2006-07-10 06:23:07 · 6 answers · asked by framling 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
ABSOLUTELY!!!
Fewer people = lower consumption of resources, lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions, less strain on global food supply, less crowded living conditions, less poverty, reduction in the spread of disease, the list goes on and on.
Now, all you have to do is convince every single adult male and female to only produce one child. Good luck with that.
2006-07-10 06:45:12 · answer #1 · answered by nardhelain 5 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Yes, absolutely. Humans supply population control through war. Nature supplies it through natural catastrophe and homosexuality (they don't make babies).
I guess that is one good side effect of the Bush presidency. They have solved the problem of overcrowding in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do they have overcrowding in Korea and iran?
2006-07-10 13:28:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I think so. We are straining the world's resources. All though it would be tough not to have the number of children that you desire. But it would also help our welfare situation, these girls wouldn't be able to keep having all of these babies and make the working people pay for them.
2006-07-10 13:27:42 · answer #3 · answered by jack russell girl 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I'm thinking it would. The problem however, is 'what are the ramifications of the procedures required to induce such an outcome'?
2006-07-10 13:28:36 · answer #4 · answered by wyrdnews 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have answered this same question on Yahoo Answers numerous times....
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is the one thing that we (humans) can do to work toward eliminating poverty and improving living conditions everywhere!
How many more times do I have to say it?? STOP BREEDING!
2006-07-10 13:26:09 · answer #5 · answered by crazyotto65 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes....coz if dere were less people around there wud be less disorders......itz dat simple....!!!!
2006-07-10 13:26:58 · answer #6 · answered by manu 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