Some say that a lack of faith in God’s Divine Plan is the primary problem of the planet. In the year 2050, the earth’s population will be nearing nine billion people, maybe more, yet already it seems that we’ve long passed the global level of sustainability. Our unique ingenuity has improved the food supply. Medical science has increased life expectancy. The world needs to address the issue of family planning. When would the religionists concede that enough is enough, at 15 billion, 20, 30, 40? Maybe Armageddon precludes their responsibility to do anything.
In 1804 the planet had one billion people, this doubled by 1927, doubled again by 1974, and by 2000 was over 6 billion. Since 1790, our population has increased by 800%. (500 cities with a million or more, 27, with 10 million or more, 12 with 20 or more; taken from, Countdown, A Weisman).
At Some Point,
Population Threatens Our Existence as a Species
Reason dictates that the resources of the earth aren’t inexhaustible and that there will be hell to pay, and not a hell made in heaven. The earth’s thin bio-sphere is limited. It can’t be increased. We have already punched a hole in the ozone-layer. Haze hangs over most major industrialized areas of the world. Fossil-fuels produce more carbon-dioxide than the atmosphere can absorb. Hot house gases are increasing. We can’t have everything.
The economists of the world must unite to take into account not just growth and population, but our only limited resource, the planet itself. We can’t breed endlessly or grow infinitely. If we don’t use moderation, if we don’t recycle and if we don’t find an alternative to coal, oil and gas, we will commit self-annihilation. Most importantly though, the pressure of population must be immediately reduced.To see children born into this world brings no greater pleasure to a person. How can we think of abortion, condoms, the pill and any other rational methods of birth control? But we must. We must shut down the religionists' superstitious views of sex and reproduction before we destroy ourselves.
The truth may be that if our current standard of living in North America is used as a criterion, the sustainability level of the globe is probably below two billion people, but perhaps that’s alarmist. I hope it is. I love human beings and modern life. My existence with my two children has been full of joy. I fear that life without spouses and children would be much less happy for people.
We could give complete unconditional control to women over their own reproductive choices. If women have full say over their bodies, I believe the birthrate could be reduced around the globe very rapidly. Many religionists do not want women educated about sexual intercourse, reproductive choices and how men should treat them. Some misogynist say, USA run a sort of fascist feminist regime without fathers. Divorced and estranged dads get short-changed and often have to pay the bills for the kids without direct involvement in their lives. Often their wages are garnished. Women do sometimes hold the balance of power, but sometimes men are violent toward their lovers, girlfriends and spouses. It’s only to say to men, “Your seeds are your responsibility. Don’t have unprotected sex or an unplanned child.” I think that all public organizations should make it exceedingly plain that children are a huge obligation which the law will vigorously enforce. The governments over the world should stop subsidizing birth rates through tax initiatives—nationalism is a form of chauvinism and racism—yeah, sure, by blood alone we’re better than other countries, we don’t have to work at our culture: screw the stats, and damn the science!. What about a tax break for vasectomies and tubal ligations instead of churches and large families?
We must consume less. The majority of the developed world are consuming far above the rest of the planet. People often wonder what they can do? Take an inventory. How many shoes, pants and shirts do you have? How many cars and are they fuel efficient? How many dwellings and are they powered by solar energy? You should have a healthly teenage weight through your whole adulthood. How many pounds can you shed by eating a whole food/low carb diet with daily exercise? What books shoud you read? Does Sting really need a castle and do you really need a four thousand square foot home? You might have ten pairs of shoes, but if you have 50 maybe you have a foot fetish. I have sandals, water shoes, dress shoes, two sets of work shoes, slippers, two runners, so under ten, but even some those I never use.
Some women say that there's an imperialistic chauvinism in the halls of corporate hypocrisy. Capitalism, what a waste without freedom, but if the men aren't up to it, no one's rushing to judge them, but damn that woman who lets her guard down. The slobs seem mostly all on one side. What I'm trying to say is that the 'consuming less part' is exceedingly difficult for hard-working people. Two, three, four billion sperm trying to escape from their owners. Women trying to keep it all non-violent and raise children. The pressure of people constantly upping the ante, and religion, for heaven’s sake, selling the idea of magic instead of science. It's hardly a marvel we can't control our numbers and that we'll use more than we need given half a chance.
What To Do?
Most importantly, women must have the final say over their reproduction, assisted with the most liberal laws in regards prevention, planning and abortifacients. