Posted on 06/29/2011 8:21:07 AM PDT by Kaslin
For years, the Sierra Club and other environmentalist groups have warned us that too many babies will destroy the Earth.
"We are experiencing an accelerated obliteration of the planet's life-forms -- an estimated 8,760 species die off per year -- because, simply put," explained environmentalist Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, "there are too many people." (Well, not exactly that simple when one considers that millions of species had disappeared long before humans selfishly began drinking from plastic bottles.)
In one of his recent works of speculative fiction, The New York Times' Thomas Friedman asked: "How did we not panic when the evidence was so obvious that we'd crossed some growth/climate/natural resource/population redlines all at once?" Dunno. Maybe we value reality? Perhaps we believe in the ability of humans to adapt and to innovate. Perhaps we've learned that Malthusian Chicken Littles slinging stories about the impending end of water or oil or natural resources are proved wrong so often that we ignore them.
Though, admittedly, it's difficult to ignore the charismatic pseudoscience of Al Gore. "One of the things that we could do about it is to change the technologies, to put out less of this pollution, to stabilize the population, and one of the principal ways of doing that is to empower and educate girls and women," the former vice president explained at the Games for Change Festival. "You have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children (they) have, the spacing of the children."
No doubt capitalism appears terribly unstable to the autocratically inclined Gore, but nonetheless, in this country "fertility management" is not only already ubiquitously obtainable by girls and women but also obtainable by boys and men -- and for free at any Planned Parenthood and at many schools. There is also post-fertility management, or 1.3 million yearly abortions -- because no one should be punished with a baby.
Then again, perhaps educating and empowering girls should be the job of parents. After all, Gore has blessed the Earth with four of his own offspring. Does he believe the world would be better off without two of them? If not, why does he assume that an "empowered and educated" woman would reach the conclusion that having fewer children is a more logical and moral choice? (Many, including Bryan Caplan, author of the superb new book "Selfish Reasons To Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent Is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think," would probably make a strong counterargument.)
Gore hasn't embraced any nefarious brand of population control. But President Barack Obama's "science czar," John Holdren, co-authored (with Paul Ehrlich of "Population Bomb" notoriety) a book in the 1970s that toyed with the idea of compulsory sterilization and coerced abortions -- to "de-develop the United States." (Boy, the tea party is so radical!) Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, openly advocated for population control to weed out undesirables. You'll remember that in a New York Times interview, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she "thought that at the time Roe (v. Wade) was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."
Whatever did she mean?
If "too many" people are killing 8,760 species every year, isn't it an imperative to do something? What is holding us back? If unrealized human life is only going to sponge off the Earth and decimate our natural resources, don't we have a duty to limit population growth?
Forget that the populations of Brazil and India and a number of other nations continue to grow and life continues to improve. Forget that our own standard of living steadily increases while our population steadily grows. Forget the never-ending ingenuity and development of mankind -- especially anything that has to do with fossil fuels. For Gore, people are parasites, millions of little environmental disasters. And when a man embraces debunked 19th-century notions rather than empirical evidence, well, surely another Nobel Prize is in order.
Adding to it, and rid the world of themselves
er, put some good old kool-aid in those nasty old plastic bottles fer’um.
I can't believe Gore still has credibility - but who knows the minds of greenies who support the rubbish he spews. Plus the fact he is a Nobel Prize winner - whoopee - you can pitch that prize now - it's worthless.
No wonder that wet rag Tipper threw you out.
The AGW cult is a joke a home for disaffected white people tired of urban uplift schemes. Half the Democratic party base is comprised of people who do nothing nor contribute nothing more than votes, do their leaders want less voters? I think not, but if you ask one of these cultists about that they just clasp their hands over their ears and mumble about polar bears.
The Sierra Club was captured by board members who swallow the entire dogma of the Left, and they have voted not to support immigration restrictions.
They had a reasonable chance of protecting the environment of the United States, and they threw it away for a zero chance at saving the world
Here’s what it’s really about:
http://www.thefreepressonline.co.uk/news/1/2238.htm
http://article.wn.com/view/2011/01/27/Muslim_population_growth_outpaces_nonMuslims_study/
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2664153/posts
The Sierra Club has been a haven for wackos since the beginning.
Their founder John Muir was nuttier than a nest of cuckoos and extremely anti-industrial and anti-capitalist.
“How narrow we selfish conceited creatures are in our sympathies! How blind to the rights of all the rest of creation!”
— John Muir
“The gross heathenism of modern civilization has generally destroyed nature, and poetry, and all that is spiritual.”
-John Muir
Well, I guess it could’ve gone on more than one thread. But my point in posting those links was that the Left (Gore, Holdren, etc.) work hand in hand with radical Islam, (although they don’t fully understand whom they’re in bed with yet), and this whole sinister “population control” plot fits in with that. Because, in fact, they’re calling principally for population control/reduction of the western world - US in particular. And the population growth rate for all industrialized countries is already at a dangerous low. They have neither the desire nor the will to reduce the rampant (intentional) population explosion of Muslims that inhabit virtually all of the third-world countries.
So the whole “environmentalist” movement ties in with this - the push to reduce population, carbon footprints, greenhouse gases, nuclear dangers, etc. The thrust of this, led by BHO, is aimed principally at the U.S., not the bad-guy culprits - to cripple America financially, industrially, militarily and every other way possible while leaving our enemies alone (most of whom have NO regulatory standards or environmental conscience).
Thankfully, I’ve learned that this all works together, if you start looking at these trends and movements collectively rather than individually.
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.
