|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 4:31:57 PM
|
|
|
Fritzpw_Admin
Posts: 8033
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
Population Control in an Aging Society
Ken Connor - Center for a Just Society
Most would agree that conserving resources and minimizing adverse impacts on the environment make sense, but something has gone terribly awry within the Green Movement. Environmental extremists championing "population control" as a means of protecting Mother Earth show that they have little regard for the human species.
Some recent comments by prominent Green advocates suggest that one of the simplest and most effective ways to reduce the global carbon footprint is to reduce the population. As means to that end, they advocate aggressive birth control and abortion. Their argument is simple enough: fewer people put less strain on natural resources, use less energy, and generate less pollution. Wealthy countries, so the thinking goes, are particularly suited to implement this strategy because they have ready access to birth control and legalized abortion.
The "Extreme Green" are perfectly comfortable with encouraging members of the human species to destroy their young, but mortified that human beings would disturb an eagle's nest or a turtle's egg. Setting aside this moral confusion, there are significant social and economic implications of population control policies on societies already struggling to cope with a rapidly aging population.
Read the rest of Population Control in an Aging Society
This totally boggles me:
"The "Extreme Green" are perfectly comfortable with encouraging members of the human species to destroy their young, but mortified that human beings would disturb an eagle's nest or a turtle's egg."
So because I have 5 kids I should murder my unborn so as to limit my carbon footprint on the earth? That's not happening!
Romans says God turned them over to a depraved mind. Do you think this is what it was referring to?
_____________________________
Fred "Fritz" Alberti
Director of Social Media
fritz@salemwebnetwork.com
Read today's Bible verse from my favorite online Bible
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 4:55:48 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 242
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Fritzpw_Admin
This totally boggles me:
"The "Extreme Green" are perfectly comfortable with encouraging members of the human species to destroy their young
'The destruction of the young' is an overly dramatic way of phrasing an advocacy of birth control (and I doubt abortion is being promoted by any but the Extreme Extreme Green). In the end, this is what public debate is about; they have their view, and I don't see why they shouldn't feel 'comfortable' in sharing that view with others.
And to face facts, population growth cannot continue endlessly. The mathematics of compound growth will eventually bite mankind in the butt.
America's native population growth is already practically 0. As for the questions raised in the article about where we will get people to support our senior citizens, etc., the answer is the same as where we get them now, immigration.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 5:11:43 PM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
Every broad philosophy has its extremists. Putting forward "Extreme Green" as any kind of an accurate representation of environmentalism is like using individuals that have assaulted and killed abortion providers as representing the thought process of the average pro-life proponent.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 8:46:34 PM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3368
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: moon_mouse
Every broad philosophy has its extremists. Putting forward "Extreme Green" as any kind of an accurate representation of environmentalism is like using individuals that have assaulted and killed abortion providers as representing the thought process of the average pro-life proponent.
Thank you and AMEN.
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 9:24:35 PM
|
|
|
SonInMe1
Posts: 1890
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: my mom by God
Status: offline
|
Global warming isn't about science. Its political. Its power.
Population control is a myth because our planet can support many more people than is here now. If people starve its mainly because of politics, not resources.
I remember the doom and gloom of the seventies where we were all sure in twenty years at the rate of population growth we would be destroyed.
It did not happen. This is just another facet of liberal guilt and seeking power.
So, why make radical political changes for a scientific myth? Don't look at their emotional pleas. Look at who will be in power and who will make the money.
Global warming and all the scare tactics from the left? It all results in the same thing...bigger government control in every aspect of our lives.
_____________________________
You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
James 4:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 9:43:32 PM
|
|
|
solo_soprano23
Posts: 2083
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sideways
quote:
ORIGINAL: moon_mouse
Every broad philosophy has its extremists. Putting forward "Extreme Green" as any kind of an accurate representation of environmentalism is like using individuals that have assaulted and killed abortion providers as representing the thought process of the average pro-life proponent.
Thank you and AMEN.
I rarely see people, Christians and non-Christians alike, advocate abortion as population control, but I see people advocate birth control such as condoms and pills, but in a lot of countries those are not available (nothing is available).
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 9:58:53 PM
|
|
|
navyblueret
Posts: 1971
Joined: 11/29/2008
From: S/W Nebraska
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Fritzpw_Admin
This totally boggles me:
"The "Extreme Green" are perfectly comfortable with encouraging members of the human species to destroy their young
'The destruction of the young' is an overly dramatic way of phrasing an advocacy of birth control (and I doubt abortion is being promoted by any but the Extreme Extreme Green). In the end, this is what public debate is about; they have their view, and I don't see why they shouldn't feel 'comfortable' in sharing that view with others.
And to face facts, population growth cannot continue endlessly. The mathematics of compound growth will eventually bite mankind in the butt.
America's native population growth is already practically 0. As for the questions raised in the article about where we will get people to support our senior citizens, etc., the answer is the same as where we get them now, immigration.
essentialsaltes, Shalom.
I hope you do not mind me picking on you, but heh heh heh, I just have to. Please look at what you typed. Your words convey to me, at least, the message that you feel that mankind makes the rules of society. W R O N G ! Those rules are found in the Bible Book, and has no other source. I believe I understand what you were meaning, but made me search for a meaning other than what I believe you said.
Shrugging aside the loss of fetal life, coupled with the withdrawal of care from the elderly, puts the middle aged, and young adults in an extremely precarious position, no one following behind to take up the slack as people age, and the wisdom of the aged destroyed to save a buck.
We must remember that God has control, and man can only mess up that control, as we have been doing for centuries, and millennia. He will, I pray, and soon, speak a word and the whole world will finish turning upside-down, socially speaking, where Right has become Wrong, and Good has become Bad. What we need right now is a good old-fashioned Snatching away, to wake up some of the people, at least, to the fact that we are on a collision course with the Beast, and the end of this Era of the Church.
In Messiah, His Blessings, and Understanding of what is to come very soon now. Arley
_____________________________
In the name of 'THE' Mashiach, Man the wall, set the watch, sound the Shofar. Our redemption draws nigh.
Messiah, my Captain, and Helmsman.
(Joh 14:6 KJV) ... I am the way, the truth, and the life: ...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/4/2009 11:10:51 PM
|
|
|
KaptZ
Posts: 172
Joined: 10/28/2009
From: The swamps of Jersey
Status: online
|
I do think as time goes by population control will have to be discussed in earnest. It's inevitable. The world isn't getting any bigger.
Doesn't HAVE to mean more abortions, but birth control is certainly our friend.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 4:09:32 AM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
America's native population growth is already practically 0. As for the questions raised in the article about where we will get people to support our senior citizens, etc., the answer is the same as where we get them now, immigration.
So, it is unacceptable for the citizens of the USA to increase our growth rate above 0, but it is acceptable for other countries to because they provide us with a sustainable labor force. Sounds kind of jingoistic to me.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 12:03:13 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 242
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
America's native population growth is already practically 0. As for the questions raised in the article about where we will get people to support our senior citizens, etc., the answer is the same as where we get them now, immigration.
So, it is unacceptable for the citizens of the USA to increase our growth rate above 0, but it is acceptable for other countries to because they provide us with a sustainable labor force. Sounds kind of jingoistic to me.
It is not 'unacceptable' for the US to increase its birthrate. I'm not calling for laws to prevent people from having more than two children or anything like that. It is just a fact that the US birthrate is close to zero population growth.
Immigration does not require that other countries increase their population - indeed most of Europe has negative population growth and we accept immigrants from those countries. Personally, I would like to see birthrates drop in the developing world, so I don't find it 'acceptable' that they have higher birthrates, either.
A combination of education and greater economic opportunity for women in the developing world has led to lower birthrates, and this trend is likely to continue, and it will be a good thing in the long run. And it is not being carried out through coercion or laws. [As effective as it has been, I can't rally behind the totalitarian birth control policies of China]
The US is in a peculiar position with the Baby Boom followed so closely by the widespread availability and acceptance of successful birth control methods. I foresee that when the world reaches zero population growth or negative population growth, the transition will be less abrupt and the economic challenges mentioned in the article will not be as severe.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 5:02:04 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
A combination of education and greater economic opportunity for women in the developing world has led to lower birthrates, and this trend is likely to continue, and it will be a good thing in the long run.
However, current psycological studies have found that women are not content with this. Not that education and greater economic opportunity are not good for women. Proverbs 31 include these as factors in the life of a wife of noble character. However, women appear to find careers and independance much less satisfying than motherhood and interdependance. Also, the restraining effect of parental responsibility and the requirement to show consideration for others that chilldren bring seem to have a positive effect on the singleminded goal oriented tendencies of the males.
< Message edited by Bluethread -- 11/5/2009 5:11:49 PM >
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 5:10:50 PM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
However, women appear to find carriers and independance much less satisfying than motherhood and interdependance.
I'm going to assume that you mean careers, not carriers. I actually like carriers. It makes it easier to carry things. 
The studies didn't propose the cause of the unhappiness, but simply compared levels of satisfaction. I'm sure you've heard the statement "correlation is not causality". It could be just as likely that women are unhappy because industrialized societies still operate on a model of one adult working outside the home and thus they have increased responsibility without increased flexibility and assistance. Perhaps if men contributed more to the day-to-day work of the home, and corporations provided more "family-friendly" policies, much of that stress and dissatisfaction would disappear.
But, that's kind of off topic.
< Message edited by moon_mouse -- 11/5/2009 5:17:03 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 7:56:07 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 242
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
A combination of education and greater economic opportunity for women in the developing world has led to lower birthrates, and this trend is likely to continue, and it will be a good thing in the long run.
However, current psycological studies have found that women are not content with this.
This may be so, but it has little to do with my point. If a particular woman is dissatisfied, then perhaps she should have a baby. I'm certainly not stopping her.
As you say, education and economic opportunity are good things. They are also associated with lower birthrates, and yes possibly lowered life satisfaction. The alternative is to withhold education and economic opportunity from women. Not many groups other than the Taliban are seriously proposing that.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 9:21:33 PM
|
|
|
solo_soprano23
Posts: 2083
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
How can you measure happiness? I don't trust these "self" happiness tests as gauges. I think one poster a while back had a thread about how women back in the day were "happier" than women today... How do you compare the happiness of one woman to another on a scale and across eras and ages? How can you know just how unhappy or happy a woman is, and be sure that what one woman calls a 5 on the unhappiness scale is the same exact thing as what another woman would call it?
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 10:11:32 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
A combination of education and greater economic opportunity for women in the developing world has led to lower birthrates, and this trend is likely to continue, and it will be a good thing in the long run.
However, current psycological studies have found that women are not content with this.
This may be so, but it has little to do with my point. If a particular woman is dissatisfied, then perhaps she should have a baby. I'm certainly not stopping her.
As you say, education and economic opportunity are good things. They are also associated with lower birthrates, and yes possibly lowered life satisfaction. The alternative is to withhold education and economic opportunity from women. Not many groups other than the Taliban are seriously proposing that.
Emphasis mine
No, education and economic opportunity in what I would call a warehouse society is associated with lower birthrates, and lowered life satisfaction. In a community based social structure children are integrated into the educational process and economy.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/5/2009 10:15:12 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: solo_soprano23
How can you measure happiness? I don't trust these "self" happiness tests as gauges. I think one poster a while back had a thread about how women back in the day were "happier" than women today... How do you compare the happiness of one woman to another on a scale and across eras and ages? How can you know just how unhappy or happy a woman is, and be sure that what one woman calls a 5 on the unhappiness scale is the same exact thing as what another woman would call it?
