Nat geo actually says bugs. They are almost all protein and require very little space to grow. They believe very strongly that bugs are a viable way to sustain food for such a large population. Now i do value human life, and every other animal on this planet. The only thing i have come up with is to limit the amount of kids born. But how to do it in a way that is fair, i don't know. I have thought maybe limit people to 2 kids. After 2 kids no stabbing the 3rd in the head just make the father have a vasectomy witch is reversible incase need be. Im not proposing a kill off either. Im not Hitler here. I don't think anything done to control population growth will be received well. I do think people who are a lot smarter than i should figure some crap out and do it soon. There is nothing healthy instore for humans or this planet when our numbers get to high. This is always a hard subject for people to think about but one that we should have talked about a long time ago. I don't know what we should do i just know we need to do something. I wonder if the bible talks about over population? I have always thought that maybe the biblical apocalypse is more about bringing the population back down to sustainable numbers. Now all that said im pretty darn sure i don't want todays government in control of that either. God aside any ecosystem can be over populated and sickness is usually the first response given from nature to balance the system. So either we control our system or it will fight back and we will loose many lives when it does. @sewingcreations15 bob and i jumped track on your thread, sorry!Okay, that helps me understand a bit. So how do you suggest we manage (if I can use that term) human population? How do we reduce it. Who determines the criterion? What should those criteria be? How long will it take to implement and manage the required controls?
Not trying to put you on the spot, just trying to follow your logic through.
From our discussions in other posts I presume you know that I am a Christian. I am not saying my position is better than yours, just acknowledging that they are different. Not all positions can be correct but each person is entitled to (and I believe accountable for) there position in the end.
Part of being a Christian means, for me, that every person is created in the image of God (although there is no denying it is often very difficult to see). That means that I believe in the intrinsic value and sanctity of human life. I understand there are times when life must be taken for a variety of reasons but still see the value of each life.
I have never had to kill someone, although I did serve in the military, and to the best of the ability of someone who has never been in such a situation made the decision to do so if need be. Over the years I have talked with military personnel, mercenaries, police officers, felons and doctors who have taken the life of another. All were changed by the experience and not for the better.
Are you suggesting we kill a percentage of the population or have forced birth control? How do we bring an exploding population to some sustainable number, which( neither of us knows, but we can assume for discussion that such a number can be determined).
How did the writers of National Geographic propose solving it in their multipart series (which obviously I have not read)?
Maybe you haven't thought it through as most of us are prone to fail to do with a position. Maybe you have some thoughts. Just curious.
I prefer such conversations over a coffee or kitchen table because in a forum such as this it is easy to misunderstand or be misunderstood, but we don't have that luxury.