Canadian green: Hey, let’s fight climate change by limiting everyone in the world to one child
posted at 2:21 pm on December 11, 2009 by Allahpundit
Consider this “progress.” For whatever reason, possibly the vogue generated by the Goracle’s Nobel win, a bunch of green commentary in this vein popped onto our radar in mid- to late 2007. First came a think tank urging Brits to go green by having fewer children, even though their population’s already below replacement rate; then came that notorious “abort your way to a healthier planet” op-ed that kicked up a fuss in the ‘sphere; and finally a call for a tax on reproduction by an Aussie environmentalist, coincidentally on the very day that Gore delivered his Nobel speech. (A few months later, Ted Turner rounded off the meme by insisting that we might eventually resort to a tastier form of population control.)
Those ideas were all aimed at incentivizing childlessness, either through tax breaks or appeals to conscience, but ultimately left the choice of whether to have kids to the individual. Not this new one, though. It seems we’ve now reached the point of explicit, balls-out admiration for Chinese-style compulsory population control and all the social niceties it entails. And not for the first time lately, either. Remember this hyper-creepy Tom Friedman ode to the one-party ChiCom system in September?
It’s come to this:
Ironically, China, despite its dirty coal plants, is the world’s leader in terms of fashioning policy to combat environmental degradation, thanks to its one-child-only edict…
China has proven that birth restriction is smart policy. Its middle class grows, all its citizens have housing, health care, education and food, and the one out of five human beings who live there are not overpopulating the planet.
For those who balk at the notion that governments should control family sizes, just wait until the growing human population turns twice as much pastureland into desert as is now the case, or when the Amazon is gone, the elephants disappear for good and wars erupt over water, scarce resources and spatial needs.
China itself has already used this argument, in fact, to claim that it’s “doing its part” to fight global warming. Two points, then. First, does the author realize that, with a few exceptions (like the U.S.), it ain’t first-world countries that are driving the population boom? The birth rates in Europe and Japan are already helping to depopulate the planet; if she wants to make a dent in global crowding, talk to the third world. And second, what’s alarming about pieces like this isn’t that they’re close to being implemented politically but that the basic idea — fascism in the name of environmentalism — is respectable enough to warrant publication even in outlets like the Financial Post and the NYT. If you think the illuminati at Copenhagen are wagering an awful lot on the science being settled, imagine how heavy a bet idiots like this are willing to lay. Thank goodness there’s no one in power in America who’s ever entertained similar ideas.
Your reading here will not be complete until you see the punchline from Jim Geraghty. Exit question: Would compulsory population control also involve some sort of cap-and-trade system, with anomic urbanites like myself able to barter away our reproductive “quota” to couples who want more than one?
Update: No post on green scaremongering would be complete without the video that opened Copenhagen. Via MKH, don’t watch this with the lights off.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
From what I read, the Black Death led to great financial rebirth because it consolidated family property into fewer hands.
Think how wealthy the remaining Chinese would be if a plague eliminated 50 percent of their population. (and of course every other remaining person in the world.)
barnone on December 11, 2009 at 4:36 PM
I stumbled across some enviro wacko website that actually called upon people to commit suicide to save the planet. They had an email address and so I dropped them a note with two words: You first.
Terrye on December 11, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Can you imagine trying to pull this off in the Muslim world? Yeah right. jump right in there. tell them how many kids to have. I dare ya.
Terrye on December 11, 2009 at 4:40 PM
I see no one is willing to address my concern.
ICBMMan on December 11, 2009 at 4:41 PM
It was also good for the surviving laborers and tradesmen, who had a chance to stick it to the thuggish nobles by demanding higher pay. Until then the situation was disturbingly like some places in modern times: most people were seen as expendable by their ‘betters’…until suddenly they were in short supply.
Unfortunately, from what I can tell the improved situation didn’t last for very long.
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Let’s not make the typical liberal, teenage-like mistake of assessing a particular option/policy with some utopian ideal of how we’d like the world to be. Real people and real governments usually have to choose between evils.
