Population Research Institute

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChristIsTheWay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ChristIsTheWay

Guest
I received a letter today from a group calling itself the Population Research Institute, PRI. They claim to be fighting abortion, especially some illegal funding that Planned Parenthood is receiving for aboriton procedures in Guatemala. They asked for a donation to help them stop it. First off, does anyone know if the PRI is legit? Secondly, has anyone else heard about this alleged Guatemala thing? Thanks.
 
Google population Research Unit and check it out. I have heard the head of the Unit speak on Catholic Answers and he seems ok but you go and have a look and make a judgement for yourself.
 
Founded in 1989, Population Research Institute is a non-profit research and educational organization dedicated to objectively presenting the truth about population-related issues. Our mission is threefold:
  • To document abuses of human rights in the name of population control, which have occurred in China, Bangladesh, and dozens of other countries around the world, and work for their elimination.
  • To make a case against the widely held, but fundamentally wrongheaded, development paradigm which places economic and population growth in opposition to each other.
  • To articulate the material and social benefits of moderate population growth and promote economic development through models which respect the dignity and rights of the individual human person and the family.
    Read about the president of PRI, Steve Mosher.
    pop.org/main.cfm?id=151&r1=10.00&r2=1.00&r3=0&r4=0&level=2&eid=211
 
I’ve been supporting them for years – they do a great work!
 
I’ve heard they do good work. It’s a struggle, however, to convince secular society that there isn’t a true overpopulation problem overall on this earth. In fact, in alot of Western cultures such as Europe there’s a scary trend of a dying civilization.
 
ChristIsTheWay said:
I received a letter today from a group calling itself the Population Research Institute, PRI. They claim to be fighting abortion, especially some illegal funding that Planned Parenthood is receiving for aboriton procedures in Guatemala. They asked for a donation to help them stop it. First off, does anyone know if the PRI is legit? Secondly, has anyone else heard about this alleged Guatemala thing? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Absoultely legitimate and they do wonderful pro life work. Mr Mosher is a tireless worker especially for pre born life.
I support them .
 
I don’t support anything funded by “The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation”. I think their Project of the new American century crowd have nothing but greed and disregard all catholic values. They seem to have a pattern of using good organizations to do bad.

I also find that the teachings at pop.org are not in accordance with the teaching of the catholic church (see: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/documents/sv%2099%285of5%29.pdf). This is in my mind further evidence that the are a front group for corporate America rather than someone trying to help our cause.
 
bear in mind there is also a Population Research Institute at Penn State University which has no relation to Steve Mosher’s very worthwile organization, so when you are doing your searches be very careful, the proper link is cited above.
 
Yes that makes researching a bit harder but the pop.org people are the ones funded by the Bradly Foundation
 
Odin said:
I don’t support anything funded by “The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation”. I think their Project of the new American century crowd have nothing but greed and disregard all catholic values. They seem to have a pattern of using good organizations to do bad.

I also find that the teachings at pop.org are not in accordance with the teaching of the catholic church (see: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/documents/sv%2099%285of5%29.pdf). This is in my mind further evidence that the are a front group for corporate America rather than someone trying to help our cause.
Click to expand...
So, why don’t you demonstrate to us, specifically, how the foundation stands for “nothing but greed” and how it “disregards all Catholic values”, instead of simply stating your opinions and generally citing a 500+ page volume as your evidence?

Specifics, please, and reputable sources for them. I’ll wait.
 
Odin said:
I don’t support anything funded by “The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation”. I think their Project of the new American century crowd have nothing but greed and disregard all catholic values. They seem to have a pattern of using good organizations to do bad.

I also find that the teachings at pop.org are not in accordance with the teaching of the catholic church (see: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/documents/sv%2099%285of5%29.pdf). This is in my mind further evidence that the are a front group for corporate America rather than someone trying to help our cause.
Click to expand...
What a load of bolony you speak.
I know the organisation and its founder for years and they are more Catholic than you
as for being a front for corporate America, you speak through your left nostril.
Sorry people like you create confusion.
GraceAngel.
I have been on speaking tours with this organisatiuon and its people and you dont know what you speak about.
GraceAngel.
 
Ok I seem to have struck a nerve here.

first of all to avoid confusion here is my proof that pop.org is taking funds from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation : old.mediatransparency.org/recipientsoffunder.php?funderID=1 the question in my mind is what is the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation getting for its money.

To be clear I am not by any means saying that the people involved in the PRI are bad, i suspect that the vast majority are good people. It’s just my opinion that the The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation has a history of funding organizations that are good and then bending them to its pleasing. I researched this a few years ago so I don’t have all the sources handy (and I concede that therefore this is just an opinion untill I do that).

