English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Nowadays, some people are beginning to worry about the issue of human overpopulation and the environmental effects that such a large amount of humans have on this planet. We are seemingly using more and more resources per person as the years go by. However, I know many families that have a lot of children. From what I understand, some countries have placed a limit of some sorts on how many children a family can have. In order to keep the population from exponentially increasing, having 2 or less children per family would be the way to go. (one child to "replace" the mother, one child to "replace" the father) However, I know many families that have 4, 5, 6 or more children. Hundreds of years ago, this was considered normal, but there were far less people, the average life span was significantly less, and there were no environmental concerns. At this point in time, it is morally, ethically, or environmentally correct to have such large families? What do you think?

2007-10-22 10:22:47 · 8 answers · asked by garrett 2 in Environment Other - Environment

8 answers

Thank you for bringing this up. This is exactly why I haven't had any kiddies yet....and also because it was never really an interest of mine....I'm an animal lover....my cats are my kids. But really, there are *WAY TOO MANY* people in the world and I believe we need to follow in China's footsteps and enact a limit on the number of children per family to save the world before it is too late. I'm not one for telling people how to live but I think the world is in a major state of trouble - I am against destruction of the earth. We cut down trees and replace them with homes. There is just too much of this. It is beyond out of control. There is just too much development, too many cars, too many roads and the list goes on and on. The world is in major trouble. http://maketheconnection.co.nr

2007-10-22 12:01:31 · answer #1 · answered by veggurl21 4 · 0 0

A lot of pregnancies occur regardless of moral, ethical, and/or environmental considerations. Given that, your question comes down to a decision of whether it is more "morally, ethically, and/or environmentally correct" to "have a lot of children" or to kill a lot of unborn children (or even those already born, as is done in some of those countries with limits on children per family). I can't imagine anyone other than perverted child molesters advancing an argument that it is more "morally, ethically, and/or environmentally correct" to kill children.

2007-10-22 11:24:15 · answer #2 · answered by Rationality Personified 5 · 0 0

It can be.

A large family that has an energy efficient house, and and makes a real effort to live environmentally could be better than a childless couple with a mansion, a private jet, and a garage full of gas guzzlers.

Maybe they educate their children, who go on to become environmental scientists and engineers.

People can be a burden on the environment. They can also be its' protectors. You can't judge by just one thing.

2007-10-22 11:34:45 · answer #3 · answered by Bob 7 · 0 0

Ethnically. Beliefs such as religion are a reason why people have a lot of children.
Morally, no because if you were that concerned about having children, there are plenty to adopt. And environmentally no, it was explained in your question.

2007-10-22 10:30:52 · answer #4 · answered by poppapimplepimpin 1 · 0 1

Too many people on the earth now. China has adopted a " one child" policy or 50 years from now they will all be starving. It is morally, ethically and environmentally wrong to have large families.

2007-10-22 10:28:29 · answer #5 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0 1

Not only is it an environment issue of overpopulation but; the factors regarding exhausted gene pools that contribute to retardation and other infractions are a major consideration before producing more defective humans.

2007-10-22 12:45:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I personally don't believe in large families - they are simply not necessary like they used to be when we needed them for farm hands, they died in birth, infancy or early childhood from disease or were killed in accidents. There used to be a reason for large families, now there is not. I have only two children myself.

2007-10-22 10:30:09 · answer #7 · answered by ♥ тнє σяιgιиαℓ gιяℓfяι∂αу ♥ 7 · 0 1

+where do u get your info.!i can understand environmental .u speak like a communist lobby!or a brain washed twerp .what ever the level i hope u do not reproduce

2007-10-22 10:37:22 · answer #8 · answered by ata31254 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers