1freeworld Groups - Print Page


    
      
        1freeworld Groups
        (http://www.1freeworld.net/cgi-bin/Yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        Archives >> Best & Closed Threads >> House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
        
(Message started by: kim on Nov 19^th, 2004, 11:08am)

Title: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 19^th, 2004, 11:08am

''Our resources can only afford a small population. The two- child policy is part of a strategy to save the nation because over population is killing us,'' he (Edcel Lagman ) told a radio interview.

In its 2000 census, the National Statistics Office counted 76.5 million Filipinos and placed the population growth rate at 2.36 percent or an annual increase of 1.8 million. Based on the growth rate, official estimates now place the population at 84 million, with four babies born per minute. The population will double in 29 years if the growth rate continues.

Poverty affects 38 percent of the population, or 26 million Filipinos in absolute numbers, who cannot make both ends meet. In the freshly issued United Nations Development Program report, the Philippines ranked 83rd among 177 countries in its human development index.

...Quoted from interpress news agency...

Big population = bigger money needed to accomodate everyone

Big population = greater chances of poverty

It is to no surprise that the Catholic Bishop Conference of the PHil. And Pro life Philippines opposed this bill....

Let us not go int a religion discusion but let us concentrate on what is better for the country...

Post away... ;D

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by Analyn on Nov 19^th, 2004, 11:56am

If one can afford to feed a dozen mouth and even afford to send them to school, why stopped them from having more children?.... Two-child policy is just a bill of somebody who can't think of things to do during his term :-X (He better try to look busy if he don't know what to do). The problem with some of our officials nowadays is that : just so they have done something during their term they will make some nonsense-bill :o ...They should have : spend time and money educating the uneducated so these uneducated will know the effect of making so many babies and give them jobs so they have something to do than "make babies" every day. Between unemployed and employed, the unemployed produce more babies and in fact some employed can't even produce one...that's because they have things to do than think or do the act of making babies...I think of this bill as an excuse of the government officials to be blamed of the ever-growing population. It is their way of covering up their ineffeciency in answering the unemployment problem.

If you work 8-5 or sometimes more do you think you have more time to make and make and make babies? With a net pay of less than a thousand pesos, do you think you will risk of making more babies? hmmm..just a thought ;D..... but really, one shouldn't be stopped from making babies if he/she can afford to have more than 2... and what our government official should do to these people overpopulating Philippines is to give them jobs and "population education" .... and not send Kimmy to teach them that..for she will rather give a "sex education" class...hehehe

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by mylane on Nov 19^th, 2004, 1:11pm

Since Kimmy said not to focus on the religious side of the issue. The best question is: Should the two-child policy be made compulsory?

Other legislators oppose the bill, they said that it will only promote abortion and also objected to Section 9 of the bill, which mandates the use of 50 percent of the internal revenue allotments of local government units to fund the purchase and distribution of artificial contraceptives.

In China, this is mandatory as a result it did encouraged abortion, especially once the couple knows that the fetus is a babygirl.

What they should do is educate people, especially those people from the far flung barrios about all the birth control methods.

The government should educate them and let them know all the possible options and give them the freedom of choice to decide how to plan their family.

And more importantly, contraceptives should be made available to those couples who don't have the resources to buy it themselves. I was shocked to find out that most of them don't even know how to use condoms, or some even think artifical contraceptives are harmful to their health.

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by scottman on Nov 20^th, 2004, 1:13am

The concept of education and providing jobs (I assume public service jobs so your are just increasing the tax burdon on those that work in the public sector) and handing out birth control are all nobel ideas, and should be persued.

The arguement, though, is that those that can afford to have 10 kids, wont. This is especially true in the western civilization. It is the poor and uneducated that tend to have the larger child count.

The problem with education is "how do you do it?". What I mean is, how do you educate the poor and uneducated since that tends to be the part of the population that these types of bills are addressing. (now don't shoot me here; I realize I am making a huge generalization and that not all poor people are uneducated) but that is the segment of the population you would have to figure out how to educate... what is that plan?

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by mylane on Nov 20^th, 2004, 7:20am

on 11/20/04 at 01:13:34, scottman wrote:

The problem with education is "how do you do it?".

Hi scott, welcome back. I miss you...lol ;D

I heard that there's a team of health workers currently going around disseminating information about surgical methods of family planning, specifically vasectomy. What we need to do is to educate them about the misconception that vasectomy diminishes one's manhood.

On the contrary, I guess Filipinos are just simply hard-headed. Family Planning has been included in the curriculum of high school and college students for years now and yet the total number of unwanted pregnancies are dominated by the students. So I think educating the youth about family planning is not really working in reality.

This could be the reason that prompts legislators to apply drastic means to solve the apparent ignorance and hard-headedness of Filipinos that will deal to the problem of population explosion that the basic education failed to solve.

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by okasantina on Nov 21^st, 2004, 5:58pm

Its not about Religion, its not about Education, its not about Poverty .... POPULATION is all about Implementation to be committed! Each and every one of us must commit a relentless drive in spite of the obstacles. @ child policy well..i agree to that....not becuz we have to but because we need to...Given this scenario, the govt faces an enormous chalenge in its drive to eradicate poverty and protect the vulnerable and disadvantages sectors in our society.To improve the quality of life of "us" Filipino should have main objective of its social and human developement initiatives.

Come to think of it..JAPAN has a big problem w regards w their population...know what is it?? NO CHILD! Their prob is they have no enough kids to sustain their future! Imagine that?? I noticed when i was there...90 percent of what i noticed riding on trains and buses are ages 20 above...gosh...what will gonna happen to them in the near future? im sharing this to let u know...that we, our problem is not that severe...it makes it difficult cuz we are livin on a 3rd world country...meaning...no enough education, no money to support, lack of labor, and corruption!

Mymy is right Filipinos are really stubborn and hard headed.. :-/ They release their depression by means of f**kin :-/ :-X (excuse the word)..and not thinkin of anything. Poor country. >:( :( :'(

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by thebeast on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 5:21am

This is interesting. All kinds of pros and cons here. I wouldnt think the catholic church would allow this. I think thats the whole problem. To much religion in your government. But then what do u say to someone who wants to have 3 or 4 kids. If you say you cant do that to them, they would be losing their freedom of choice. But if population is a problem something needs to be done because sounds like not enough resources to take care of population. I think its a good idea if positive results happen. But think about this if a 2 child limit is accepted whats next? Abortion. Thats the negative about trying to incorporate new ideas. A newer idea is always around the corner. See if you put a 2 child limit on people then y cant anyone have an abortion? Changes are necessary thats true, but can the government, religious aspect and people accept the changes is the big question.

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by mylane on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 5:53am

on 11/21/04 at 17:58:34, okasantina wrote:

Its not about Religion

Its about Religion. No matter how much we tried not to mention religion it would always be involved. Philippines being a predominantly Christian country, goes against the saying , "Be fruitful and multiply."

Filipinos' culture of being conservative significantly influences the public's aversion of the policy. Laziness to comply and lack of discipline also adds up to the growing population of the people.

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by okasantina on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 7:34am

on 11/22/04 at 05:21:35, thebeast wrote:

To much religion in your government.

*** YES! Too much religion sucks..but its a democratic country... even me can make my own religion :-/ ... There is no consistency of whose and how to follow...the problem is i think PI should be in a parliamentary gov't. ::) Wether u are a Catholic. a muslim, a protestant, a Christian..the thang is should follow the rules! there are lots of contraceptives for women not to engange in ABORTION.

Quote:

But then what do u say to someone who wants to have 3 or 4 kids. If you say you cant do that to them, they would be losing their freedom of choice.

*** As long as they can provide a good shelter. education, clothing, food to their kids why not? but if the head of the family has no work/job and the mother is doin laundry only? why need to have a dozen of kids??? >:( Its their choice?? i dont think so..its their choice why their life is miserable and not to blame the gov't.

Quote:

But if population is a problem something needs to be done because sounds like not enough resources to take care of population. I think its a good idea if positive results happen. But think about this if a 2 child limit is accepted whats next? Abortion.

*** There are lots of alternatives, we dont need to go on abortion just to solve a problem? LET THE PEOPLE BE AWARE....by informin them the pros and cons of having too much kids...not only to themselves but for the nation.

Quote:

Thats the negative about trying to incorporate new ideas. A newer idea is always around the corner. See if you put a 2 child limit on people then y cant anyone have an abortion? Changes are necessary thats true, but can the government, religious aspect and people accept the changes is the big question.

*** I am a Catholic and i believe in LIFE! but once LIFE is threatend to abandon..that...i disagree. Abortion is killing intentionally..willingly....but using some CONTRACEPTIVES.. is not against God's Law...its precautions to prevent the big population problem. Thats why GOD gave us mind to think, to reason out whats the best without doin any wrong...If the population breaks down badly...can the Religion aspect will be able to help the Gov't for the betterment of the nation?? NOOO!! not at all...Prayers yes! but how to stop? no they cant help..They only know is to argue and battle..and not being open and broad to what the problem really is.

Title: Re: House bill 13 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 8:16am

When i first heard the bill i said to myself, why not make it a law that you can't have more than 2 children if you cant afford to? But if you are rich and can afford to have dozens fo children then go ahead.... Majority of us Filipinos are poor... Meaning, that majority of us CANNOT afford to raise even a single child. And if you impliment a law saying that only the "can afford" people can have more than two children then that would start a very very.. and do i mean a very big problem... people will shout out... THATS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE POOR!!!.. One question.... Why do we always look at these kind of "proposals" negatively? YEs this is not the "only" solution to poverty in our country but it is a start. have you ever noticed that those people who can afford to raise children only have 1 or 2 and sometimes even none. While those people who cant afford to raise them have 4 or more children... What are their reasons why they have so many children? they say that "the bigger the better". But do they even think of what or how they will be able to raise their children? Having a child is a privilage and also a responsibility. Its all about responsibility. Be responsible to take contraceptives if you are sexually active so that you can prevent unwanted birth..... ok i could go on and on but let me comment on some of what you said... ;D

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 9:12am

Ana...
Yes this true that the unemployed have more children than the employed. Thats because they have more time to have irresponsible sex that leads to irresponsible child baring... thats leads to irresponsible child caring and raising.. etc...

Yes its true that the Gov. should provide more jobs to these people so that they can earn money.

And yes you can have more than 2 children even if the house bill 16 is passed.. its not like you will be killed or jailed if you did ;D ;)

House bill 16 (Sorry for the error.. its 16 n not 13 ;) ) or the REproductive health Acts of 2004 states that:

SEC. 13. Ideal Family Size. – In order to attain the desired population growth rate, the State shall encourage two (2) children as the ideal family size. Children from these families shall have preference in the grant of scholarships at the tertiary level.

Its not compulsary but if familes who will chose to have only 2 children will be in the front row of gov benifits ;)

Mymy...
Although contraceptives like pills are not deadly, they have certain side effects depending on the reaction of your body... Its just the same as taking almost any other medicines. IT contradics other types of medicines and some people have allergies in some of the pill's componets... Based on my own experience, (I am sexually active.... althoung not as of the moment ;D ;D... So i take contraceptive pills) i've tried atleast 5 types of pills before i found the right one that suits me... the first 4 kinds i used gave me daily head aches and i also gained weight... 10lbs in a short span of a month... I went thought all those because i wanted to find the right pill for me... I want to be responsible enough to use them ;).... Its just the same as walking for hours in mega mall ( FYI: SM megamall which is located in the philippines is the biggest single shopping center in the world) trying to find the right dress to wear at a party or the right shoes to show off to your friends... If you spend time, money and effor you should also spendan equal amout to your health and your well being.

SEC. 11. Mandatory Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education. –
Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to Fourth Year High School. Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education shall commence at the start of the school year immediately following one year effectivity of this Act. The Council shall formulate the Sexuality Education curriculum, which shall be common to both public and private schools, based on the following subjects and standards:
a. Reproductive health
b. Reproductive health care and services
c. Attitudes, beliefs and values on sexual development, sexual behavior and sexual
health
d. Proscription and hazards of abortion
e. Family planning and the number and spacing of children
f. Natural/traditional methods to prevent unwanted, unplanned and mistimed
pregnancy
g. Use of modern contraceptive devices
h. Abstinence before marriage
i. Prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other STIs/STDs
j. Safe sex

Sad to say that most schools... specially catholic schools do not like teaching their students about sex :-/

Contracepives are free in most health centers but DOH said that they will be no longer giving free contraceptive probably by next year because they say that there are no more supplies...

I dont belive that the poor people cant affort to buy comdon! you can but it for less that 5 pesos for god's sakes!!! They spend more than that for gambling and cigaretes!!!!!

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 9:27am

Under House bill 16 it is stated that:

"While the full range of family planning methods, techniques and devices shall made available to couples and adults of reproductive age, abortion shall remain to be penalized under the Revised Penal Code and relevant jurisprudence"

Abortion is another issue that should be discussed. IT may be true that this bill will promote abortion, but t could also be one of steps to in helping our country regain itself... For the past few months abortion has been the topic of all teh TV news and news papers. fetus found all over the Philipines dumped by their mothers... Abortion is a crime that has its just punishments too. THe rate of illegal abortion here in PI is rising because of poverty... they abort the child because they know they cant raise them... why not prevent the pregnancy rather that eliminating the fetus when you get pregnant?

I think people in general are stuborn and hard headed... its like when you tell them to do something they tend to get defensive and not do it at all... Those people yapping and yapping are mostly the ones who dont even do anythign good for themselves and others...

To sum it all up, we should start with ourself first... We cannot force other people to love us or respect us if we dont do it to ourselves first... Respect yourself and others... respect your body too....

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 22^nd, 2004, 9:29am

Lets be responsible.... be educated... be informed... be involved... and we can all be happy ;)

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by thebeast on Nov 23^rd, 2004, 4:20am

Yes having children is very expensive, but lets be realistic, nobody chooses to have a child based on their finances. Its either an expected thing or unexpected. I dont think money is the factor untill after the fact. I think im missunderstood. I dont like any religion or government telling me what I can or cant do. Its not that Im for a 2 child limit or against it or for abortion or against it. I believe everyone should have a choice. If PI did put a 2 child limit in place what is the government gonna do about the people who dont stick to it? The thing about it is this, its only gonna work if the people do it. And I dont think PI, America or any other democratic nation would go for it. When you start telling people you can do this or cant do that for any reason they start to cry about how its against their civil liberties. Thats what you call a liberal. Here in the states you can have as many children as you want. And I know that these people shouldnt be having this many children. Its also legal to get abortions. Why? Because of the liberals. Listen the fact is this. If you live in a democratic society this is the way it is sooner or later. Dont really matter if its right or wrong. Same with homosexuals. I dont get it. Everybody knows its wrong. Same with abortion. Thats what I mean. Wheather its right or wrong depends on who you are talking to. I understand this and accept it. That dont mean Im for it. Democracy is just a game of give and take. If you give a little here you got to give up something there. Thats the way it will always be because everyone is different.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 23^rd, 2004, 4:54am

10 facts about the Philipine population Condition

1. We are the 12th most populous country in the world. In 2002, the Philippine population reached 80 million. In 2007, it is expected to hit 90 million and, in 2012, 100 million. This year, 3.73 babies are born every minute in the country.

2. Poor Filipinos make up almost half, or 40 percent, of the population. They live on less than fifty pesos per day.

3. The number of malnourished children, pegged at 15.6 million, is on the rise.

4. Unemployment and underemployment increased by 13.9% and 19.6% respectively in 2000.

5. The 2.3% annual population growth diminishes the country’s economic gains, according to the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, while the Asian Development Bank there is “not
so much a positive dent on poverty alleviation unless the Philippines achieves a growth rate of seven to ten percent over the long term”. For the whole of 2004, NEDA expects a 4.9 to 5.8 percent growth.

6. We have the lowest GDP growth per capita in East and Southeast Asia at less than 1.5 percent.

7. More than one-third of our population, or 37 percent, is aged 14 and below, indicating a high level of dependency which strains resources at the household and national levels.

8. The Arroyo administration’s population policy is hinged on four principles: responsible parenthood, respect for life, birth spacing, and informed choice.

9. President Arroyo said the matter of overpopulation is not a priority of her government, but rather “the social and macroeconomic issues that strike at the root” of the problem.

10. The Arroyo government will not use public funds to promote or supply artificial birth control methods, and expects private initiative to be active in this area. It favors the promotion of
natural family planning methods.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by mylane on Nov 23^rd, 2004, 4:58am

on 11/22/04 at 09:12:13, kim wrote:

The Council shall formulate the Sexuality Education curriculum, which shall be common to both public and private schools, based on the following subjects and standards:
h. Abstinence before marriage

Abstinence? It is next to impossible Even some priests (no offense to all the devoted catholics) who take the vow of celibacy generate children behind the secrecy of the church walls.

How much more ordinary citizens who have no way of affording cheap entertainment but the pleasure of unabated sex? We can't teach morality to people who become blind to reason at the height of sexual orgasm.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 23^rd, 2004, 5:16am

on 11/23/04 at 04:20:06, thebeast wrote:

It has every thing to to with money joel. Ask anyone who has ever had a child and they will tell you that "you need money to raise a child" hecl you need money to raise yourself. Anybody who choses to have a child not taking finance into concideration is irresponsible. The unexpected part can be prevented by practicing "safe sex". YOu are responsible for eveything you do. You cant just bang all day and deposit your sperm everywhere n not thinking that "hey what i did might just give me a baby" You can have sex and not get preggy. You jsut have to be responsible and informed.

