Developing Countries: Birth Control?

Well, it must be convenient for them to live in a more privileged society where he/she is morally secure in deciding to have children. I would like to disagree with that member as well. I understand the argument they are making, but the resolution they offered is tantamount to disfranchisement. I'm sure many of us have wondered why people's in the poorer parts of the globe seem to have inordinate amount of children. It seems that if a family limited themselves to one or two children, they would be more able to adequately care for the children they have, rather than adding more hungry mouths to feed.There are several factors for why this is. For starters, there is a lack of contraceptives in that region because contraceptives cost money. To mitigate the effect of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, perhaps we should be sending over free contraceptives. The second contributing factor is probably a lack of awareness. An increase in awareness would also help to mitigate these effects. Abstinence-before-marriage should also be taught as a virtue, not as something that is only for religious weirdos.But even though the variables I raised may be the case, it doesn't take away the fact that people are allowed to have children. What did this person suggest? That we model after China who forcibly limits its citizens to one child per familial unit?Anyway, that's my take on it.

---

"With derision the atheist points out that there can be no God because this world is so unfair. Without hesitation, I concur with him. Indeed, we live in an unfair world because of all sorts of social ills and perils. I must not contend with such a sentiment because it is factual-- we don't live in a fair world. Grace is unambiguous proof that we live in an unfair world. I received salvation when I deserved condemnation. Yes, indeed this world is unfair." -Andrew Jaramillo-

Capitalist enterprises need to stop sending jobs overseas for a few reasons. Yes, sending jobs overseas will cut down on costs because of cheap labor and does have temporal advantages. However, these companies aren't seeing the big picture. If you keep taking jobs away from Americans, the economy is going to take a nosedive without generating new jobs. Without jobs, people don't have the money to buy those products that they are making in sweatshops in third world nations. So they are essentially cinching their own noose, and ours.Secondly, there is a moral issue with the sweatshop mentality. It is unfair to pay people overseas disparaging wages, even if that is considered decent money in that country. Its not right to do that to those people. If you strengthen other countries economies, you stengthen the global market. Pay them what they are worth.Having said that, it takes two to tango. You can't place the blame squarely on Western capitalists as the sole beneficiary of blame. These nations 'allow' those companies to exploit their own people, because essentially they are ending up exploiting the companies who are exploiting the workers. The average worker is the one losing in the end, twice. I think just as much focus should be placed on these governments who exploit their own citizens for monetary gain.For instance, China has done a bang up job at allowing Western companies to exploit their citizens in order to exploit us. Its genius, really. And now that they've adopted a free trade market, the money is rolling in. However, since they are fiscal cheapskates, they aren't strenthening the average worker, they are strengthening its governmental infrastructure.The centroid of power has been shifting Western since the time of the rise of the whole Mesopotamian region, like Babylon and Persia. It went from Egypt to Greece, going to Rome, and to Paris and London, then to the US. It still continues to travel westward until the westward expansion finally ends up in the Far East. India and China are on their way to becoming economic powerhouses, which in turn will make them military powerhouses, and we are actually helping them to achieve that goal. If we continue down this path, we might as well just hand them the gun that is going to kill us.Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : edit to add

---

"With derision the atheist points out that there can be no God because this world is so unfair. Without hesitation, I concur with him. Indeed, we live in an unfair world because of all sorts of social ills and perils. I must not contend with such a sentiment because it is factual-- we don't live in a fair world. Grace is unambiguous proof that we live in an unfair world. I received salvation when I deserved condemnation. Yes, indeed this world is unfair." -Andrew Jaramillo-

The IMF doesn't make sanctions like the UN does. And this is all contingent upon an agreement. Pacts aren't forced on nations, they agree to them. So, again, its their government that needs to be looked at in this debacle. I don't know where you are going with this. Can you explain it to me? Nations are run by those in power when it should be run by the People, and for the People. Unfortunately, in many nations, it is those in power who have all the control. Really, I'm just objecting to you placing the blame squarely on successful companies, as if they are the sole proprietors of power. The governments of these nations are allowing the sweatshops, which, really, are actually better than the alternative for many people. I think the American people should be outraged at some of these companies that pander themselves for the almighty mammon, but we should be even more outraged at the nations that prostitute its own constituents. I agree. I mean, on the one hand, we are trying to open to China because it might improve relations and generate economic growth for both nations. On the other hand, if we are going to put our foot down about North Korea, Iran, and Syria, we shouldn't hypocritically turn aside from Chinese issues.

---

"With derision the atheist points out that there can be no God because this world is so unfair. Without hesitation, I concur with him. Indeed, we live in an unfair world because of all sorts of social ills and perils. I must not contend with such a sentiment because it is factual-- we don't live in a fair world. Grace is unambiguous proof that we live in an unfair world. I received salvation when I deserved condemnation. Yes, indeed this world is unfair." -Andrew Jaramillo-

That seems like a side issue while we are looking at the broader picture. Look no further than to the Middle East. China is actually moving away from this mindset more and more. And for the most part, some Middle Eastern nations are becoming more Westernized in this way, but they have a long way to go. You also have to remember that this has been apart of their culture for so long that these ways die hard-- especially when fanatical Islam is supplanting moderate Islam. Some of the women want it this way. You'd first have to convince them of a better way before you do the patriachically-minded males.

---

"With derision the atheist points out that there can be no God because this world is so unfair. Without hesitation, I concur with him. Indeed, we live in an unfair world because of all sorts of social ills and perils. I must not contend with such a sentiment because it is factual-- we don't live in a fair world. Grace is unambiguous proof that we live in an unfair world. I received salvation when I deserved condemnation. Yes, indeed this world is unfair." -Andrew Jaramillo-

They could do what the evil, tyrannical US did and cancel all the debt from Africa as a gesture of good faith. No, I don't see that happening any time soon for the sole reason that this money between nations is largely fictitious. What I mean is, every nation on earth, (with the sole exception of Monaco-- maybe one or two others) is in debt. Who owes who, and how much, kind of cancels itself out unless you are a nation that deals out a lot of monetary support. I'm sure we owe France, and France owes us, and we owe Israel, and Israel owes us.I do, however, have a theory on one of the main reasons why the US invaded Iraq. It has to do with the value of the US dollar. I'm not going to go into a huge discourse, but I'm surprised no leftist circles have caught wind of it. Ah, thanks for clarifying. Yes, but who knew they would bite the hand that feeds? I'm not. I agreed that these companies need to stop shipping their jobs overseas because they are hurting themselves, and by default, all of us, in the long run. Hence, why I made the sub-title, "It take TWO to tango." It means we shouldn't do business with nations that treat their own people so disparagingly, because what does it say about us that we turn a blind eye to it? If means we become isolationistic in the eyes of them, so be it.See, we have a real catch-22 situation in the US. We are constantly being harangued for "sticking our nose in the affairs of other nations." When we allow them to conduct their governments as they see fit, then we get them whining about how we left them high and dry. Seems that we can't win no matter what we do. So we might as well stand by our laurels and forget whether or not we're P.C. enough.

---

"With derision the atheist points out that there can be no God because this world is so unfair. Without hesitation, I concur with him. Indeed, we live in an unfair world because of all sorts of social ills and perils. I must not contend with such a sentiment because it is factual-- we don't live in a fair world. Grace is unambiguous proof that we live in an unfair world. I received salvation when I deserved condemnation. Yes, indeed this world is unfair." -Andrew Jaramillo-