Science proves kids are bad for Earth. Morality suggests we stop having them.

We need to stop pretending kids don't have environmental and ethical consequences.
by Travis Rieder / Nov.15.2017 / 2:17 AM ET

A startling and honestly distressing view is beginning to receive serious consideration in both academic and popular discussions of climate change ethics. According to this view, having a child is a major contributor to climate change. The logical takeaway here is that everyone on Earth ought to consider having fewer children.

Although culturally controversial, the scientific half of this position is fairly well-established. Several years ago, scientists showed that having a child, especially for the world’s wealthy, is one of the worst things you can do for the environment. That data was recycled this past summer in a paper showing that none of the activities most likely to reduce individuals’ carbon footprints are widely discussed.

The second, moral aspect of the view — that perhaps we ought to have fewer children — is also being taken seriously in many circles. Indeed, I have written widely on the topic myself.
...

www.nbcnews.com...

So here we go... Soon enough we will have the left-wing "moral brigade" not only claim that this is the case, that having babies is bad for Mother Earth, but they will be calling for the implementation of policies similar to those of China's "one child policy"... Yes, China is now "allowing" people to have two children, but it is still a draconian law which many in the left in the west agree with, but now they can even claim that "such measures/laws will help mother earth"...

It's not enough for these people that Shillary Clinton herself wanted to adopt new measures to allow expectant mothers to decide to end the life of their unborn child even the same day the child was to be born...

Here are some of the views that Hillary and many, if not most of her fans have regarding this issue.



Of course, you can also listen to all those Hillary fans blindly shrieking and applauding as they salivate over the claims made by Clinton on the second part of the above video starting at 32 seconds.

But that's not the "most progressive" and "highly moral standards" that progressives can come up with. As it has been posted before, a not so new "argument" being made by several "progressives" is that "just like the unborn have no right to life, so do newborns have no right to life" in the minds of several "progressives".

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

Soon enough it won't be an argument anymore, through the "denations" made by rich liberals like the Gates, and Soros, and with the help of their liberal acolytes in power I am betting this will probably start in Europe where a new law will pass similar to China's "one child policy". Eventually such a law will be implemented even in the U.S. unless people come to realize the stupidity behind such a claim. Not to mention the obvious evil intent behind such a measure to "kill unborn and the newborn to save the Earth"...

When you though the left couldn't come up with a new measure even more evil than others they have supporter, they come up with something even more....evil.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

How many of the people who would advocate for this have children of their own?

Controversial topic, no doubt about it.

In the future I believe we will see laws like those in China on a grander scale.

This is hypocritical of the left.. This would mean, according to them, that to save OUR environment, here in the U.S. means we would most definitely have to curb immigration. While they are at it, logically, they would have to get rid of others as well. Oh wait, planned paranthood, they already are. Such Hipocrits.

Well considering that white Americans are trending toward not replacing themselves with kids, we are helping save the earth...

My wife and I only have one kid so we did our part..

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Well considering that white Americans are trending toward not replacing themselves with kids, we are helping save the earth...

My wife and I only have one kid so we did our part..

That is kinda where I was trying to get at. It just is, period.

if all of the people concerned with man made global warming just did the noble thing and offed themselves, we wouldn't have to listen to them anymore. I mean it prob wouldn't help the situation, but at least we wouldn't have to listen to them anymore.

There would at least be no one left to fudge the numbers to make it appear that the sky is falling.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

"Science proves kids are bad for Earth"

LOL. No it doesn't.

What science proves (if you can call it proof) is that the average human life in today's society has an overall adverse affect on the planet. Kids are not the problem, the parents and popular culture are.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

We need to stop pretending kids don't have environmental and ethical consequences.
by Travis Rieder / Nov.15.2017 / 2:17 AM ET

A startling and honestly distressing view is beginning to receive serious consideration in both academic and popular discussions of climate change ethics. According to this view, having a child is a major contributor to climate change. The logical takeaway here is that everyone on Earth ought to consider having fewer children.

Although culturally controversial, the scientific half of this position is fairly well-established. Several years ago, scientists showed that having a child, especially for the world’s wealthy, is one of the worst things you can do for the environment. That data was recycled this past summer in a paper showing that none of the activities most likely to reduce individuals’ carbon footprints are widely discussed.

The second, moral aspect of the view — that perhaps we ought to have fewer children — is also being taken seriously in many circles. Indeed, I have written widely on the topic myself.
...

www.nbcnews.com...

So here we go... Soon enough we will have the left-wing "moral brigade" not only claim that this is the case, that having babies is bad for Mother Earth, but they will be calling for the implementation of policies similar to those of China's "one child policy"... Yes, China is now "allowing" people to have two children, but it is still a draconian law which many in the left in the west agree with such draconian measures, but now they can even claim that "such measures/laws will help mother earth"...

It's not enough for these people that Shillary Clinton herself wanted to adopt new measures to allow expectant mothers to decide to end the life of their unborn child even the same day the child was to be born...

Here are some of the views that Hillary and many, if not most of her fans have regarding this issue.

Of course, you can also listen to all those Hillary fans blindly shrieking and applauding as they salivate over the claims made by Clinton on the second part of the above video starting at 32 seconds.

But that's not the "most progressive" and "highly moral standards" that progressives can come up with. As it has been posted before, a not so new "argument" being made by several "progressives" is that "just like the unborn have no right to life, so do newborns have no right to life" in the minds of several "progressives".

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

Soon enough it won't be an argument anymore, through the "denations" made by rich liberals like the Gates, and Soros, and with the help of their liberal acolytes in power I am betting this will probably start in Europe where a new law will pass similar to China's "one child policy". Eventually such a law will be implemented even in the U.S. unless people come to realize the stupidity behind such a claim. Not to mention the obvious evil intent behind such a measure to "kill unborn and the newborn to save the Earth"...

When you though the left couldn't come up with a new measure even more evil than others they have supporter, they come up with something even more....evil.

It's a view.

People ARE the climate.

Bad attitudes, not being considerate of others, selfishness, greed, fear and carelessness are not only bad for the climate but bad for the people. They are one in the same. The climate would still be negative with just a handful of people inhabiting it if they acted unethically towards the natural mammalian cultivation of the species known as people.

Change behaviors for the better and the climate changes for the better. Change the climate by invoking self centeted reasons, the climate will produce a new toxicity and become self centered.

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

"Science proves kids are bad for Earth"

LOL. No it doesn't.

What science proves (if you can call it proof) is that the average human life in today's society has an overall adverse affect on the planet. Kids are not the problem, the parents and popular culture are.

I don't think science has proven that. At least not without fudging the data. Which has been shown over and over.

originally posted by: WhiteWingedMonolith

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

We need to stop pretending kids don't have environmental and ethical consequences.
by Travis Rieder / Nov.15.2017 / 2:17 AM ET

A startling and honestly distressing view is beginning to receive serious consideration in both academic and popular discussions of climate change ethics. According to this view, having a child is a major contributor to climate change. The logical takeaway here is that everyone on Earth ought to consider having fewer children.

Although culturally controversial, the scientific half of this position is fairly well-established. Several years ago, scientists showed that having a child, especially for the world’s wealthy, is one of the worst things you can do for the environment. That data was recycled this past summer in a paper showing that none of the activities most likely to reduce individuals’ carbon footprints are widely discussed.

The second, moral aspect of the view — that perhaps we ought to have fewer children — is also being taken seriously in many circles. Indeed, I have written widely on the topic myself.
...

www.nbcnews.com...

So here we go... Soon enough we will have the left-wing "moral brigade" not only claim that this is the case, that having babies is bad for Mother Earth, but they will be calling for the implementation of policies similar to those of China's "one child policy"... Yes, China is now "allowing" people to have two children, but it is still a draconian law which many in the left in the west agree with such draconian measures, but now they can even claim that "such measures/laws will help mother earth"...

It's not enough for these people that Shillary Clinton herself wanted to adopt new measures to allow expectant mothers to decide to end the life of their unborn child even the same day the child was to be born...

Here are some of the views that Hillary and many, if not most of her fans have regarding this issue.

Of course, you can also listen to all those Hillary fans blindly shrieking and applauding as they salivate over the claims made by Clinton on the second part of the above video starting at 32 seconds.

But that's not the "most progressive" and "highly moral standards" that progressives can come up with. As it has been posted before, a not so new "argument" being made by several "progressives" is that "just like the unborn have no right to life, so do newborns have no right to life" in the minds of several "progressives".

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

Soon enough it won't be an argument anymore, through the "denations" made by rich liberals like the Gates, and Soros, and with the help of their liberal acolytes in power I am betting this will probably start in Europe where a new law will pass similar to China's "one child policy". Eventually such a law will be implemented even in the U.S. unless people come to realize the stupidity behind such a claim. Not to mention the obvious evil intent behind such a measure to "kill unborn and the newborn to save the Earth"...

When you though the left couldn't come up with a new measure even more evil than others they have supporter, they come up with something even more....evil.

It's a view.

People ARE the climate.

Bad attitudes, not being considerate of others, selfishness, greed, fear and carelessness are not only bad for the climate but bad for the people. They are one in the same. The climate would still be negative with just a handful of people inhabiting it if they acted unethically towards the natural mammalian cultivation of the species known as people.

Change behaviors for the better and the climate changes for the better. Change the climate by invoking self centeted reasons, the climate will produce a new toxicity and become self centered.

That sounds like the plot to ghostbusters 2

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I'm concerned when anyone with a materialist viewpoint speaks of ethics. I'm particularly concerned when they are a scientist.

forceful steralisation of people who advocate this would be a good start.

What's the goal than?
To turn Earth into Coruscant?
I realize everyone likes Star Wars but my God...

a reply to: FamCore

I'm pretty sure it is a necessity in some Third World Nations though since a lot of them suffered from overpopulation.

originally posted by: Ohanka
forceful steralisation of people who advocate this would be a good start.

You just advocated forceful sterilization by saying that people who suggest forceful sterilization should be forcefully sterilized.

You do realize you just volunteered?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse


I happen to agree with that assessment. The earth is overpopulated and it is irresponsible for people to keep having 3 or more children.
I absolutely hate Hillary Clinton but that clip has nothing to do with your initial argument in your post. I am pro life but you initially start out talking about whether or not to get pregnant and have kids in the first place and not getting pregnant is a whole other realm away from abortion.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Well considering that white Americans are trending toward not replacing themselves with kids, we are helping save the earth...

My wife and I only have one kid so we did our part..

I'm raising 5 white children.


You're welcome.

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

"Science proves kids are bad for Earth"

LOL. No it doesn't.

What science proves (if you can call it proof) is that the average human life in today's society has an overall adverse affect on the planet. Kids are not the problem, the parents and popular culture are.

It’s not hard to have proof.

You have kids which is more strain on the world ecosystem, those kids grow up to have more kids, so on and so on. So yes kids have a large impact on an ecosystem.

Let me guess, you’re near the poverty line depending on supplemental income with three of the five children of yours doing nothing to contribute to society.

You’re welcome.