In China’s case, there was a large, restless, rapidly growing, poorly educated population, most of whom were already living in poverty. There was (and is) considerable internal economic stress as well as ethnic tensions, and a history of regular internal conflict that goes back centuries.
The government decided that a (non-universal) one-child policy was the best way of reducing the risk of (yet another) civil-war over resource allocation or having communities grow uncontrolled to resemble the worst bits of squalor in Bangladesh.
The ‘suffering’ is that vast numbers of people are being brought steadily out of poverty and the country has less anarchy and squalor than many of its neighbours. Imperfect, yes, but ‘foolishness’ seems rather harsh, given the actual results so far and the foreseeable alternatives.
Most Chinese people seem to agree.
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Nice … of course they won’t, they consider themselves to be “enlightened” and therefore invaluable to the human race.
darwin on December 11, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Thanks for the summary. Do you think the situation could have improved without the policy if China had followed a course other than communism?
darwin on December 11, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Comedy writers are being made redundant.
Vashta.Nerada on December 11, 2009 at 5:15 PM
China has millions upon millions of men who will not be able to marry, due to the one child policy. Once they figure it out, revolution of some sort is inevitable. Brilliant plan.
Vashta.Nerada on December 11, 2009 at 5:18 PM
In Muslim Pakistan, as I understand it, the lack of birth control is due to ignorance about methods, not Islam. Pakistan women, as everywhere, would prefer not to have more children than they can feed and there have been attempts to reduce family sizes by educating people about contraception. The UN commented on the issue at least as far back as 1998.
I looked to see what your concern was but, I regret to inform you, I couldn’t actually understand what you were referring to.
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 5:21 PM
One wonders if this wasn’t planned for…millions of young men who want to get laid, a society in which you follow orders from your superiors or else, and you’ve got all the ingredients you need for a war.
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 5:22 PM
I would be in prison for my six kids if I lived in this world of Lib-Nazi control!
gina4 on December 11, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Yup, as the movie title says “It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World “.
D84 on December 11, 2009 at 5:36 PM
John Holdren already pushed for this:
http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
Of course, he wanted forced abortions, mass sterilizations by poisoning drinking water, and genocide of “undesirables” based on “global cooling.” The villains’ ends stay the same, only their words change.
CPL 310 on December 11, 2009 at 5:44 PM
You go first
CWforFreedom on December 11, 2009 at 5:53 PM
There are problems, yes. But are those problems bigger than the ones that would have existed with uncontrolled population growth?
China is a huge and diverse place traditionally beset by strife in the same way that Europe is a huge and diverse place traditionally beset by strife. As a result China has traditionally had a lot of inherent weakness and internal fracture points. Less than 100 years ago those weaknesses were so significant that a vast country like China was smacked-around rather successfully by a twiddly little country like Japan. The memories of that, and similar humiliations served by the French, Portuguese, British and others, are a strong motivation for attaining and maintaining national coherence.
Communism in China seems to have managed to keep the country together and that highly imperfect enforced ‘peace’ has allowed the Chinese people to start addressing underlying internal problems, participate more fully in industry, education and technology and so strengthen themselves against internal and external conflict. Without communism perhaps the population size would have been controlled even more severely by outbreaks of civil war and the attendant slaughter and starvation as crops were destroyed or neglected.
It could be argued that a strong central government was necessary for the transformation to even begin and will remain necessary to sustain it; if not communism then what? I don’t know. I’m not even sure how to describe the present Chinese government except how it describes itself, namely: “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” which I think roughly translates to “we’re doing our own thing so shut-up and don’t interfere”. Personally I think the idea of a western-style democracy in China is too fanciful … the method barely works in the far more homogeneous countries where it is most strongly promoted. After-all, look at the state of government in the UK and USA and the incompetent, arrogant people who hold the top jobs! Democracy in the EU? That’s a bad joke. A western-style democracy in China would possibly cause the country to tear itself apart again.
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 5:56 PM
the reality is that while islam does not forbid birth control it often discourages it and emphasizes the need to procreate.
The views can very among the sects .
CWforFreedom on December 11, 2009 at 6:02 PM
In that case the sects beneath Islamic banners are a little less strict on the matter than a similar sized group of sects that gather under Catholic banners: i.e.
