Two children should be limit, says green guru

reply to post by dalan.


Genocide is the systematic extermination of a genetic lineage, cultural heritage, or other cohesive or identifiable group. Random people choosing to only create a specific number of spawn before using whatever means they can find to stop glutting the planet is not "genocide."

If you must, call it mass-murder, although that really only applies to one entity (be it the state or an individual) doing all the killing. The term you're probably looking for is "a marked uptick in the number of babies being slaughtered" although, once again, we run into a problem because syntactically, a baby is a fetus until it's born, but since the syntax probably doesn't matter to you we'll just agree to disagree on that point.

Originally posted by nyk537

Two children should be limit, says green guru

women.timesonline.co.uk

COUPLES who have more than two children are being “irresponsible” by creating an unbearable burden on the environment, the government’s green adviser has warned.

Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the government’s Sustainable Development Commission, says curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming. He says political leaders and green campaigners should stop dodging the issue of environmental harm caused by an expanding population.

A report by the commission, to be published next month, will say that governments must reduce population growth through better family planning.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Environmentalism is all about controlling other people, while the Al Gore's of the world live in mansions and fly corporate jets while telling us how to live.

Does anyone else see this? Isn't it irresponsible for Jonathan Porritt to have any kids? Because us dumb white folk are trying to be responsible, the 3rd world is taking over England, America, and other western countries who allow the foreigners to come and breed like rabbits. How about if we just limit the two rule to THEM. It takes, what? 3 to replace yourselves? Not everyone lives to replace themselves. I want to help make up for a few of those.

As harsh as it may sound to let government regulate how many children one is allowed to have - there's no way around the fact that the planet IS overpopulated.

Not 'cus of the bogus global warming BS, but because resources and living space are NOT infinite. Look at India and China. Do we really want that? I dont think government should enforce people to have abortions etc. But people need realize that it's a proper mindset to keep families small.

It disgusts me when people who are poor and dumb just keep poppin' out babies, going at their 10th kid when they can barely provide for the first. Don't tell me they're SO poor or SO dumb that they can't afford/know about contraception.

It's one thing in third world countries where people HAVE to have big families, to work the families cropfields etc. Or simply to take care of the elders later on, since their governments doesn't provide any social care as pensions etc.

But there is simply no excuse for breeding like rats or rabbits in a western nation. It's also not fair to the kids - bringing more of them into the world than you can provide for. Why the hell don't poor and/or dumb people learn?! You think they would've figured it out at the first, second, or even THIRD kid - but no. They HAVE to have like, ten kids - and where do you think they will all end up?

Red China, here we come. This agenda was being pushed hard all week here in the USA. The convenient timing of the story about the woman who had octuplets fit right in. This woman delivered eight babies having six already I believe. She’s a single mother on the gov dole. Bill O’reilly was screaming about how she must have gov supervision right now! And the left wing radio pundits were integrating that story with the idea of limiting people to two children. It will probably start with a tax benefit/penalty, but eventually they’ll just come and take your ’extra’ children and murder them like they do in China.

Someone wrote about 4 million persons on this planet. That is wrong! The true number is almost twice as much! And the population of the Earth is doubling in about 26 years!

As the saying goes: "The children of to-day are the unemployed of to-morrow"…

Or one could say: "… the starving of to-morrow, … the war victims of to-morrow …"

It is really inunderstandable why not two children, or better one child, should be enough for normal people! And why adoption couldn't be an option. There are masses of orphans in the world ...

Who doesn’t want to see the problem here is naïve …

So what do we want to do about it? It is obvious that something HAS to be done, before it is too late!

But for people it is like the cancer patient who kills the physician because the treatment hurts and then has to die from the disease.

reply to post by dalan.


i agree.. there a bucn of tossrs the whole global warming for example is because of astrological effects caused by nibiru.. even the bible proves whats happening now days. and what if a woman falls pregnant with triplets? are they guna say oh sorry u have to kill that third baby? get stuffed idiot heads!

So here we go ladies and gentlemen, now they are going to tell us that our children, and we ourselves, are destroying the earth simply by being alive! I'd like to take a moment here to take a look back at a key statement from above... curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming Apparently, global warming is serious enough that we need to start killing more unborn children. These people make me sick.

YOU people make me sick. People that dont understand overpopulation will be.. no IS the doom of everyone are the real sicko. But thx to the Balance, the government know that problem of overpopulation and is using some drastic solutions to reduce population. No thats a bad comment? I m not sure. Someone told me one day "human is his own destruction", hell yes. Irresponsible ******* should be banned.

It works great in China right?

NWO here we come. Limit the population to make it easier to control.

Step 1: Stop our sexual freedom and rights to have children of our own free will.

It doesn't have to be like in China if people are sensible and responsible. Only irresponsible people have unprotected sex, so that sexual freedom isn't the issue, either. Therefore people can decide to have only 1-2 children. Why more?

And it isn't a matter of control if people would be clever enough, but of self-protection against a catastrophe that with time grows increasingly unavoidable.

all i have to say on this topic is that i dont believe humans are destroying the planet. yeah, we use resources quite constantly without regard, but that isnt necessarily our fault, but the fault of profit and how every corporation connected to resources has a raging boner for it.
but i look around at the world every day and question if i would ever bring a child into this.
it seems automatic.
everybody does it. its getting boring.
graduate. get job. get married. have kids.
yawn
maybe we SHOULD cut back.

# the fed, simple as that.

I can do what I want in a liberal democracy.

oops! I have 2 x's 4 children! I am so sorry Mother Earth.

reply to post by mosey


And we do consume all the unnecessary junk made for profit by corporations.
Doesn't that make us accomplices?

If we would have the responsibility to consume only what we really need, the world would be better.

reply to post by Gorman91


... even go out and kill someone?

reply to post by tenhearttkc


I'm sure that Mother Earth will forgive you.
It is the sum of all the very many individual cases that burdens her, not really each single individual case.

Originally posted by memyself
reply to post by Gorman91

 

... even go out and kill someone?

If they are a threat yes.

I have no problem.

Fact is that Government can keep out of my pants. I have a blade in my hands gladly ready to cut the old hands of Uncle Sam.

Originally posted by memyself


If we would have the responsibility to consume only what we really need, the world would be better.

Why? Why shouldn't I be allowed to feast?

If the world can't handle it, then maybe it was in error in allowing me to evolve and thus must pay the consequences.

[edit on 8-2-2009 by Gorman91]

[edit on 8-2-2009 by Gorman91]

double post error

[edit on 8-2-2009 by Gorman91]

reply to post by Gorman91


Intelligent and decent people usually have better ways to deal with threats then killing.

Allowed to feast? Certainly, within reasonable limits. But what you seem to not understand is that consumption of all unnecessary things is what keeps companies and industries destroying planet resources.

If there is no demand they won't do it.

For example: No demand for rare tropical wood and the rain forests are left to grow for the benefit of all humans, since trees turn carbon dioxide we cannot breath into oxygen we cam breath. Once a limit is reached, oxygen recycling drops and what then?

Or: all the useless plastic junk that is made to be thrown away sooner or later makes a heavy burden for nature, because:
- it pollutes when destroyed (or even more when thrown away without destroying),
- it consumes oil we need for better uses and speeds up the decline of resources,
- its manufacturing uses energies we should limit and use for better purposes,
- etc. etc.

It is like slowly cutting the branch you are sitting on...