My research on the Project for the New American Century is also 8 years back now but I am strongly convinced that the people involved in that are all sinners. They are the ones who got us into Iraq, which I think we can all agree with the pope was not a good thing (cathnews.com/news/303/124.php)

Although I have no idea if this sources is credible in general this article seems compleatly in line with what I found out back when researching the PNAC. sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century Like I said im not pinning my credibility to them but just so you guys know what I’m talking about.

Now as far as differences between the pop.org website and the teachings of the catholic church lets take this recent article: pop.org/20090722971/obamas-qsilent-focaq-would-strip-pro-lifers-of-rights they name no sources, no amendments, no details, just fear. In contrast to the usccb’s recent articles on the subject: usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-253.shtml they seem bent on defeating any bill where the USCCB want a bill with a few changes.

The article I mentioned in my last post describes the fact that there is a maximum number of people who the earth can support which, in contrast to some pro forced abortion facists, is not a fixed number but dependent on how many resources each person actually uses.

So I do have a problem with the opening sentence “For more than 100 years, alarmist scientists have been perpetrating a myth based on faulty math -the myth is that the world is overpopulated. This myth is based on faulty math, and flawed science and reasoning. It has never been true” That there are more people than can be sustained at the wasteful American living standard is a truth that the church teaches as well. If “alarmist” scientists come to the conclusion that “either there are too many people or we are squandering too many resources” which seems to be the common theme of these scientific studies then they are not creating a myth. The problem exists. We are using up most of the worlds resources and that is not fair to those in the third world! I don’t support population control but anyone who is dismissing the problem of scarse resources is in error

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
 
Odin said:
Ok I seem to have struck a nerve here.

first of all to avoid confusion here is my proof that pop.org is taking funds from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation : old.mediatransparency.org/recipientsoffunder.php?funderID=1 the question in my mind is what is the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation getting for its money.

To be clear I am not by any means saying that the people involved in the PRI are bad, i suspect that the vast majority are good people. It’s just my opinion that the The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation has a history of funding organizations that are good and then bending them to its pleasing. I researched this a few years ago so I don’t have all the sources handy (and I concede that therefore this is just an opinion untill I do that).

My research on the Project for the New American Century is also 8 years back now but I am strongly convinced that the people involved in that are all sinners. They are the ones who got us into Iraq, which I think we can all agree with the pope was not a good thing (cathnews.com/news/303/124.php)

Although I have no idea if this sources is credible in general this article seems compleatly in line with what I found out back when researching the PNAC. sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century Like I said im not pinning my credibility to them but just so you guys know what I’m talking about.

Now as far as differences between the pop.org website and the teachings of the catholic church lets take this recent article: pop.org/20090722971/obamas-qsilent-focaq-would-strip-pro-lifers-of-rights they name no sources, no amendments, no details, just fear. In contrast to the usccb’s recent articles on the subject: usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-253.shtml they seem bent on defeating any bill where the USCCB want a bill with a few changes.

The article I mentioned in my last post describes the fact that there is a maximum number of people who the earth can support which, in contrast to some pro forced abortion facists, is not a fixed number but dependent on how many resources each person actually uses.

So I do have a problem with the opening sentence “For more than 100 years, alarmist scientists have been perpetrating a myth based on faulty math -the myth is that the world is overpopulated. This myth is based on faulty math, and flawed science and reasoning. It has never been true” That there are more people than can be sustained at the wasteful American living standard is a truth that the church teaches as well. If “alarmist” scientists come to the conclusion that “either there are too many people or we are squandering too many resources” which seems to be the common theme of these scientific studies then they are not creating a myth. The problem exists. We are using up most of the worlds resources and that is not fair to those in the third world! I don’t support population control but anyone who is dismissing the problem of scarse resources is in error

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
Click to expand...
Wow you are not sure of much are you just that we have control population (abortion best means I suppose) because the third world’s leadership is corrupt. Wow fabulous thinking.!!!
GraceAngel.
 
The only thing I have said about abortion so far in this thread is that people who force it are facists.

From that you conclude: “Wow you are not sure of much are you just that we have control population (abortion best means I suppose) because the third world’s leadership is corrupt. Wow fabulous thinking.!!!”

I assume you are not as honest about things you are not sure about as I am…

I oppose abortion and see the solution to the growing population the same as the church; that we all need to get by with the resources we have. I don’t drive a car although I could easily afford one, I buy local and try to get the best energy to use ratio with everything I buy.

