Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Breitbart – CBC News author Kristen Pyszczyk thinks its outrageous that some parents choose to burden the planet’s climate by having lots of children, when there are lots of migrants who need a new home.
It shouldn’t be taboo to criticize parents for having too many kids
Celebrities Chip and Joanna Gaines took some heat for announcing they are pregnant with their fifth child.
Kristen Pyszczyk · for CBC News · January 14
Chip and Joanna Gaines, stars of HGTV’s Fixer Upper, were probably surprised at the backlash on social media last week that accompanied their announcement of baby number five. I was surprised too.
Not because I disagree with their critics, who admonished the couple for having too many kids, but rather because it’s a sentiment so seldom heard in a society that generally celebrates procreation with almost militant cheerfulness.
While having a child or five is a very personal choice, it’s also a choice that affects everyone who inhabits our planet. So while many people might find the backlash unwarranted, it’s actually a conversation we need to have in order to challenge our uncritical acceptance of the life-fulfillment-through-procreation story.
.@chipgaines swears he can already tell it’s a boy. Look at the little heartbeat!! 🙌🏽❤️❤️ #5 pic.twitter.com/bUwC3T91Cl
— Joanna Gaines (@joannagaines) January 3, 2018
Population control is a fraught topic, and carries with it associations with eugenics and other nasty historical events. But we still need to talk about it, and people who reacted strongly to the Gaines’ pregnancy announcement know this on some level. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the survival of our species depends on it.
In August of last year, New York Magazine published an article claiming we are living through a mass extinction. The article claimed that the earth will be uninhabitable within 100 years due to various consequences of climate change, food shortages and economic and political instability.
…
Shame is a powerful tool for changing behaviour: it’s how we introduce new and existing social conventions. It’s unfortunate that Chip and Joanna bore the brunt of changing attitudes, but let’s learn from the reaction and examine our own actions.
…
And if the birth rate in Canada declines, so what? As old You-Know-Who cuts off aid to not-for-profits that educate on abortion, restricts immigration and stops sending money to countries that need it, we will have a steady supply of smart and talented immigrants. Their loss, our gain.
Anyway, here’s wishing Chip and Joanna the best!
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/chip-joanna-gains-pregnancy-1.4481165
My heart goes out to Chip and Joanna. What should be one of the happiest moments of their lives is subject to public bullying by eco-lunes who think the announcement of a woman’s pregnancy is a good opportunity to talk about climate change and population control.
They might be right on 13 counts: Thing 1, Thing 2, Thing 3…….Thing 13…Recent news from wacky California…
Actually the parents should be ashamed, not for having the 13 children, but how they treated them…I do support the 13 children…
?strip=all&w=750
Someone does not understand what the word pregnant means.
Kristen Pyszczyk probably understands immigrants more than we.I don’t think that’s a Canadian name? Wondering how many siblings, cousins and aunts/uncles she has.
What if the migrants come from big families?
“What if the migrants come from big families”, you ask?
ANSWER: No problem, as long as the big families are from poor countries to whom the US should be giving money to support. THOSE big families are okay, since they are MIGRANTS, which somehow magically disqualifies them from the stigma of having come from big families. We are not supposed to support the people from big families in our own country, you see, but rather ignore our own country and give our support to the rest of the world.
It makes so much sense.
yeah…and then the migrants have BIG families but thats dandy?
cos theyre not white
so thats pc/greentard acceptable, and they also wont be lectured on family size cos??
its their religion so off bounds for criticism
“a choice that affects everyone who inhabits our planet”.
” cuts off aid to not-for-profits that educate on abortion,”
” With a fertility number of 7.19 children per woman Niger has the world’s highest birth rate”
These people only hate Christian ‘White’ families with many children. They don’t think about ‘poor’ families, families ‘of Color’ excluding ‘White’, or Muslim families. It is what we call a ‘striking double standard’, ‘xenophilia’, and ‘nationally constructed racial thinking driven by left-biased motivated reasoning’.
Yes, the word celebrity leads to misguided thinking. Joanna is born in Kansas, deplorableland, and has been based in Texas, deplorableland.
Then the migrant genes get passed on instead of those of their snowflake enablers. What these folks are promoting is ending your own genetic line to foster the continuation of another family group. I only took Anthropology 100 in the 70’s, but this seems totally opposite of what I was taught about human nature.
Pop; In reference to your second sentence, perhaps like the movie “Idiocracy”?
Pop, you should read up on “r” and “K” reproductive strategies and associated psychology, philosophy, and political leanings. Leftists are effectively “r” strategists, and for an “r”, it makes total sense to abandon your own genetic line and favour foreigners (especially foreign “K” strategists; the competitive advantage from that is convoluted but biologically actually makes sense). That of course is complete nonsense to us K types. Humans are naturally K but we can epigenetically switch to r in the presence of abundant resources (or even the perception of same), or in chaotic environments, both of which favour an r strategy.
“totally opposite of what I was taught about human nature”
The same can be said for most left wing policies.
That’s right. Bring the Masai warrior and his 8 wives and 40 kids over.
It’s all right, because that’s cultural. It’s the Trump voting rednecks that’s the problem. /sarc
BTW, the eight wives is not racism.
Those who think it was, listen, it’s a sourced fact. Just google ‘The Maasai village we visited was run by a man who proudly had eight wives. Each wife and the children had by her live in one of the huts constructed from cow dung. The hut also holds some of the livestock at night’.
You will find a trigger warning, that suits so well to people who deny inconvenient facts.
…..And for certain allow him to bring his herd of cattle since cattle form the basis of his self-image.
They will have and indeed do, contining the cultural practice.
It seems to me that Kristen Pyszczyk’s parents had one too many children
You said it!
They never offer to do something about the problem by dying promptly themselves.
Yes. Plus, the biggest Climate Fascists are typically the biggest hypocrites. How many kids doe Gore have?! FOUR. Four CO2 emitting (and with daddy’s money, at numerous times the “average” rate) “climate burdens.”
Hopefully, Chip and Joanna will learn something from this, and teach all five of their children about the need to resist the political agenda the “Climate Nazis” push with every fiber of their being. And hopefully each of them will have five of their own and teach them likewise.
+1
It’s not that they had too many kids, it’s just that one turned out to become a very aggressive cyber-bully.
Here’s an independent confirmation.
https://epistlesofthomas.wordpress.com/2018/01/13/when-is-cyberbullying-ok/
Well that was well said.
+1. Made me laugh. Made me wish I’d said it.
CBC News author Kristen Pyszczyk thinks its outrageous that some parents choose to burden the planet’s climate by having lots of children, when there are lots of migrants who need a new home.
Why doesn’t she open her home to them then?
they have homes its just that they are in “less than ideal” countries … and rather than fix their countries they run away …
…and they think that’s they kind of people who will make America great again (or ever).
Sad, demented, uncritical thinkers.
Kaiser D, my ancestors fled “less than Ideal” conditions to come to the new world and try their fortunes.
The difference is that there is no more new frontier land to squat on and claim. They sold what they had in Europe to finance their passage and establish a domicile in America.
The migrant victims of over-population are not running away because they choose to, they are like the ants and bees driven from the nests. Nature has no compassion when habitats become overcrowded, and the Pizchick plan is for people to selflessly abandon their geneology and raise the progeny of the uneducated, unproductive victims of third-world dictators, whose only talent is to procreate.
Yeah Kirsten, how about you taking up this cause in the Middle East to save the planet.
Conversation my rump, they want to be able to walk up and lecture folks like the poorly raised barbarians they are, and “people with a bunch of kids” are about the only target their selfish lifestyle doesn’t include.
I’ve been getting this fecal matter since folks realized we had three! They really don’t like it when you don’t bow down and scrape an apology out for their cheap grace.
Stop with the bullying! The same people doing the bullying love to quote Stats Canada when it appears to be to their advantage. Well Stats Canada says the AVERAGE Canadian family has
1.2 children – not the case with migrants. They come with 2 to 3 and have more. So, stop commenting unless it applies to everyone.
This is true, but the reasons why immigrants from poorer nations have a tradition of larger families is because of survival rates. From what I have seen, the children of those immigrants have families much the same size as anyone else once they have become Westernised. Language is a good example of this. The immigrants may never speak the local language well, but their children will be fluent.
I read somewhere that 1st gen immigrants have family sizes that reflect their home country.
2nd gen tend to be about half way between home and host country.
3rd gen on, tend to be whatever is the norm for the host country.
1) My use of home and host was merely to keep the terminology the same for each generation.
2) I’m speaking averages, anyone can come up with examples that don’t follow the average.
3) It’s sad that I need to add points one and two.
Well their are those for whom a very large family including several wives is a mark of wealth! These are not from the poor segment. Did you know that the most popular name of newborn boys in UK is now Mohammed?
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/01/britain-most-popular-baby-name-muhammad
Even Kirsten will be ghettoized before long.
“My heart goes out to Chip and Joanna. What should be one of the happiest moments of their lives is subject to public bullying by eco-lunes who think the announcement of a woman’s pregnancy is a good opportunity to talk about climate change and population control.”
They also apparently believe it’s a great idea to flood the West with the overpopulation from cultures which breed at a truly prodigious rate and then go on to further stimulate their breeding potential on the agar plate of generous Western welfare states. This level of insanity is something for which I can find no suitable words.
Shame is the next bitcoin, trade it with your friends!!!!! Narcissism is epidemic!!! yea
The West is toast.
The answer is offset credits. For every child you have, buy an offset from a more virtuous person who has aborted.
Why should only those who have chosen abortion profit from this program? We keep hearing how the vast numbers of baby boomers reaching retirement age are putting a huge strain on our economy. Euthanasia can eliminate this burden while simultaneously providing offset credits for the next of kin.
And if that doesn’t prove effective enough, we can go on to more proactive means of lowering population numbers. Like by making it a contest to see who can eliminate the most surplus population, with points awarded. Maybe a car race.
http://www.syfy.com/sites/syfy/files/styles/1200×680/public/wire/legacy/DeathRace2000.jpg?itok=Iel22AH7
Or maybe Global Thermonuclear War?
How about gas chambers? They are even more effective and can be disguised as mass showers.
Muslim men have up to four wives and up to 20+ children…jihad welfare warfare…to promote jihad while living on the dole…as advocated by Imams…
And critics like Worrall and the other liberals never mention Muslims, they are probably cringing at the possibility of death threats
I’m not a liberal.
no you are not a liberal because you forgot what liberal is supposed to mean …
Kaiser, liberal seems to mean whatever one wishes it to mean. Nothing more, nothing less. Liberal in Australia seems to be different to Liberal elsewhere.
I criticise Muslims as much as I criticise anyone else, when they try to exploit nonsense climate claims to advance their political agenda.
e.g.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/27/claim-climate-change-responsible-for-severe-flooding-in-the-nile-delta/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/01/terrorist-plan-to-destabilise-america-using-the-climate-issue/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/01/al-jazeera-climate-deniers-costing-400000-lives-year/
LOL. Well, it goes this way for the lıberal thinkers. Don’t have kids, adopt the ones from afar that need our generosity. I’ve got nothing against that, actually. In fact people who foster kids are near-saints. But the truth also is this: we also have a responsibility to pass along our genetic heritage; if we suspect genetic “difficulties” (such as latent genetic diseases), there is enough genetic screening and ‘counselling’, that one really can do the right thing for future humanity. But having one’s own kids, and raising them ‘right’ is both an honor and a social obligation in some circles.
In the end, if you have kids, be happy with them, and try to instill in them values, mores and ethics that’ll serve them and society well in life. NO more, NO less.
GoatGuy
“have a responsibility to pass along our genetic heritage”
I reckon people like Kristen have a responsibility NOT to pass along their genetic heritage.
Responsibility or not, I sure hope she doesn’t.
Though unlike her, I won’t lecture her if she chooses and option that I wouldn’t have.
It’s probably not her genetics but her programing (education). She may very well be an intelligent individual who is wildly astray.
That being said I would allow her to procreate, but I certainly would not want her to raise the children.
Worrall is just as bad as the righteous social media posters with his value judgement “not because I disagree with their critics” at the beginning of his article. The decision to have children should be up to the parents, and I commend Chip and Joanna for being married parents with the resources and dedication to raise five or more children. If they can afford to do so which means feeding, educating and taking care of them properly, they should have ten children if they want. It is the same as criticizing someone for owning a large truck or using a gas guzzling boat.
The parents and single mothers who have five children and no resources to raise them are the problem and they outnumber people like Chip and Joanna
Worrall was hiliting in the article. It didn’t seem like agreement, but emphasis on the self-righteous lunacy of the original author.
For instance, he emphasizes shaming. If that doesn’t work, they will probably press for law.
I’m criticising this eco-lunacy, not condoning it.
I recall a documentary, or maybe a news cast, years ago that I saw about a family where the parents had 16 children somewhere in Tasmania IIRC. The entire adult compliment of the family were on welfare. There opinion was “We are doing our job for Australia by having these children so we expect welfare” or something like that. There are thousands of people here who have this attitude. Every year I get a statement from the Australian Tax Office that shows a breakdown of where my taxes go. Right at the top of the list is welfare. Last year, over AU$45,000 of the total tax taken from my earnings, using the skills and abilities I have leant and acquired over the years, went to welfare.
The purpose of government is to transfer money from those who work for a living to those who vote for a living.
Welfare is the belief that when you take money from those who work, in order to give it to those who don’t want to, you can improve society.
Eric is quoting Kristen Pyszczyk here to highlight her views, they are not his words!
Read it again.
Some dude: Do you see how much your valid point is diminished by your blatant error, attributing to Worrall the very thing he is criticizing? Your comment below indicates medical training, is that why you can’t admit your error?
In modern society, many large families exist because they can get massive amounts of welfare.
I did not believe such people existed and thought the subject of people having babies to receive welfare payments was made up by right wingers. Until I went to medical school and did rotations in hospitals that served a large number of poor people, and some of the mothers readily admitted they had babies for the welfare payments. I pity the children and hope some of them become productive happy adults.
South Australia – yeah!
I reckon family help, ok maybe, but ONLY for the first two children.
After that, you pay your own way. (maybe modify for multiples)
But this continued payout has to stop, especially when it is used in family groups allowing large incomes for zero work.
Usually has more to do with single mothers and multiple fathers; there’s also a lot of fraud in getting the kids diagnosed as disabled for the SS check.
Voting needs to be limited to those who are net taxpayers.
Are you in favor of removing the US federal subsidy for all children of taxpayers? That is, the income tax deduction for dependents.
Christ! Now we have to curb our embryo emissions!
That’s where they are heading:Population control. Emissions control isn’t enough now desire to control procreation. it was tried and found wanting in China: Where are all the girls? CONTROL is the active word and children are now the focus as CO2 control has been a bust in control of climate.
Ian… Winner. Winner. Chicken Dinner!
Embryo Emissions…
That is Gold.
“Shame is a powerful tool for changing behaviour:”
But people like Kristen have NO SHAME, so their irksome, self-righteous, interfering, busy-body behaviour will never change.
so lets see this bimbo run something on the kardashians latest”emission” number 3, by a proxy mum
guess kims over DIY childcarrying
Hopefully Kristen will get multiples of what she dishes out. Maybe we should all hang around her place and criticize her for how big her house is (you know, based on *our* “standard” for how many square feet someone *needs*), how she gets to work (drives?! the horror!) – and she drives WHAT?! Surely a smaller, more fuel efficient, and infinitely more life-threatening econo-box would suffice! Etc. ad nauseam.
Under the diversity doctrine, people are interchangeable by color. Under selective-child, we are, in fact, disposable. For purposes of democratic leverage, business interests, social justice, resource redistribution, and “clean” wars, immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises) is a political imperative.
There’s a special place for classical CBC-types; presumably they have space in a cloistered room, away from reality, where she can share thoughts with David Suzuki and others of their ilk. Or maybe she’s just plumping for a job on CNC or MSNBC.
In Suzuki’s places (at least two homes), he can revel in his fathering five children and at the same time lecturing on over population whenever given the opportunity.
https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2010/10/13/david-suzukis-five-kids/
Sorry, meant CNN…
Everyone needs to watch the futurous movie on this subject on YouTube Red called “The Thinning”, the UN identifies the problem and sets quotas for each country to thin out their herds. America’s solution is to test every student over 5 every year. The dumbest students in every grade are put to death in the basement of their school, locked in their chairs, by lethal injection and made to disappear. If you can sleep after watching this, you are not human.
Thinning has my vote for best picture for the last 20 years.
I had trouble sleeping after seeing just the trailer.
It is the graceless, self-serving twaddle like this that keeps me off the morass of trash called ‘social media’.
Anything good, like a pending birth announcement, is treated as criminal behavior.
Anything bad, such as destroying private property (gas pipelines, anyone?) is treated as heroism.
When will the world get straightened out again? Well, it’s up to us to make it happen, people. Otherwise, this becomes ‘the Crazy Years’ that Heinlein wrote about – crackpot science disguised as religion, public shaming over doing normal things, being hounded for being yourself instead of a wacko, praising the wackos for their individuality.
We’re going to have to fix it and make sure it stays fixed, because these birdbrains are too stupid and self-centered to fix it themselves.
One thing I’ve noticed about many hippies. They go on and on about doing your own thing and being an individual who doesn’t follow the crowd.
While they stand there, everyone wearing the same uniform, tie-dyed tee-shirt, jeans with holes in them, long hair, all unwashed for a week or two.
So, I’m not the only one thinking about “The Crazy Years”.
They are crazier than anything Heinlein imagined. 🙁
I did sort of wonder if it was just me seeing it that way. Thanks.
