|
Post by Ms. Duncan on Apr 9, 2018 23:53:29 GMT
What are the pros and cons of government laws regulating family size? Do you think that nations with high rates of population growth should set a legal limit on the number of children a family may have?
If you take a look at the World Population Clock (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/), you can see the top 20 largest countries by population. The top two are China (more than 1.4 billion people) and India (more than 1.3 billion people). Should those two countries legislate family size?
It is believed that by 2050, India will be the most populous country, with more than 1.6 billion people (17 percent of the world's population). If you have not been in favor of legislating family size, does that change your mind?
The third most populous country is the United States, with more than 326 million people). Should we legislate family size in the U.S.? The U.S. is, by and large, a wealthy country. Does that matter when discussing the legislation of family size?
What about a country like Iceland, which has fewer than 400,000 people - should family size there be regulated?
What are some of the consequences that can occur when countries legislate family size?
(Please keep in mind that there are no right or wrong answers to these questions - I want you to think and discuss!)
|
|
|
Post by raigenjones on Apr 13, 2018 14:02:59 GMT
The pros of the government possibly regulating family size are population stability and keeping families away from deeper debt. However, this regulation would cause people to feel controlled and unsatistied. This could also be seen as disrespect to certain religions who thrive off of having multiple children such as Mormans. China and India are the top two countries in population size, and I think they have surpassed the limit where a family size limit should have already been implemented. Yes, they are successful countries, but their large population causes severe damage the biological aspect of their countries. The air in China is almost unbreathable because of the pollution cause by so many people residing in one place. If by 2050 India’s population grows to be 17% of the world’s population, wars might become an issue due to India wanting to gain more land to fit the citizens. A question that arises from this potential scenario could be, “Would India be able to maintain superior health standards with such a large population?” Human waste should be properly disposed of, so would India be able to create space to keep enough waste plants? Families that can not afford many children continue to reproduce anyways for the government benefits in the U.S. This results in evergrowing taxes for the American people so the government can keep their programs afloat. Each country should review the standards and everything they are able to provide for their citizens and establish a family size limit. In my opinion, the U.S. has not reach this imaginary limit yet, and we have enough commodities and the type of economy that could support a hefty amount of people. A country like Iceland with a population like 400,000 people should not consider a family limit yet, but their government should discuss the limit and prepare for such an event where this law would take place. Some consequences that could come from governments putting such a law into action could be rebellion, high murder tolls (when families accidentally exceed their limit), protesting, and people moving out of the country.
|
|
|
Post by felicitybeltran on Apr 13, 2018 14:11:55 GMT
1- If nations with high rates of population growth were to set a legal limit on the number of children a family may have then overpopulation would not occur, although It would make it hard for the family to decide which kid to keep. China and India shouldn’t legislate family size because the population will always be higher there no matter what. Back when China did limit the number of children that families were about to have people were still getting upset when that were to have a girl because she could not do all the work that men would be able to. With that being said, I feel like the girl population would decrease incredibly making reproduction less common. No indias population does not make me change my mind. There are many religions, and countries were the families have multiple kids, for example, Mormons. They believe in having as many kids as the can, if you were to limit the number of children that people could have you would also be force people to go against their religion. The U.S by a large wealthy country yet that should not have anything to do with family size on the U.S. some consequences that could occur when countries legislate family size would be people going behind the countries back to keep their children alive.
|
|
|
Post by abbywillis on Apr 13, 2018 14:35:42 GMT
Discussion question 2: If the government sets laws regulating family size then the government should expect pros and cons. Reducing family size will eliminate risk of overpopulating and lowering the number of people in poverty. The cons would be forcing abortions or adoption for children born after the first born and the government should expect outside births to avoid the laws. I think limiting family size should be the last result in any country because people should be able to reproduce if they want. If setting laws can’t be avoided then I think the government should take into consideration the wealth the country has and still try to avoid limiting child birth. Small countries should be limited if all the other countries are going to be limited because if not everyone is equal then people with find ways to create chaos or loop holes to get what they want.The major consequence of limiting countries family size is taking away freedom of religion because some religions want family’s to reproduce constantly and they will not be able to practice their beliefs with a law saying they can only have one child.
|
|
|
Post by Robyn kaake on Apr 18, 2018 13:44:57 GMT
The pros of regulating family size are not having overpopulation and keeping families away from debt. The cons are that most people who would want a big family would not agree to this, and also it could be seen as disrespect to certain religions. China and India are the top two countries in population size, and they are over populating their countries. I believe they should have a law on family limit at least for a little while until their populations go down. Although they may be successful countries, the over population is causing damage and short supply for the families. If by 2050 India’s population grows to be 17% of the world’s population, then their population would only continue to grow. Some problems that could come from the government putting such a law into action could be rebellion, abortions for the families who exceed their family limit, and protesting.
|
|