Reproductive Wrongs
...wherein I unleash undoubtedly my most controversial thoughts. And yes, I firmly stand by all of the following.
I will not apologize for my radical position, because our very survival as a species depends on taking drastic, even extreme measures that will most certainly never be taken—unless humanity is in crisis mode, at which point it'll be much too late. And that's assuming humanity is worthy of preservation (if it matters, I think not).
I challenge anyone to argue that the planet isn't overpopulated. With a global population swiftly approaching eight billion as of this writing, we no longer have the resources to support such numbers. Indeed, as measured on an annual basis, our resources are depleted sooner each year, and we're forced to borrow into the next year's allotment. At some point it will no longer be a crisis; it will be the end of civilization.
China's now-defunct mandate of limiting households to one child each may have seemed draconian, but in fact it was a step in the right direction; the real problem is that it didn't go far enough.
Many moons ago, when an in-law asked me during our wedding reception when we were planning to have children, I remarked that we had no plans to procreate (having had a vasectomy in my early twenties, I'd made certain this would remain the case). I was then accused of violating "god's will" by not "replacing myself." I had to laugh because, given the accelerating global population, it seems "god's will" is being embraced to absurd excess, because people are replacing themselves exponentially.
While I cannot imagine anything I might suggest would ever be taken seriously, I am nevertheless compelled to present my solution to the problem of overpopulation.
It has been said that parenting is the most important job of all. Yet how many parents take this seriously? We wouldn't have hundreds of thousands of children up for adoption if competent parenting was considered vital in society. I propose enacting strict laws on a global basis forbidding anyone from having a child without first applying for a license to do so (with no "religious exceptions" to these laws). Furthermore, in order to obtain said license, one must pass a battery of tests proving one's competence at child-rearing, as well as proving their emotional and financial stability necessary to see it through. If a child is born to anyone not having such a license, the child would be put up for adoption and the parents would face fines, jail time, and mandatory sterilization.
(One exception: pregnancy by rape. In which case the rapist would undergo mandatory castration, and the mother's right to an abortion vigorously protected.)
Obviously humans cannot be trusted with "reproductive rights"; our history provides more than ample proof of this. Unfortunately, as they stand now, such rights justify and even encourage our tendency to breed uncontrollably. Politicians of every stripe will ensure such rights are protected aggressively—and not for religious, moral or ideological reasons, but because increasing the population increases tax revenues. This is fact. Look it up.
Then there's the subject of fertility clinics. Despite living on a planet filled to overflowing with people, infertile numbskulls spend millions of dollars annually to find ways to cheat the hand they're dealt. Jesus, how selfish is that? Oh, you can't have a kid? Boo hoo hoo, I can't have a fucking yacht. You absolutely have to have kids but can't? Do the planet a favor and spend your money on adoption fees instead. In fact, I'd turn all fertility clinics into adoption agencies which, if all goes well, will no longer be needed after a few generations.
Most absurdly of all, protection of reproductive rights extends to everyone including those with acute physical and/or emotional ailments, ensuring that they can have as many offspring as they wish—thus adding to the population of disabled people, and thus adding to the financial burden society faces supporting the disabled. Oh, I know full well people will line up to stone me for this one, but just stop for a moment and think about it: what sense does it make to protect people's desire to reproduce when the likelihood of the offspring inheriting the parents' condition is virtually guaranteed?
See, I warned you. Oh, I can hear monitors everywhere being yelled at and see fists being raised and shaken. But, just so you know, I'm not alone in this thinking. Sadly, the like-minded are an extreme minority, so the human race is guaranteed to endure a slow, painful death by starvation—assuming our mortally wounded planet doesn't kill us first—because no one has the balls to tackle the problem effectively, and allow those who can't or won't reproduce responsibly to face a Darwinian end.
Bottom line: people must earn the right to reproduce, not be granted it freely.
Aren't you glad you read this?