It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Save the Planet: Have Fewer Kids

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Finally somebody really 'gets' it, fewer children is in every way better for everyone. Combine the green approach with the financial aspects of society today and you have a very strong case for not having kids, not only do they have a detrimental impact on the environment (not that I much care) but they cost a crap ton of money and in this depression one needs to cut costs every way possible to stay afloat.




posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Well, my parents always said, "replace yourself and that is enough". Having too many kids is irresponsible as far as I'm concerned. Two kids is enough...seriously. Intelligent people with access to birth control have no excuse these days.

It's interesting how people say, 'tell the chinese to do it'. They have had a one child policy for years. So, it's ok to tell them to do it but not us in western countries. We produce the most waste per capita than anyone!!! I believe if the world (my one and only home) is in dire straights that I would have no problem having less children. I am 40 and have none now.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Helig
 




Finally somebody really 'gets' it, fewer children is in every way better for everyone.


I really hope that your reply was laced with extremely heavy sarcasm and you were trying to stir the hornets nest and I was too dense to pick up on it...



-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
few questions...

1) Why have kids?

2)If you have found an answer for the first question, why have kids in this mad world where they will have to works all their life and probably harder and where they will have to fix the mess we did and still doing?

3)Why, at your eyes, can we kill/slaughter wild animals to control their population but human kind can do all he want to reproduce his kind without ever being annoy by overpopulation problems, and if someone dare says that we have to keep some tadpole in ours balls, it looks like a crime against humanity...

We sure do have the right to have kids, even if it's highly selfish because we don't know if the kids wants to come or not and we will force him to enjoy life to assure ourself we did the right thing by make him coming in our house, but the crime against humanity would be to have kids without thinking about the fact that if every one got all the kids they want, one day or another, their will be no more rooms one earth for us, pollution will increase, hygiene will be then compromise what will lead the huge disease contamination rate, probably less and less food as more and more problems
will appears and then it will be wars all over the world and then humanity will be, finally, dead.

So now there is 5 options

1) We do what those scientist said, just have a fewer kids: not so hard.

2) Set up an human hunt team to control population as we do with animals: could be annoying if you are the one who get shot BUT it could give more meat to the whole population, dangerous but there is some advantages.

3) We let the NWO doing their mass population reduction program, even if it is not working as every one think it is. A good solution if you survive to the program and want to have plenty of kids but not the good one if you don't care about having kids: definetly not an option.

4) Just keep the way of life we have yet and enjoy the end of humanity: an happy ending but the fauna and flora will not really like it.

5) Or just do like me, Get no kids, enjoy your life as much as you can, travel as much as possible, spend your daytime to do what you want and not going to work, have nothing to care about the critism of those goodly thinking citizens who vomit their resignation on you and don't understand things that you are telling to them.


The choice is yours



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I really appreciate the discussion on whether or not there is an issue of people having too many kids. While I will agree with you that at the current rate of population growth we will have issues down the road, it is not my aim to discuss that here.

My thread is aimed at figuring out if this is a new avenue that the NWO is using to stop the masses from having a chance to defend themselves.

If instead of an all-out attack on the people like we have thought lately with the Flu or Biological agents if they will try to convince us to wipe ourselves out.

They are using an angle that isn't as effective at reducing emissions as they want us to think. My original post includes examples of this and I am more than willing to supply others showing how the "Green Movement" scams us.

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sliadon
reply to post by Helig
 




Finally somebody really 'gets' it, fewer children is in every way better for everyone.


I really hope that your reply was laced with extremely heavy sarcasm and you were trying to stir the hornets nest and I was too dense to pick up on it...



-Sliadon


Actually, I don't think he is being sarcastic. In fact he's making total sense to a rational minded person.

See, the earth is not an infinite source of resources and it's not an infinite garbage dump. If you have too many people on the planet you disturb the natural equilibrium and you start to run out of resources and places to dump your garbage. Makes sense right?



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sliadon


This bill wants to make it where one person (The Attorney General) can cite you as a terrorist or a threat and you lose the right to bear arms. That much power to one person is insane!


I agree with you that there is a lot of fear-mongering and I will gladly admit there are times I let that side get the best of me.

Sometimes coincidences aren't just coincidences anymore...

-Sliadon


Sorry, Did not mean to come across calling you ignorant, was directing it at the topic.

I am studying Criminal Justice in College, and from my perspective i can tell you that the guys teaching us and telling us are not trying to control anyone they are seriously trying to protect others. I mean if you stay in a negative atmosphere like criminal justice major people do you see all the negative and thus they speak more negative than positive. SO perhaps the politicians need to get out of their negative and greedy ways so that society can prosper. I mean politicians see all the negative and you know their attitiude is negative by all the greed we are seeing.

But again they are not trying to do negative things to the people just trying to create laws that deter violence and create a well balanced positive community.

