Firstly, let me say that I’m pro-life.
Secondly, let’s consider what 2 billion more humans on Earth at this time would mean... fewer resources per person, as the requirements for food, water, etc., would be jeopardized.
The scenario reminds me of a movie I’ve seen a couple of times —I can’t recall the title and even used Google— , where people lived in a pretty closed environment after some apocalyse (like nuke war). .......Upon reaching the age of 35 or something, the adults were required to go to something called “Sanctuary”, where they died and that made room for the younger people born into the community with limited resources.
I can imagine that a significant increase in the Earth’s population would probably result in mandated euthanasia for people of some specified age.
“Logans Run” - Carrousel ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSUAAKFLoL0
-
Shall I also link you to “Soylent Green”?
Not sure what being pro-life means to you, but let's go with it for now.
Secondly, let’s consider what 2 billion more humans on Earth at this time would mean... fewer resources per person, as the requirements for food, water, etc., would be jeopardized.
This Neo-Malthusian nonsense has long been completely debunked. The assumption that the food production can't keep up with population growth is factually untrue. An additional two billion people would mean more people to produce food, clean water, etc. Since relatively little of the the earth's tillable land is producing food for consumption, this is not a constraint. In fact, food production efficiency is increasing beyond any possible human growth rate.
Nature: Malthus foiled again and again
...I can imagine that a significant increase in the Earth’s population would probably result in mandated euthanasia for people of some specified age.
It's actually just the opposite. A degrading of the respect for the life of any class of people results in the lowering of the value of everyone else's life. It is no coincidence that the countries that support euthanasia the most have the lowest birthrates.
I'm sure the Nazis told themselves the same thing when they outlawed abortions for Aryan women.
Secondly, let’s consider what 2 billion more humans on Earth at this time would mean... fewer resources per person, as the requirements for food, water, etc., would be jeopardized.
Malthus first suggested this over 200 years ago when the earth's population was around 1 billion, we're now over 7 billion and doing just fine.
What Malthus and everyone else who pushes leftist tyranny through "population control" ignores is that a larger population results in more productivity. The world isn't even close to using up its natural resources. Food production is curtailed to create price stability. There is no shortage.
The scenario reminds me of a movie I’ve seen a couple of times —I can’t recall the title and even used Google— , where people lived in a pretty closed environment after some apocalyse (like nuke war). .......Upon reaching the age of 35 or something, the adults were required to go to something called “Sanctuary”, where they died and that made room for the younger people born into the community with limited resources.
Yes, I am well aware that the left is fond of producing movies with the "you better let us do what we want or the consequences will be dire" theme. It's propaganda and nothing else.
I can imagine that a significant increase in the Earth’s population would probably result in mandated euthanasia for people of some specified age.
They're going to try to mandate euthanasia anyways, but YOU are using the murder of TWO BILLION INNOCENT BABIES to justify letting the left do whatever they want.