Ina step towards blatant “Population Control”, Climate-change activists are mobilizing to cut the birthrate, arguing that richer nations should discourage people having children in order to protect them from the ravages of global warming and reduce emissions. Travis Rieder, assistant director of the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University, told NPR that bringing down global fertility by half a child per woman “could be the thing that saves us.”
“Here’s a provocative thought: Maybe we should protect our kids by not having them,” said Mr. Rieder, who has one child.
He proposed procreation disincentives such as government tax breaks for poor people and tax penalties for rich people, a kind of “carbon tax on kids.” Poor nations would be cut slack “because they’re still developing, and because their per capita emissions are a sliver of the developed world’s. CONTINUE
Hang on,did i read correctly:richer nations should be discouraged to have children?Shouldn’t it be equal all over?Rich and poor nations?It is because of the rich nations expanding that the poor nations have some form of sustainability.It is the rich nations that keeps the global economy afloat!If your reason is to stand,then we will have total poverty and chaos in a few years time from now.
So the developed nations whose numbers are already in decline, who are recycling, using the best pollution controls, constantly striving to be good stewards of the earth should not have children? We should just encourage the developing nations who have an average of about 10 children per family to carry on as usual. We should overlook the largest polluters, China and India. We should take the blame and feel the shame. How about everyone playing by the same rules??