The “hippies” are the most extreme conformists I’ve seen in a long time. They can’t even think for themselves, never mind figure out how to use a can opener to open a can of beans. (Not a joke. There’s a video of it.) Remove them from the cities where everything is within walking distance and they will starve to death, end up lost, freeze to death, die of thirst, etc.
If you dropped them off in a forest preserve around my area, near a parking lot, they’d have no idea how to get home.
You see it, too.
Bless you.
Constantly Biased Corporation should have been defunded decades ago.
As a fully funded auxillary of the Liberal Party of Canada this bunch of tax dollar consuming parasites are famous up here for their lying by omission.
CBC’s coverage of the CRU emails was amusing, silence for weeks.
Claiming the emails were stolen, hence it would be unethical to publish them, after having been all over wikileaks and other such.
CBC just went over the top about an alleged attack on a 11 year old muslim girl.Lecturing all Canadians about racism..after the “attack” was revealed to be a lie, they lack the spine to apologize.
Investigative journalism is something they may have heard about, somewhere, maybe.
Since President Trump being elected,CBC has had Trump Derangement Syndrome to the point it is hard to find any Canadian news on their outlets.
They are so deranged they bring up and criticize President Trump while reporting a snowfall.
Strangely they use exactly the same talking points as CNN.
Perhaps the CBC should have a long talk with the Trudeaus about the sizes of their families. What is the total for Pierre and his ex? Six? And doesn’t Justin already have two?
More self-hating liberal crap from the Canadian Broadcorping Castration. Our culture is the best in history and is worth carrying on. Indeed it is our duty to breed and pass our culture to the future.
Cultural heritage matters. Here’s a link to a study of CEO performance in American companies. It found that CEOs with Polish roots were the best performers. It also found that the effect lasted six generations after the family originally immigrated to America.
Again, The Donald is much less wrong than his liberal elite critics.
When the birth rate falls to below 1.5 or so like it is right now in Italy, towns start to sound different because of the dearth of children playing. Family trees become inverted. Four grandparents have two children who have one child. This is the sound of a culture, a society, that is headed for death.
To top off this madness, such people advocate policies that facilitate the replacement of the indigenous people of the nation with people from far away, who hold cultural norms and religious beliefs that are hostile to the indigenous people. These replacements have no intention of preserving the nation’s culture, but to take over and replace it with their own.
This is sheer madness. Even three generations ago had some foreign power stated these policies in a demand, it would have been considered an act of war. Did I mention this is sheer madness?
+1
Deutsche Bank did a study a while back, and based on current demographic trends, world population will peak at 8.5 billion in 2055 and decline to 8 billion by 2100. Idiocy does not begin to cover Kristen’s world view.
AMEN!
I’m one of 8. All 8 of us have contributed to what is good. How? Because our parents were good and had values they tried to teach and pass onto to us. The best they knew. Members of “The Greatest Generation”.(At my Dad’s funeral the receiving line was 8 hours long. He wasn’t a politician or a celebrity. He was just a very good man who touched many lives.)
Those of you with more than one kid, which one would you replace with an illegal or legal immigrant?
Disclaimer: After my oldest moved out, we had a legal immigrant live with us. I gave her away at her wedding.
“it’s also a choice that affects everyone who inhabits our planet…” and, regarding having {excess] children …”It’s not an exaggeration to say that the survival of our species depends on it.”
Both of these statements are true ONLY if the resources of the planet are assumed to be finite in the foreseeable future. Of course, at a theoretical level, the existence of anyone (including the author) affects everyone – and everything – else on the planet. But the earth has been that way for a few hundred million years and here we are – evolving along with everything – else making use of what is available.
As far as the survival of our species goes; the ONLY way that is at risk is to allow the birth rate to get too low so that something else takes over. The measure of success of each and every species is to reproduce in competition with everything else, and keep reproducing.
Not just finite, but close to running out as well.
Is there a more distinct signal of “wild exaggeration” than a progressive saying “it’s not an exaggeration to say….”? I’m reading a story of a CA couple who had thirteen children, and it had absolutely zero affect on NEIGHBORS! for crying out loud, never mind the species or planet. If we could use progressive overstatement as a resource (aiming Ms. Pyszczyk’s emissions at a windmill, for instance), resources would approach “infinity and beyond”.
David Suzuki’s Five Kids
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2010/10/13/david-suzukis-five-kids/
David Suzuki: Canada is ‘Full’
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2013/07/11/david-suzuki-canada-is-full/
“David Suzuki’s Five Kids” – like I said, they’re the biggest of hypocrites.
“It’s not an exaggeration to say that the survival of our species depends on it.”
No duh. If we stop having babies, the species dies off.
“we will have a steady supply of smart and talented immigrants.”
Starting when?
In the US, starting when Congress passes the RAISE Act.
Incidentally, when I consulted the internet to confirm my assumption, the first entry (beyond “buy the RAISE Act at Amazon”) was Wikipedia who framed it as an “anti-immigration” bill and quoted “economists” saying this would not raise the level of contributions of “immigrants” (and of course ignoring the difference between legal and illegal”).
The Left has told the same lies about everything President Trump has accomplished.
The Left has become the party of lies and deception. Sad thing is, a big part of the country agrees with them and are accomplices.
“The Left has become the party of lies and deception.”
When was it ever anything else?
The difference is that they no longer control the communication channels, so their lies are rapidly exposed.
Opening premise from Idiocracy.
There is no evidence that teaching people about birth control has any impact on birth rates.
The only thing that has ever lowered birth rates has been increasing wealth in the population.
Let me guess. Kristen is,a lesbian athiest that hates her parents.
I don’t care in the slightest what society thinks I have four kids and they can suck it. I have a hard time believing that shame is a powerful tool. Me and everyone are related to which is a large group of people by the way couldn’t care less what anyone thinks is right. We were raised to do what we believe is right and moral; what others think and say mean absolutely nothing to me or my family members. The mere fact they think their opinion matters to me is hilarious.
