Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom Confessions Mom Confessions

Adults should have a breeding limit

Posted by Anonymous   + Show Post

It is reported that the UK government-sponsored Sustainable Development Commission believes that curbing people’s right to reproduce should be central to the fight against global warming (1).  Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the commission and is also a patron of the Malthusian campaigning group the Optimum Population Trust, wants to turn population control into the key objective of environmental campaigning. So the totalitarian impulse towards controlling people’s reproductive lives has now received the blessing of sections of the British political elite.

Porritt’s estrangement from the newborn puts him in the company of a growing band of dreary misanthropists. King Herod’s fear of the newborn was confined to one baby. Today’s misanthropic fear-merchants have a wider target. One Australian professor of obstetric medicine, Barry Walters, believes that the very survival of the planet demands stringent controls on the number of children parents can have. This is what he has to say:

‘Anthropogenic greenhouse gases constitute the largest source of pollution, with by far the greatest contribution from humans in the developed world. Every newborn baby in Australia represents a potent source of greenhouse gas emissions for an average of 80 years, not simply by breathing, but by the profligate consumption of resources typical of our society. What then should we do as environmentally responsible medical practitioners? We should point out the consequences to all who fail to see them, including, if necessary, the ministers for health. Far from showering financial booty on new mothers and thereby rewarding greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour, a “Baby Levy” in the form of a carbon tax should apply, in line with the “polluter pays” principle.’ (2)

Throughout history, different cultures have celebrated birth as a unique moment signifying the joy of life. The reinterpretation of birth as a form of ‘greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour’ speaks to today’s degraded imagination, where carbon-reduction becomes the supreme moral imperative. Once every newborn baby is dehumanised in this way, represented as a professional polluter who is a ‘potent source of greenhouse gas emissions’, then it becomes increasingly difficult to feel anything other than apprehension about the growth of the human race.

Posted by Anonymous on Nov. 17, 2013 at 3:57 AM
Replies (131-134):
Anonymous
by Anonymous 17 on Nov. 17, 2013 at 7:30 PM
Quoting PestPatti:

Quoting Anonymous:
Quoting PestPatti:

Quoting Anonymous:
Quoting PestPatti:

Quoting Anonymous:
Quoting PestPatti:

Quoting Anonymous:
Quoting BEXi:HEIL HITLER



Don't be silly.

 Whats silly he wanted to control the population too.  The only difference was his was about the ideal German. 




Why can't we discuss these things without someone pulling a hitler? There are many ways to curb the population without killing anyone in a gas chamber, or through abuse!

 Hitler did other things besides Gas the Jews to control .. 




Well duh.

 Control is control no matter how you spin it.  Whether you limit how many kids you can have, or you kill people because their not the the perfect ideal specimen.    




Education, Better access to birth control and more equality is a great way to curb the population without taking away anyone's rights, but of course you and that other person assumed all of us were talking about hurting people.
That's why nothing will change, because people just decide what others are talking about without listening!

 Oh stfu. 




Lol!! Did I push a button? Maybe you will use your listening ears from now on instead of ASSuming what people are talking about.
Anonymous
by Anonymous 18 on Nov. 17, 2013 at 7:41 PM
It was tough to be logical. I worked up a mental sweat over that. ;)
Quoting Anonymous:

Quoting Anonymous:


Quoting Anonymous:
Quoting PestPatti:

Quoting Anonymous:
Quoting BEXi:HEIL HITLER



Don't be silly.

 Whats silly he wanted to control the population too.  The only difference was his was about the ideal German. 




Why can't we discuss these things without someone pulling a hitler? There are many ways to curb the population without killing anyone in a gas chamber, or through abuse!

Indeed. Birth control in the developing countries is a good start. The developed countries are finally slowing down, but an incentive would be offering tax breaks for less children and for waiting until an older age to have children instead of tax breaks for having more children. The largest problem I can see is the inverted population pyramid due to too many retirees and not enough of a working class to take care of them, though in time that will balance out. We cannot keep infinitely growing our population. Our resources won't take it. 





Thank you my anonymous friend for not jumping to conclusion and understanding that there are many ways to curb population without killing anyone!

msalice_21
by Platinum Member on Nov. 17, 2013 at 9:01 PM
I'm sure I have a pretty unpopular opinion. I firmly believe in natural selection. And we shouldn't be messing with it. Things like vaccination shots. I do believe we are overpopulating. Especially if you want to look at if we JUST depended on natural resources. If we didn't have the crap food we have now and the unnatural resources. If and when technology crashes.. people will of course use up all the crap we used to have then when it comes down to the nitty gritty of going green.. A lot of people will die. Why? Because the planet only has enough natural resources to support so many strong people.

I think the only reason why people live as long as they do now and because there are so many people is because of technology. We have modified food so there is now more then enough CRAP to eat. Places to live? Yeah you can live in a lot of places comfortably because of technology as well.

But this is just my 2 cents and I'm sure I'll get jumped for it lol.
Momof697
by on Nov. 17, 2013 at 9:10 PM

I agree with you jen2150 I am a farm owner and my husband and I live on almost 300 acres with our 5 kids. It is all ours no one else is moving on it uninvited.

Also global warming is now being changed to climate change because the temperature is actually getting colder. 

Everyone in the world can fit in a state smaller than New hampshire yes in the world. so it is not a population problem what a myth. 


Quoting jen2150:

If we have too many people please explain why I can live on 40 acres by myself. People that go hungry is more of a fact of government control. You really need to educate yourself. This is not the first time this idea has come up. People should always have the freedom to have as many kids as they can afford. I personally have two kids because it is what I can afford. Others are able to afford more. The important part is not how many kids you have but raising responsible adults that will benefit society.


Quoting GaleJ:

WE HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE AND NOT ENOUGH RESOURCES!!! It really is that simple and America uses resources and produces garbage completely out of proportion to our population. There can be reasonable and voluntary population control now or great suffering down the line, to deny that is to condemn the generations that follow us.




Quoting jen2150:

The planet is not over populated. Cities but not the planet. No one has a right to tell you how many kids you should have. The UK governmwnt is a highly intrusive government and their citizens have few rights. So glad my country's fore fathers saw them for what they were. Population control has nothing to do with resources. It is just another way of exerting control.




Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN