Child Limit Law

I'm going to first present my own case, then refute my opponent's. Again, best of luck and thank you! ------------------- 1) Child Limit Laws are inherently unjust It's not only unjust to deny a family or mother another child, but also immoral. In any situation where the government overrides the will of the people, you have, essentially, a dictatorship. But imposing will on anyone or anything is unjust because it doesn't provide the opportunities someone might set out for. 2) Child Limit Laws lead to higher abortion rates This is going to be my key argument. What happens if a mother becomes pregnant, but giving birth to that child would violate this Child Limit Law? Abortion. This causes severe detriment in two ways. First, it's again, opposing on the will of Americans. If, for example, I hold very close moral or even religious values that abortion is immoral, I would HAVE to infringe on my own values for the sake of the government. But even more, secondly, you would simply be disagreeing with the majority of Americans, and in a democracy, that is unjust. The majority rule still finds abortion in America wrong; you can never infringe on the will of a democracy or else you have dictatorship. 3) Child Limit Laws effectively solve nothing. What exactly are they stopping? My opponent brings up things like starvation, hunger, poverty, and "other negative things", which I will refute later. But this doesn't really stop anything. Like I'll bring up later, there are plenty of work arounds, like going to another country. Also, if the U. S. stops populating, other countries will bring up that role, so basically the "duty" per say will go to another country. 4) Child Limit Laws will collapse the American economy. If a mother really wants to have a child, she'll move out of the country. When a lot of mothers want to do this, you're effectively cutting your population severely. But what if a mother decides to violate the law anyways and stay in the country? She can't go to the supermarkets to buy food, because buying food for more than herself and whatever the child limit laws state looks suspicious. So now she has to feed her family without being under American capitalism; she's basically forced to use a sort of underground system, such as a "black market", in which NONE of that revenue would go to the American people or government. So you're effectively going to cut off the American economy. 5) Nothing is wrong with America's child population today. Let's say we suppose a two child limit. According to the U. S. Census, (. http://www.census.gov...), the average number of children per family is only 1.86 children under 18 per household. So this isn't even necessary, because Americans aren't overpopulating. -------- Now, onto the pro case. First, just one flaw in this debate topic. What exactly are we going to set this new limit to, if we determine that we should? I believe it'd be more educational to this debate to set it, such as China's 2 child limit. 1) The world is over-populating Basically, this argument is flawed in numerous ways. First, like I brought up previously in my case, world population isn't going to be limited to the USA. If one stops, others will take up the role and nothing ends up being stopped. But my opponent's claim of leading to starvation and poverty is completely false. Premises like these assume no one is being added to the work force to provide for them, but this isn't true because when these new children grow up, they become workers too. To provide for more people, you need more people to work, so the demand will rise in the exact same ratio as nowadays. Just within America, you don't have a large amount of poverty. But even so, I would argue that having more people to provide for those who are in poverty is a good thing; you can actually create less poverty. Even so, the fact is, America's population isn't growing at some uncontrolled rate; remember, in the negative realm, things are being kept the way they are. We're perfectly capable of managing all these people. 2)People are irresponsibly having children My opponent doesn't really elaborate or even back-up this claim; therefor, I don't have anything to argue so you must drop this argument on-face. It'd be unfair to the debate if he came back in his next speech and gave warrants to this. -------- Again, thank you for the debate, and I await your responses.