Having large families ‘is an eco-crime’

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linnyo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Another thread had a link to an article where some lady had herself sterilized because (in part) she was convinced that having even one child was a crime against “eco-”.

:rolleyes:

Apparently, we’re not supposed to be here on this earth. 🤷
 
My wife and I are doing our part to ruin the environment. We were blessed (sorry cursed) with our 4th child last week.

In protest, I have also decided to leave the energy guzzling floodlight pointed at the stork in the yard on all the time.

MP
👍
 
mikeypricejr said:
My wife and I are doing our part to ruin the environment. We were blessed (sorry cursed) with our 4th child last week.

In protest, I have also decided to leave the energy guzzling floodlight pointed at the stork in the yard on all the time.
Click to expand...
Yeah, bring on armageddon. Right? There is a christian need to ruin the earth to accelerate the second coming. 😃
 
Linnyo said:
women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article1752235.ece

It appears that larger families are an eco-hazard! This article is laughable but apparently taken seriously by some!
Click to expand...
I fail to see why it is laughable. It’s certainly nothing new. It’s long been known that the planet cannot sustain a continuing rising population along with a decrease in fossil fuels.

The fact that its tied to “one’s impact on the environment” is a bit new, but the basic argument has been around a good while.

I understand the condundrum that has occurred in the area of contraception, abortion, marriage, etc, but still its no reason to deride the truth. We cannot go on like this forever. We are called upon to be good stewards of the planet as well as “multiply”. I doubt that God meant multiply to override all other statements he made.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
I fail to see why it is laughable. It’s certainly nothing new. It’s long been known that the planet cannot sustain a continuing rising population along with a decrease in fossil fuels.

.
Click to expand...
I have faith that we are smart enought to invent some technology that doesn’t depend on fossil fuels. 🙂 Hopefully our grandchildren will be zipping along on vehicles fueled by some enviroment friendly source.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
I fail to see why it is laughable. It’s certainly nothing new. It’s long been known that the planet cannot sustain a continuing rising population along with a decrease in fossil fuels.
Click to expand...
People might have to walk. Yeah that’ll keep them from having sex.
 
News flash!!! The earth will not exist forever, nor will man in our current state. No matter what we do this reality will not change.
Be good stewards, but prepare your soul because no one knows the hour.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
I fail to see why it is laughable. It’s certainly nothing new. It’s long been known that the planet cannot sustain a continuing rising population along with a decrease in fossil fuels.

The fact that its tied to “one’s impact on the environment” is a bit new, but the basic argument has been around a good while.

I understand the condundrum that has occurred in the area of contraception, abortion, marriage, etc, but still its no reason to deride the truth. We cannot go on like this forever. We are called upon to be good stewards of the planet as well as “multiply”. I doubt that God meant multiply to override all other statements he made.
Click to expand...
The part I think is laughable is their use of carbon dioxide emissions to make their points, and I think junk science fuels that argument. Kind of like the vegetarian-driven studies of cow flatulence.

Still, though, I agree that we can’t go on indefinitely. If we multiply geometrically there will be a point a few generations down the line where resources will not be enough.

Resource problems today are mainly out of distribution rather than amount, I’ve heard. Well, there is a limit somewhere where the shortages will be actual. It may be several generations down the line but if more families had six children like we have, it is inevitable. Mathematically, whatever the maximum number of people this world can support, geometric population increase will approach it at an increasing rate.

Alan
 
Do we all realize that if we took the entire 6 billion inhabitants of earth, we could place them all in the state of Texas with about 1,200 sq ft of land? Large families is hardly endangering the earth.
 
D317 said:
Do we all realize that if we took the entire 6 billion inhabitants of earth, we could place them all in the state of Texas with about 1,200 sq ft of land? Large families is hardly endangering the earth.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard this before, though I never checked the numbers myself. The way geometric progressions go, though, that would change at an ever-increasing rate.

For example, if every couple had a family the size of mine, the population would multiply by 4 in one generation. Clearly it would be very difficult for society to adapt to that, and poor Texas would be packing them in at 300 sq ft each!

BTW, has anyone ever seen “Captain Planet?” I saw one episode of it. It is propaganda packaged as children’s edutainment. There was an “eco-crisis” (I think the sewage plant overflowed or something) that Captain Planet had to come fix. They vilified a family with, I think, 4 children and praised a family with only 1. They blamed the whole thing on the large family, which of course also had an wasteful big-screen TV and all other sorts of things I guess they shouldn’t have had.

Alan
 
Let’s just permit those who want children to have them and those who don’t not to. Compromise.
 
D317 said:
Do we all realize that if we took the entire 6 billion inhabitants of earth, we could place them all in the state of Texas with about 1,200 sq ft of land? Large families is hardly endangering the earth.
Click to expand...
uhuh…you’re forgetting the resources to feed, house, school, medicate, recreate, all those people. Your looking at the wrong end of the telescope.
 
Out of my 8 children, I’m hoping one or two (or more??) will be called to the priest hood or religious life. So how does that fit in with the multiplication of the population? 🤷
 
It needs to be realized that populations in industrialized nations are imploding, not exploding. The U.S., which has the highest birth rate of the developed nations, barely exceeds replacement rate. Underpopulation of developed areas (including by then China, and in some underdeveloped places like Mexico) is going to be a very big problem toward the end of this half-century.

Since it takes awhile for lower-than-replacement birth rates to be felt, a lot of people are going to be very surprised in the next few decades when populations shrink dramatically.

Before one gets too fevered about overpopulation, one needs to realize that if we had 50 years with no human births, that’s the end of the human race-totally. I don’t think that’s a likely scenario, but it’s still a sobering thing to think about. It doesn’t take all that much for populations to die out. I have certainly known large families. But I have also known dozens of large families that, in one or two generations, died out completely or collapsed from, say a family of ten children to one or two remaining fertile heirs. It’s very common. I really don’t know what causes some families to expand and some to contract. But you see both, and the latter reminds one dramatically of the actual frailty of human populations.
 
I’m sorry but I didn’t read it all but I would love to say that my mom had 10 kids. So I have 9 brothers and sisters. I don’t know what I would do without out them. the way I see it, its just more souls for God. So is this a crack on faith again. I want a big family and a chance to show them God and his love for them.
 
uhuh…you’re forgetting the resources to feed, house, school, medicate, recreate, all those people. Your looking at the wrong end of the telescope
Click to expand...
So spiritmeadow I saw on another thread you vehemently sticking up for give the homeless money and don’t assume or ask questions. Now you have an “anti child” worldview as I see it.

So we should feed the homeless then and all others but just do all we can to not have children? Doesn’t that kind of push abortion, contraception and other moral evils?

I’m for using low energy long lasting light bulbs, sparing water use etc. but I think if you can have 10+ kids go for it!!

Let’s not go “Gore” over the environment with all the moral evils that come with it like infant genocide, euthanasia for seniors/mentally challenged etc. (read POPULATION CONTROL)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top