“I have four kids and they can suck it”
That’s a pretty tough attitude to take towards your own children.
Apparently not everyone got the message. When you calculate the various spellings of Mohammed, it has been the most polpular boys name in many European areas for years. So if you are trying to save the planet by slowing the population growth, bringing in immigrants may not be the best solution.
https://qz.com/1082778/popular-baby-names-muhammad-is-actually-the-most-boys-name-in-england-and-wales-not-oliver/
http://fortune.com/2017/09/22/muhammad-william-popular-baby-names/
https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/01/mohammed-most-popular-name-for-newborn-boys-in-the-netherlands-for-second-year-in-a-row/
Mohammed has been the most common boys name in the capital of Norway for several years….
https://www.nrk.no/ostlandssendingen/mohammed-vanligste-navn-i-oslo-1.11898780
You’d think as unaccomplished as most Muslims are, using Mohammed’s name over and over would be an insult to the memory of their profit.
If immigrants are the key, then perhaps we should consider how to get more Europeans and Buddhists to emigrate throughout the world.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religious-group/
I do believe population in a few generations will start increasing rapidly again. Simply due to natural selection.
Yes – parents who have a genetic tendency towards strong desire to have children will pass this on to their many kids.
According to the WHO 55-56 children are aborted annually. And it is considered to be not enough prevent massive destruction of the environment. How can you reading with people like this.
To everyone who had more than 2 I can say my wife decided one was enough for us so you picking up our slack is greatly appreciated. Have as many as you are willing and able to take responsibility for. Happy diaper changing!!
Kristin Pyszczyk is a RACIST! White people have among the lowest birth rates on the planet, barely replacing themselves. Non whites have higher birth rates and it’s these people whom she is really addressing. (we get your code here K. P.) Notice the cheap appeal to immigration at the end there in a sloppy effort to give herself cover. So what are you going to do, Kristin, to keep those immigrants from having too many babies? Shame them? (or just sterilize them?)…
Whilst I think that 5 children IS excessive it is indeed becoming a serious issue that the dangerous left have created a freak show of shame amongst liberals who hate their own skin and want to replace it with anything from anywhere, the more backward the better! Trace the story back and you come to Critical Theory and the Frankfurt School. What we are dealing with is one of the many pronged attack on Western Society that is the marxist originated Critical Theory (Political correctness) to undermine and ultimately destroy Western democracies. Every aspect of what made our societies in the West to be the pinnacle of human achievement is under attack by the delusionals who call themselves liberals working at the behest of the marxists. The absurdity of what is happening is incredible as is the blindness of whole populations to what is going on blinkered as they are by political correctness. Stalin understood when taking over a country he had as quickly as possible to destabilize the population and he did that by mass importation of Russians. The dull witted virtue signaling mostly socialist politicians of the West have been conned into doing just that and importing people en mass into our countries on a scale which is historically unprecedented. Their gossamer thin ideological excuse is because they claim it will undermine our historical nationalistic based motivation to make war with eachother. But this is so flawed when you see what the overwhelming proportion of those they are importing just happen to be of an ideology which has been trying to take over Europe for 1400 years! Here we are inviting them to come and breed on welfare on a truly massive scale and set up their own bankrupt societies in our midst and we are supposed to smile and celebrate the demise of our own unique culture, our humanist and caring culture because according to the liberal nut jobs, anything is better than that shameful thing. I used to be in business with an Algerian who asked repeatedly “what is wrong with you white people? Why are you trying to dilute your race and remove yourselves from the planet”. He was brutally open about the mess that his society was in but he asked “what is your excuse for wanting to change? You have the best of everything”. He also asked when did any political party in any Western country make this an issue for people to vote on at the ballot box? It has been he said imposed and imposed in such a uniform way right across Western society as to make him believe there is a higher level of command and control above that we see visibly supposedly governing each individual country.
Having 5 children may be excessive, if EVERYONE in your population had 5 children. But you know that is not the case.
BTW, consider using paragraphs. Your comment had some interesting points, but it will be unreadable for most people; they will just skip it. I had to really concentrate to get through it.
“…when did any political party in any Western country make this an issue for people to vote on at the ballot box? It has been he said imposed and imposed in such a uniform way right across Western society as to make him believe there is a higher level of command and control above that we see visibly supposedly governing each individual country.”
———————-
Many people are coming to that view.
not fast enough. it is much worse than the average American realizes. these watermelons are the worst. Chicken Little types worried about unscientific CAGW; they have no understanding this is eugenics couched in self-loathing. Interestingly mirrors the same M.O. of the major players pushing that program.
.
.
.
Typical. They go on high-falutingly about “conversing”, “talking”, and “learning”, in the same way that Goebbels might have done.
….and yet Goebbels wasn’t interested in learning anything from his victims.
Professing high-minded neutrality and openness to dialogue while expressing highly biased and intolerant views, frequently in the same breath. An all-too-common doublethink of the modern (il)liberal.
Mr. hart: Good point, Ms. Pyszczyk wants to have a conversation about this like Michael Mann wants to have a conversation about CAGW.
Clearly the obvious solution is to outlaw the ownership of pets like cats and dogs then use the freed up un used resources to allow some parents to have bigger families if they want. It’s a win-win really with the added bonus of fewer things to step in. Perhaps a rule you can have 1 pet if you have fewer than 3 children will work. If an unexpected pregnancy occurs you have to either have an abortion or let Rover move to the country to a nice farm. Guess what the majority will choose correctly and you deserve a place in politics.
As we have only one child – stay away from our cat! 🙂
Almost as evil as getting your puppies from breeders, right Kristen. The west will not survive with people like this as mouthpieces.
Or voters.
I thought the US and Canada held the top spots globally for adopting children from struggling nations. So, what is the CBC author talking about again?
Anyone who has examined the biography of Margaret Sanger and the origins of Planned Parenthood knows that they started out in the business of eugenics, and they would like to bring us back there. They are the real N@zie$ in every respect. They hate all people. This foolish reporter only let it out before we were “ready”.
USA and European citizens will have have to accept a lower standard of living in the coming decades (elites exempted).
Soon everyone will want to live in Australia.
We have the ‘right’ immigration policies.
Our key policy is f . . . k off unless you have money.
We’ve done the hard yards unlike your ancestors.
Stay in your country and fix your culture (religious and/or corruption) and economy.
Australia will eventually fix its energy-cost crisis created by the green/left/right (Goldman Sachs) ‘uniparty’.
When it does we won’t look back.
Mass immigration has a purpose and it’s only to benefit a few.
We feel very sorry for y’all . . .
Yes. Rapid mass emigration is usually a true sign of something very bad about the place people come from. So bad that that they can’t fix it themselves, which is what humans usually try to do first if they are not deliberately impeded by reinforced politics. Unfortunately, this happens, and will continue to happen.
But global warmers want to make it worse for poor people in the third world, by making it more expensive to use fossil fuels to make their own lives better by themselves. Maintaining their own culture and dignity by domestic economic growth ought to be viewed as another human right, but the do-gooding global-warmers don’t like people being independent of what the global-warmers and the UN ‘know best’.
The English language has a precise word to describe the harm done to humans by the climate-change global-warming agenda. That word is “pernicious”.
the elephant in the room–all of those European social democracy’s, ( and the USA also) need the emigration (worker bees) to continue funding the extensive government entitlement promises to their rapidly ageing populations. With western birth rate below that needed for population growth, and even stability, there are not enough young coming up to support the government pyramid scheme of massive social welfare.
This is an often cited but fallacious argument used predominantly by the left to brow beat a suspicious indigenous population into accepting the unacceptable. Take the UK as one of many examples. The official current net immigration (add your own multiplier for the illegals), is 250K a year into a country of 70 million which was at 45 million when I was born in 1958. Those people are CONSUMERS of services from schools through to healthcare and most certainly welfare. I know extreme examples can be trashed but the pizza delivery guy with 7 kids all in school all receiving child credit consuming health care consuming welfare consuming social services is adding to a problem not solving it. That this is happening on a massive scale and that the true cost is being hidden from the tax payers is nothing short of a criminal act. If you want to know what this liberal generosity costs then inexplicably Norway, a bastion of socialism provides an insight. They publish the cost of immigration and it is very telling because surprisingly they are not afraid of categorizing the data in a way which is useful and meaningful unlike the UK which buries any data under the weight of political correctness, “We have to hide the data or make it unreadable because heavens above we do not want to give the right wing information that might support their cause”. This is the mindset we have openly at large in Europe. So the bottom line…. importing extended families with the main breadwinner who has little or no education delivering pizza, selling kebabs or driving taxis does NOTHING to solve the plight of an aging population. Instead it it enhances the problem by seriously sucking away resources.at breathtaking speed and any pretence by politicians to say otherwise is shown for what it is by the Norwegian data which is shocking if only because of the cost burden which a relatively small number of professional welfare dependent immigrants can impose on an equally small society.
But that doesn’t work if the population coming in ALSO consumes entitlement resources.
As mentioned below, the entering “worker bees” have to have self sufficiency and something to contribute.
This was US law before 1965 when Ted Kennedy led the change to the “open” immigration philosophy.
“Dependent” immigrants are a boon to the Democrat party.
“the elephant in the room–all of those European social democracy’s, ( and the USA also) need the emigration (worker bees) to continue funding the extensive government entitlement promises to their rapidly ageing populations.”
No, they don’t, because most jobs, particularly low-skilled jobs or those based on knowledge rather than creativity, are going to be automated away over the next couple of decades.
It’s quite literally insane to be bringing millions of new immigrants into a country that’s about to lose tens of millions of jobs. Unless you’re a left-wing politician who needs their votes.
johnny Scott, a link to the norwegian numbers would be good…
“Celebrities Chip and Joanna Gaines took some heat for announcing they are pregnant with their fifth child.”
As far as I know, and from experience, only a female can fall pregnant. I have never been pregnant.
The writer sounds very judgemental.
Yeah, I saw that and found it very strange.
My Dad came from a large family. He had 2 brothers and 8 sisters. They grew up on a farm (cheap labor) during the Great Depression. When my grand parents could no longer work it was the family who took care of them. Not the government.
As one with 3 brothers and 4 sisters I can say its great being in a large family. Made better given that my mother is one of ten and dad one of 4. So lots of close cousins. This is highly recommended. In NZ the birth rate has been in decline for ages, now basically below replacement. There needs to be more encouragement for bigger families among those that can afford more kids, and better financial training for those that can’t afford more kids. Then eventually we might be able to afford our generous welfare state as well as an enhanced natural environment.
Did he not invest in a pension, either state or private ?
Farmers often did not have enough spare cash to put anything away, especially back in the days prior to the great depression when farm productivity was so much lower than it is today.
David Suzuki has five kids, Al Gore has four. The CBC has been the Canadian journalistic organ of green socialism for ages now and needs to stop bleeding taxpayers for this kind of execrable bias-driven garbage.
I’m sure they carbon-offset them though….
CBC is terrible. 100% climate propaganda.
I’ll bet these Libs wouldn’t criticize Muslim families who on average have 4or 5 children.
(they may be dumb, but they ain’t stupid… ☺)
That would be racist /sarc
In Germany, it is too late. The politcally correct immigration culture that Merkel cultivated there is so strong. Now young German girls are “converting” to Islam to have an Muslim boyfriend. So sad. The cultural destruction of Western Europe and everything that Enlightenment from the Dark Ages of religious oppression brought is at hand.
https://youtu.be/UxzSvP8szNI
This is nonsense. Suggesting that one girl’s conversion to Islam is a reflection of the destruction of Western Europe is just barking mad racism. Just because there are crazy far right evangelicals in the US does not mean the country is collapsing. I am aware of people who have moved in both directions, but the ultimate number is so low as to be insignificant.
Insignificant? Until they blow themselves up at a location near you, surely.
“Islam” isn’t a race.
I am 100% certain I can survive a 3 degree temperature rise over 50 years (People survive a 20 degree temperature rise over 1 week when moving from New York to Florida), and a 10 mm/yr sea level rise. What I’m not nearly as confident about is surviving nuclear detonations around the world. No one fear mongers against nuclear attacks because there is no multi-million dollar grant fund for studying nuclear terrorism.
Global birth rate is down from 7ish to 2.4 kids per family. That means in 20 years the population will start to decline.
Perhaps a little longer, depending on what happens to life expectancy.
The people who cause me concern are those that marry time after time, dump their divorced wives then bring in new wives from other countries at the same time as having lots of children. The procreation of lots of children is not an issue, but having such a disruptive family structure can be really damaging to young people.
I see US police have raided a house which kept 13 children chained to beds, starved and made to recite long passages from the Christian Bible.
This is not a good example of US family life.
I wonder what some of our posters would say though if the parents had been Muslim, carrying out the same torture and forcing children to memorise long passages from the Koran ?
“Gareth January 17, 2018 at 1:54 am
I wonder what some of our posters would say though if the parents had been Muslim, carrying out the same torture and forcing children to memorise long passages from the Koran ?”
Or forced marriage to minors etc etc. The “Koran” is based on the Hebrew “Torah”, or as we know it the “Old Testament”. Islam arrived ~700 years after Christianity.
A bad example is no reason to doubt that the majority of parents do their best to look after their children in the USA and elsewhere. World population growth is slowing in most parts of the developing world and static or falling elsewhere.
My objection is to the eco-hypocrites who urge others to have no children but happily have four or five children themselves, this including especially the members of the global elite and MSM.
Gareth: I wonder which of “our posters” you are slandering. I have not seen a single poster at this site, not even the welcher tony mcleod, who favors chaining or starving children, have you? Maybe you think some would be ok with making kids recite bible passages but would be opposed if it’s koran passages? I haven’t seen any indication there, either, but you seem to suggest both are equally bad. What would you think of a scientist who made his or her kids recite multiplication tables? One reason I spend so much time at this site is the posters, most of them think before they post. You should try it.
Walk on down any road paved with the philosophies of those who advocate for CAGW.
They all end at the same place, known as “too many human beings exist”.
Their hidden goal is promulgated and fully known by only handful of those who would commit genocide on the rest of us, but their banners are carried by legions of the blind.
“Gareth: I wonder which of “our posters” you are slandering.”
Nobody in particular, just Americans in general, I think you’ll find.
Let’s try a different tack…..
As grown up consenting adults (those over age =45 anyway), doesn’t actual Real Life Experience tell us that when there are that many kids in a family that ‘Something Is Wrong’ in that relationship?
It is not an equal partnership going on in there and it WILL explode at some point.
So, we read Malthus and Ehrlich and, in no small part due to a Hollywood influence, envision the disasters they foretell as streets choked with dying people, a tsunami coming due Broadway, LA disappearing, chunk by chunk, into a smoking hole-in-the-ground. London under an epic grey cloud, blowing a hurricane and raining down hail & lightening?
What is wrong with the picture coming up….
Its a picture of a deliriously happy family. A picture of The American Dream.
I find it actually very very sad – can you think why.
Here it is
You should see a photo of the Gaines family.
Apart from being horribly ‘posed’ and blatantly fake. The couple are selling themselves and using their children to do it. Exploitation at it most gross and horrible.
See those 4 children – soon to be 5.
How old are they – what is the age gap between them?
Far too small for that supposed mother to have breast fed them – certainly not until they were each 30 months old. (Remember, breast feeding is a near perfect contraceptive)
Hence they are each ‘deposed children’. They were fed on something that, by the definition of not being their mother’s own, was malnourishing. The people of Ghana have a word for it, begins with the letter K.
Not only that, they were deprived of the social contact and learning that only a real mother can provide.
A grandmother, an aunt, a nursery worker CANNOT supply what a tiny baby needs socially and emotionally.
Those babies will have been spoilt right from the word go. And they will have been ‘told’ what to do, how to behave by a stranger using (typically) sugar as a chastisement/reward mechanism. No-one else can control a small baby as a mother can. She’d go ballistic if she found out not least.
So, roll that all together and what do we get…
1. A lot of children in a family that is going to destroy itself within the next 10 years
2. Spoiled children who don’t know what is right and wrong because their mother was hardly ever there – apart from self publicising photo shoots. Wow, what an example to set there.
3. Finally and the real killer, young brains that were malnourished when they needed it most (age 30 months and less) They will become unintelligent, lazy & morose and easily irritated people – when they can start to express those things in their late teens. (Have I just described yer average Climate Scientist)
Even worse, they will be addicted to a mind-altering substance – sugar.
What could possibly go wrong
And how many times times do we pillory Malthus and Ehrlich around here?
Because in this story is one of real starvation – physically and emotionally, coming from those babies being deprived of their mother’s milk and also, simply, her ‘being there’ for them.
and that picture looks soooooooooooooo happy.
…..her not being there – but you knew that.
And DO NOT blame the parents. They don’t know they’re doing wrong.
So, for Today’s Brain-Ache, where is it coming from?
PS If you’ve the time, search out Dr Jonice Webb and her thinking on “Childhood Emotional Neglect”
She describes what I’ve just done, ‘cept you have to pay for her advice.
I’m 10 younger than my older brother.
I’m living proof that breasfeeding is not a good method of contraception.
Man oh Man, that’s a huge number of conclusions to be reached from a single photograph.
After reading your attempt at a different tack, my conclusion is that if you had stayed the course instead of trying a different tack, you might have avoided exposing your self-righteous judgmental side. We pillory Malthus and Erlich because they exposed their extreme foolishness in their wrong (could say not even wrong) predictions. You could have stayed quiet and let us wonder, but no……
You may want to look at this : “DON’T PANIC — Hans Rosling showing the facts about population” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FACK2knC08E&feature=youtu.be
To quote the bimbo – er, sorry! – young lady complaining about two people who are doing something normal, :”population control is a fraught problem”. Aside from her illiteracy issues, she has absolutely no clue what she’s talking about.
