2006-10-09 08:36:53 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Should the government limit the number of children a person can have it they are a family known to consume significantly more than their share of carbon?
Examples of wasteful living that the poor will never consider are:
If a child will live in a family that routinely flies to Europe or China for vacations?
If that child will consume foods gathered from around the world and shipped by air to their kitchen or restaurant, rather than scrounge locally?
If the family owns a number of vehicles, land or air, that consume disproportionate amounts of fossil fuel to power?
If the family has many time the amounts of clothing needed, made from limited resources and shipped from fashionable shops in Europe?
If the family lives in a house with many times the square footage needed for the average family, and heats and cools it year round, even if on vacation in yet another home?
If the family commutes regularly great distances to work, taking great amounts of fossil fuel?
If a child will grow to expect to wear diamonds, dug by impoverished poor in Africa.
Well, you get the idea. Poor people could very well use far less of the earth's resources PER FAMILY than wealthy people do PER PERSON.
Who holds the wasteful accountable for causing global warming and wars over oil?
The poor with all those children you fear, may very well be the ones doing the janitorial work the rich fear, and provide the cannon fodder to protect the interests of people disguised as patriotism.
Rich don't want to pay for poor children. Poor don't like to see the rich destroying the very earth that sustains us.
We all need to crank up our true morality.
2006-10-09 08:53:18 · answer #1 · answered by Dee M 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. It should limit the amount of aid that person can have based on when they applied. The person has a choice to have children and the government has no right to interfere. By the same token, the government (and taxpayers) have no responsibility to pay additional support for children that are born after they begin to recieve public aid (unless they are pregnant at that time). The parents ought to take precautions to prevent such an occurance. I know it sounds harsh but that's because it is.
2006-10-09 08:42:51 · answer #2 · answered by matt b 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. What if wealthy people were required to have 10 children because they could afford too. You're implying population control and you're designating the poor as the scape goats. But the scenario can go both ways. The people that target the poor as the cause of this problem and that problem are closed minded to other areas. Personally I think the space program is a waste of money. Those finances could certainly be put to better use. It's paid for by the government too and costs a whole h*** of a lot more than a poor person having 4 kids living on assistance.
2006-10-09 08:46:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
no, but they should limit the amount of aid that goes to a family. If you CHOOSE to have kids after that, then you are going to haver to do it with the same amounbt as you had before. And then, the state can provide free birth control, parenting classes, and abortions.
2006-10-09 08:52:52 · answer #4 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely!
2006-10-09 09:14:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
good one i have often thought that if your claiming benefits then the government should not support them, but if you only hope to be tempory unemployed then i cant see why the government cant help but for the ones that knock out kid after kid should have all welfare removed and then thay have to go it alone tuff but why should you and me pay for them
2006-10-09 08:44:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, they should.
There should be a choice....
Either be cut off from government monies
OR
be sterilized
2006-10-09 08:45:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course. Why do we need to keep rewarding poor choices?
2006-10-09 08:49:24 · answer #8 · answered by ANDREW L 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a nation that is "prolife" we should never penalize kids for their parents mistakes.
2006-10-09 08:39:15 · answer #9 · answered by Villain 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You bet it should, right after the FIRST one!!!
2006-10-09 09:30:22 · answer #10 · answered by usaf.primebeef 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