Stop at Two
by Carder
From BBC News, February 18:
This week, the Optimum Population Trust… launched its “Stop at Two” online pledge to encourage couples to limit their family’s size.
Parents who have more than two children are “irresponsible” for placing an intolerable burden on resources and increasing damage to eco-systems.
Curbing population growth through contraception must play a role in fighting global warming, argues Jonathon Porritt, the leading green campaigner.
Porritt is not advocating a compulsory limit but told the BBC couples should “connect up their concerns with the natural environment with their decisions as prospective parents… every additional human being is increasing the burden on this planet which is becoming increasingly intolerable.”
Contraception is not the only mechanism to implement Porritt’s final solution. Earlier this month he stressed “contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming.”
China Phase Two?…
A perusal of OPT’s blog finds study after study, important person after important person bemoaning the environmental holocaust we nasty humans have perpetuated.
And yet, we have noted Japan’s underpopulation dilemma. Russia has also made attempts to increase their fertility rates.
One British commenter had this brilliant summary in response to Porritt’s pontifications:
I have three children. I feel it is my duty to attempt to repopulate the World with intelligent individuals in an attempt to offset Mr Porritt’s stupidity. Idiocy-offsetting, kind of like carbon offsetting, just a little more immediate.
[Photo courtesy of building.co.uk]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“Parents who have more than two children are “irresponsible”.”
What a joke. I’ve said it many times; first evil is called good (as in abortion and contraception) and now good is being called evil.
I wonder where this “moral responsibility” to limit our families to only two children comes from… Is it a transcendent responsibility? If it isn’t something beyond us humans, then this is just some dudes subjective opinion which we can either take or leave. In other words, there is no moral responsibility if this is the case. If not, are they really willing to argue that there is some transcendent cause that requires us to limit family size? Good luck with that.
Looks like Porrit shouldn’t have had ANY! But I wouldn’t deny him his one or two.
It’s unfortunate when people think that limiting the amount of children anyone has will IMPROVE the children that grow into adults … this has not been proven – you are a good parent whether you have 1 or 16.
Counting the cost is a good idea – but not using abortion to count it after the conception.
UGH!
What had me spinning wasn’t the ridiculous online petition. It was the support this green goon had from the commenters. Since this originates from Britain, naturally the majority were Brit cheerleaders.
You’re on to something Bevy. Why stop at two? Go Chinese and keep it at one. In fact, let’s just stop reproduction altogether and then Porritt will NEVER have to worry about intolerable ecosystem injustice!
But *gasp* carder, if we stopped reproduction altogether, the abortion industry would go out of BUSINESS! I mean, they can’t allow *that*!!
Besides, we can use the extra people as medical experiments to “better life” for the rest of us, right? I mean, that’s what we attempt do with the stem cells, so why not? And if that fails, well…there’s always Soylent Green.
Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
Free choice.
If they believe in choice, where do they get off giving suggestions???
How intolerant for Porrit to shove his values off on others.
I do suspect that the health czar may say they will give health care for only 2 children and if you want more, that will be your expense.
Xppc,
I could completely see that happening as well. This is a very scary time for our poor country! At least, if you’re on the RIGHT side!!
Hmm, this is starting to sound a bit similar to The Giver. Two children…one boy, one girl and NO MORE!
Another “the world is overpopulated” person I see……
I remember reading a comment from Bobbi McCaughey when talking about the pressure to selectively reduce during her pregnancy of septuplets. Bobbi has been famously quoted as saying, “Well, come to our house, and tell me which four I shouldn’t have had!”
Bingo, Liz.
I have a better idea for a slogan for Jonathon Porritt.
“Subtract Yourself”
Do the green thing, set the example, dig a hole, jump in it and recycle yourself and ask a sympathetic associate to join you in the effort.
Or as an equally ecolgoically friendly thing, cast the next block of ice floating out to sea and take someone of the opposite sex with you.
Wow… just wow.
I have to say, two of those lines are very similar to things I say regularly when asked why seven children? “We’re trying to outbreed the idiots” and, this one was to my dad who was saying I didn’t NEED to have had so many children. “Okay, dad, which one of your grandchildren do you not want anymore?”
I just looked again at the graph that Doug posetd. The yellow section represents the ‘developing nations’ and the orange represents the ‘industrialized nations’.
If the industialized nations populations were growing any slower they would be going backwards. In some countries they are.
The same people who purport to know the ideal population for the planet earth are the same people who purport to know the ideal climate.
In the 1970’s these people warned us that the world would be out of fossile fuels in 20 years.
That was the ‘energy crisis’.
Then there was the Population Bomb warning of the dire consequences of allowing the Population Explosion.
Now we have the same chicken littles warning us about global warming.
One of these days they may actually be right.
yor bro ken
kbhvac,
“Even a paranoid can have enemies.” Safehouse, with Patrick Stewart
One of these days they may actually be right.
Ken, I really don’t know when most pro-lifers will acknolwedge global warming, but the day is coming.
