ONE CHILD ONLY

[TurdBerglar]

BEIJING - China has banned crude and insensitive slogans promoting the country's 'one-child' family planning policy, such as "Raise fewer babies but more piggies," which have stoked anger in rural areas, state media said Sunday.

China's 28-year-old family planning policy limits most urban couples to just one child and allows some families in the countryside to have a second child if their first is a girl.

Critics say that has led to forced abortions and sterilizations and a dangerously imbalanced sex ratio due to the traditional preference for male heirs, which has prompted countless families to abort female fetuses in hopes of getting boys.

The policy continues to engender anger and resentment, especially among farmers in the countryside, because of the sometimes brutal methods used to enforce it, such as heavy fines and the seizure of property. Local authorities themselves face demotions, criticism or the loss of jobs if they fail to hit population targets.

The National Population and Family Planning Commission said it was striking insensitive slogans promoting the policy in order to dispel the impression the government was "simply forcing people to give up having more babies, causing misunderstanding (of) the policy and even tarnishing the image of the government," the official Xinhua News Agency reported.

Xinhua said uncouth slogans also threatened to undermine China's efforts to keep the population under control. It paraphrased the family planning commission as saying such "low-quality slogans" could lead to "public complaint and resentment."

Harsh slogans
Among the slogans that were forbidden were "One more baby means one more tomb" and "Houses toppled, cows confiscated, if abortion demand rejected." Such slogans are often found painted on roadside buildings in rural areas.

The planning commission issued a list of 190 acceptable slogans, such as "Mother earth is too tired to sustain more children" and "Both boys and girls are parents' hearts."

The government contends the one-child policy has helped prevent at least 300 million births — about the size of the U.S. population — and aided China's rapid economic development.

But it has also been the cause of recent protests.

In May, thousands of farmers in southern Guangxi province rioted to protest fines they said were imposed "arbitrarily and brutally" against people who had more children than allowed under the policy, state media reported. Authorities detained 28 people after the incident.

Media reports said all public servants in the province's Bobai county had been ordered to collect fines from people who violated the policy. If violators failed to pay within three days, their homes would be demolished and their belongings seized.

One villager said some fees were as high as $1,300 — an unmanageable amount for an area where most annual incomes were only $130.


i know this article is mainly about the slogans but i totally agree with this one child thing. not only in china but the world over. it may be handled a bit wrong in china but i see nothing wrong with limiting how many children a person can produce. just make it equal among all people and i see no problem.

[insertnamehere]

I agree. Places where populating growth is way too crazy, something needs to be done about it. Places where population growth is replacement level or lower really doesn't need any kind of formal policy or regulation, but I am all for planned parenthood and the like.

This may sounds kinda hard. Where kinda = really, but I don't think we should do so much to help out starving kids in Africa. I'd say in some places, humans have defiantly gone over the carrying capacity of an area, and, well, it's natures job to lower the population.

[Jitters]

I see where you're coming from. I remember a conversation about how, just like in the past, species get overpopulated and things naturally die out through disease, starvation, etc. The reason Africa has so many problems is because of overpopulation and lack of resources. It's sad but sometimes there are just way too many people :(

If America didn't have so many resources and new technology then this would have happened to us a long time ago.

[ms.peachy]

Ha, ha, ha, you young people are so funny.

[hitmonlee]

i dont think i could have a child and deprive it of a sibling. how cruel. being left alone with your parents.



ps. the world is fucked anyway, we may as well do what we want and finish it off.

pps. we should just sterilise the genetically weak/ugly/stupid.

[Kid Presentable]

The world is crammed to the brim with ugly, stupid kids with ugly, stupid parents. Absolutely there should be a limit per couple, but it would be nigh-on impossible to enforce fairly.

[roosta]

having not enough kids is / is going to be a problem in developed nations. I think Germany is one for starts...theres gonna be lots of old folk, and not enough young folk to take care of them. Or something.

[Yeti]

i dont think i could have a child and deprive it of a sibling. how cruel. being left alone with your parents.


We are blessed to have a little boy. I hope he does not feel cheated. Your opinion makes me feel sad.

I saw this on CNN's webpage......
LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AP) -- It's a girl -- again -- for Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar, the proud parents of 17 children.
Michelle Duggar is surrounded by her children and husband Jim Bob, third from right.
1 of 3 And after Jennifer Danielle was born Thursday morning, her parents already were talking about having more children.
"We'd love to have more," Michelle Duggar said, adding that the girls are outnumbered seven to 10 in the family. "We love the ruffles and lace."

[Kid Presentable]

I'm an only child, and a weird one at that. The idea of being 'deprived' of a sibling is ridiculous to me.

[Yeti]

Thanks for stating that you do not feel deprived. My Pops was an only child and he loved his parents.

Who knows? We might have another child so my son will have a brother or sister. At this point in our lives there is a chance Aiden will have to put up with us.

