Posted on 08/19/2016 2:37:31 PM PDT by drewh
“Should We Be Having Kids In The Age of Climate Change?”
That was the audacious question NPR’s website and All Things Considered radio show asked on Aug. 18, as it promoted a college professor’s “radical” proposal that people need to have fewer children because of the “prospect of climate catastrophe.”
The academic proposed a “carbon tax” on children, to decentivize procreation, in wealthy nations.
NPR correspondent Jennifer Ludden reported that Professor Travis Rieder presented “moral” arguments to James Madison University students, claiming the best way to protect future generations from the threat of climate change is “by not having them.”
A philosopher, Rieder told them that having fewer children reduces carbon emissions more effectively than not eating meat, driving hybrid cars, and using eco-friendly appliances. Ludden’s article posted on the NPR website about the interview with Rieder was even more positive. In it she wrote that his claims “sound pretty persuasive in the classroom.”
Such anti-life arguments are typical of the left, including the environmental left.
According to the article, Rieder and his Georgetown University colleagues, Colin Hickey and Jake Earl, have a plan to save the earth which was described as “carrots for the poor, sticks for the rich.”
They are asking richer nations to “do away with tax breaks for having children and actually penalize new parents.”
DONATE Rieder described his strategy as a “carbon tax, on kids,” and said it should be “based on income” and raised for “each additional child.” He claimed that punishing people in wealthier nations for having large families is “not like China’s abusive one-child policy” because it targets the rich rather than the poor.
However, Climate Depot’s Marc Morano strongly disagreed, writing, “U.S. environmentalists are taking a page from China's mandatory one-child policy even as China abandons the policy. If these wacky climate activists believed their own literature they would realize that 'global warming' may lead to less kids!”
Rieder claimed to have the moral high ground, saying, “It's not the childless who must justify their lifestyle. It's the rest of us.” In the radio program, he said his family is “one and done” even though his wife Sadiye formerly wanted a “big” family.
Ad Feedback When a student asked, “What happens if that kid you decided not to have would have been the person who grew up and essentially cured this,” Rieder called it a good question. But then he added that “valuing children as a means to an end...” is “ethically problematic,” according to NPR.
He dismissed such positive views of human potential, saying the “chances are slim.”
It was not the first time Ludden revealed her liberal bias towards environmental issues. In 2013, she also complained that schools were still teaching both sides of the global warming debate.
We could do with fewer NPR hosts. Let’s start there.
Too bad, so sad, Professor Travis Rieder. My ten deeply annoying children and their myriad descendants will bury you, regardless of the temperature.
All Leftwing politics is aimed at population control:
Climate change
Abortion
Homosexuality
etc
They want less people. They hate everyone. Procreation must be stopped.
Question: Should Liberals be having kids?
Answer: NO.
Next question?
Or by killing them before they are born.
Let me guess, the lecture was aimed at white folks, not the ghetto...
Liberal mom doesn’t have kids, support those who will bring in a culture that breeds like rabbits... (Islamist)..
Negates her selfishness of not having kids and future women in same country now treated like crap by Islamist Regime...
well done...
Sure. Disincentive children in richer areas, subsidize more children in poorer areas. What could go wrong?
How is it that such obviously insane people are roaming around without any restraint?
.
Almost all the world's wealthy nations have birth rates below replacement level, some substantially so. And for a number of reasons, that is not a good thing.
They want White moms to have fewer kids. (Already happening.) Why aren’t they telling the 4-wife crowd to switch back to the goats?
(Because they want the 4-wife crowd to have a lot of kids and replace the Whites.)
Yes.
travis is excess protoplasm
Just about every Westernized country has a birth rate below replacement (about 2.1 kids / woman) - in the US that number is close to 2.1 only because the (really high) birth rate of immigrants biases the net value.
Now there are particular continents and particular cultures for which that birth rate is amazingly high - you can pretty much figure out which ones by noting which ones NPR never mentions.
So bottom line from NPR: the current populations in the West should evaporate even more rapidly - so that they can be replaced by primitive populations and failed cultures.
Yep. When confronted, I often ask them if the world is so overpopulated, or whatever, then instead of requiring everyone else to limit their kids, or kill them in utero, why don’t you take yourself out? That will lessen the strain on the world’s resources and you’ll be out of your projected misery. They usually tell me to go “f” myself, but I got my point across. Hypocrites, all of them.
Control fascists.
If the NPR clowns would like a class that they will get a F in, give me a call.
Hint: It has the physics of gas absorption and some real math...not the fourth grade crap (if even that) one gets with a liberal farts degree in journalism.
NPR. For those too stupid and ugly to even be a politician.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.