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 NPRs website and All Things Considered radio show asked on Aug. 18, as it promoted a college professors 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. Luddens 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 Chinas abusive one-child policy because it targets the rich rather than the poor.
However, Climate Depots 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.
Okay, but is it not likely that left-leaning parents will heed this lunatic call and have fewer children? Maybe we should just keep our objections at a low volume for our own kids to hear.
It may take a few years of living here in Disneyland. I've read that it has to do with the women, surrounded by glitz and automobiles, becoming unwilling to continue the dark-age Moslem game.
So far, only the Hasidim seem to have perfected the art of rejecting the modern world and living apart from it while milking it for financial bennies--while having scads of children.
“So far, only the Hasidim seem to have perfected the art of rejecting the modern world and living apart from it while milking it for financial bennies—while having scads of children. “
—
Yep ! Diamonds are a girl’s best friend.
.
One more time, remind me why my tax dollars are paying for this?
Thank you. Honestly, I wish more people could have this much fun.
That is obviously an absolutely “yuge” problem but a secondary one to not existing.
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.