This “lets ridicule anyone who doesn’t completely agree with us” demonstrated in your last post is in my mind one of the problems of our movement. We seem to be a little too touchy when it comes to constructive criticism of our methods. Lets face it we are on most issues a majority if not a vast majority of the American population but we have basically gotten no where since roe v. wade. Also on other topics like better education or better perspectives for the poor. Somehow we all put a lot of effort into things but never really get anywhere.

We shouldn’t always have to choose between one teaching of the church and another. Think of how often that happens. Almost every political decision I have made has always been a lesser of two evils with half of the teachings on one side and half on the other side. Think of how often that happens to you. That is as I see it our biggest hurdle, that we are being pitted against each other by dividing us up into ever smaller groups.

A stance of Yes to pro life but No to the notion that resources are distributed unfairly and No to any form of health reform passing is a divider. The catholic church teaches that all three should be a Yes. Note that I’m not referring to the bill of the day but rather the best plausible bill. Something with the Stupak Amendment in it with the few things fixed which are not quite perfect. Thats what the USCCB supports and thats what I support. I think its OK for me to criticize the two "No"s at pop.org and state that it might be because of the corporate money flowing in from the Bradly Foundation. I did say I’m not claiming it as a fact but voicing it as opinion.

@GraceAngel I don’t doubt that you are a good person either, I have seen many posts of yours which are good advice here in the forum. I do find your reaction grossly unfair to me though!
 
If I have offended you I apologise. But PRI is as Catholic as you and I. And gossip createes disillusion and pain.
GA
 
That they have taken a lot of money from The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation which in turn has funded some pretty nasty organizations and gets its money from corporate America is not gossip. Going that far its all based on fact.

My suspicion of them being a good organization influenced a bit by bad money is not such a stretch as far as I can see. I also stated a few things which I think they are a bit biased on.

We don’t have to debate weather the doomsday criers weren’t thinking things through. I think we agree on that. Since life expectancy grew all of a sudden all over the world the situation went from two generations being alive at one time to three. That means a third more people with no higher birth rate. People who are understanding that as a trend which will continue are wrong… no brainier. But thats not all there is to population.

Take for example energy. We can debate all day on how much there is of it and how far we should go poisoning different creatures or destroying their habitat to get more of it but we can all agree its not endless. So without an endless supply, if wealthy people like us Americans buy up most of the demand the price rises and the poor countries suffer. Thats also a factor when talking about population, its pretty key to the topic. The fact that they don’t mention it may also have to do with the fact the The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation gets a tone of money from Exxon.

This trend of only stating half the facts and leaving out the half that the sponsoring companies would rather not have printed seems to me to be a common trend.

A friend of mine asked me recently why people in the third world are starving… Now hes only 12 years old so I couldn’t get too much into detail with the world bank and corporate interests and all so what am I going to tell him. If we are going to win this argument we need to offer a true and believable solution. I don’t see any way around accepting that we Americans need to live with less of the resources which are scarce and work to take power away from those giant powerful but evil-doing corporations who corrupt third world governments.

If pop.org were not taking money from those powerful corporations maybe they would have an easier time rounding out their message that we can take care of the worlds population and how to do it.

@Grace Angel thank you for apologizing for dismissing me as a pro abortionist baloney speaker. However I don’t find it fair to dismiss me as a gossiper either. If you do have ties to this organization then please take my constructive criticism seriously, if my criticisum is unfounded then show me the holes in my logic and if it is true take the message to them. I am a good person and my motives are not out of my left nostril but out of my good concence.
 
Odin said:
Take for example energy. We can debate all day on how much there is of it and how far we should go poisoning different creatures or destroying their habitat to get more of it but we can all agree its not endless. So without an endless supply, if wealthy people like us Americans buy up most of the demand the price rises and the poor countries suffer. Thats also a factor when talking about population, its pretty key to the topic. The fact that they don’t mention it may also have to do with the fact the The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation gets a tone of money from Exxon.
Click to expand...
True, the energy supply is not endless; entropy applies to the entire universe.

The earth obtains virtually all its energy from the sun, which uses nuclear fusion to generate energy. We of course, only tap a minuscule portion of that energy as sunlight. We could tap a lot more. Or we could generate our own nuclear energy. But the sun will run out of nuclear fuel in about 5 billion years. Not endless, but no immediate danger of running out.
 
I have no knowledge re. some of the arguements going back & forth in this thread, but know that Steve Mosher is a courageous man.
We heard him speak at the dedication of the Human Life International headquarters years back when Fr. Marx was in charge.
And what’s wrong with Exxon?? We have family in the oil industry & appreciate the employment.👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top