We could possibly find examples of both Islamic and Catholic communities have bred themselves into poverty by procreating beyond what their society could support. contemporary Pakistan and Bangladesh come to mind for Islamic examples … not sure about Catholic examples … maybe contemporary cities in Brazil, or Ireland a couple of centuries back?
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 6:18 PM
I didn’t go back to all the posts, so apologize if this is redundant, but we effed ourselves over from the 60s through the 90s.
America determined, and I still see the trend, that it is PC to have only 2 kids. I fell for this piffle, and felt it was my responsibility. Now, I almost wish we had reproduced like rabbits…after all, the go’bment is going to be our safety net.
The Muslims, Hispanics and almost every other group have focused on GROWING their population…
We fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Chewy the Lab on December 11, 2009 at 6:22 PM
The “incompetent, arrogant people who hold the top jobs” are there because we failed. The people installed them and it’s our job to get them out … one way or another.
Democracy only works if the people are vigilant, and it looks like we’ve been sleeping on the job.
darwin on December 11, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Somebody alert the illegal aliens~they’re popping them out like a pez dispenser….
HornetSting on December 11, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Nonsense. What we fell for was the idea that government subsidizing procreation seventeen ways from Sunday with our tax dollars was somehow beneficial to society.
Now we have a public ‘education’ system that is an expensive joke, staggering welfare costs all around, and a most of an entire ethnic group “dependable on the government for every conceivable thing” as Booker T. Washington put it.
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 6:31 PM
There is no population problem.
darwin on December 11, 2009 at 6:35 PM
The funny thing is in 50 years we’d end up with a population so heavily skewed towards the elderly social security and medicare and health insurance wouldn’t just collapse our whole society would.
jhffmn on December 11, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Plus, we’re already killing millions of kids every year … future workers.
darwin on December 11, 2009 at 6:42 PM
I agree quite a lot, but there are also some inherent weaknesses:
(1) Fully 50% of the electorate are of below average intelligence and an even higher percentage are inadequately informed. A simple one-person-one-vote democracy is predisposed to become a tyranny of the least able.
(2) The system effectively operates by minority vote. People agitate for change and all those who don’t vote are assumed to have voted in favour when, in fact, those who don’t vote are probably perfectly happy with things as they are and should therefore be counted as a no vote.
Therefore I do agree therefore that conservatives need to be far more proactive. Freedom is not free.
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 6:52 PM
I hope all leftists take this to heart and sterilize themselves. Then it is probably too gruesome to hope they get some incurable venereal disease that spreads only among the left very quickly… but it is in the back, maybe middle of my mind.
petunia on December 11, 2009 at 6:54 PM
As St Paul warned us – the real battle is between us and the forces of evil -the powers and principalities.
Amazing, destroy God’s human creation and save the snail darter, hug a tree, or some cute puppy. A pro-death president, hedonism, pornography, greed and envy….No wonder we’re heading into the tank.
Don L on December 11, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Unintended consequences entangle so many good intentions! I guess it could have been a good thing, if controls were placed on who was procreating … Without those controls the group of the most irresponsible, most needy and least productive people just keeps increasing; sooner or later something has to give.
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 6:57 PM
I ignored them. I have six children, well five biological children and one adopted. And now there are five little grandchildren helping keep the conservative way.
Zero population was the AGW of the 1960-70s. What is old is new again.
petunia on December 11, 2009 at 6:57 PM
I might point out that by definition half of the population is below average…
petunia on December 11, 2009 at 7:00 PM
I agree the more the merrier!
But at least the simpleton leftists think there is a problem and self limit their reproduction. That is a good thing.
And they think evolution is not in favor of conservatives!
Survival of the fittest is in our favor.
petunia on December 11, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Exactly … hence this is an inherent problem for a western-style democracy that depends for its success upon having more than 50% of the population make better than average choices more than 50% of the time. By definition!
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 7:07 PM
I apologize on behalf of Canadians everywhere ! Sometimes I feel almost ashamed to admit I am one!
cableguy615 on December 11, 2009 at 7:08 PM
We still luv ya!
