Re: Is it moral to have more children than the earth can support?
I don't want to debate morality, but I reckon it doesn't make all that much sense to breed as many children as you can unless you're in a place where (involuntary) infant mortality is high. This might apply mostly to places in super-rural Africa where medical care is limited to shamans and prayer. India and trailer parks don't qualify for that, at least there's some rudimentary medical support around those places, as far as I can see on BBC and CNN.
It's also very, very stupid to have more children that you can support financially (food, clothes) and in the context of the prevailing culture (fashionable clothes so they won't be mocked and bullied and grow up to be spree killers, other luxury goods).
Then again, I don't like kids much, and I don't think I'd make a good parent.
Re: Is it moral to have more children than the earth can support?
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCDrivesAPorscheToWork
anyone here familiar with Malthus and his predictions about population growth?
for those who dont:
Population Growth is exponential.
Agricultural Growth is geometric.
.
Malthusian demography has long been debunked. He basically used it as a reason to keep poor people from having kids. I never understood why he claimed reproduction is exponential but agriculture (based on plant and animal reproduction ) is linear. Very anthropocentric view of agroecology.
Carrying capacity is difficult to define for humans in the industrial age. It changes with technology, access to old biomass (fossil fuels) that supplement energy inefficient systems (our current agribusiness regime) and finally standard of living. To address adam's original post, 6 billion people is too many if everyone wants the standard of living observed in the US (or GB, etc). One of the many reasons why we see world wide resentment of multinational economic exploitation of natural and human resources around the world (companies frequently go in, extract the resource and leave the local or national community to clean up the mess while most of the profits go overseas- When governments oppose this (i.e. Nicaruaga in the 1900-1910's, Iran in the 1950's), they frequenbtly get deposed or threatened with economic sanctions). Local resources for Local people
Re: Is it moral to have more children than the earth can support?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eboloid
I don't want to debate morality, but I reckon it doesn't make all that much sense to breed as many children as you can unless you're in a place where (involuntary) infant mortality is high. This might apply mostly to places in super-rural Africa where medical care is limited to shamans and prayer. India and trailer parks don't qualify for that, at least there's some rudimentary medical support around those places, as far as I can see on BBC and CNN.
It's also very, very stupid to have more children that you can support financially (food, clothes) and in the context of the prevailing culture (fashionable clothes so they won't be mocked and bullied and grow up to be spree killers, other luxury goods).
Then again, I don't like kids much, and I don't think I'd make a good parent.
The thing is that on most of the places you argue that birth control may be "moral", are places where it seems would face more difficulty to implement that.
I mean, if you want to implement birth control on cities with good medical care, or to people with some culture level you would probably have more success, though ironically they probably wouldn't be needing it. In many rural areas (those with no medical care) people are willling to have as many children as they can, so they have more people working on their fields.
So probably the places that need birth control the most, are the places where it may be the hardest to implement.
As far as the world, those are my thoughts. Personally, I think the world is overpopulated, there isn't too much reason to bring someone who I would probably love around here, and I hate kids.
Is it moral to have more children than the earth can support?
is it moral that the usa consumes a highly disordinate percentage of the earths resources?
if we are truly concerned about what the earth can support, we would have to drastically change our lifestyle
are we willing to give up our suvs in order to be more energy efficient and friendly to the environment?
are we willing to pay more for our goods/food so that we can help developing nations economies truly flourish instead of taking advantage of their low labor costs?
a bigger issue than the number of children in developing countries or in poorer areas in the usa is the question of distribution. we have plenty of food (and resources), but why arent the people most in need getting it?
just look at new orleans' poor after katrina as one example of the lack of political will to really help those in need and the massive fraud and selfishness by folks who take advantage of the systems in place for their own good
Re: Is it moral to have more children than the earth can support?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainierBeachPoet
is it moral that the usa consumes a highly disordinate percentage of the earths resources?
if we are truly concerned about what the earth can support, we would have to drastically change our lifestyle
are we willing to give up our suvs in order to be more energy efficient and friendly to the environment?
are we willing to pay more for our goods/food so that we can help developing nations economies truly flourish instead of taking advantage of their low labor costs?
a bigger issue than the number of children in developing countries or in poorer areas in the usa is the question of distribution. we have plenty of food (and resources), but why arent the people most in need getting it?
just look at new orleans' poor after katrina as one example of the lack of political will to really help those in need and the massive fraud and selfishness by folks who take advantage of the systems in place for their own good
1. No, we have worked hard to get to that point. America gives a lot as well.
2. There are SUVs with low MPG like Honda CRVs.
3. Yes.
Yes, I totally understand where you're coming from about katrina. Politics aside, liberals and conservatives should both agree that those people should not be given a whole lot more money if it is being spent on super bowl tickets.
Re: Is it moral to have more children than the earth can support?
