Hello Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 21st, 2009 at 07:34 pm
Send This Topic To A Friend
Two children should be limit, says green guru: World Religion - (Read 124 Times)
 
Admin
Main Admin


Member is offline

The Ten Commandments are Not Multiple Choice.

Decorating with HGPgal Send email to decluehgp@hotmail.com Send PM


Posts: 822
Post Icon Posted: Feb 9th, 2009 at 02:39 pm Quote Post

According to the UK government's green adviser couples who have more than two children are being “irresponsible” by creating an unbearable burden on the environment. Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the government's Sustainable Development Commission, said that curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming. Porritt said, “I am unapologetic about asking people to connect up their own responsibility for their total environmental footprint and how they decide to procreate and how many children they think are appropriate.”

Read the article here.

Admin. note: Apparently Mr. Porritt believes anyone disagreeing with him on this issue is unable to think for themselves what is really appropriate. Oy. I liked the reader's comment about paying more attn to teenage pregnancies as a higher goal.
...

« Last Edited by Admin Feb 9th, 2009 at 07:09 pm »
IP Logged

Home Decor & Design Ideas
Got Questions? Ask them at our Design & Decor Forum!
Order Online!
Advertisement

Click here to disable ads!


Admin
Main Admin


Member is offline

The Ten Commandments are Not Multiple Choice.

Decorating with HGPgal Send email to decluehgp@hotmail.com Send PM


Posts: 822
Post Icon Posted: Feb 9th, 2009 at 03:03 pm Quote Post

Here's one response...

RunAmok says:
February 2nd, 2009 at 11:20 pm

Eugenics is back in fashion, man, the Nazi regime darkened it’s name too much for a while but now the sins of the past are forgotten and we’re ready to go “green”, whatever it takes.

http://www.wholetruthcoalition.org/2009/02/02/population-control-to-combat-global-warming-advocates-jonathan-porritt/

What do you think?
IP Logged

Home Decor & Design Ideas
Got Questions? Ask them at our Design & Decor Forum!
Order Online!
Admin
Main Admin


Member is offline

The Ten Commandments are Not Multiple Choice.

Decorating with HGPgal Send email to decluehgp@hotmail.com Send PM


Posts: 822
Post Icon Posted: Feb 9th, 2009 at 03:06 pm Quote Post

Another, perhaps more chilling, related article here:

http://iperceive.net/nancy-pelosi-jonathan-porritt-two-ps-in-a-population-control-pod/

Nancy Pelosi & Jonathan Porritt: Two Ps in a population control pod
by Kurt Schulzke on February 2, 2009

Quote:
How radical is Nancy Pelosi? Pretty far, judging by Pelosi’s population control proximity to Jonathan Porritt. Porritt is Chair of the U.K.’s Sustainable Development Commission. Pelosi, as you may recall, went on the air recently in support of proliferating “contraception” as way to stimulate the economy by cutting the costs of government health care. If there’s a more powerful argument against nationalizing healthcare, I’d like to hear it.



And a reader comment of note:

Gravitas
02.03.09 at 2:43 am

We all know the Social Security contributions paid by one retiree are not enough to support him/her — not if he/she survives very long into retirement — since Congress raids Social Security funds for other pet projects and the money is not being invested.

Since our Social Security contributions are not kept “in the bank”, someone currently working is subsidizing someone who is retired. Actually, it takes several someones to produce those dollars.

Sooo, sweet Nancy, whose kids are going to produce Social Security checks for two aging parents who DIDN”T have more than two kids? You say *my* five kids are going to subsidize them? You are picking THEIR pockets? Who’s being irresponsible here, Nancy? You are, my dear: those of us who “reproduce irresponsibly” are the only ones who ARE responsible. We are providing for our own. What a concept!

After all, since it doesn’t go into mutual funds or a lock box, shouldn’t those who want to qualify for Social Security be required to have enough children to support their own retirement?

If a gynecological exam shows you can’t have more than two — then you are a charity case, and your retirement would be subsidized by families who do who have more children than Nancy’s prescribed limit...

And in fact, it IS. Those who have voluntarily chosen to have smaller families are leeching off those who have larger families. Do the math; it has to come from somewhere, Nancy. If Congress cannot keep it’s sticky fingers off Social Security funds, then we have to keep on reproducing.


Please give me your comments.

« Last Edited by Admin Feb 9th, 2009 at 03:46 pm »
IP Logged

Home Decor & Design Ideas
Got Questions? Ask them at our Design & Decor Forum!
Order Online!
FresnoJoe
Viscount


Member is offline



Send email to ke6oyc@pacbell.net Send PM


Posts: 66
Post Icon Posted: Feb 10th, 2009 at 10:30 pm Quote Post

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12
IP Logged

 
 

A great way to get more members is to spread the word about your forum:



Asian Models
Click here to disable ads!

This forum powered for FREE by Hyperboards v2.13
Get your own free forum today!