Population Pledge, 27°

I pledge to have no more children other than via adoption. This will save a lifetime of environmental footprint for each child I will not bring into the world.

3 comments about this action

Unfortunately bringing a person from poverty to 'middle class' also increases footprints, for example last year something like 30 million Chinese moved into cities (call it growth) from rural areas, this was back when China was building the equivalent of an Australia per year in infrastructure, or a coal fired power plant every 10 days, I'm not 100% on these figures but I'm sure you can get the picture.This is what people can't work out or accept, the planet is overpopulated now, the only way 'we' as a species are going to be around in 100 years is if we fast become underpopulated, due to resource depletion the population has to/will drop by 3-5 billion as we plunge down Hubbert's curve, this will happen over the next 25 -30 years 99% of our food is dependent on oil and natural gas, take that off the worlds dining tables and watch what happens to adopted children. In the 1960s China had a famine with 30 million people starving to death, they had a saying back then "you eat my child and I will eat yours" ... same thing happened on Easter Island. Maybe adopted children will be useful for barter?
A suggestion, as parents are the ones responsible for overpopulation they should front up and do the 'Soilent Green' thing and volunteer to make room for the innocent victims of their ego driven breading ... namely us non breeders, and their children. Sorry mum and dad, for your child's sake you have got to go ;)

in May 2009

Adoption is a great gift, both to childless couples and children. Some adoptions unite children from impoverished backgrounds with families from wealthier circumstances, but that is not always the case.

Adoption is not only an opportunity to give a home and family to a child who would otherwise be without, it is also an opportunity to instil ones values in that child. A better world will come from better people.

Thanks,
Glenn.

in May 2009

I learned when I was in my teens almost forty years ago, that Mao Tse Tung a general who rose to leadership in China, banned more than one child per person for about forty years, because when the chinese were invaded by the japanese in the late twenties and early thirties in particular, Nanking, the horrors were perpetrated by lack of food were so bad that everyone agreed to do just that. There is a book called "The Rape of Nanking that details this horror.
My point is that to ask people to do without children while they support the "right" of others to breed at will, is good for a free society but breeds resentment on a mass scale. Especially if they are practicing predatory eating practices like the consumption of meat. The hormones in meat and dairy and even fish promote the philosophy that it's O.K. to kill to eat. Then it's a short step to enslaving to eat. We have seen this plenty over the centuries. Even the HIndus and Buddhists have a saying that when you put meat into your body it takes on a life of it's own inside you and justifies it's own existence by telling you it's O.K. to kill and enslave...
Why take on a kid just to hurt them even more. The recent article of Brad Pitt yelling at his six kids to drink their carbonated sodas to get out of bed and get on with their chores etc, makes me think that adoption is only good under certain perameters. I am more of the belief that the Celestine Prophecy, or the ancient Hebrew texts "ONLY RECREATE YOURSELF" is the best policy. Since I believe noone is so inferior that they should not be allowed to breed; we are not the wolf pack, we are the caretakers of the earth...

in February 2012

2 people have doing this

1 person pledged to do this 

Brooke L. pledged to do this 756 days ago