No.
2006-11-11 16:59:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I don't think anyone should be able to tell me how big my family can be. Even if we only allowed one child per family, there would still be MANY children who wouldn't get proper care. How would you solve the problem of third pregnancies? Forced abortions? Sterilization after two kids? Kids forced into orphanages when they have parents who love and want them? Who would foot the bill for these procedures? This would be much more expensive than just allowing people their god-given right to procreate. The welfare system needs some work, I'll give you that, but come on- we live in a "free" country where more and more freedoms are taken away everyday, let's not even consider making this one of them.
2006-11-11 18:34:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Amanda D 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well I understand what you are saying but what would happen if that was in place. You know the couples in China that have more than the 1 kid that is allotted, they have to pay a fine. Then that kid gets taken away from them and sent to an orphanage. So how does that help this person. If they do not want these women to have anymore children then maybe they should make it the law to sterilize them and the men too. But that is taking peoples rights away to reproducing. I mean god gave us sex to reproduce and to enjoy. I only have two children and I got my tubes tied because I didn't want anymore. But if I did want more then there is nothing wrong with that.
2006-11-11 17:05:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Miss Vira 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think to each there own, to some point. However, I do feel that there are some people out there just having children for the money, and the attention, rather than actually wanting them. And in terms to that, they dont provide for the child. So I do think that you should have to earn the right to be a parent. Not the bragging right. Some of us care dearly for our own, others however, need a swift kick in the butt. So it shouldnt be a law, but they should require a parenting class with your first born, free of course, i mean since they give out money to half of them bad parents anyway, they ,might as well put it to good use. And that way, parenting, would be alot easier, and possibly, less children would be born to the un-fit. Thus meaning, less over-populated
2006-11-11 17:05:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by littledsboo 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Absolutely not! I have 7 children. Two are grown & living on their own now. Then they are 16, 7, 6, 4 & 3. I take care of them myself & don't ask for help from anyone. Some people do have more children than they really should financially or emotionally but that is not the case for everyone so you can't really say 2 is the limit for everyone.
2006-11-11 17:44:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by dmommab@sbcglobal.net 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
It isnt anyones right to tell anyone how many children they can have, If god intended for you to have 30 kids, you will have 30 kids. Thats not up to the government, If you cant provide for your children then people shouldnt have anymore than they can handle. I have 8 children and I am NOT on welfare, Their daddy works everyday and has worked everyday of his adult life. But i dont criticize those who are on welfare because that is what its there for to help those in need. But I also dont think they should live off it for the rest of their lives, just long enough to get them back on their feet. There is a Job everywhere for everyone!
2006-11-12 04:42:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
That would stink - as I had two pregnancy's and three children ( and it was the second that was twins). I think there should be a law that if you can't afford it you can't produce it. People who keep having children and live off the government because of it drive me mad. I believe that if you can not afford to have the children on your own earnings than you shouldn't have them. If you can afford ten kids then great- have all you want.
2006-11-12 01:55:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by puzzleraspie 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, even if one child per family is not getting proper care, they should have no children. I have friends with 4-11 children and every child is loved and well cared for. Over crowding should never be an issue with how many children you can have. Look at what happened in China.
2006-11-11 17:07:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by hearttwinbeat 2
·
4⤊
0⤋
You must be kidding! The world really isn't overcrowded and there are plenty of statistics to prove it. However, either way it's not your decision how others live their lives.
As for children not getting proper care, most who don't it wouldn't matter if there was one child or ten, they would still be neglected. People who don't want children right now however shouldn't be putting themselves in a position to get pregnant. Then it would be much less of an issue for all, especially you. Do you have 2 children, a dog and a nice house in the suburbs. How quaint.
2006-11-11 17:03:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by suzyQ 3
·
5⤊
2⤋
No, if you can love and take care of 20 children then that is your business, just as if you decided to not to have any. Limiting children will just create more problems (China for example). Bad parenting is the problem not the number of children someone has. Either way it is none of the government's business.
2006-11-11 17:04:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tulipa 2
·
4⤊
0⤋
this is fine if u think for the world but...a law?think of parents who can afford to bring up a lot of kids,n those who get special kids and have to go in for larger families,so on everyone has a reason for more kids,but yes morally parents who don't take care of kids should be dealt with.maybe nature is already taking its toll as many are left with problems of not concieving and adopt.certain things are meant to be and laws cannot change them.
2006-11-12 01:55:58
·
answer #11
·
answered by vasu_narula 1
·
0⤊
0⤋