Hey, when Obama destroys our health care system can we come up there?
darwin on December 11, 2009 at 7:10 PM
You may just as well. Maybe PM Stephen Harper will be taking notes on what not to do to a country’s economy .
cableguy615 on December 11, 2009 at 7:17 PM
Argue with me that this country was ever, ever told to increase–NOT decrease–it’s population.
The number of Muslims is growing. The number of Christians are shrinking…the Catholic Hispanics may be our only hope, but unfortunately they have been encouraged to limit their family size as well.
The thought that the “we are overpopulating the planet” meme was a ruse to limit our influence never occured to me until recently.
Yup, brand me a “right wing nutcase.” Scratch that, I’m a “Complete rightwing squirrel.”
I’m happy to accept either label. I’m a whole lot more scared about where the country is going than I am what others think of me.
To my Catholic friends who have had REAL problems with the Churchs’ stance on birth control…tag, you’re it!
I’m NOT Catholic, but it is pretty apparent that we, as Christians have been used. Y’all remember from Sunday school that admonition, “Be fruitful and multiply?”
Well, guess what, we haven’t.
Instead of listening to what the Bible told us, we listened to what the government told us. This was, “Limit your family size, if you must reproduce, do the green thing and only replace yourselves.”
GOTCHA! LOL you Christians! SARC! Getcherdangprayerrugsout, because we’re going to all be facing Mecca in, 5-4-3-2-1
WTH: Why not have buckets ‘o Babies if the government is going to cover their healthcare, education, and provide them with a job (according to their ability as determined by said gob’ment).
Also, if I–as their parent–get money just for reproducing, why wouldn’t I want to continue to do so?
Consider: Oh, whoops (sound of skid marks on pavement), I’m pregnant! I’m 22 years old and it’s my fourth child.
I have no income and live in a 2-room rat-infested apartment. I go down to the Department of HOPENCHANGE and file for an additional some-hundreds of dollars increase in my “benefits.”
Shazam! I’m told if I have a TAXPAYER FUNDED ABORTION, my benefits would go up by (X) factor. (It is afterall cheaper to subsidize one person, than two). [Oh, but that death panel thingy...just a giant joke! The gob'ment can tell me that I'll be better off to kill my baby, but there "ain't no death panels, Miss Scarlett!"]
Three months later, I have a boatload of bills to pay, I’m really struggling. A lightbulb goes off…If I get pregnant…
Please, oh please tell me I’m wrong about this!
Chewy the Lab on December 11, 2009 at 7:22 PM
Just like with the EPA on carbon dioxide, they always ask nicely at first, then bring out the iron knuckles when things don’t go their way. Too bad they can’t use these tactics on real enemies.
Greenhelmet on December 11, 2009 at 7:39 PM
Yeah, I’m sure the women who are pulled from their homes while 9 months pregnant, and held down while their children are murdered are really glad they live in such a “progressive” society.
Same for the women whose children are snatched away at birth.
Horray for progress.
Vera on December 11, 2009 at 7:46 PM
That video is fascist propaganda. Reminds me of the Nazi movies made against the Jews. Sickening that this is what the AGW crowd is pushing on the world. Will we wake up, stand up – and fight it?
Related – the EPA has ruled that what all living creatures (non-plants) exhale is a POLLUTANT. How long before there is a forced “cleansing of the population” to ensure “lower carbon emissions” by the “greatest” polluters – people? Kinda what China is doing to itself with the forced-abortion one-child policy being pushed by Canada. A Statist’s dream come true….
I wish I could wake up from THIS nightmare, like the girl in the video.
DINORight on December 11, 2009 at 7:53 PM
You quote one part of scripture, an injunction given in obvious picture language to only the first humans, but skip so many other parts that are clearly applicable to everyone. Christians were never going to inherit the earth and live peacefully for eternity.
The end has already been scheduled and will come at its appointed time. All nations will rise against Israel and the war between the hosts of heaven and hell will be waged to its culmination. There will be plagues, pestilence, earthquakes and what sounds like it will be a massive meteor strike. Fire will consume the earth. Billions of people will die.