No matter where you live you there wll always be otehr people to tell you what to do. Thats what we call rules and regulations. ITs unfair to say that in the US you are not told what to do and you have the freedom to do what you want. You have street signs that tell you " no crossing" or areas that say "no parking" Even the simple stop light tells you what to do. IT tells you when to go or stop. That the way life goes. There has to be rules to follow in ordder to make the world a better place.

And last but not the least, one big misconcepcion about the bill... according to the existing law, the suggested number of children are only 4. Can i have more than 4? Yes you can but your government benifits will be limited if you chose to do so. Bill 16 just changed the nubmer from 4 to 2. ITs not like you will be shot to death or put in jail if you chose to have more than 2. The Philippine population is out of control and if we dont do something about it NOW then we are doomed.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 23^rd, 2004, 5:19am

mymy i think I should start a topic about sex education ;D.. wanna sign up? ;D ;D

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by thebeast on Nov 24^th, 2004, 5:43am

on 11/23/04 at 05:16:15, kim wrote:

Im saying when people do have children they are not thinking of finances. I just dont believe people have kids that way. If you wanna have kids you have kids that goes for both the rich and the poor. The money issue doesnt happen till after the kid is born. I just dont believe a normal man and women sit down and say to each other "Well we cant have kids because we dont make enough money." What they do say is "Lets have a kid." Money, finances, rich or poor never enters into the equation. Most people just dont do that regaurdless of thier income. If it does come up and the people who are poor discuss it, I bet 9 times out of 10, they convince each other they can get by. It makes since to me. Why should people who can afford to have kids have kids and people who cant afford kids not get to have them? Seems to me that says people with money get everything. This House bill 16 of Lagman might be a good idea, but its gonna take a hell of a lot more than that to turn an economy around. Population control is not the panecea for any economy thats low. I think most of PIs problems is just plain poor government. I would focus more on bringing money into the country. Tourism is a big winner for the coastal cities of Mexico. Gambling is another big winner. Government should invest time and money to educate the young, because todays young will be tomorrows leaders. I dont buy that people dont know about birth control. People know about it. Hell I knew about it and I had a kid. What do I buy? Well it feels better without a rubber, I will buy that. When you are young you are aware of these things. Isnt the Catholic church against any kind of birth control? If yes, theres the problem right there. The problem might just be that PI has a lot of good Catholics just doing what all good Catholics do.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by thebeast on Nov 24^th, 2004, 5:58am

on 11/23/04 at 05:16:15, kim wrote:

No matter where you live you there wll always be otehr people to tell you what to do. Thats what we call rules and regulations. ITs unfair to say that in the US you are not told what to do and you have the freedom to do what you want. You have street signs that tell you " no crossing" or areas that say "no parking" Even the simple stop light tells you what to do. IT tells you when to go or stop. That the way life goes. There has to be rules to follow in ordder to make the world a better place.

Kim, stopping at a stop sign is not the same as telling me I cant have 10 kids if thats what I wanted. I dont want to have 10 kids but if I did its nice to know I can do it without someone on my back about it or making me pay more income taxes or some kind of charge. When I say I dont like government or religion telling me what I can or cant do I mean by the way I choose to live my life and my personal business. I want to have choices about how to raise my family and live my life the way I choose to. To me having children is a personal thing. ;)

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Nov 25^th, 2004, 3:46am

As i have said, anyone who makes a baby without taking into concideration whether or not they can raise the kid or not is irresponsible. If you like in the streets and eat only left over food and you dont even have a decent bed to sleep in it is not fair that you even think of having a baby. Your homeless and t\dont have anything to eat and you get preggy where will you get the money to give the baby in your belly proper nourishment? pregnant women need vitamins.. lots of rest and low stree or else it will affect the health of the baby. When she is about to give birth where will she go? She'll give birth in a street alley? where will she get the clothes to wrap her baby with and the money to buy food and vitamins for her baby? and where the heck will she find the money to raise her kid? Is that responsible parenting? If you cant support a child then dont have one. I want to have a baby right now buti know that if i do i might not yet be able to support her. THats why i still dont have a kid and thats why i am taking pills.

