Skip to comments.Treating human beings as little more than carbon
Posted on 12/12/2009 9:47:42 PM PST by Lorianne
Below a picture of 12 black babies, the caption warns: Babies in Dakar, Senegal. Then, with a literary sigh of relief, the subtitle to the caption points out that a cost analysis commissioned by [the Optimum Population Trust] claims that family planning is the cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions (1). In other words, the destructiveness of such babies, these carbon emitters, can be counteracted if we prevent them from being born in the first place.
What is truly disturbing about this, from a humanist perspective, is not simply that there is a silent crusade against the unique quality of human life, but that there is an almost complete absence of anger about it, a lack of any critical reaction against it. In modern times, there have always been small coteries of Malthusians, eugenic fantasists and bitter misanthropists who were estranged from children and who regarded babies as an imposition on their existences. Thankfully, these people tended to be consigned to the margins of society. Not any more.
A world that can place an equal sign between a baby and carbon is one that has lost its faith in humanity. This profound sense of malaise about the human condition is most systematically expressed around the extravagant, quasi-religious, time-is-running-out rhetoric that surrounds the Copenhagen conference on climate change, which started this morning. But it is important to recognise that the current anxiety about the destructive potential of human life is not a direct consequence of the issue of climate change. The campaign against climate change merely provides a vehicle through which a pre-existing sense of human self-loathing can be articulated. If climate change did not exist, the very same misanthropic sentiment would find expression through other issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at spiked-online.com ...
Someone please explain to me the difference between these people, Margaret Sanger, and the Nazi eugenics fans.
There is no difference.
Yes you don’t see the elite offering to reduce their population or carbon footprint. It will always be “somebody” else- the masses- who must reduce energy use and their ecological impact.
Case in point, how much resources did this meeting in Copenhagen consume?
One of the worst lessons we learn from the movies is that evil is in the form of black-caped, chuckling supervillains. It's actually a lot more pedestrian than that. It's these alien beings who shuffle their papers and snottily say we'd be so much better off if we'd just snuff out the most innocent of lives, and they don't see anything wrong with saying that.
These people are turning a funny Gary Larson joke into a sickening nihilist reality:
The cartoon depicted a lovely pastoral scene with birds and deer. From the clouds, a giant vial has been dropped. It is breaking as it hits the ground; I think HUMANS was on the label, and men and women were running out of it. The Almighty’s speech bubble just said “Uh oh...”
It was funny. But these creeps think human beings for real are hurting “the planet.”
There. Fixed it.
Now, instead of purchasing carbon credits, we should be buying black babies. Does Al Gore sell black babies?
Anyone who truly believes that human life is the problem causing global climate change - warming - cooling (whatever) should put their money where their mouth is and rid the world of themselves first.
Hey, but if you are a white European Politician, you can have as many children as you want.
Liberalism’s face unmasked.
My view, although a catholic and 200% against the murder of an unborn child, I do support birth control.
However, I think it needs to be practiced by those who can’t support offspring, not those who can...
1) “natural born”, does not mean “born on the soil”, it means “born on the soil, to parents that are citizens”.
2) the MATERIAL evidence is not in dispute: Obama’s father was never a citizen
3) whether Obama was born in Hawaii or Kenya is irrelevant
, so Obama, even if born in Hawaii, is not a “natural-born” citizen
4) the illegal aliens who have their kids here, have kids that are only allegedly “natural born” since their parents are not citizens
Actually, I think this is a wonderful idea. Rather than sending infinite food and medical aid for rapidly growing third world populations, why not just send then contraception? It’s win/win for everyone. They get to enjoy doing something that they like, and we have less dependents that liberals will find a reason to support out of the fruits of our labor.
No, according to the article preventing one baby being born in Kenya = one airplane trip from London to Sydney for a Western European.
So, you can continue your carbon consuming ways without guilt ... as long as ou work towards preventing births in developing nations (for example black babies in Africa).
These people are so evil probably Satan himself is surprised.
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.