction to "hold everybody's hands." People need to take responsibility for themselves, and look to God, not government, for our needs and guidance.
I believe in the natural flow of human life. Let the human race enjoy BLOSSOMING in size, as God may allow. I have no interest in restraining natural baby booms. Sure, they are contagious, so let the baby booms persist, spread, and intensify naturally. We should be more grateful God allows humans to enjoy being so many.
Separate names with a comma.