Given the human population, should we be spayed or neutered?

[Deja Q]

Poll question: Given the human population, should we be spayed or neutered?

?

[kick-ass-bob]

1. Just you.

:P

[Deja Q]

3. I'm gay; I'm already nature's form of birth control.

Also, where'd you send me to to have it done and how are you going to pay for it? :P

[kick-ass-bob]

4. D'oh!!

Maybe there will just be more gay people - God's way of limiting the population!
(Wouldn't the fundies love this interpretation!!)

[Deja Q]

6. LOL! The fundies are a bunch of raving nutters...

LIke the Canadian Geese, they want us all to be hetero and multiply like mad. (and human 'oiling' is a sin too.)

It's not interpretation. It's reality. MANY animal species also have homosexual representatives. I also had a pair of angelfish once... laid about a million eggs and I thought "A family! Cool! Angelfish make lovely parents until they grow up!" Both fish were female, but that didn't make me go picketing in front of fish churches or dumping them in the toilet... (though some anti-life people would... yes, anti-life. And many of them have the nerve to call themselves "pro-life".)

[slackmaster]

2. I'm in a misanthropic mood this morning

I'd say about half the population is worthless, and a drain on the rest of us. I'm sure the Earth can support a lot more people than we have now, but at what cost? What kind of quality of life would we have with 10 billion? 15 billion? 100 billion?

Start snipping at will.

[Deja Q]

5. In 1981, there was talk that 6 billion people would be too much.

As if 3 billion wasn't enough already.

We can only have as many people as we do now THANKS to charitable organizations and, you guessed it, oil (transportation, fertilizer, etc).

Without oil, what is naturally allowable in terms of a temperate liveable climate will be radically reduced. Many will die.

And the _AFTA agreements allow the US to take other countries' oil in the event of a crisis. But in 1995, who in Canada thought there'd be a crisis at some point?

[RPM]

7. No, but....

Each person should be granted 1.4 reproductive credits. That way each person would be entitled to personal replacement in the population.

E.g. a single person could have one child with his/her own credits
e.g. a married couple could have two children with their credits

Remainder credits could be bought/sold on an open market.

Persons having more children then their credits allow must either purchase the credits from others or face an added tax; i.e instead of getting another credit on their tax return, they have to pay an additional $2,500/yr.

Sterilization/ birth control would be made available to all persons for free / deep discount.

Population numbers threaten the survival of earth; here is an idea of a way that would stabilize the population without directly running afoul of excessive entanglement with religious doctrine (if The catholic church wants to help its people buy more credits, I ma sure thay have the money to do so...). Moreover, it also allows persons who do not want kids to sell the credits for income, moving the credits to persons who want them...

Don't crusify me here, just throwing out an idea...

On Edit - I answered the poll above with "NO" as i believe that reproductive freedom (to have or not have children) is crucial; However, the state has a compelling interest in promoting a sustainable society - this idea balances the state interest with personal fundamental freedoms, IMHO...

[Deja Q]

8. A fascinating prospect.

Looking at "the real world" (money), that's not a bad idea.

Everyone knows I'm anti-money... and with no money as a factor, people will breed like there's no tomorrow. Of course, many poor breed like that and the wealthy don't... now I'm confused, not that it takes much...

Free sterlization. How do we educate people to inform them of population and other problems, to make a rational choice? Many people reproduce as a fulfillment. And it's a natural drive too.

[RPM]

9. thats a sticking point...

At first the idea was hashed out with sterilization being mandatory after exhaustion of ones credits; but since credits would be transferable and because mandatory sterilization would impinge upon a fundamental freedom, thus impinging on a fundamental freedom, that provision fell away being replaced with a economic levy for going over credit.

Perhaps mandatory sterilization of persons having children without sufficient credits - still likely a constitutional issue though...

As to your question about educating people: hit them where it hurts:

1) Instead of all properties paying tax for schools, half the fixed tax on properties, and make up the difference by levying against those properties with school aged children living there.

2) Turn the Federal Tax Code's treatment of children upside down; Less credits / deductions for children; i.e. the first two children will be tax neutral, but subsequent children will increase tax liability.

3) Outside of hitting them in the wallet, other informational tacks must be taken

Most importantly is to debunk the modern concept of growth: The modern consumer economy requires massive population growth to support revenue growth required to create profit growth; Also since profit growth can be achieved through cost reduction, the expanded population creates a watered down labor pool, allowing empolyers to pit these extra workers against oneanother in a race to the bottom for wages.

Quite simply - one of the best thing labor could do for iteself is to reduce the size of the labor pool; one way to do that is to make future workers.

[Heidi]

11. Intriguing, but every time the government has had an interest

in reproductive rights, people have died.

www.eugenicsarchive.org

[NMMNG]

10. Bite your tongue!

The Bible clearly says "GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY"

And we must always do what the Bible says.


Now go get your father drunk and sleep with him...

:rofl:

[FizzFuzz]

12. one of my biggest issues here

I need to get back to sleep though. Woke up and decided to DU till I got sleepy again.

But replacing one for one still isn't good enough when 6 billion is already killing us, in my book.

what would actually help?

I don't know. Stop tax breaks for 2nd or more children? Give tax breaks to people with no kids? Target school taxes at those who have kids, child-free people being exempt? (not sure about that one. kids in school are better than kids with no education. On the other hand, that's just about the situation now...) Assess extra taxes on baby and child related items?

One thing for sure: improve education, and encourage girls to excell. Self respect and having a dream is one of the best family planning motivators for girls and women. And it is girls/women, ultimately, who should be in control of the baby making decision.

and now,
good night. Or morning.
zzzzzzzzzzzzz