[Kid Presentable]

There's been five generations of only sons on my family-named side.

I'm not going at hitmon though. She has siblings, so I get where she's coming from (sibling? I'm not sure. There was very little in her trash that revealed anything conclusive)

[Yeti]

Well, I think she was responding to the 1 child law. But her wording was bad. The---- being left alone with parents being cruel-- comment was what set me off.

I have 2 brothers but sometimes 1 child is how it happens. Some people cannot even have 1 child. What happens happens.

[Kid Presentable]

The most I could see wanting is one.

[QueenAdrock]

The Duggar family is fucking crazy. I was watching them on TLC and they were like "We weren't planning on having any kids, but then we decided whatever the Lord wants to bless us with, we'll have!" MAYBE JESUS SHOULD BLESS YOU WITH A VASECTOMY.

Annnnyways, I think there should be a 2-kid limit. 2 kids means no population growth, because when you and your spouse die, then the two kids take your spot in the population, and so on and so on. The thing is, the way to enforce it is to have a totalitarian government, and though we're getting closer we're not quite there yet.

[Kid Presentable]

The Duggar family is fucking crazy. I was watching them on TLC and they were like "We weren't planning on having any kids, but then we decided whatever the Lord wants to bless us with, we'll have!" MAYBE JESUS SHOULD BLESS YOU WITH A VASECTOMY.

Annnnyways, I think there should be a 2-kid limit. 2 kids means no population growth, because when you and your spouse die, then the two kids take your spot in the population, and so on and so on. The thing is, the way to enforce it is to have a totalitarian government, and though we're getting closer we're not quite there yet.
That doesn't account for children dying before their parents. Population control is probably a little more involved than that.

[QueenAdrock]

Yeah, but to keep it generally stable.

[Kid Presentable]

Yeah, but to keep it generally stable.

You've oversimplified a bit. There would need to be areas of concentrated breeding. Just hoping that it averages out won't really work. It would need to be like vegetables; high and low yield seasons.

[QueenAdrock]

Yeah, but it has to be oversimplified a bit, because otherwise it becomes too complicated, and would need too much government control. If you follow the general rule of thumb, saying that 2 kids will replace their parents, then it will generally work. Some children may die in childhood, some parents may have triplets, it won't be exactly no population growth but it would be the closest we could get without any more government dictation on the specifics.

[Kid Presentable]

Yeah, but it has to be oversimplified a bit, because otherwise it becomes too complicated, and would need too much government control. If you follow the general rule of thumb, saying that 2 kids will replace their parents, then it will generally work. Some children may die in childhood, some parents may have triplets, it won't be exactly no population growth but it would be the closest we could get without any more government dictation on the specifics.

I'm pretty sure you're just referring to the modern equation, if it were averaged out.

[ms.peachy]

Annnnyways, I think there should be a 2-kid limit.

I think that adults should be allowed to make their own reproductive choices for their families and that it's no one else's business as long as they are capable, caring people.

[QueenAdrock]

I think that adults should be allowed to make their own reproductive choices for their families and that it's no one else's business as long as they are capable, caring people.



And that's why we're going to run out of resources and will have many wars over what's remaining. Iraq, anyone?

Either way, it's a moot point because it won't happen in America. But it'd be nice to see people being responsible and actually thinking about how having 10 kids will impact the world as opposed to just saying "Jesus wants us to have babies!!"

[abcdefz]

Wow. So much for "a woman's right to choose." :rolleyes:

[Nuzzolese]

I think that adults should be allowed to make their own reproductive choices for their families and that it's no one else's business as long as they are capable, caring people.


Ahhh, as long as they are capable, caring people. But that's just the problem, isn't it? Do we have definite criteria for what makes someone a capable, caring parent? How do we know? Can we all agree on that and should we? Do we have adequate means to determine this distinction, and to monitor the behavior of parents? Do we have the right to take action if we determine a parent is not capable? If we do, what action would that be? When does it become someone else's business?

[Tompz]

I think that adults should be allowed to make their own reproductive choices for their families and that it's no one else's business as long as they are capable, caring people.

i agree with this

the resources are sufficient for a huge number of people because it's all about how you use them

sure, it will be a problem if all children grow up to become over-consumers lika americans or europeans that's certainly going to be a major problem

if we use resources more wisely there's room for any woman to have as many children as she'll like

[Nuzzolese]

But don't you get angry at those families on public assistance who keep having children and don't have the means to care for them properly? The mothers, they may be sweet and kind and loving and have the best intentions but they don't have any money and they can't work, so their kids run wild and get sick and have discipline problems because the mother is too tired to spend much time on them. And the average person has to pay for their doctor visits and medicine. And she KEEPS HAVING CHILDREN. It pisses me off, and her choices that she is making with her body, do become other people's business when she's putting strain on the people of her community. Having a baby, people think it's one person and it's insulated to a household but it isn't. If you are making more people, you're creating an impact on the rest of the world.

