To support this argument, Mill highlights the severity of having children, given the dangers of overpopulation and the necessity of giving offspring the “ordinary chances of a desirable existence” (Mill 106). Moreover, he suggests laws which restrict marriage to those who have the means of supporting a family and by doing so, the State does not violate the greater population’s liberty. Mill declares, “Such laws are interferences of the State to prohibit a mischievous act—an act injurious to others, which ought to be subject of reprobation and social stigma, even when it is not deemed expedient to superadd legal punishment” (Mill 107). Here, he implies that the precautionary requirement he suggests is not an infringement on liberty because it
To support this argument, Mill highlights the severity of having children, given the dangers of overpopulation and the necessity of giving offspring the “ordinary chances of a desirable existence” (Mill 106). Moreover, he suggests laws which restrict marriage to those who have the means of supporting a family and by doing so, the State does not violate the greater population’s liberty. Mill declares, “Such laws are interferences of the State to prohibit a mischievous act—an act injurious to others, which ought to be subject of reprobation and social stigma, even when it is not deemed expedient to superadd legal punishment” (Mill 107). Here, he implies that the precautionary requirement he suggests is not an infringement on liberty because it