I dont doubt that there are people in office who would like to control others but the Governments job is to control populations in a general way. I guess the way society is currently going is too fast and taking too many liberties away I know violence needs to stop and society has done well to stop that... but we are not there yet and need people such as yourself to stand up for your beliefs to keep humans making laws from abusing their power.. (Keep in mind that power corrupts anyways so you have to be careful with it as most politicians ARENT... think of power as an energy)

And no worries about the fearmongering we all succumb to it when it hits close to home, we all have the need to survive and if something threatens us we will do whatever necessary to protect it... thus... we get offended.

But as you said "Sometimes coincidences aren't just coincidences anymore..."



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by milesp
 


Again, I agree with everyone here that is posting saying that there is a population issue. I know that if we do not do something about it then we will have a major crisis.

My issue lies with the method they are now trying. I am questioning whether or not appealing to the fad of "Green Friendly" holds ulterior motives.

Attacking me as not being "rational" isn't pertinent nor a productive part of this thread. I am more than happy to take criticism to my theory as well as take advice on ways to modify it. Calling someone on a Conspiracy site 'irrational' would almost seem like a compliment, would it not?
Since after all we all here have our topics that our friends or even fellow ATS'rs would give us a skeptical eye as to why we went there.

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
They have no right to tell people they cannot have children, or they will be taking away their liberty that the Constitution of this country promises.

But I do believe they should restrict people like Octo-mom, that is effin' ridiculous! That should be considered child abuse, not environmentally damaging.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Here is my opinion of it all

People who shouldn't be having so many kids are having too many kids, they are being irresponsible and causing problems. Because people that are having too many kids are genetically inferior when it comes to intelligence, they are selfish in their survival methods and focus too much on just procreating which is Highly linked to sex
(which could be lustful) depending...

So back to my point, less intelligent people are having kids and less intelligent people are the ones who end up in jail. Its like 60% in jail have no education (no GED or Highschool) so thus they have figured if you educate people dont go to jail as often. A society without corruption is a good society... i know thats the goal but its hard to fix.

So I think their argument is ok... but i hope they dont try to control ne1 to those standards. It sounds to me like htey are trying to hit the less intelligent people with that info anyawys.

im still looking for my link but here is one of the violence and violence normally operates from less intelligent people. LINK

[edit on 4-8-2009 by rjmelter]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bushido Kanji
They have no right to tell people they cannot have children, or they will be taking away their liberty that the Constitution of this country promises.


They don't say have NO children they say have a FEWER kids, big difference.


Frankly I don't see where the fears is here, do you prefer they come down some random street and kill everyone?
Human have to take RESPONSIBILITY, is it so hard?
For one time in his history human kind have to be responsible of what he did, he is doing and what he'll do.

Please people, stop this permanent paranoia because you destroying yourself with all those possible NWO conspiracies and please start to think by yourself and try to understand what you are seeing and reading, especially on a web site.


Sliadon, of what do we have to be scared when some says that we just have to get a fewer kids, if you leave aside the fact that they said you can't have the 5 kids you wanted to, what really is dangerous for you, me and all the population of this world?


[edit on 8/4/09 by ufopunx]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Danna
 


People need to breathe, they do not need to have 8 kids. There are these things called condoms, birth control pills, vasectomies, IUD's, and diaphragms. Any one of which by themselves can prevent you from having children, but for best results use two or more in combination.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Bushido Kanji
 


I think people should have their fundamental rights, including the right to procreate. They should also pay the price for exercising those fundamental rights. If my religion commands me to burn a 20 foot stack of $100 bills everyday, I should be free to burn stacks of $100 bills. I should not however, ask everyone else to provide me with stacks of $100 bills so I can exercise my free rights of religion.

Similarly, with the right to procreate, people who have children should bear the costs those children bring to society at large. They should also not demand that the rest of us foot the bill. Our society should really examine the way it rewards welfare recipients by giving them more cash for more children, rather than requiring birth control as a precondiiton to getting welfare.

If the Catholic Church or some other Church wants to complain about how I am trying to stop people from being fruitful and multiplying, maybe these churches should melt down the gold roofs of their churches and pay for their parishoners themselves.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
The world is totally screwed up. Is there someone that seriously thinks that all will be solved if we have fewer kids? That's just BS in my opinion. Giving people "immediate solutions" to not think about the problem more deeply is a good way of brainwashing and controlling those who think they think and feel the urgent need to be politically correct.

In my honest opinion if we ought to do something about the situation we should do exactly the opposite.
Everybody should have no less then 10 kids and train them to be truth seekers and defenders.

That way we would accelerate the awakening of everyone to the extreme conditions we have been in for a while.

We have billions of people suffering but no one does a damn thing to change the situation. The world only is the way it is because WE, the people, let it be like it is. We have all the power in our hands but we are freaking lazy zombies.

If we stop having kids we will have less chances of having an actual change because everybody is just in stand by mode right now, pretending that all is well and will be well. New minds are crucial for the evolution of our species.
We need a new generation of rebels, we need more people that put their freedom above everything else. We need people that aren't enslaved by fear and the only way to do such thing is to have your own kids and teach them how to practice their freedom truthfully.

The only real problem about overpopulation is misleading .We have enough food for everybody, its just not well distributed. Diseases only show up because the governments who are supposed to take care of the people only care about themselves.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ufopunx
 


Hey ufopunx


My issue again isn't the Scientists saying that overpopulation is coming. I agree with everyone on here that says people are having too many children.

And I agree with rj with his statement. Well, I would change a few words around but the gist of what he says I would hold true.


originally posted by rjmelter
So back to my point, less intelligent people are having kids and less intelligent people are the ones who end up in jail. Its like 60% in jail have no education (no GED or Highschool) so thus they have figured if you educate people dont go to jail as often. A society without corruption is a good society... i know thats the goal but its hard to fix.


More times than not, the uneducated and the impoverished have the highest number of people living in their house. They have more children and as a result have more of a burden. You will also see that typically families that are better off do not have as many children. There are many, many examples of situations that do not fit that schema, but the vast majority of the time it is the case.

You ask me,



Sliadon, of what do we have to be scared when some says that we just have to get a fewer kids, if you leave aside the fact that they you can't have the 5 kids you wanted to, what really is dangerous for you, me and all the population of this world?


And the fact is I'm not scared in this thread. This thread (once again) is meant to explore the possibility of my theory having any measure of truth to it. My sincerest apologies if I came across in a convoluted manner, but I am just questioning the approach. I am stating that Green Friendly is a fad that many people buy into. In opposition to many of the rebuttals I have given, Green Friendly appeals more to the educated crowd of people, not the uneducated.

So,

Why would Scientists be appealing to people who aren't as likely to have large amounts of kids in the first place?

I am questioning the motives of this research. I am questioning the dangers of why approach a demographic who isn't as likely to contribute as much to the issues they are suggesting come as a bi-product to our large population.

I was personally never fond of the idea of having large amounts of children. It just strikes me as odd to approach this group of people in this manner.

I hope this gives some clarification to you and to others.

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
in stead of genocide ... create a faster then light propulsion system so we can become a multi planet species and take half of the population to multiple planets ..
that wil be better for all of us..



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I think a great example of what you are referring to, although not 100% relevant here, is a situation very similar to that in the movie "Idiocracy," which is a grim, yet quasi-humorous look at a not-so-distant future. I recommend you see it if you have not before, as I think you would enjoy it.

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Chances are the motives are just hot air; as its already been illustrated that the more intelligent the people the less likely they are to have children. It would be quite nice if there was a campaign in the works to encourage people not to breed, but somehow I don't think thats the case. Most of the time when you tell people not to do something they turn around and go do it just to spite you much like telling a child not to do something.

I was dead serious with in my previous statements for those who suspected sarcasm. Having children is a huge gamble between keeping your job to support them and hoping they don't come out deformed, sick, or otherwise impaired. Honestly those who do wish to breed should probably seek out a medical intermediary to ensure the health of the embryo prior to bringing it to term and giving birth to help guard against many of the maladies that plague newborn children.

Of course people will never opt for that route because they are selfish creatures who insist that they must enjoy the creation of the new life via the sexual union of parents rather than letting the trained medical professionals handle all of the mixing to ensure healthy and viable offspring.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Helig
 


First off all, reading your posts I could imagine a RL encounter with you would probably be a combination of shock and comical undertones.


While your tone cuts a little sharp I understand the point you are making.

Could you answer a question for me though? Why do you think that Scientists are targeting the demographic more apt to not impose as big of a Carbon Footprint? An example of monkey-see monkey-do interaction of the lower educated wanting to emulate those who have the keys to success?

The only reason I sparked this up was with my OP about how they felt the need to explain their research and say there were no ulterior motives. In my experience, that is something done out of guilt. I would definitely appreciate your views on this question for me though!


-Sliadon

edit: grammar

[edit on 8/4/2009 by Sliadon]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
utterly ridiculous- these people are just FREAKS, I cannot capitalise that word enough, but that is no surprise given the previous of some of these eco nut jobs. Let us be honest here, the real problem with population control, the real SERIOUS problem is in Africa, where people, who cannot feed themselves are having bucketloads of kids- dying kids now is more relevant than spurious per capita notions of carbon footprint ( I don't think the environment and climate thinks in terms of carbon footprints)

For crying out loud population growth in places like the US and europe is barely at replacement levels while these freaks want even more of a cull, but won't deal with countries where population growth is a real problem.


The same people come from the same intellectual wellpool that supports immigration in the west because of an ageing population



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join