What would happen if your individuall carbon footprint ...?

Question

were tied legally to your right to reproduce?

were tied legally to your right to reproduce?

Or put another way, if you weren't doing anything to reduce your contributions to the destruction of the environment, you would lose the right to create offspring that would inherit the mess you contributed to.

Let me continue to play devil's advocate here ...

The carbon tax is an alternative, but taxation is force and population control is force. One is more direct than the other to be sure, what the bottom line is force. Our culture finds force more pallatable when it's indirect, but ultimately, what's the difference? We still haven't abandoned force to "fix" things.

Also, is it more humane to keep reproducing and leave a less hospitable environment for the offspring?

Answer 1

I suspect that it would result in revolt and very justified lynching of those who implemented such an inhumane policy.

That strikes me as draconian, a violation of basic human rights, and simply infeasible.

May I suggest a carbon tax instead as a much more effective and humane alternative?

The first link to wikipedia gives their usual very nice overview. The second link goes into some detail. Both discuss current carbon tax implementations and policy implications.s

Edit - Just for the sake of argument lets suppose such a reproduction control system were implemented. Like any kind of restriction it would be subject to corruption (as is the carbon tax). Given that you are proposing messing with a very fundamental human drive, and given that we all come pre-equipped to reproduce, I suspect the amount of corruption this system would create would be very great and therefore the system may have a very corrosive impact on society. The enforcement measures that come to mind are not at all attractive. There is a very good chance that it would lead to a backlash at some point and be abolished but we would most likely be left with the lingering corruption and find ourselves worse off, not better off. I am thinking of the after effects of the Prohibition, which left the legacy of organized crime and was unsuccessful in stopping alcohol consumption. I envision a similar but more extreme outcome to the reproduction prohibition.

A point-of-use carbon tax would be both much more focused making it more effective for the amount of "pain" it would cause and it would be much harder to subvert.

Don't get me wrong, I am very sympathetic to your goal, but for reasons noted I don't particularly like that solution.

Answer 2

It would make sure than only the smart would survive. Not a bad idea in theory. But actually implementing something like that would be impossible.

Answer 3

I think that would be F*cked up! ! ! ! !
& I think it would be used for Racism ...

Don't get me wrong, we should reduce our carbon footprints as much as possible, but take it from an APOC they're too many white racist people in the Environmental/Animal movement(s) ... they need to work on their issues...

Oh and can we say "Patriarticle" and "Control Freak"!
Talk about Gender Oppression sheesh!!!

Answer 4

in case you comprehend that you've royal blood in you, and also you're a Prince/Princess. then you really ought to take it for the effective and comprehend what you should do. What might want to take position in case you chanced on that you've royal blood i does no longer care what human beings imagine or say to me i does no longer say no longer some thing in any respect. it truly is you , you've royal blood

Answer 5

You are presenting a clandestine social darwinist notion....it was stupid when it was practiced and it remains a stupid ides.

Answer 6

huh?!?!?