Causes and Consequences of Early Marriage
(3 votes)
Story / Multimedia / Text, Video
Here we are in a little village of Cameroon. Just like many other villages around the world, Early Marriage has shown the weakness of present day Democratic Governments.
"The Government can't solve all problems" - some people think. But, one can easily figure out that, Government is powerfully able to help the wealthy rig elections, render the majority voiceless, promote misery, maintain the wealthy in power, widen the gap between the rich and poor, promote corruption and give a blind eye to the basic necessities of Human Beings.
About Awafong
9 years 36 weeks ago
5 days 17 hours ago
Awafong
EspañolLatest comments
-
Hello! overnight viagra , discount...
-
Hello! cialis
-
unvytr payday loans 3969 payday...
-
Hello! http://r5free-viagra.com/#...
-
Deseamoa nos autoricen a emitir...
-
I followed a report on TV this...
Comments
What about the case where
What about the case where early marriage is not cultural like this one? I think it's preferable to help out those who do so out of frustration caused by abject povery and lack of education. Since people find themselves relegated to background as far as decision-making in society in concerned, they tend to make their own little world where they can feel active - as such comes the trap of early marriage and many children.
In some cultures, early
again
interesting, funny and pathetic.
Luv it.
Root causes of overpopulation - lack of power.
In my opinion, the idea that poverty is the reason for overpopulation is incorrect, just as the assumption that the eradication of poverty will eliminate the danger of an overpopulated world. Poverty has a lot to do with situations like these, where young people are encouraged (and forced) to 'settle down' and raise a family (usually an incredibly large family); but for me the cause runs deeper than that. Yes, providing a good education, and sex education, will dramatically improve the situation, but we need to look at the deeper issue, which is why do some societies try so desperately to put 'all their eggs in one basket' - ie: an incredibly large extended family?
The reason, it seems to me, is that they don't feel as though they are already part of a larger whole, and that they lack the awareness of how these kinds of behaviors invite very harsh consequences. It may be possible to feed and cloth everybody with the resources we currently have, but to use this as a reason to continue to have as many children as possible only invites an eventual collapse, and to make live only more challenging for everyone, including the children being brought into the world to hack out a piece for themselves, and their families.
The root cause of over-population is the same as the root causes of exploitation, resource-depletion, etc. It is not the poverty, but the lack of connection. People without any sense of belonging to a larger whole automatically fall back on their close family for support, their extended family, their tribe, their nation, and so on.
It is not lack of money that creates these situations, but a lack of power.
I believe that if these people were given more say over their government than they have now (and who can deny that they have an infinitesimally small say now) through vote sizing, then they would see that their behavior of encouraging everyone to have so many children is not a good plan. It's only when we feel insecure that we try to shore up our survival by promoting the idea of our children having children to support us as we grow old (our own children will busy, but not hopefully not the grandchildren). Developed countries don't have smaller families because they already own so much, they have smaller families because they feel responsible to the society as a whole not to put so many more citizens in it.
People feel they are left alone.
Steve said: "Developed countries don't have smaller families because they already own so much, they have smaller families because they feel responsible to the society as a whole not to put so many more citizens in it."
I like that. The sentiment I always get people voice out is that, "I need to have many children as possible because if some die along the way, I will still have many, who, when I get old and older (they refuse to accept that their life expectancy is quite low in developing nations), they will take care me/us.
They mean to say here that, a childless person will suffer a lot when he/she gets old.
My question then is, why should a man or woman who has served his nation, suffer when he/she grows old simply because he's childless? To me, this lies in the fact that we have a disorganised government in place which treats old people as useless people.
.A lot of people in the
.A lot of people in the developing countries are so glued to certain senseless traditional beliefs and forget that the world is evolving and so should be their mentality.Its no secret that a great number of people consider having many children as a symbol of 'wealth'.Others try to justify their actions by sticking to the Holy Bible,just to name a few.
To sort of just blame everything on the government will be wrong.However what the government should do is to embark on a massive sensitization campaign on the dangers of having too many children.Though we've been hearing about family planning for a long time now I think the efforts have been futile.
The government has been given the powers to ...
So you want us to believe that government does not know that it should sensitize her people.
So we should console ourselves by accepting that: "yes, government can't do everything, yes, the people be sensitise". And year-in, year-on, society keeps drowing. Saying people should take their responsibilities is like saying, people shouldn't count on government, and if people are not to count on government, then everyone will be government for himself, and if everyone is government for himself, then everyone will make his own laws, and if everyone is to make his own laws, then everyone will solve their own problems according to the way them deem necessary to them.
This is anarchy right? It's pushing society to a fast collapse. To prevent this from happening, humans beings have decided to put in place a government that should come out with unique way of dealing with societal problems that will be accepted the majority. If that, doesn't happen, it means government is not doing its job, and it may be because we have the wrong people in that government and if we have the wrong people in government, it means we used the wrong approach in selecting those that should be in government. So according to Vote Sizing, don't fix the people, fix the wrong approach that is used to put a place a government.
With this done, I think government should be able to create an enabling environment where people will feel bellonging to that society.
I have been to many places in Cameroon and cases like these are found in poor and jobless areas. One of my friends said to me "people living in these remote areas, spend most of their time discussing in a group after a little farm work. They don't have electricity to watch TV, Cinemas to go for relaxation or any busy place just like you find in cities. So their next distraction, is normally sex, and that's why you will find children of 12, 13 years old having children"
That to me is why you will find a young woman of 33 with 8 children and the first daughter of 13 already having her own first child.
The government has been given the powers (according to democracy) to cater for its people, so is a society is in abject misery like most of our societies, it means government isn't doing its job - government has failed.
What then makes a government to fail? - is what interests vote size advocates.
Post new comment