Guest essay by Eric Worrall
CNN is celebrating green efforts to ensure that any genetic tendency towards being a climate alarmist is eliminated from the human gene pool.
BirthStrike: The people refusing to have kids, because of climate change
By Stephanie Bailey, CNN
Updated 1314 GMT (2114 HKT) June 10, 2019London (CNN) Climate change is rapidly changing the environment we live in. But how far would you be willing to go to help save the planet?
Would you skip school? Eat pig’s feet? Deliberately get arrested? How about forgo having kids?For 33-year-old British musician Blythe Pepino the latter is a reality. Her fears about climate change are so strong she has decided not to have biological children.
“I really want a kid,” she told CNN. “I love my partner and I want a family with him but I don’t feel like this is a time that you can do that.”
Pepino believes that there will be an “ecological Armageddon” and founded BirthStrike at the end of 2018. BirthStrike is a group of people who are declaring their decision not to have kids because of climate change.So far, over 330 people have joined, of which Pepino estimates 80% are women.
…
Read more: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/05/health/birthstrike-climate-change-scn-intl/index.html
For the record I think climate alarmists probably should reproduce. Having a few people around who worry about everything is likely an evolutionary advantage. Better to have a few people around who jump at shadows than to overlook a real threat.
But if a group of the most committed alarmists choose not to reproduce, who are we to object? Their self sacrifice might well be a balance of nature kind of thing.
This is clearly Mother Nature supporting the survival of the fittest in the species, that is, those whose brains are still functioning normally and those that have not had their vision clouded and reason impaired by irrational CAGW propaganda and tales of rapid extinction of species.
“Think of it as evolution in action”.
The future belongs to those who show up. The same goes for the voting power of any group with the highest birth rate.
I have always found left wing logic to be so confusing.
1) Climate Alarmism drive some to refuse to have kids to reduce carbon emissions
2) Desire to care for the worlds poor drives them to open borders and mass immigration, which increased CO2 emissions.
Apparently when they look at one issue they can totally ignore the other. Of course emotions are so much more important than logic for these folks.
These people are doing a good thing, … just not the good they think it is. (^_^)
We had the same thing in the 1960s; it was called Zero Population growth (ZPG) and it was a movement that derived directly from Paul Ehrlich’s book The Population Bomb, which predicted mass starvation in the USA by 1980, and people dying in the streets from polluted air by 1986, the collapse of the UK by 2000, and on and on.
Ehrlich is still at Stanford and still churning out the same nonsense. At least now he can claim senility to justify it.
For all those lunnies not having children: don’t come looking for mine when you hit the “old folks home”. Who is to care for you? Not my kids, they’re obligated to care for me. Now, if you decide that you DO need care, then have at it. Have those kids and you won’t see me looking for them to care for me.
Wash your own car, fix your own meals and have your own kids. Otherwise, your stupidity will eat you up.
“Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake”
Napoleon
An image search suggests Ms Pepino is a publicity hound ? At the risk of seeming to be a nasty man, I would conclude that child rearing was never a realistic aim for her, and that her current stance is merely a search for more publicity 🙂
Unfortunately, any children actually ALLOWED to be born will be immediately indoctrinated.
I think it is best that these climate alarmist don’t have children. How happy a childhood would they have? I can’t image how depressing and negative life would be having to put up with all the constant indoctrination. Almost everything we find enjoyable they would be told is bad for the environment. It would be a miserable existance. And as an added benefit, one less potential progressive voter to contend with.
I sympathise with these people. It’s so sad that in their old age they will lead a lonely existence with no children and no grandchildren to support them a and the realisation that it was all for nothing, because the climate emergency did not happen. I foresee a boom in voluntary euthanasia.
“The climate crisis has changed not only my view of procreation, and its ramifications, but also my understanding of the very concept of the future. I feel we are living in an age of profound grief; that many of the social ills, the political polarizations, the relationship struggles and personal longings so many of us are currently experiencing…”
So introspects birthstriker Erin Kamler, 44
I did like 24 yr old Elle Pugsely’s beginning-
“Observing and continuing to learn about climate issues, other man made ecological issues…”
although Lisa Cohen-Veit, 51 seems to be a bit gender confused about that-
” I grew up in South Africa, it was a beautiful childhood but tainted by the apartheid government. Even as a child I was aware of the planet and her fragility.
When climate change first reared her ugly head back in the 80’s…”
But 22 yr old Amber W has the answer-
” When I was a child the mere mention of climate change would cause me to have a panic attack…”
So let’s have no more mention of climate change around kiddies OK folks?