Pardon my fained lack of an opinion on the subject, but what do you believe is the best standard to use in determining what should be encouraged in the way of fertility?
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 1:28:51 AM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 659
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
Such threads pose as a legitimate question but primarily serve as a derogatory comment on those who disagree with some of the basic views and doctrine of Christians.
To me, it is simply hate-mongering. Giving that juxtaposition of views, wanting to preserve God's creation (trivialized by the writer) and suggesting abortion for humans, we are being lulled into an apparent "obvious" conclusion: these people are nuts. Ergo, don't listen to them.
Extreme green may have information for us, either directly or indirectly, about questions we might face in the future. We neither do justice to our faith or our future by denigrating "odd" views. Reach first for understanding instead of judgment; God is patient.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 10:20:49 AM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
That speaks to my second point about how family life tames the "savage" male.
 How, exactly?
quote:
Regarding, your second point, that is just jerrimandering secular society in an attempt to "redeem" it. I find such solutions similar to attempting to mend a hole with an ice pick.
Do you mean gerrymandering? Gerrymandering is dividing a political entity to concentrate voting power. I'm not sure how what I suggested does anything like that.
Or perhaps you meant jury rigging, meaning to fix using a temporary or makeshift solution? If so, then the way our society has worked since about 1800 has been the jury rig. After the Industrial Revolution, work was removed from the home, which really created the distinction between SAHM and WOHM that we see today. Flexible work hours, greater work from home opportunities, entrepreneurship, and even home schooling are actually taking the family back closer to the Biblical model.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 10:30:25 AM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
No, education and economic opportunity in what I would call a warehouse society is associated with lower birthrates, and lowered life satisfaction. In a community based social structure children are integrated into the educational process and economy.
I'm not sure I agree with that, because we see a correlation between increased education and economic opportunity and decreased birthrate in non-industrialized nations where a communal lifestyle is still quite common. So, perhaps it's not education and economic opportunity leading to lower birthrates that make women unhappy. Perhaps it's the fact that in an industrialized nation, in order to be able to pursue those if they wish the way our society is structured forces them to make compromises or sacrifices that men don't have to make in the same way or to the same extent. Logically, if we create ways in which women (and men for that matter) can exercise their talents while having a more balanced life, women will be happier and society can still benefit from their skills in arenas other than the home. I'm not sure if that would have a huge effect on birth rates. It would be interesting to look at countries whose major employers that have more "family friendly" policies, and see if there is at least a correlation with higher birthrates. If there is a correlation, we wouldn't be able to say one caused the other, but if there isn't a correlation, we'd be able to say there cannot be a causal link.
Of course, this still doesn't address the article, but it's an interesting side thought.
< Message edited by moon_mouse -- 11/6/2009 10:47:11 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 10:40:56 AM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
Another thought...well, actually a previous thought reiterated....
Correlation is not causality. We know women in industrialized nations have fewer children. Studies suggest that women in industrialized nations report lower levels of satisfaction than men. We don't know if having fewer children has made women unhappy, or if being unhappy leads women to have fewer children, or if the two are unrelated and tied to completely different factors. So while there may be good reasons to encourage people to have more children if they wish, making women happy is not one of them, because we don't know if procreation is directly linked to happiness. Studies have come out on both sides, which just proves that happiness is very difficult to capture.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 11:11:45 AM
|
|
|
3cappuccinosmom
Posts: 3587
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Some recent comments by prominent Green advocates suggest that one of the simplest and most effective ways to reduce the global carbon footprint is to reduce the population. As means to that end, they advocate aggressive birth control and abortion. Their argument is simple enough: fewer people put less strain on natural resources, use less energy, and generate less pollution. Wealthy countries, so the thinking goes, are particularly suited to implement this strategy because they have ready access to birth control and legalized abortion.
Getting back to the OP.
I actually don't think those arguments represent the extreme at all. More like mainstream environmentalism/tree-hugging, although most would probably be hesitant to actually say they want increased abortions because they know it sounds sick. Wide-spread use of birth control and sterilization, though, and standardization of the two-child maximum family, whoo-hooo, Utopia, here we come!  The problem is, you can't standardize the two-child family without some level of control. Education and wealth is associated with lower birth rates statistically, but even intelligent, well-off people may either choose to have larger families, or be unwilling to get sterilized and have birth control failures. It also assumes that most poor people have more than two children because they're ignorant or stupid, and not because they value having children. Even if birth control were readily available, in many cultures people might indeed choose to limit their family size but still choose an unacceptable (to environmentalists) number like 4-6 children instead of 6-12.
I know lots of large families that are very environmentally friendly  , and yes, we can be Christian and conservative and green-living, but I've never met a serious environmental activist, in person or in writing, who doesn't advocate population control as a means of "saving the earth". They believe in varying levels of stringency, but they all believe it on some level. If not government mandated population control, then government subsidized or government manipulated population control. They look down their noses at large families and start rambling about ignorance and carbon footprints.
Dh says "If they think humanity is a cancer on the earth and think the population needs to be reduced, to be really consistent they should all sterilize themselves and eventually start jumping off bridges. That would be setting a good example, rather than wanting to control other people's fertility."  Dh isn't the most PC person in the world, obviously. 
< Message edited by 3cappuccinosmom -- 11/6/2009 11:31:37 AM >
_____________________________
 Moo
The Ballad of Bad Biruk
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 12:26:22 PM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 3cappuccinosmom
Education and wealth is associated with lower birth rates statistically, but even intelligent, well-off people may either choose to have larger families, or be unwilling to get sterilized and have birth control failures. It also assumes that most poor people have more than two children because they're ignorant or stupid, and not because they value having children.
If by the "it" in "it also assumes" you mean the statistics, that's inaccurate, because statistics in and of themselves can't assume anything. Statistics are simply collections of data. People make assumptions from statistics, and unfortunately most people don't know much about how to interpret statistics. Education and wealth are associated with lower birth rates, that's a fact, but correlation in itself doesn't tell us anything about what causes that lower birth rate. If people make the assumption that people who have large families must be ignorant, they're just as wrong as people who make the assumption that educated, wealthy people with small families must not value children. 
quote:
I've never met a serious environmental activist, in person or in writing, who doesn't advocate population control as a means of "saving the earth". They believe in varying levels of stringency, but they all believe it on some level. If not government mandated population control, then government subsidized or government manipulated population control. They look down their noses at large families and start rambling about ignorance and carbon footprints.
Most environmentalists I've met do believe that making contraception more available to people who wish to use it can be a valuable tool, but don't believe in any sort of government mandate because they believe that procreation is a personal choice. But maybe I'm just meeting a better class of environmentalist. I know people like you describe exist, but I'd be careful not to make an assumption that just because someone views contraception as a potential tool they'd automatically "look down their nose" at someone who chooses not to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Population Control in an Aging Society - 11/6/2009 2:09:32 PM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 435
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 3cappuccinosmom
Or maybe they've just never made the logical connection that simple "education and availability" will never cut population growth to the "safe" levels they want. Controlling other people's fertility by laws or manipulation is the only way to do it, because human beings as a whole haven't demonstrated a natural inclination to stop at below-replacement levels.
I think you are assuming that the suggestion that better availability of contraception could help the environment means they believe it's only helpful if population growth stops. That's simply not the case. Some environmentalists believe that giving couples the ability to limit their family size if they wish will slow the growth rate to a level that will buy us more time, to be a little simplistic, to change the way we consume natural resources to support the population growth that we do have. And, most environmentalists will readily acknowledge that the most rapid destruction of the environment occurs in, or is directly caused by, highly industrialized nations, where birth rates are actually lower.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