The good news is that climate change, anthropogenic or otherwise, is not listed among the terrible afflictions that will befall the planet.
Then the heavens will be rolled up, the earth will wear out, and both will be replaced.
It is going to be very messy but Christians are called to persevere in faith and good works and loving their enemies, right until the cataclysmic end or until God calls them home.
YiZhangZhe on December 11, 2009 at 8:01 PM
There is a great book that you can read explaining all that and more: Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. Very well written, documented, and thorough. This overpopulation meme is VERY old; Progressives have been at this for over a century, in one form or another.
Will this beast ever die?
DINORight on December 11, 2009 at 8:02 PM
“The nature of an ideology is not determined by majority vote—but by logic… The logic of environmentalism leads to a society without technology… even if various environmentalists would deny this.”
- Ayn Rand, 1971
Sharr on December 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM
I’m all for every Canadian family having only one child.
Red State State of Mind on December 11, 2009 at 8:11 PM
Actually I don’t know any liberal Canadians… that’s odd cause I know a lot of Canadians. But I’m from the west and so are the Canadians I know… except Rod, he’s from Toronto, but he’s conservative. But then again he chooses to live in AZ.
petunia on December 11, 2009 at 8:20 PM
It is possible climate change might account for some of the upheaval… And I remember we were all sure the fire at the end would be Russia nuking us…
Sometimes I think Christ can’t come soon enough for me. Beautiful bright millennial day.
petunia on December 11, 2009 at 8:24 PM
I was trained as a demgrapher and therfore know what is happening in the world in terms of population and birth rate trends. While commentary here and elsewhere has rightly focused on the author’s mindset, there has been virtually none concerning her portrayal of the alleged problem.
Suffice it to say that the article is woefully misinformed. The world birthrate is rapidly declining towards replacement levels and most of the affluent world is concerned about present or incipient population declines creating labor and social security solvency problems. Ironically, the proposed solution here would accentuate these problems. In the poorer countries, the admittedly real problems of excessive population growth are abatting rapidly without the heavy fascistic hand of the environmentalists. Let’s keep it that way!
ptolemy on December 11, 2009 at 8:24 PM
I just saw the author of this piece on the BOR show with Laura Ingraham substituting. Diane Francis came across as a ditsy writer grabbing a PR opportunity. Laura ripped her to shreds.
d1carter on December 11, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Zeig Heil Diane Francis.
Hard Right on December 11, 2009 at 8:32 PM
The new Green is the killing off of those damn White people.
GunRunner on December 11, 2009 at 8:33 PM
At least half of the people out there don’t really care too much about having children anyway…to them it’s a mere consequence of unprotected sex. When it comes to overpopulation and poverty these types are mostly the problem.
Try controlling their loins-good luck with that.
How does one fine those on a country’s state welfare or live out in the sticks, or in the slums and have no real income and are pretty much living anonymously to begin with, thus the authorities don’t keep tabs on them and are only vaguely aware they even exist?
Merely another Leftist dig at middle and upper classes…who, BTW, tend to have far fewer children than the ignorant and the impoverished anyway.
Dr. ZhivBlago on December 11, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Tell this to my sister with 5 kids and my brother with 6.
powerpro on December 11, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Nailhead. It isn’t people like you or me that should be getting the most attention for birth control…
You might be able to address the problem by requiring monthly BC shots, administered by a qualified medical person, a no-arguments-allowed condition for receiving welfare. For men as well as women once the white-coat crowd finally gets the formula ironed out, which shouldn’t be terribly far in the future.
Unfortunately there’s two big barriers: the bleeding-heart idiots who’ll jump to the ‘defense’ of the ghetto dwellers, and the little fact that they can vote. (IMO, we really need to update our ideas of who can vote and/or become a citizen)
The Dems would easily rally them to action with plenty of TV/radio/Internet propaganda. With the rabble they’d rile up, there wouldn’t even be a need to resort to voter fraud. You’d never be able to break that kind of bought-and-paid-for voting bloc unless something horrible happened that wiped out enough of the welfare crowd in one go. Needless to say the chances of THAT happening are rather slim.
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Waaaah. My children won’t be able to see butterflies.
Sorry dear, you won’t be permitted to have “children” – we’ve instituted a one child policy. It will save the butterflies though, so cheer up.
Buy Danish on December 11, 2009 at 8:50 PM
Your jacket is now dry.
unclesmrgol on December 11, 2009 at 9:03 PM
A good friend of mine, no dummy he (self-made millionare), subscribes to this idea that the world is horrendously overpopulated.
I can’t, for the life of me, figure it out.
I tried explaining to him that nearly all the Western nations are well below replacement level of births, and that in Europe, the traditional native demographics are being replaced by Muslims.
My summation was that if we, in the Western world, do not start breeding again, our world as we know it will be replaced by those who are breeding.
This, of course, segued into my indictment against the Muslim religion, and the type of world it creates (not one I want to live in) under sharia law.
…He was decidedly not convinced.
…..I am at a loss to understand why otherwise intelligent people cannot grasp what is right in front of their faces. Demographic numbers do not lie.
Hawkins1701 on December 11, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Liberals should stop breeding. Problem solved.
Geochelone on December 11, 2009 at 9:31 PM
Maybe your friend is taking into account all people-groups instead of just focusing on the birthrates of Western nations?
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 9:31 PM
Having compared the population pyramids of China and India, I think the Indians may eventually dominate Asia through their youth and energy, while the Chinese seem likely to go into a decline as the “baby boomers” among them, already middle-aged, begin to lose their energy and health. Among the BRIC nations, I think I reasonably foresee good things for Brazil and India, and bad things for Russia and China, because of these nations’ respective demographic features.
Kralizec on December 11, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Doesn’t make the premise, or the proposed solutions, any less wrong for the former, and morally repugnant for the latter.
Feel free to support the creation of an arbitrary metric for what constitutes “too many” people.
I will then wholeheartedly invite you to set an example in alleviating the “problem.”
Hawkins1701 on December 11, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Anyone who registers or votes Democrat should have to live in a grass hut, ride a bike to work, get sterilized, and give most of their money away. Yeah, right! Fat chance they ever do any of their own ideas.
gina4 on December 11, 2009 at 9:52 PM
And thus does the wingnut hit upon a truth, in the manner of a stopped clock. Almost ALL the levels of how many = “too many” are devoid of any science in their calculations – or what they do include is neither verifiable or unbiased.
Much like government spending, an ever-growing population is bound to hit a ‘wall’ sooner or later. The ‘wall’ could either be a sudden natural disaster (such as a plague or unusual climate conditions), a sudden man-made disaster (such as a large-scale war) or any number of slower-developing problems. Say for instance that we take a totally utilitarian view to the environment for the sake of living space…wonderful news for the housing industry (for a while) but not so nice to wake up one morning and discover all that remains of America’s forests is city parks and photos.
The problem boils down to what metrics are used to determine the “too much” level and how they are used when doing the numbers. Simply put, I have yet to see a report that shows all the math done to get from theory to final product, the methods used therein, unbiased and knowledgeable sources quoted to provide evidence, or even a more than a sliver of common sense throughout the whole thing. It’s all come down to the brainless pro-natalists who have forgotten that the biblical flood is over and humanity is far from in danger of extinction…and the foolish ‘greens’ who display almost no logic in anything remotely scientific, much less on the subject of population.
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 10:15 PM
heh
I have two children and working on having two more. Guess I am a climate criminal now.
But my kids will exist and theirs…not so much. Now that is the ultimate final laugh.
iconoclast on December 11, 2009 at 10:34 PM
My thoughts exactly!
TN Mom on December 11, 2009 at 10:51 PM
This is all Octomom’s fault….
TN Mom on December 11, 2009 at 10:52 PM
The liberal agenda will eventually result in violence against non-believers.
Ironic how they claim to be pacifists.
scotash on December 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
You probably meant that as sarcasm, but let me tell you right now that broodsow stirred up quite a hornet’s nest in certain circles. That and the fact Mrs.Duggar, AKA The Amazing Clown Car Uterus, just recently had another kid.