The real energy crisis has yet to hit, and with global oil production being at or near the peak, we’ll see it reassert itself in the coming years.
Meanwhile, rock on.
Doug,
I acknowledge climate change. I even acknowlege that human activities contribute to the change. But I am skeptical that human activities have apprecialby accelerated the change or that a reduction in the same activities can reverse or even reduce the change.
The geological processes that produce oil have not ceased. There is plenty of oil. The technologies for discovering and recovering it continue to improve. Automobiles, which consume most of the end products from crude, continue to become more efficient.
If or when the price of crude becomes prohibitive then the marketplace will respond with economically viable alternatives.
Capitalism and entrepreneurship will never cease as long as demand exists.
The earth may be as ‘finite’ as the sun, but life will go on as long as the sun is shining.\
The biggest threat to our existence is not climate change or war or disease or pestilence.
The biggest and more immediate threat is the kind of crap that has just gone on in Washington D.C. this last two weeks.
Those human activities can have dire consequences because they do impact the market place and that impacts us all.
A wise man once explained to me the three golden rules of good management:
1. Do not touch a man’s wife.
2. Do not touch a mans’ children.
3. Do not touch a mans pocketbook
If you touch his pocketbook, you have touched the other two.
yor bro ken
“Contraception is not the only mechanism to implement Porritt’s final solution. Earlier this month he stressed “contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming.”
Ok, let’s abort you first Jonathan.
Two is a good number. Have more if you want them, but whats the sense?
Re: kbhvac at February 19, 2009 5:53 PM
Wow. So you’re suggesting sucide for those who disagree with you? Seriously man… thats harsh! Get a grip!
Ken, on the climate change – one easy thing to understand is that the carbon dixoide-absorbing ability of the earth’s ecosphere was in balance with the CO2 coming from natural processes, volcanoes, etc. Human activity has added enough to throw it out of balance, with readily observable effects.
…..
The geological processes that produce oil have not ceased.
You realize that’s a non-sequitur, right? The time frame of that takes it out of the realm of applicability, here.
…..
There is plenty of oil. The technologies for discovering and recovering it continue to improve. Automobiles, which consume most of the end products from crude, continue to become more efficient. If or when the price of crude becomes prohibitive then the marketplace will respond with economically viable alternatives.
Nevertheless, the trend in oil consumption remains up, even on a per-capita basis. The easy oil has been found, and the “elephant fields” have been pretty much identified and tapped. Yeah, there’s “plenty of oil” given that it will be rationed by price, as we saw last year.
…..
The biggest and more immediate threat is the kind of crap that has just gone on in Washington D.C. this last two weeks.
Nah, it’s business-as-usual for the federal gov’t, the same as it’s been through the past decades, Democrats and Republicans alike.
Ken, who’s talking about chicken littles, when we all know the reaction of everyone here when Obama got elected? :P
YLT… what’s the sense? Gee, I don’t know, maybe my other five precious children, all of whom are well-mannered, studious, bright and industrious, just like their oldest sister and brother… maybe one of them will even save the life of one of you someday (out of the four younger who are already born, 2 want to be nurses, 1 wants to be a doctor, and 1 a dentist. Add that to the two oldest, the ones I’m not judged for having, who want to be a veterinarian and a mathematician… hmmm… yup, what’s the sense? They obviously have nothing to contribute….
oops.. anonymous at 3:05 am was me.
YLT=
The suggestion of suicide comes from the fact that his man is telling everyone to limit human impact on Earth. If he really cared about it, he would kill himself.
I’m not saying he *should* kill himself, because I don’t think he should. However, I do wish he’d admit that he holds a completely inconsistant view of the world.
Here is my take on climate change:
1. This earth has been here for millions of years and has undergone thousands of transformations; who’s to say that this transformation we are seeing today is the ‘end of the world’?
2. While I’m sure humans contribute to this issue I am sure other animals, plant life, etc have their contributions as well.
3. We as humans have the power to change some things but not all, we are not the all powerful beings that some like to beleive we are. With that said, do what you feel is right to correct this issue but note that this just maybe a nautral form of progression for the planet.
Oh and I have three kids, I guess I’m one of those ‘irresponsible parents’! I would hope that America would NEVER put a limit on the number of children I produce but who knows, I guess anything is possible in the land of the ‘free’.
Here is something from the local newspaper here in Fairbanks
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2009/jan/19/al-gore-ice-sculpture-unveiled-fairbanks-invitatio/
YLT: “Two is a good number. Have more if you want them, but whats the sense?”
I dunno. Maybe I should go ask my youngest brother (youngest of three of us).
“Wow. So you’re suggesting sucide for those who disagree with you? Seriously man… thats harsh! Get a grip!”
Oh, no, YLT. Not “suicide.” This is called Voluntary Population Reduction to Alleviate Climate Change. We’ll see how serious Jonathon Porritt is about saaaaaaaaaving the world.