|Environmentalists & Population Control|
|Written by Ann McElhinney|
|Monday, 20 July 2009 17:00|
One of the more enduring but most appalling characteristics of environmentalists is their dislike of people. While they have immense time and compassion for furry animals and gnats and the double breasted whatever this concern does not seem to stretch to people.
Humans, according to environmentalists, are actually a problem. In fact they are the problem.
As Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace, but now one of its sharpest critics, says in Not Evil Just Wrong “[Environmentalists] don’t seem to realise that people are also part of the environment.”
When I was filming Mine Your Own Business we spoke to an environmentalist in Romania who opposed a Canadian company that wanted to open a gold mine in Transylvania.
We had a long and very friendly chat. He was college educated, wore a woolly jumper and sandals and had facial hair. He was what most women go for in a big way at college. Well into the conversation I said how great it was to be alive and how progress was allowing people to live longer and eliminating diseases that in the past wiped out enormous populations. Then he dropped the bombshell. Yes, all the progress was great he agreed but there was a downside it interfered with the “natural cull”.
Barack Obama’s choice of John Haldren for Science Czar I am sure has nothing to do with the fact that he has facial hair (which he has) but a whole lot to do with his ideology. So what does John Haldren believe in?
His book Ecoscience from 1977 gives a clear insight into the thinking of the man.
1. People who "contribute to social deterioration... can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility."
2. "Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."
3. "One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society."
4."A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. "
5. "The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births."
6. "If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection."
So for environmentalists it is essential we save the spectacled bear, the vaquita (I know!), the Eurasian lynx, the black spider monkey and of course who can forget the unfortunate bearded vulture. They always want to save a double titted something or other. But the humans? They don't need to be saved. On the contrary. Abort, cull or better yet let just them die a slow and painful death. Sounds absurd? Everyday in Uganda 370 children die from malaria. There is a simple and effective way to stop this Silent Slaughter. It would involve using DDT which environmentalists have made sure is banned. They continue campaigning to keep the ban in place. And the children keep dying. I think the death of 370 children every day is a tragedy that all compassionate and campaigning people should want to stop. However I can’t find the Ugandan child on any environmentalist endangered species list.
Share this page on your favorite Social Websites...