Is Having An 18th Child An Eco-Crime Against Humanity?

For those of you who may have missed it, the Duggar family of Arkansas just had their 18th child. In a world of dwindling resources, this story has once again sparked a debate about whether humanity should be free to multiply as they wish or whether strict population controls are needed for the good of mankind.

For most of human history, the thought of the government or anyone else restricting how many children one could have was absolutely unthinkable.

However, today there are many, particularly in the Western world, who are more than willing to restrict their own reproductive capabilities.

One 27 year old woman named Toni Vernelli told the Daily Mail why she decided to get permanately sterilized: "Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population."

Some activists have even gone to the extreme by forming "The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement" which seeks to reduce the presence of humanity on earth as much as possible.

Their motto is: “May we live long and die out”.

So is the ballooning population of planet earth a huge threat to the environment? Do we need to implement strict population controls for the good of mankind?

The reality is that the world has more people than it ever has in all of recorded history. Some countries have implemented population laws that are quite strict (such as China's one child policy), while other nations do not have any population regulations. Lately, however, we have started to see some population control measures begin to pop up in the Western world.....

*Women in the Netherlands who are deemed by the state to be unfit mothers will be sentenced to take contraception for a period of two years, according to a new bill before the Dutch parliament.

*In the U.K., one influential think tank says that it is an "eco-crime" to have too many children and that we really need to examine the impact our large population is having on the earth.

*In South America, the government of Peru goes door to door pressuring women to be sterilized and they are funded by American tax dollars to do this.

The desire by the global elite to limit the population of the earth has been around for a long, long time. Between 1798-1826, English economist Thomas Malthus published six editions of his work entitled "Essay on the Principle of Population", which argued that population growth inevitably outstrips food production.

The primary argument advanced by Malthus was that the English working class was poor not because they were exploited, but rather because there were too many of them. Malthus opposed welfare and higher wages because he believed they would allow the poor to survive and breed, thus compounding the overpopulation problem and leading to more poverty. Of course Malthus was terribly wrong about all of this, but nonetheless his theories gained wide acceptance among the English elite of his day.

Many years later, Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, vigorously promoted this type of thinking in the United States. The following is one of Margaret Sanger's most famous quotes:

"The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

Unfortunately, the theories of Malthus, Sanger and other population control advocates did not die out. Rather, they seemed to gain steam as the population of the world absolutely exploded in the 20th century.

U.S. environmentalist Paul Erlich, in his 1968 book entitled "The Population Bomb", argued for very strict population control measures, especially in the poorer areas of the world. He warned that if we did not implement such measures we would be facing catastrophic problems very quickly.

Dr. Arne Schiotz, World Wildlife Fund Director of Conservation, said this in 1984:

"Malthus has been vindicated, reality is finally catching up with Malthus. The Third World is overpopulated, it’s an economic mess, and there’s no way they could get out of it with this fast-growing population. Our philosophy is: back to the village."

Unfortunately, the philosophies of Erlich, Schiotz and others have garnered a following even among powerful members of the United States government:

“There is a single theme behind all our work–we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it…."

“Our program in El Salvador didn’t work. The infrastructure was not there to support it. There were just too goddamned many people…. To really reduce population, quickly, you have to pull all the males into the fighting and you have to kill significant numbers of fertile age females…."

“The quickest way to reduce population is through famine, like in Africa, or through disease like the Black Death….”

–Thomas Ferguson, State Department Office of Population Affairs

The quotes above are typical of the mindset of the global elite. The call for radical population control has grown louder than ever before. College professors are given standing ovations by their students when they call for a 90 percent reduction in the human population of the planet. Ted Turner said, "A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal," and the global elite applauded him for it. The Georgia Guidestones which call for us to "maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature" are increasingly cited by our leaders as an important, and perhaps even necessary, goal.

What is happening to our world?

It seems as though for the global elite, every major crisis these days is an opportunity to further one of the key pillars of their agenda:

Population reduction.

Problem #1: Gas costs too much and we are faced with "global warming".

Answer: Get rid of a whole bunch of people and we will use less gas and we will produce less "greenhouse gases".

Problem #2: Medical costs are soaring out of control.

Answer: Get rid of a whole bunch of people and kill off the elderly and we will have fewer medical costs.

Now Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, has the perfect solution for the "food crisis":

Get rid of a whole bunch of people......

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3908588.ece

The following is one of Prince Philip's most famous quotes about world population:

"You cannot keep a bigger flock of sheep than you are capable of feeding. In other words conservation may involve culling in order to keep a balance between the relative numbers in each species within any particular habitat. I realize this is a very touchy subject, but the fact remains that mankind is part of the living world…. Every new acre brought into cultivation means another acre denied to wild species."

Prince Philip, the "Eco-Warrior", also once said that he would like to come back to earth as a disease after he died to help reduce the human population.

But he is far from alone on this issue. The call for human depopulation is coming from a myriad of other sources:

John Guillebaud, professor of family planning at University College London has said: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet."

He has also made this shocking statement: “The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”

Now there are influential think tanks in the United Kingdom that are even advocating that the U.K. adopt a "2 child" policy to help fight "global warming".

The Club of Rome certainly is clear about who they think the enemy is.....

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap of mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

–Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, 1991

Mikhail Gorbachev made the following stunning statement about the population of the earth: "We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage."

The reality is that we are getting increasingly closer to the kind of world where the "useless eaters" that Henry Kissinger talked about will be "eliminated". Is this the kind of future that we want for us and our children?

The truth is that the world is not experiencing runaway population growth. While the earth's population is growing, the rate of growth is definitely slowing. The population of the world grew by 140% between 1950 and 2000. However, authorities predict a rise of only 50% between 2000 and 2050, and a rise of just 11% in the 50 years after that.

The truly frightening thing is that many of you who are reading this article actually agree with this radical depopulation agenda.

For those of you who do believe in such insanity, we would love to hear your rationale. Feel free to post a comment to this article below.