7.5 billion humans (current population estimate?) all placed in one area would take up maybe the amount of square mile room in a small country like Kuwait and still leave room for portapotties, but not much else. (I’m trying to imagine enough portapotties to serve that large a crowd.)
The only real population issues are in regard to large cities like New York, London, Paris, Chicago, San Fran, Delhi, Beijing. If they are overcrowded, it is not my problem. It is theirs.
We have the suburban commuter population out here in my kingdom. There is some commuter spillover from the city, but it’s mostly because the offspring of horse farm owners didn’t want to be bothered and sold the property to real estate developers. There’s still plenty of farmland available even in this county, and people run produce farms nearby that you can visit and support, if you want fresh stuff in the summer. We also have, in this country, a rather fine bird and wildlife census program, and a lot of hiking trails, and that kind of thing is may or may not happen in the cities.
The idea that humans should not have children is nonsense. If this silly young person avoids having even one kid, then when she gets to nursing home age, no one will come to see her, and she’ll be left staring out the window.
The Earth is NOT overpopulated, so let’s get off the Homo Sapiens existence guilt trip.
Is this anti-Muslim or just safely targeted at white burden?
The link with migration is absurd. People migrate for either economic or “safety” reasons, not so that w Western country can have the “right” number of people.
People try to escape Cuba but not Chile, North but not South Korea, Somalia but not Kenya. allow freedoms in those places, and people will stop migrating.
This is all the result of the warped thinking derived from the absurd concept of “privilege”.
Privilege abdicates responsibility for the decisions of prior generations and seeks to shame those we benefitted from their parents and grandparents sacrifices.
There were times when my parents had to choose between eating and feeding the kids. Working two jobs and saving for a child’s college does not make the recipient “privileged”, it’s a choice. Just as I starting saving for my children’s college the day they were born.
In the 1800’s people moved south and west looking for their riches. Some died, some survived. Cracker farmers in Florida faced hard living and Indian attacks. Yet, their great-grandkids now sit on multi-million dollar tracks of land because of those risks.
DACA kids have parents who broke the law to give their kids a better life. It may have been a risk worth taking, but Americans are under no obligation to reward those children over immigrants with children that lawfully apply for entry.
The Gains took a risk in opening a business. They earned success and can afford to pass that wealth down to four, five, or more children.
The real immorality is people who have kids, stay out of wedlock, and leave them as a burden to the rest of society.
Unfortunately, instead of holding moral account on those who fail to sacrifice for their children. We blame the children of those who endured the sacrifices to give their kids a better life.
We have truly moved through the looking glass, and Atlas shrugs his shoulders.
Biology is destiny.
Those who don’t procreate become extinct.
Choosing extinction is a form of suicide.
Suicide is a form insanity.
Those who discourage procreation are encouraging suicide.
Encouraging suicide is evil.
From Ehrlich on, the Academy has accepted thise who encourage suicide.
This is the least of their worries. Anti Christians have also tried to have their show cancelled because of their beliefs about marriage.
What are the odds that Chip & Johanna’s children will pay taxes, & keep SS, Medicaid, etc. alive, or immigrants?
I really can’t understand this migrant obsession. Europe has it the worst (and we see the results), but the US is catching up. The conspiracy nut in me says it’s an implanted propaganda meme feeding on people’s sympathies to ensure votes for the socialists.
They think it’s appropriate to shame a family for having multiple children when they can fully support every single one of them, but you mention reducing welfare for families that can’t support the children they are having or to limit migration of large poor families and all of a sudden they are up in arms.
We could shame these types of people back, but I don’t think they have the mental capacity to feel its effects.
Do the greens forget that when immigrants come to the USA, they generally begin using a lot more energy than they did in their home country. Greens can be so ignorant. Also, for many years in a magazine I receive there was a guy that put an ad in every month where he stated, “The more intelligent you are, the more children you should have.” And, yes I know that intelligence tends toward the average.
I just want to put on record here that when extreme longevity tech is available, I’m planning on having ~twenty kids per century in batches of 2 to 10 with the finest women on the planet. We are going to fill up the solar system with trillions of awesome, beautiful, talented, and joyful children…and then on to the stars. The left can take their nihilism to oblivion.
By that token I assume they would agree that is it right to ban totally, unconditionally and with no recourse to human rights laws any migrant from a family with more than two children.
The problem is that the immigrants breed like rabbits once they arrive in the land of other people’s money with politicians willing to pay to raise all the children they can pop out, never having contributed to the system.
In 2016 28.2% of live births were to mothers born outside the UK, the highest level on record.
People born in the UK have less than 2 children on average, foreign born is about 5 (from memory).
The commonest boy name in the UK in 2017 was Muhammad.
So taking in immigrants actually massively increases the global population problem.
I see no distinction between that thinking and simple anti-white racism. Quacks like a duck.
‘What should be one of the happiest moments of their lives is subject to public bullying by eco-lunes’
Again – almost by-rote hypocrisy. Don’t forget this is also the ‘anti-bullying’ crowd.
So naturally their tactics are almost exclusively some form of intimidation and bullying.
And again, almost in lock-step stereotypical conformity, like any bully they absolutely cannot take getting pushed back.
Anyone who’s every busted a bully a good one knows this.
No personal choice or God-given right is immune from the progressive filter of collective moralizing. In fact, it’s just a wrong way of thinking to see yourself as an individual with any rights or privileges at all. At the individual level, it’s all about duty . . . to the collective.
free speech includes those nonsensical rants. So be it. As long we can also shame those Malthusian xenophile, homophobic, morons
Seems legit, migrant families in Europe average 4 kids, Europeans half of that
So we need to stop having kids to allow for people who have twice as many kids as we were having.
Climate maths