Save the Earth!!

You said it yourself, and I have to agree; that is indeed vile.
Willingly killing off billions of innocent people with no signs of concern is very disturbing.



We ARE acting like a virus, and we ARE basically destroying the planet.
There are waaay too many of us here.
At some point, we will be at war with China over oil, and a huge portion of the population will go up in smoke anyway, so that problem already has its solution written in stone.
But until then, I see no solution.

Smaller families is common sense, and has been pushed for years now.
Legalized abortion proves the government supports it here in the USA.
While I am for smaller families, I am not for abortion being the method of achieving this.

Now, granting a chimp human status. . . . . . we did that once here.
Even gave the little feller a legal name:
George W. Bush
;D

Mr Watson is a typical leftist elistist XXXXX. He will tell everyone else how they are screwing up, tell them how to fix it, and even if the same goes for him, he will do nothing of the sort.

See Al Gore...

Maybe there are some activists who are willing to sacrifice for the good of the planet............

It's a shame that some nutcases get press for extreme statements in support of what is really the correct position on an issue. It makes it more difficult for those who are trying to advance that position without the craziness.

I completely disagree with the silliness about going back to living like primitives. We can be as modern as the day after tomorrow without being wasteful about it, and can probably live "greener" than we could in a mud hut, eating roots and berries. The real lesson we need to learn is that there does need to be fewer people crawling around on the planet to make it last.

I read "The Population Bomb" by Dr. Paul Ehrlich, back in the mid sixties, and decided he was right in that the earth was well on its way to being ruined and depleted by overcrowding. Still think so.

That's why our son never had any siblings. We decided to stop with one. It was a tough personal decision between that and having one more, but after taking a good long look at the situation, there was never a question of more than two.

I think anyone who takes a serious look at it, has to come away with the conclusion that we already have too many people for the world's resources to go on supporting forever. The solution is as simple as stated by the British Group quoted above. Have two kids if you want, and you're still part of the solution. Have the third, and you're part of the problem.

As simple as that is, and despite all the evidence that it would be better for the health of the mothers, and despite the obvious financial benefits to limiting the number of kids to one or two, it's still a hard sell to get young people to make the right choice.

We start our families when we're pretty young, and we haven't had the time or inclination to think seriously about saving the earth. We may have taken part in a trash pickup or learned not to pitch our McDonalds sacks out along the roadways, but controlling the world's population growth? Way too heavy to even consider.

When we do get around to thinking about it, our three or four kids are in school and we're not planning any more. Then it's our grandkids that you're talking about limiting the numbers of, and we really want to play with our grandkids. They're usually even more fun than the first batch. Hard to tell the son or daughter that you think they should really consider not having that third one, in order to save the planet.

We have a few folks in the family who got on the "save the whales" type bandwagon in college and came out dedicated to living in a responsible manner and not polluting any more than they needed to. They used cloth diapers and timed thermostats and whatever new item the greenies were touting at the time. One of them had four kids, and would have had more if she'd been able. The other green couple, both engineers who crunch the numbers on everything, made the conscious decision to have their third. Wanted to try one more time for a girl.

Never mind the fact that the earth ain't gettin' any bigger, or that we're running out of fresh water, or that the chemicals we're dumping on the ground to grow enough food are poisoning those grandkids. What was important was that they could get their girl, or their boy in the other case, after three girls.

It's the most natural thing in the world, to want to procreate as successfully as you can. Goes directly to the most primal drive, that of survival of the species. Most people in the more developed countries have accepted the idea, despite all that, and the populations are stable or slightly declining in much of the civilized world, except for the immigration from the baby factories elsewhere.

I'm running on, and I could keep going on this subject all day. I'll shut up now, except to state one more fact to illustrate just how suddenly the situation has changed. I'm 62, and I remember reading in "The Weekly Reader" in grade school, that the population of the world had hit three billion people. It's now well over six billion. We DO need to do something to at least stop the increase in numbers.

If everyone limits themselves to 2 or less kids we will be just fine.

One problem is the mulitple marriages we are now getting.

We end up with his, hers and ours...

GEEZ LAWEEZ This planet is right on course as GOD wants it. I could care less if you have 1 or 50 kids. This planet will be here right to the exact second that it's suppose to be.

I know a whole bunch of fine upstanding citzens that for some period of time throughout their life they were what we would call scum of the earth. So I guess it's a good thing we don't go with the "kill the bad ones" thinking. I know a few that has done more good, and now only lives to do that good for their fellow man. Good thing we didn't kill them ?

If you say so.
For my 2 cents, I think we should have executed a great deal more than we have.
I have known a lot of less than upstanding types who 'grew up' and became responsible.
I have never known what I call scum of the earth to change in any manner.
And I have known several I would label as such.

[quote author=johnsmiles
I have never known what I call scum of the earth to change in any manner.
And I have known several I would label as such.[/quote]

Try looking in a CHURCH!

IMHO, Thomas Malthus was pretty much right, less the variables of technological advances in agriculture and medicine.