jenslyn wrote...
we have a massive problem with over population because we bread to fast and our medicine is extremely effective compared to 200+ years ago so we get much older.
I'm going to go ahead and include your replies to nash into this.
I can see how that would go over in Africa and the rest of the world. "Civilized America and Europe imposing their view of what is right on the savage mud races". If we weren't imperialist or fascist before, we sure as hell would be then. To think, some asshole from another country comes and forces women in your country to have an abortion if they don't fit what he deems acceptable.
Also, who would we use for this? The U.N.? or would the U.S. and Europe just go in and do it?
There should be like a minimum requirement to become a parent, I do not know if that should be a test or a psych evaluation, but considering how thoroughly people are checked when adopting, then natural parents should at least fulfill some minimum requirements so we avoid at least some of the bad parents.
This brings up the question of who gets to decide who get to have a child and who doesn't. Who gets the power to violate the rights of women? The pro-choice crowd is always pushing it's a woman's right to choose. Yet, you promote taking that choice out of some hands. Also what criteria would you use to select who is can have birth or not? What's next, aborting a fetus if it shows any sign of defect? The idea you and Ramsus promote sounds a lot like Action T4.
I won't change my mind.
Spanish Proverb: “A wise man changes his mind, a fool never”.
On topic: I don't lean one way or another on the topic. Pro-choice doesn't define at what point a "lump of cells" become entitled to the same rights as everyone else while pro-life gets you labeled a right wing nutcase and vilified as the devil incarnate by the other side. For the sake of my sanity I won't pick a side.