Posted on 07/27/2014 7:31:11 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
LONDON: A new culprit has been found causing climate change - "lifestyle" babies.
Scientists have called for a blanket ban on free fertility treatment for those making "lifestyle" reproductive choices, such as sterilization reversal or single motherhood for fertile women.
They have also called for a legislation that makes fertility clinics subject to carbon capping schemes, in a bid to help curb climate change.
This has made professor Cristina Richie of Boston College, Massachusetts, say that only those who are medically infertile through no fault of their own should be eligible for government funded treatment.
"The fertility industry is just one small piece of the jigsaw puzzle of rampant consumption that leads to climate change," but it needs to do its bit to start to become more sustainable, she says.
The adoption process needs to be made easier, and society also needs to change its attitude to childlessness, she says.
"Retrenchment in all areas of life is the key to slowing down or halting carbon emissions that lead to climate change. For each child made through medical intervention, a carbon legacy results," she concludes.
(Excerpt) Read more at economictimes.indiatimes.com ...
And of course she’s not a hard left Margret Sanger euthanasia nut promoting national socialist agendas.
The bottom line of the “climate change” movement: there have to be fewer people, one way or another.
If people are bad for the environment, why should the public be paying for children for anyone who can’t naturally have them, no matter what the reason? That money could be used to prevent healthy people from having children!
Chesterton on birth control/population control:
In 1925 Chesterton wrote an introduction to Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol in which he said that “The answer to anyone who talks about the surplus population is to ask him, whether he is part of the surplus population; or if not, how he knows he is not.”
“The bottom line of the “climate change” movement: there have to be fewer people, one way or another.”
So if the bitter clingers to this climate change agenda would all commit suicide to support the movement...
Compare the arrogance and self absorbed sanctimony of this women who wishes to deny life to anyone who threatens her privileged lifestyle with the story below
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3185632/posts
She is one of those people who dream of the day when all children are murdered and another 100 million wretched humans are delivered to the pits for burning in order that the privileged might live out their fantasies.
She works for a Catholic College. She is simply weaving in Catholic belief to limit children to traditional families to leverage the global warming nuttiness. I agree; fewer children born to single women or homosexuals is a good thing. The fertility racket is out of control.
She's a left-wing screwball.
It is strange. I agree with her conclusions, but not her reasoning. The gov’t shouldn’t pay for ‘lifestyle’ fertility choices.
How about we just blow Boston off the face of the earth, that will wipe out a huge number of unneeded people and over the long run Dramatically decrease “America’s carbon footprint”
If bostinites were really worried about it they would euthanize themselves.
You are a lunatic.
“”How about we just blow Boston off the face of the earth, that will wipe out a huge number of unneeded people...”
You are a lunatic.”
No I’m just taking her argument to its logical conclusion. If your going to start denying people existence to save your own mythical god, then you should start with your own existence.
What happened to freedom???????
Fertility clinics are pure medical care in most states not screwed up by insurance, just like cosmetic surgery. Business model: supply, demand. People come in, pay, are treated.
And anyone should be able to have children and as many as they can afford.
“I agree; fewer children born to single women or homosexuals is a good thing. The fertility racket is out of control. “
I agree that nothing good can come from the noted forms of parenting. However, carbon emissions have nothing to do with it; rather, it’s the socially destructive destructive consequences of single parenting and homosexual upbringing of children.
From some of her other writings: “The health care system is too pervasive and significant an establishment to disregard its environmental effects or exempt it from environmental ethics. The integrity of the health care system and the consumption of medical goods should be assessed in light of environmental sustainability. Medicine and its attendant branches can become “green” through conservation and aiming at integrating green bioethics into its developments, techniques, and procedures.”
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.