Dark-Star on December 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM
I don’t think we fundamentally disagree. Perhaps you misunderstood my original point (or not).
Essentially, we’re f-k-d!
We had better get get in the faces of our reps and tell them who should be calling the shots.
I’m flippin tired of them giving us the proverbial finger!
Chewy the Lab on December 11, 2009 at 11:10 PM
I live in Canada,and I’m glad,me and the wife had three
children!
The Greens are becoming a Cult!!
canopfor on December 12, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Get out while the gettin’ is good.
t.ferg on December 12, 2009 at 12:45 AM
That is the problem with large comment forums. The original post gets lost. OK, let me repeat it.
Well, I was wondering if anybody else knew about the Copenhagen summit’s sponsors. Some of them are very well known, such as Coca-Cola, Choice Hotels, and even fairly conservative companies such as The Wall Street Journal and Clear Channel.
My main concern is with Clear Channel, though having WSJ as a sponsor of this idiocy also baffles the mind. Clear Channel has a $400 million contract with Rush Limbaugh, who vehemently opposes the concept of man-made global climate change…yet, they are investing time and money into Copenhagen. What is going on here?
I tried to email Rush about this, but my email was returned with “fatal errors”. I don’t know if Rush knows about this situation and is complicit with it, or if he doesn’t know about it, but it doesn’t make any sense. It concerns me, because at the very least, this situation makes Rush and other conservatives who oppose AGW look silly, and worse, it makes them look hypocritical, or dare I say it, conspiratorial.
Has anybody else seen this? Doesn’t this appear rather peculiar?
ICBMMan on December 12, 2009 at 12:48 AM
What these environuts are rarely explicit about is their belief that the Earth has an innate value separate from humans. It doesn’t. The whole concept of “value” depends upon conscious minds to appreciate it, i.e. humans. Without us, it’s just a lump of molecules.
Sharke on December 12, 2009 at 1:17 AM
ICBMMan
Perhaps you have forgotten that these people are in business to make money, not to push a political agenda. Sponsoring Limbaugh and Copenhagen both makes money for them.
Buford Gooch on December 12, 2009 at 1:42 AM
“…Francis has two children of her own.”
***
NewsBusters — The Canadian Financial Post: ‘The Whole World Needs to Adopt China’s One-Child Policy’
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/carolyn-plocher/2009/12/11/canadian-financial-post-whole-world-needs-adopt-china-s-one-child-p
StewartIII on December 12, 2009 at 1:55 AM
Funny, I did not see the green shirts approve wars.
I mean, war was the oldest and most effective way to achieve population decrease.
Now that China is not so military-challenged anymore, and immigration is open to Chinese citizens to go and colonize the world, it is possible that the “one-child” policy to be scraped.
Rookie on December 12, 2009 at 3:01 AM
Yes it’s a strange old world on the left.
Monday: “Stop having so many kids! Giving birth is irresponsible! Population growth is destroying the planet!”
Tuesday: “Have as many kids as you like! The state will pay for them! We’ll clothe and feed them from the cradle to the grave! Don’t even worry about the father sticking around!”
Wednesday: “Is their any gas left in the SUV honey? I gotta get to the airport.”
Sharke on December 12, 2009 at 3:19 AM
Diane Francis has been, is, and always will be a f*cking idiot.
She doesn’t represent the left. She’s just a stupid gasbag. So put away your giant paint brushes.
Dave Rywall on December 12, 2009 at 8:19 AM
Well…I have no kids. Anyone want to buy a kiddie credit?
zoyclem on December 12, 2009 at 9:20 AM
Hmm…and if Canadians limit their growth, it will be easier for us in the U.S. to invade when we start needing more room.
Sarcasm aside, I seriously wonder about people who believe we should limit birthrates in countries already experiencing low reproductive numbers. Do they hate children? Themselves? Or humanity in general?
zoyclem on December 12, 2009 at 9:24 AM
It seems simple:
environmental wackos – produce no children because they like animals more than people
pro-abortion libs – abort their children because they don’t want to be “punished”
poor on welfare – mandatory bc since they “can’t support theirs”
Leaves plenty of population growth for the rest of us.
katiejane on December 12, 2009 at 9:51 AM
People need to see this.
