Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dilbert San Diego
She’s a hypocrite because she will feel entitled someday to getting her social security and government benefits, or whatever the British equivalent is. And those benefits will be paid for by somebody else’s children.

Well said. These women are hypocrites in a number of ways.

(1) Each of them, living in the UK, have a "carbon footprint" far, far, far larger than a family of six in India, say. But neither of them would ever dream of consciously and intentionally living in poverty in order to live up to their ideals.

(2) They say that it is selfish to have children, but one of them claims to love other people's children. People do not love children when they consider children to be an immoral and selfish burden on the planet.

(3) If their goal is the reduction of the number of human beings on the planet, they are hypocrites for not committing suicide. That is obviously the most direct and foolproof method of reducing the human population they believe is poisoning the earth.

(4) Plenty of gung-ho environmentalists have children. So these women can give whatever rationalization they want for not having children - it is automatically hollow.

(5) When they are elderly, as you pointed out, they will have no children to look after them. As a result, they will become a responsibility of the state and therefore of other people's children. Not only that, but the state is the least efficient caregiver possible for the elderly - if these women and their spouses (can't really call them husbands) live as long as they are expected to, they will spend thirty years living off other people's taxes and labor.

18 posted on 11/23/2007 5:16:42 AM PST by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: wideawake

every once in a while i like to delve into the liberal mindset, if for only a few minutes. it really helps when trying to understand where they come from. but staying there too long could permanently damage you.
something tells me they won’t worry about the points you bring up, because in their mind their behavior is already offset by having reduced the carbon output of their unborn baby. for example, to that ecobroad, whatever she does is justified because her lifetime carbon output has been paid for by preventing another lifetime of carbon output.
i hope she realizes the error of her ways. when she does, i hope she doesn’t kill herself immediately, but starts some sort of eco-campaign to raise eco-awareness of the eco-danger of this eco-midset.


64 posted on 11/23/2007 10:57:08 AM PST by Disciplinemisanthropy (...and that, people, is what grinds my gears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson