By Patrice Lewis Posted: January 02, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 For some time now, I've been bookmarking "green" articles on overpopulation and how we need to reduce the number of children we bear in order to save the planet. Recently another opinion piece came to light that so revolted me that I knew it was time to address the issue. Diane Francis, editor-at-large of the National Post, wrote a column for the Financial Post in which she endorsed implementing China's one-child policy worldwide as a means of saving the planet. "The fix [for overpopulation] is simple," writes Ms. Francis. "It's dramatic. And yet the world's leaders don't even have this on their agenda in Copenhagen. Instead there will be photo ops, posturing, optics, blah-blah-blah about climate science and climate fraud, announcements of giant wind farms, then cap-and-trade subsidies. None will work unless a China one-child policy is imposed. … China has proven that birth restriction is smart policy. … The only fix is if all countries drastically reduce their populations, clean up their messes and impose mandatory conservation measures." I see. Are you volunteering, Ms. Francis? Because here's the clincher: You have two kids. For those who like the idea of a one-child policy, you'll be pleased to know that "China's population-control measures have resulted in 400 million fewer births, translating into 18 million fewer tons of carbon dioxide emissions a year." This is reported by Zhao Baige, vice minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China. I'm sure he's right. But it's how those 400 million "fewer births" happened that things get ugly. Compliance with the one-child policy isn't always voluntary. Therefore many Chinese people must be coerced into limiting themselves to one child … and I mean "coerced" in the worse sense of the word. Is this really what Ms. Francis wants? READ FULL STORY >
Sunday, January 03, 2010
Eliminate those resource-sucking brats! ~ By Patrice Lewis
Commentary from WorldNetDaily
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment