agenda of the homosexualist forces and
neo-colonialists is clear: it is not
about climate change, but rather it
is about population control. They will
tell all lies, including reviving Malthus,
to push their agenda.
If climate change is a problem, it is
clearly the fault of the developed countries,
who are mainly responsible for carbon
emissions, due to their relentless economic
activities and lavish and hedonistic
lifestyles. Reducing population will
not significantly alter the problem
of harmful carbon emissions. But this
is what the elitist First World wants
to do. They want to kill off the populations
of the Third World, so they can continue
with their pursuit of the "good"
life and their idolatry of Baal.
They will force their diabolical intent
on the poor and defenseless peoples
of the world. They will resort to everything
and stop at nothing. They will even
impose China's satanic one-child policy.
These powerful forces -- the EU, elements
of the UN, the US government under Obama,
liberal media, certain elitist billionaire
philanthropists -- are pawns of Satan,
who hates and opposes what is of God.
They are out to destroy life -- that
of the unborn, and even their own lives
through euthanasia and demographic suicide.
We need to defend family and life. In
this we are engaged in intense spiritual
warfare. We will have to make great
sacrifices for the cause of family and
life. The forces of evil crucified Jesus
on the cross, but his affliction, suffering
and death were what won for us our salvation.
We do not know where this world is going
to, and when the end will come. But
let us simply stand for the cause of
Christ, and that of family and life.
Embrace the cross. Even die in order
to truly live.
Re-Birth of Population Control
Human Life Seen as a Carbon Problem
By Father John Flynn, LC
DEC. 13, 2009 (Zenit.org).-
The Copenhagen climate summit has
brought with it an outpouring of opinions
on environmental issues. Among these
is a disturbing return to the Malthusian
position of seeing population control
as the solution to the world's problems.
planetary law imposing China's one-child
policy on all nations is what is needed,
according to an opinion article by Diane
Francis, published Dec. 8 in the Canadian
newspaper, the National Post.
predicted this would reduce the current
world population of 6.5 billion down
to 3.43 billion by 2075. While more
extreme than most, Francis is hardly
alone in advocating population control.
prior to the Copenhagen summit, Britain's
Optimum Population Trust launched a
scheme, reported the Guardian
newspaper on Dec. 3.
explained by John Vidal, the paper's
environment editor, this
allows rich consumers to offset their
jet-set lifestyle by paying for contraception
in poorer countries.
to Vidal, the trust's calculations show
that the 10 metric tons of carbon emitted
by a return flight from London to Sydney
could be offset by preventing the birth
of one child in a country such as Kenya.
is still alive in the attitudes of some
environmental activists who don't see
any problem in urging developing nations
to curb their population so that the
carbon emissions of richer countries
can be offset.
launch of the scheme followed a report
published in August by the trust titled:
"Fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions,
Less Cost: Reducing Future Carbon Emissions
by Investing in Family Planning."
conclusions of the study stated: "The
cost/ benefit analysis found that family
planning is considerably cheaper than
many low carbon technologies."
on the study's findings, it is proposed
that family planning methods should
be a primary tool in the optimum strategy
for reducing carbon emissions,"
the report advocated.
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
joined the Malthusian chorus
with the publication of its State of
World Population 2009 Report.
access to "reproductive health"
was constantly urged by the report.
This U.N. term is understood to include
access to condoms, contraceptives and
have now reached a point where humanity
is approaching the brink of disaster,"
stated Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, UNFPA's
executive director at the London launch
of the report Nov. 18.
report was greeted in the press with
titles such as "UN: Fight Climate
Change With Free Condoms," (The
Associated Press, Nov. 18).
Control: The Most Effective Way of Reducing
Greenhouse Gas Emissions," trumpeted
the Nov. 19 headline in the London Times
newspaper in its coverage of the report.
alongside the call for reproductive
health in developing nations were other
statements that contradicted the thesis
that less people in poorer countries
would bring the world back from the
precipice of environmental disaster.
dominant responsibility for the current
build-up of greenhouse gases lies with
developed countries," the report
linkages between population and climate
change are in most cases complex and
indirect," it also conceded.
better guide to the issue of population
and the environment came in a special
report published by The Economist magazine
in its Oct. 31 issue.
the editorial that accompanied the report
the magazine pointed out that the trend
to lower fertility in developing countries
is already advanced. "Today's fall
in fertility is both very large and
very fast," it said.
can limit the human impact on the environment
in three ways the editorial maintained:
population policy, technology and governance.
Regarding population there is not much
more to be done the magazine argued.
Only "Chinese-style coercion"
could bring about a speedier reduction
for a publication that in no way espouses
religion, the editorial also added that:
poor people to have fewer children than
they want because the rich consume too
many of the world's resources would
report itself proposed that the
way to deal with carbon emissions and
environmental concerns is not to try
and reduce fertility but to alter economic
growth so that it is less polluting
and to make it less resource-intensive.
sociologist Fran Furedi explored the
return of Malthusianism in a piece written
for the Web site Spiked. His Dec. 7
commentary harshly attacked the proposals
of the Optimum
Population Trust for being "a zombie-like
Malthusian organization devoted to the
cause of human depletion."
most of history, human life has been
valued in and of itself; it has been
seen as possessing a special quality
that could not be reduced to quantities
to be measured by misanthropic accountants,"
based his comments on a humanist perspective
and not on a religious foundation. There
is a unique quality to human life he
argued. He also wondered why other humanists
were not interested in defending human
life and standing up for ideals developed
in the Renaissance and the Enlightenment.
world that can place an equal sign between
a baby and carbon is one that has lost
its faith in humanity,"
interesting commentary was published
on Dec. 9 by the Australian Web site,
On Line Opinion. It was written by Farida
Akhter from Bangladesh. According to
the article, she is the executive director
of an organization that works with communities
in Bangladesh and she also runs a feminist
reflected on the UNFPA's State of World
Population report and argued that it
is a simplistic approach to consider
that women can solve environmental problems
simply by reducing their fertility.
the developing nations simply doesn't
make sense, she affirmed. Citing data
from the UNFPA report she stated that
the world's richest
half-billion people are responsible
for 50% of the world's carbon dioxide
she continued, even
if we reduce population growth in the
poorest countries their contribution
to the reduction of carbon emissions
or consumption of resources will be
not be significant.
not make women the target for contraceptives
in the name of solving climate change,"
sentiment shared by Jennie Bristow,
editor of the British publication, the
also wrote an article for Spiked on
the topic of population and ecology,
on Oct. 6.
defended abortion and contraception,
but also pointed out that history is
full of examples where these practices
have been imposed upon women by authorities
who wanted to decide how many children
should be born.
essay was critical of the pro-life position,
yet she also argued that: "Serious
questions have to be asked about how
genuine the commitment to free choice
is among those who ultimately would
like women to choose not to have children,
or more than a certain number of children."
do indeed have a responsibility towards
the environment pointed out Benedict
XVI in his June 29 encyclical "Caritas
is at stake, however, is something more
than just ecological issues, the Pope
added. Respect for nature also includes
a respect for human life. "Our
duties towards the environment are linked
to our duties towards the human person,
considered in himself and in relation
to others," the encyclical argued
the two become opposed, then "herein
lies a grave contradiction in our mentality
and practice today," the Pontiff
A contradiction being proposed by not
a few voices in the debate over how
to approach environmental issues today.
to me to live is Christ, and to die
is gain." (Phil 1:21)