The catholic church does not allow the use of artificial contraceptives like pills and condoms but they do promote rythm method and abstinence before marriage... Thats all i can comment on this coz if i comment further i might offend some devoted catholics ;).....

Joel having a child is a personal choice and responsibility. But sad to say most of the poor and uneducated people here in pi dont know their responsibilities. Families in teh slums have 5 or even more children... Ask a motehr with 5 children why she has so many children and the first thing she'll tell you is that i was suppose to have 8 but 3 died becasue of sickens or died during birth or was hit by a train... THen she'll say "a big family is happy" But look at all her childern and you'll see that they are malnourished and has lots of sickness... if she only had 1 child then she could have taken care of that single child better. You tell them their rights and responsibilities but they wont listen. Thats why you have to give them rules. Its like a stuborn child who doesnt listen.. They have to be reprimanded.

The bill is not the solution alone to solve the poverty problem in PI but it is a start.

There is a difference between you cant and you shouldn't... yes you can have 10 children if you want but you shouldn't have them if you cant feed them. Lagman said that you "can" have more than two children but the government "can" only support you if you have only 2.

ITs not fair to hae dozens of children and demand the government to help you raise your kids. Have 10 children if you want. FIne but raise them on your own. Dont ask anything from us. You did that and you must stand for it.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by Hernando on Dec 4^th, 2004, 8:54pm

wow kitty baby your on politics now, does it mean i need to be in this area too? :-*

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by killerabbit on Dec 5^th, 2004, 9:53pm

Oh no,it's a population explosion!

This is what one of my favorite authors Michael Crichton had to say about these fears:

For all my adult life,informed people have lived in continual anxiety about an exploding world population and the inevitable resulting mass starvation and enviromental degradation.
In the 1960's,experts like Paul Ehrlich spoke with conviction:"In the 1970's the world will undergo famines-hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death."Ehrlich argued for compulsory population control if voluntary methods failed.In the 1970's,The Club of Rome(a global think tank)predicted a world population of 14 billion in the year 2030,with no end in sight.
Instead,fertility rates fell steadily.By the end of the century,they were about half what they were in 1950,with the result that many now expect world population to peak at 9 billion or so and then to decline.(It's estimated to be about 6 billion today)
And mass starvation never occurred either.Instead,per capita food food production increased through the end of the century because of the "green revolution" resulting from increased agricultural effiency and better seeds.Grain production increased agricultural as much as 600% per acre,bringing unprecedented crop yields around the world.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by killerabbit on Dec 5^th, 2004, 10:03pm

Oh no,it's a population explosion!
continued

These changes were exemplified by the rise of India,which in the 1960's was widely acknowledged to be a symbol of the overpopulation disaster.Western children were chided to finish their food because of the starving children in India.By 2000,however,India had become a net exporter of grain,and Americans were worried about outsourced jobs to that nations's highly educated workforce.Almost no one concerned about population spoke of an explosion anymore.Instead,they discussed the new problems:an aging population and a declining population.

This is excerpts that I have taken from Parade magazine.It comes with our local Sunday newspaper.

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Dec 6^th, 2004, 2:49am

on 12/04/04 at 20:54:17, Hernando wrote:

wow kitty baby your on politics now, does it mean i need to be in this area too? :-*

that depends honey... if you want to say something about this topic then join me here on my bed.... ops.. i mean thread ;D

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Dec 6^th, 2004, 2:55am

wabby sweetie in every problem that is solved arises a new one. ITs a cycle. Most countries take population growth seriously. America, being 1st world country doesnt feel the effect of a large population because it still generates large a large income. But still, your government are doing the proper measures to prevent population explotion. Here in PI it is so much out of control. And when i say out of control i mean OUT OF CONTROL!!! :'( [smiley=bigcry.gif]... two child policy is not even compulsary. Its an option. But if it were my desicion i'd make it compulsary ;D... I'd make a great dictator ;D ;)

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by killerabbit on Dec 6^th, 2004, 3:52am

;DCan I be one of your consorts...err....staff members? ;D ;D

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Dec 6^th, 2004, 9:41am

wabby that depends... send me a resume and i;ll send you copy of my propaganda

Title: Re: House bill 16 of Lagman... Two Child policy
Post by kim on Mar 15^th, 2005, 5:06am

Lagmans has been on the hot seat lately because of this bill. Pro life activist say that this bill promotes abortion. THey also say that teachign grade 5 students sex eduaction is unthinkable. Any comments?