morality can become a luxury.
it's ugly but, principles, ideals, ostensibly ethical choices - personally and in the choices we indirectly influence governments to make - can because of short-sighted indifference to consequences become in and of themselves reprehensible behaviors, that require what first appears to be greater evil to counter them.
But I wouldn't worry too much about the laws. They are, in most places, acknowledged only in their violation. Such is the case in every place where paper is thrown at the frieght train of the human biological imperative.
What we have to worry about is the failure of just about each and every human to acknowledge the reality that WE as a species, need to take no more from the world than we put back in.
We don't show any signs, collectively, of having realized that. That reality, and the failure of any governmental intervention designed to instill such a realization by force of law, will have catastrophic effects in the none-too-distant future.
2006-11-27 03:36:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The negative effects come into play when you start thinking about how you're going to enforce it. I asked a Chinese man what would happen if he had a second child; he said that he would be sacked tomorrow. That is, he, his wife, and his other children would be reduce to subsistence overnight.
A two child policy is not required in the west; wealth brings with it a natural reduction in the number of offspring. "Fairness" isn't justifiable as an argument for it either, as different people care differently for their families, and desire different numbers of children.
To deal with global overpopulation, we need to bring contraception to poorer countries, and bring them wealth too, as best we can. As things stand now, a minimum wage for internationally traded goods would be the best way forward. The level of it would have to be set according to the productivity that poorer countries can muster, but it would improve their lot by preventing them from undercutting one another. As an individual, one can choose Fair Trade over other goods, although trade is still better than no trade.
2006-11-26 21:32:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by Morosoph 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
To enforce such a policy you either have to
a) require mothers of 2 to undergo medical procedure to become barren
b) require pregnant mothers who already have 2 kids to get abortions
c) forbid married couples with 2 kids to have sex
All of these things are unethical and ridiculous. This is an awful policy, and there are ONLY negative effects, because you have to weigh the policy as a whole. It can't exist without the negative effects.
2006-11-26 21:25:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by radioflyer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only thing I can think of is it would cut down on the population.
I personally have 3 biological children & 1 stepchild, I couldn't imagine not haveing one of my biological children.
Hope this helps.
2006-11-26 22:41:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by eyes_of_iceblue 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Too many children.
2006-11-26 21:50:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