China’s at the forefront of saving the planet. And they’re doing it one baby at a time. That is, killing one baby at a time, according to Max Schulz from the Washington Examiner:
Want to save the planet from global warming? Forget about getting rid of coal plants or the internal combustion engine. Get rid of the humans. They’re the true problem.
That insidious message gained new currency with the United Nations Copenhagen climate change circus this month. While the conference likely will be remembered for participants’ failure to reach a binding emissions reduction agreement, its legacy may be that it brought mainstream respectability to the fringe left-wing notion that mankind is a scourge on the planet.
In so doing, it has breathed new life into population control proposals that had seemed discredited since the population bomb alarmists warned about in the 1960s and ’70s failed to detonate.
During the Copenhagen summit, Chinese representatives chillingly claimed credit for stifling 400 million births since the implementation of their one-child policy in 1979. That policy, which generally limits couples to no more than one offspring, is enforced by government mechanisms including coerced abortion and sterilization.
By Beijing’s calculations, its fascistic family planning regime has prevented 18 million tons of CO2 from being released into the atmosphere. Snuffing out lives to snuff out emissions seems a perfectly fair tradeoff not just to Beijing, but to opinion makers who have come to regard China as the global green exemplar.
That was the position taken by Peggy Liu, chairwoman of the Joint U.S.-China Collaboration on Clean Energy in a recent debate sponsored by the Economist. Liu, a 2008 Time magazine “Hero of the Environment,” argued that China must be given credit not just for what it is doing on climate change, but “for what it is not doing.” By that she explained, “China’s one-child policy reduces energy demand and is arguably the most effective way the country can mitigate climate change.”
It kind of figures that CNN would call this person a hero, doesn’t it?
Can you imagine being present at a conference where they’re boasting about 400 million forced abortions and not storming out or at least slamming the door. But no, our President and the elite of the world sat on their hands or worse…even approved. 400 million?! That’s not environmentalism, that’s a holocaust.
You know, I’m starting to think that these people who tout the environment so much maybe don’t like humans too much.
December 30, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I'm not sure if I should admit this or not, but I am really scared for the future.
December 30, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Misanthropy has been the true core of environmentalism for a long time. It's similar to the abortionists–they've largely given up the "is it human?" angle and instead say, "yeah, it's human, yeah we are killing it, so what?" It's a mixed blessing when the Enemy drops their facades. On the one hand they out themselves, on the other hand, it means they are confident enough to believe they can destroy the truth by sheer force.
Scott W.
December 30, 2009 at 1:50 pm
China has an atrocious record on environmental conservation. This is like cheating off the test from the guy who always gets Fs.
December 30, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Western "environmentalists" don't care about China's local non-carbon pollution. In fact they probably like it because the more people drink water that is unsafe for industrial use in the U.S., the more people die. That's another million not contributing to climate change.
December 30, 2009 at 4:38 pm
…Gee, ya think?
First it was kill off the surplus or we'll all starve; then it was do it to reduce suffering; then it was do it because we're killing the environment; now it's do it or we'll all burn. I may have missed a few of the problems– amazing how the solution is always the same, no?
December 30, 2009 at 5:55 pm
It appears from the text that TIME Magazine called Ms. Liu a "Hero."
December 30, 2009 at 8:26 pm
if we give up man, we give up on nature and nature will give up on us.
December 31, 2009 at 12:23 am
Environmentalists = watermelons
Green on the outside, red on the inside
December 31, 2009 at 1:24 am
and the movie AVATAR is backing them up by telling us to get rid of humans.
December 31, 2009 at 4:09 am
Eeeeks! the carbon footprint of all those old people who are no longer productive… I guess the green criteria for the health care death panels will see to it.
December 31, 2009 at 6:57 am
As per usual, the genocide declaration is ignored, especially by the United States of America, well done Obama, really, who cares about article 2 section d, not like genocide means anything!
December 31, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Good people:
Vote in 2010 against the current ruling party and Administration. Vote anyone who even remotely supported the agenda mentioned here or is associated by party with those who support this agenda. Vote them out of power. There are more of us than them, if we only get out and vote en masse. Pray that we do in the name of Jesus Christ, who Lives and Reigns with THe Father and the Holy Spirit, One god, forever and ever. Amen.
December 31, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Just remember to hold "pro-life" politicians accountable. Populaton control as foreign policy has been around since the Nixon administration. It's about resource control folks. So make those talker do walking when you put them into office.
Learning
January 1, 2010 at 4:43 am
I can't understand how anyone who thinks that people are pollution can justify his/her own life. Oh, wait, I get it–everyone ELSE is pollution. Silly me.
(BTW, sorry I didn't get to be your cashier at the bookstore the other night! Have all your kids grown a foot since I last saw them?)
January 1, 2010 at 5:46 am
Hey, you all a great group of commenters! Love that one about the watermelon!
Why don't you go on over to the CatholicVote.org site and comment there? The majority of the comments seem more like what I'd expect on NPR or the New York Times than a Catholic site. Thanks!
A blessed Christmas season and new year to you.
January 2, 2010 at 7:48 am
Ijust took a look at the CatholicVote comment box for the blog entry on Jesuit Father Reese opposing the sainthood of John Paul II. Good heavens! Where do those people come from? To blame John Paul II for sexual abuse by a miniscule proportion of US priests, most of whom molested in secret and before his pontificate, is beyond the pale!