Posted on 12/13/2009 7:18:23 PM PST by markomalley
The Copenhagen climate summit has brought with it an outpouring of opinions on environmental issues. Among these is a disturbing return to the Malthusian position of seeing population control as the solution to the world's problems.
A planetary law imposing China's one-child policy on all nations is what is needed, according to an opinion article by Diane Francis, published Dec. 8 in the Canadian newspaper, the National Post.
Francis predicted this would reduce the current world population of 6.5 billion down to 3.43 billion by 2075. While more extreme than most, Francis is hardly alone in advocating population control.
Just prior to the Copenhagen summit, Britain's Optimum Population Trust launched a carbon offset scheme, reported the Guardian newspaper on Dec. 3.
As explained by John Vidal, the paper's environment editor, this allows rich consumers to offset their jet-set lifestyle by paying for contraception in poorer countries.
According to Vidal, the trust's calculations show that the 10 metric tons of carbon emitted by a return flight from London to Sydney could be offset by preventing the birth of one child in a country such as Kenya.
It seems neo-colonialism is still alive in the attitudes of some environmental activists who don't see any problem in urging developing nations to curb their population so that the carbon emissions of richer countries can be offset.
(Excerpt) Read more at zenit.org ...
No one should accept a liberal’s claim that the goal is to solve global warming.
The goals are revealed in their “solutions” (global government/socialism, population control, enslavement of the general population to the elites). These are and were the real agenda all along.
GW was just a “convenient lie” to further those goals.
That's it, thanks. BTW, Cass Sunstein is another one of these people... he really needs to go.
Just imagine all the carbon credits Planned Parenthood could collect!
/s
If what these people intend to do are not ‘Crimes against Humanity’, then the term is meaningless.
Ah, yes ... the old “overpopulation” argument rears it’s ugly head again.
Sheldon Richman, editor of The Freeman, a journal published by The Foundation for Economic Education, points out that you give each person 1,000 square feet, the world’s human population would easily fit inside Texas.
There needs to be an accounting.
We can be assured that the Good Lord WILL dispense justice, FOREVER, when these bastards shed their earthly coil...
But I’d sure like to see some earthly justice as well.
This issue has ALWAYS been about population control. You just had to keep digging to the core of the issue to find that. There are the same Malthusians who were screaming about the population boom a few years ago. They figure contracting the world economy will cause folks to not have more children, and they’d be there to ‘help’ with ready supplies of birth control, and access to abortion, especially for the ‘brown people’ of the third world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.