Would you have sex for your country? - Page 2

**pctec** · 09-14-2007, 06:09 PM

Yay
We have too many people as it is...

Julie · 09-14-2007, 06:42 PM

Cricket just called someone a dog. LOL!

**Cricket** · 09-14-2007, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie

Cricket just called someone a dog. LOL!

Yeah, but I did it respectfully.

Julie · 09-14-2007, 06:51 PM

I know.... it's cute!

John Scott · 09-14-2007, 10:20 PM

Quote:

If we either can't reduce population rates or find some miraculous way to feed more and more people then we could face a future massive die-off.

Where do you get this crap? The technology we have today makes food a non-issue. That's today. Tomorrow the technology will most likely make food even more of a non-issue. We throw away half of our food as is, and pay farmers not to grow food.

Quote:

Does that mean government should control birth rates? I don't know.

Wow. I'm speechless. Wow. How could any intelligent person even entertain the thought?

Quote:

But I don't find the decreasing birth rate disturbing.

Did you not just say that the population is "ever expanding"? I think you need to choose one.

Common sense tells us that if the earth cannot support people, people will not reproduce; those that do will see their off spring die. We've seen it happen in African nations where paramilitary forces starved populations. Asking the government to limit people's freedom to have children shows an absolute and incontrovertible absence of respect for the very concept of civil liberty.

Sadierhianne · 09-15-2007, 03:16 AM

[QUOTE=John Scott;697738]Where do you get this crap? The technology we have today makes food a non-issue. That's today. Tomorrow the technology will most likely make food even more of a non-issue. We throw away half of our food as is, and pay farmers not to grow food.

Very true in modernised countries but it is shipping modern country food to starving populations that is now though a cause of infant death in starving countries. And whilst it would seem proper on one hand to "help" those starving, it needs to be done in the right way. Anyone considering their xmas shopping this year, take a look at oxfam unwrapped gifts.

Different cultures rely on different methods of feeding their people, different cultures have to deal with different climates, levels of education etc and so it is really hard to look at the world as a whole when we might live in a society that really does not have any "real" issues. Here in the Uk, we are educated, we do have a plentyful supply of food, we are lucky - not so everywhere.

Governments wanting their people to have children to increase a population in a certain area seems like madness when there are populations that need help in stemming their birth rate and not because that area should have an issue with the birth rate but simply because those people do not have the basics to even drink water safely.

Tis a sad world that we live in and one that appears to be very very cruel to some and overly generous and maybe taken for granted my others - myself included.

anne

jo_cstd · 09-15-2007, 12:51 AM

There is no chance that I'll ever do it for my country.
The only time I'd want a child is when my life is stable enough for it.

jamaine12 · 09-15-2007, 01:57 AM

I don't nid to do it for my country..Coz i think we're already overpopulated..haha!

ericdesrosiers · 09-15-2007, 07:02 AM

yes provided the reward me handsomely for the contribution

ewomack · 09-15-2007, 08:34 AM

Quote:

If we either can't reduce population rates or find some miraculous way to feed more and more people then we could face a future massive die-off.

Quote:

Where do you get this crap? The technology we have today makes food a non-issue. That's today. Tomorrow the technology will most likely make food even more of a non-issue. We throw away half of our food as is, and pay farmers not to grow food.

Sadierhianne has answered this well. People in the west have the luxury of plenty, but that doesn't mean the entire world does. And just because technology has saved us in the past doesn't mean it will save us in the future. Theoretical technology is only science fiction until it's implemented. Famine still exists in the world, so food is still very much an issue. Not everyone in the world today buys food in supermarkets. Many areas of Africa and Asia still live on the subsistence level. Drought decimates them.

Quote:

Does that mean government should control birth rates? I don't know.

Quote:

Wow. I'm speechless. Wow. How could any intelligent person even entertain the thought?

Yes, right now the thought of population control seems monstrous but if the right combination of circumstances arose it may not seem so. The situation did arise in China, with some rather unfortunate consequences, but it wasn't based on nonsense (link). Food rationing also probably seems monstrous, but during World War II it made sense. Suddenly people couldn't have steak whenever they wanted to. Some doubtless complained, but many people weathered the limitations and came together to support a common cause.

Quote:

But I don't find the decreasing birth rate disturbing.
Did you not just say that the population is "ever expanding"? I think you need to choose one.

A decreasing birth rate does not necessarily mean the population isn't increasing. Things can increase at a decreasing rate. It also depends upon what part of the world you're talking about. I admit the way I put it was confusing, though.

Quote:

Common sense tells us that if the earth cannot support people, people will not reproduce; those that do will see their off spring die. We've seen it happen in African nations where paramilitary forces starved populations. Asking the government to limit people's freedom to have children shows an absolute and incontrovertible absence of respect for the very concept of civil liberty.

That first sentence is at best controversial. You can find examples that support it and examples that detract it. I agree that we should try to maintain civil liberties to the utmost. However, in the right situations, usually emergencies or catastrophes, sometimes the right thing to do is to swallow a bit of freedom for a cause. For example, the government suspended our rights to fly on 911. Such situations remain highly controversial and ethical debates that can't be reduced to formulas or pat answers.

Please understand that just because I entertain a thought does not mean I either support it or think it should happen. In this case I was simply theorizing.

John Scott · 09-20-2007, 06:17 AM

Late response to: http://www.v7n.com/forums/697942-post29.html

Quote:

And just because technology has saved us in the past doesn't mean it will save us in the future.

It's not a matter of technology saving us when it wants to. The technology is already here. Food spoiling is not the life or death issue it used to be.

Food can be made in one part of the world and transported to another part in 24 hours or less.

Quote:

The situation did arise in China

No, China is entirely able to be fed. Food is not a problem. They limit their population for economic reasons.

Quote:

Please understand that just because I entertain a thought does not mean I either support it or think it should happen.

Deciding whether or not to limit people's ability to reproduce is not an intelligent discussion, is it? It's like discussing whether or not to take a hammer and beat in the skull of some 4 year old playing in the park. Regardless of in possible benefits, it is not a choice we have the right to make.

chicgeek · 09-15-2007, 09:02 AM

Politics and amorals forum!
*zips it away*

StrongInTheArm · 09-15-2007, 10:54 AM

What happened to the water?

I feel like a fish out of his depth. I'm not suppose to be in the politics forum. I live in the shallow waters of the lobby, its too deep here for me.

Yikes, is that a shark lurking in the shadows, or is that John

.

My thought provoking thread went all serious on me, I wish I was in Kansas, where are those darn red shoes when you need them.

Sadierhianne · 09-15-2007, 11:00 AM

But you said it was serious

So i got serious

Oh, you can't beem yourself up now scotty - you have to stay and face the the the sharks

Plus red is not your colour

anne

StrongInTheArm · 09-15-2007, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadierhianne

But you said it was serious

So i got serious

Oh, you can't beem yourself up now scotty - you have to stay and face the the the sharks

Plus red is not your colour

anne

So it was your fault, bad girl, bad girl!

Do you think if this thread got really silly the mods would chuck it back into the lobby?

Actually, better not, Chicgeek scares the pants off me. G10, now there is a mod, he is quite tolerant, until POW! he gets all Super Moderator on you.

In fact they are all a bit scary, I'm off for a quiet Saturday night in front of the box. Independence Day is on again, the US gets its ass kicked by a bunch of aliens until Will Smith saves the planet, AGAIN.