[abcdefz]

The crappy baseline we have for "capable, caring" parents (in the States) is, unfortunately, Child protective Services or the long arm of the law, in general.

Not only do we not legislate proper care and love for children (which I'm not sure you can do), but we don't even ENCOURAGE it, officially.

We have no mandated parenting classes in the school system. (No driving classes, either, but at least you have to take a test to get a license.) Since becoming a parent is one of the life experiences most people are likely to have (I assume), it's astonishing that students are graduated from our public school system without any instruction in the matter.

Heck, some kids are babysitting even while they're in their school years; you'd think somebody in the public system would bother.

[QueenAdrock]

Wow. So much for "a woman's right to choose." :rolleyes:

Which is why I wouldn't advocate an actual implementation in America. Ideally, I'd magically like people to wake up and stop over-consuming and being idiots and only have a minimal amount of children. But that won't happen, either. So what's left? Bitching on a message board about how you'd like to see society be, but will never happen. Human nature vs. government intervention. I hate both.

Anyways, for those nay-sayers who say there will be enough resources, go ahead and see what your ecological footprint is. I thought I didn't take up that many resources (which I don't, in comparison to a lot of people). But everything takes resources, and we'll run out one day.

http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp

[adrockmelanie]

there was an article in our paper this week about a local family who just gave birth to her 17th child. a girl. the 9th girl. the oldest kid is only 19, so this woman is constantly pregnant... and they say they want more because they love kids. i think that's ridiculous. once you get a few, if you want more just because you love having kids around, freaking adopt some.

[Nuzzolese]

If we could just get to the kitchen and rearrange a few things, we could totally party with the Chinese! http://www.americanrhetoric.com/images/clueless1a.JPG

[Tompz]

"IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.5 PLANETS."

:(


How about some serious legislative action when it comes to protecting the environment rather than a ban for too many children. That would be the way to go.

[QueenAdrock]

Perhaps, but the damage has already been done and our current president doesn't give two shits about the environment. And he's here until 2009. After that, I hope we get someone environmentally-conscious in, but I'm not too hopeful.

But even protecting the environment wouldn't solve all our problems, because people like eating meat, like using electricity, all that jazz. It's either living like the Amish or keeping the population down somehow.

[Otis Driftwood]

Banish all speed limits, abolish smoking bans, legalise all drugs and stop forcing the ho's to use rubbers, all this stuff! More fun and less fascist than having people who wouldn't even consider raising a kid decide who gets to have children or not.
I love nothing more than 40 year old physics doctors who think parents are out for the states money and constantly bitch about everyones kids behaving like brats. Embittered fucks!

[Nuzzolese]

First of all, laws and rules for safety of a population is not fascist; secondly I never offered a specific solution nor did I try to simplify anything but only tried to say that I think things are a lot more complicated than a simple outlawing or regulation rule would solve, and thirdly I never said parents were OUT for the state's money, but that they do end up having to depend on it. My point was that having children is a decision that carries consequences that have an impact on people outside yourself. Is that something you can comprehend? Where do you get 40 year old embittered physics doctors who wouldn't even consider raising kids?

[insertnamehere]

I am also an only child, and I can't imagine life any other way. I've never wished for a sibling, in fact, the idea of having a sibling seems really strange to me. I've never been very keen on the idea of having a kid in the first place, but I figure more than likely, well, I DO want to get married, and chances are, my spouse WILL want kids, and I'd end up doing it for him. But really, if I had a child, I'd want only one.

The thought of raising a child is really scary to me. I'm sure I'd do a terrible job of it. I've never really dealt with babies, and they make me uncomfortable. I refuse to hold them, I won't talk to them, hell even children I feel strange talking to and avoid it if at all possible. Up until I started school, the youngest person I was ever really around was 5 years my senior. We lived in the middle of nowhere, so I was only around family, and I was always treated as a small adult, so a lot of childrens' behavior seems pretty bizzar to me.

So hopefully, I will never reproduce. I do plan on adopting lots of doggys though.

[Otis Driftwood]

First of all, laws and rules for safety of a population is not fascist
No they aren't. Telling a couple how many kids they are allowed to raise is, IMO.

secondly I never offered a specific solution nor did I try to simplify anything but only tried to say that I think things are a lot more complicated than a simple outlawing or regulation rule would solve

Most likely you didn't. I didn't read your post. I have no clue how you think I was singling you out with what I wrote.

and thirdly I never said parents were OUT for the state's money, but that they do end up having to depend on it. My point was that having children is a decision that carries consequences that have an impact on people outside yourself
Does it have an impact on you?
Is that something you can comprehend? Where do you get 40 year old embittered physics doctors who wouldn't even consider raising kids?
This was an actual talk with a former colleague. I got riled up about this cause here you have someone who makes 5 grand a month bitching about his taxes going to the very people who are supposed to rake in his pension. Oh wait, he's so rich he made his own pension. I also think the state (mine at least) does not do enough for single parents or young families.

[Nivvie]

There is something utterly wrong about a government, any government, telling people how many kids they can have. An incentive to keep it small is one thing, but a law is a horrific idea.

Of course huge families are ridiculous. My mother in law was one of 9 and my grandmother was one of 12, but both had a few siblings die in childhood, and also a few in their twenties and thirties, as was the style at the time.

I actually believe the bigger problem is medical intervention where not necessary. I used to work in a brain injury unit, where 40 people were in permanent vegative states, costing the tax payer over £1000 a week each and none were ever going to recover. The worst part were many were failed suicides, people left hanging too long, so the poor things wished they were dead anyway.

We keep elderly people on life support machines as their children can't say goodbye, braindead stroke victims who go on for a year or two before dying of something like a chest infection or a virus. All of this has a huge environmental impact as well as financial. The energy used by a ward like this, kept at tropical temperatures all day, and cleaned to within an inch of its life with an array of chemicals. Nursing homes the place over are full of people who without a huge cocktail of drugs would be dead in 48 hours, sometimes less. I've lost count of the people who have told me as I've put them to bed how they can't wait to die. It's about time we let them. Instead, if they refuse their meds we call the doctor and he sections them as they MUST be insane if they don't want to live anymore, and they are given them by force. i once met a woman who was 102, and although she was very with it, she couldn't wait to be dead. She had buried all her children 9who had died in their 80s) and had both legs amputated. What the hell is the point of making her live?

This whole argument is picking on the wrong people.

A baby has potential to contribute, all these people do is take, often against their will.

There is however, nothing wrong with governments making no financial contribution to families, especially once they pass the 2 kid mark.

Governments are not the wisest bodies of people around, ditto churches.
Breeding is a basic human right, as long as you have the resources, and most importantly, time and patience, to do it right.

Limiting breeding will not change the world, as it has been pointed out before when this subject comes up, certain countries without the resources to control birth or for religious reasons won't, will just become the majority. With the recent influx of western money, and therefore western Coke cans and other such crap, India is becoming a polluted mess. If all the business interests of the world shifted there after the west dies out, it would all just happen again.

[wrongwayandugg]

I think that adults should be allowed to make their own reproductive choices for their families and that it's no one else's business as long as they are capable, caring people.
What about those who aren't capable or caring?

[TurdBerglar]

i see people as our own worse problem. the less the better to a certain extent. right now there's just too many and it's still growing. having child after child is nothing more than pollution to me. i see it as very irresponsible to have more than one or two children. nothing kills us anymore so we need to take the matter into our own hands. or someone needs to gene splice sharks with eagles and then with vipers and then with chimps. flying poisonous sharks than can make tools should help with the population and make going outside the adventure it once was.

flocks of divebombing sharks poking you with twigs and spitting poison in your eyes.

[hitmonlee]

I'm an only child, and a weird one at that. The idea of being 'deprived' of a sibling is ridiculous to me.

its like you're on a really cool team and your opponents are your parents
the sibling bond is inexplicable
i don't feel it with my parents or cousins...
i have one older brother :)

Well, I think she was responding to the 1 child law. But her wording was bad. The---- being left alone with parents being cruel-- comment was what set me off.

oh shit i'm sorry i didn't actually mean to offend anyone. cruel was a bad choice of wording.

its just that i feel like i'm still a kid and see things from a kid's point of view. and as a kid, i love having someone around who is my blood, but isn't an authority figure. my parents, well i have to put up a certain front for them, pretend i'm happy and adjusted so that they are happy too. with my brother there's no bullshit. plus growing up, even though he was so much older than me, its so good to have someone around to play games with and stuff. you can't always have friends around.

pets are good though, a good pet can be almost as good as a sibling.

i just think (based on my upbringing) that i'd be a bit sad if i was the only person of my generation in the house. who would you talk to and bond with :confused: who is going to help you take care of your parents when they are old? who is going to take care of you when your parents aren't around anymore?

[Nivvie]

I just read that the growth of the world's population is decreasing.

But I have to say it again, babies are not the problem, we have less of them than we ever did, it's the aging population that needs to be addressed.

Right now in China one young person supports an average of four elderly people.

We've messed with survival of the fittest, and while it's nice to have decent medical care and all, the world cannot be run that way.

[ms.peachy]

What about those who aren't capable or caring?

Well then it becomes other people's business, doesn't it.

[abcdefz]

It's time to go all flying, spinning, whirling, death pit a la "Logan's Run".



Read "Welcome to the Monkey House." The story, not necessarily the whole book.