Quote:
Originally Posted by kazbates
When you start talking about population control, you get into a really dicey area. I, for one, do not want to tell people whether or not they can procreate. I wouldn't have liked it if someone told me I could only have 2 children, then I wouldn't have had Ryleigh who is an absolute blessing from God.
Having said that, I agree that people should be more sexually responsible. If you can't provide for a child, don't have one. I wish it were that simple, but know that it is not. Go back a few posts to Steve's comments about "getting laid every night" and you see an underlying issue. Sex feels good! When you can't control much about your outside environment, that seems to be the only thing you can control. The escape that sex can provide from the realities of life is one of the biggest aphrodisiacs. Thinking about birth control or disease transmittion gets in the way of that euphoric/escapism feeling, not to mention the religious or cultural aspects of birth control. 
Bottom line, we're going to have to deal with world hunger another way. |
I agree.. i never said my idea was the solution. But i have been getting laid and have yet to get pregnant. Population control, may have been a wrong term. But prevention it before it happens.
There should have been a birth control pill for men already. Distribute it in the poorest of nations.
I do not see what's wrong with not allowing people who are starving to make more children.
Secondly; hunger should have been eradicated already, but politics do get in the way. I have heard there is not enough food. bollocks! the majority of the homes in the US are stacked with food for at least a cpl of years.