China's One Child Policy............

[schmoowithazing]

Is it morally wrong?????

China's radical answer to its population problem was introduced in 1979. Before the restriction to one child per family was brought in, China had tried various other schemes during the 20th century to try and limit its population growth.

Despite its effectiveness, the 'One Child' policy has attracted huge amounts of criticism from different quarters. Apart from groups who see it as a violation of the rights of the unborn child, there are also those who see it as a violation of the rights of the prospective parents.

In 1999 controversy erupted when an eight month pregnant Chinese national seeking sanctuary in Australia from her Government's 'One Child' policy was deported back to China. The consequences for the woman, on her return to China included the aborting of the pregnancy against her wishes.

Supporters point out that unsustainable population growth is perhaps the most serious environmental concern facing the planet and applaud China for being one country that has been prepared to tackle the problem seriously. They see it as hypocritical to sit in moral judgement of the Chinese, whilst bemoaning the ill effects of over-population in other countries.

Thoughts????

[BeBMan]

Re: China's One Child Policy............

Originally posted by schmoowithazing
Thoughts????

Just curious, have you some links about this topic? I´ve heard about it, but I don´t know much about this issue. I could of course search too, but perhaps you know some good sources anyway.

To your question about moral - it is a dilemma between individual concerns (having as much children as you want) and what´s good for the society (less children). I´m not sure what to answer, instinctively I´d say, the individual wishes for children a more important, then again I think on a certain scale overpopulation is too serious to let it simply go on...

It would be interesting to hear how exactly this "one child" policy is executed, what the public opinion in China about is etc...

[Thue]

Obviously there can't be a right to have as many children as you want of the ressources are limited. That seems completely clear cut to me, not even a dilemma. So I agree with China's policy in principle. The Chinese leadership is showing good leadership in thinking so long term.

Of course I do not agree with every act committed while enforcing the policy.

[Urban Ranger]

There is a great big problem with overpopulation. Either you go through the pains now for a better future, or have the next generation going to hell in the proverbial handbasket.

It would be a better idea to let education and affluence do their duty, but there simply isn't time for they to kick in.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Thue
Obviously there can't be a right to have as many children as you want of the ressources are limited. That seems completely clear cut to me, not even a dilemma. So I agree with China's policy in principle. The Chinese leadership is showing good leadership in thinking so long term.

Of course I do not agree with every act committed while enforcing the policy.

I agree with that. While I don't necassarily agree with their meathods, something must be done, and I don't blame them for their actions.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Thue
Obviously there can't be a right to have as many children as you want of the ressources are limited. That seems completely clear cut to me, not even a dilemma.

Well, I didn´t use the word "right" But however, I think the question how deep the state can go into private affairs is not so easy to answer.

[trolling on]Hey if its only about limited resources, why not simply kill some million Chinese? It can´t be wrong when the resources are limited![trolling off]

Not that I will discuss on that level, but is the relation between state/society and individuum only a matter of resources?

[Sava]

Personally, I think it is society's duty to decide who can have children or not. There are many people having children who shouldn't be. The other problem is that the people in the government now shouldn't be allowed to make those decisions.

Priorities:
1. Get the greedy, immoral Democratic and Republican parties out of the government.

2. Improve society at the root (education) by raising the next generation right.

I find it hilarious that in order to drive a car, you need to prove you are responsible enough. But in order to choose a leader, you don't need to prove anything. Voting and having children should have some sort of a responsibility test. Unfortunately, that won't happen because there are too many obstacles in the form of stupid people.

[mindseye]

I don't know if you will be sorry or happy to hear this, but China accomplishes most of its population control with tax incentives. The forced abortion and similar horror stories are not the norm.

I think the law is pretty universally supported. If you live here it is pretty clear on a daily basis that there are simply TOO MANY PEOPLE . From that single fact springs most of China's other major problems: air and water pollution, oversupply of labor, shrinking water supplies & desertification, traffic, deforestation, insufficient gov't safety net, etc, etc.

In fact, many wish it was more strictly enforced, as there are plenty of loopholes (ethnic minorities, farmers whose firstborn is a girl, marriages between two only children, etc), and lots of countryfolk simply fail to register their "extra" offspring. The latter is really a cruel and selfish practice, as these phantom children later face enormous problems finding jobs and housing since they do not officially exist - they don't have any official ID, etc.

[ranskaldan]

Sava: I agree, but you do realize that you are advocating a sort of neo-aristocracy that will never sell in, say, the USA, don't you?

[Jon Shafer]

It's a pity that things are what they are in China, but so far, no one else has offered another viable solution. Their current system has a very real potential to help the population problem, desipte some of the things that may occur. It's just a good thing that most other countries don't face a problem on the scale of China or India.

[Sava]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
Sava: I agree, but you do realize that you are advocating a sort of neo-aristocracy that will never sell in, say, the USA, don't you?

Yes I am. The difference is that this aristocracy will be inclusive rather than exclusive. If you want to be a member, you can be. There are prerequisites. Don't say never either. With the right marketing and advertisement campaign, you can sell a lighter to a man soaked in gasoline who lives in the middle of a dynamite factory.

[mindseye]

Not that I will discuss on that level, but is the relation between state/society and individuum only a matter of resources?

Depends on how scarce those resources are, and how their relative scarcity affects the quality of life for the whole. Difficulty in finding a parking place at the mall is probably not sufficient grounds for the gov't to get involved. However, problems on the scale China faces seem to me to a pretty clear-cut case for involvement.

[David Floyd]

I think the One Child Policy is morally repugnant, and certainly an extreme limitation on individual rights.

Of course, I'm not surprised it is universally supported in China, seeing as how the Chinese aren't generally known for having or even really wanting individual rights as opposed to societal control, if I may generalize.

[DanS]

I agree with DF. "Morally repugnant" is a good description. Have you all lost your way? Do the ends justifying the means nowadays?

[ranskaldan]

Morally repugnant?!

So letting everyone reproduce like rabbits and then undergo violently nasty famines on the scale of North Korea is therefore morally correct?

More importantly, can anyone offer an alternative to the One Child Policy that would also control the Chinese population?

Of course, I'm not surprised it is universally supported in China, seeing as how the Chinese aren't generally known for having or even really wanting individual rights as opposed to societal control, if I may generalize.

The same old debate over Liberty vs Stability. You can only pick one. We, living in the West, picked Liberty. Someone else, in a different society, picks Stability. Simple as that.