Guardian on December 12, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Ah yes, the ever-popular “TEH MUZLIMS ARE OUTBREEDING US!!! MAKE MOAR BABIES!!!”
Dark-Star on December 12, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Dark-Star, it should concern you that a fundamentalist religious sect that hates women and is hell bent on destroying western civilization is far outbreeding the groups it hopes to overpower.
Don’t delude yourself into thinking that birth rate does not matter. It does.
Vera on December 12, 2009 at 10:29 AM
And where the hell did I say that the birth rate didn’t matter?
I’m just sick and tired of it being paraded about as a thinly-veiled excuse to berate westerners for not popping out enough babies!
Dark-Star on December 12, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Well, how do you suggest we react to this issue? Lean back and accept that all of Europe will have a majority Muslim population?
It doesn’t seem like much to ask people to have children at least at the rate of replacement.
The truth is that the Muslim population boom is by design, not accident. Right now we’re all putting our heads in the sand.
Vera on December 12, 2009 at 10:46 AM
This needs a thread
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUtzMBfDrpI&feature=player_embedded
The UN uses force to shut up a journalist who dared question a UN Official about Climategate.
CWforFreedom on December 12, 2009 at 10:46 AM
In Muslim Pakistan, as I understand it, the lack of birth control is due to ignorance about methods, not Islam
Well then some of what you “understand” is wrong. Europe now would be in full decline without their muslim immigrants. It is they that are holding the birthrate to anywhere in Europe. Of course that all really means that Europe as we now know it will quit existing very soon.
Noelie on December 12, 2009 at 11:07 AM
I’m just sick and tired of it being paraded about as a thinly-veiled excuse to berate westerners for not popping out enough babies!
Well that’s fine then. The end of all your culture as a goal is successful. “Congratulations”
Noelie on December 12, 2009 at 11:08 AM
If you were any more of a wingnut, you’d have silver skin and handles sprouting from your shoulders.
Dark-Star on December 12, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Liberals confuse me. (No surprise there, I know) On one hand, they want to control population by limiting the number of children born -this Canadian deal is not the first- yet on the other hand, they won’t let us kill ourselves off!
They want us to stop smoking, stop eating trans fats, stop drinking sweetened soda and stop drinking alcohol. We are supposed to wear a helmet, a condom, a seatbelt and we’re to give up our guns, all in the name of keeping us safer, which in turn is supposed to help us live longer.
Using their mindset, all of the above things would help thin out the population, yet they want us to live longer which will keep population numbers up! Make up your fricking mind!!!
Major Nuisance on December 12, 2009 at 12:54 PM
The short film is embarrassing. It has all the subtlety of a grasshopper slamming into a Peterbilt. On the other hand, I get amusement out of picturing the Copenhagen summiteers sitting in a dark room with tears welling up in their eyes as they blubber in self-congratulatory pity. Then the lights go up, they go out to the lobby at break time and, over coffee and donuts, lie to each other about how profoundly they have been touched. None of the spineless bureaucrats have the huevos to say what they really think. The stated critical consensus goes unchallenged. The combination of cowardice and smugness creates a feedback loop, and voila! Like a Wagner opera, this sophomoric drivel isn’t half as bad as it seems.
ObjectionSustained on December 12, 2009 at 1:25 PM
This will never happen here.
There is only a small population of people here who could possibly enforce this and at least half of them would involved in an armed uprising against any people or government sent to enforce it.
I know I would.
Who is going to enforce it, this douchebag woman and her pacifist, vegan buddies? Please.
NoDonkey on December 12, 2009 at 2:37 PM
Hmph. Indeed. I’m imagining every unwashed welfare leech from California to Texas to New York reacting to the news that benefits will only be calculated for a couple children.
In such a situation, the powers that couldn’t hope to maintain order as we know it in more than a relative handful of decently-sized cities. Not even with every police force in the nation on riot alert, the National Guard mobilized in all 50 states, and every last warm body with an M-16 were recalled from every last overseas post.
Dark-Star on December 12, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »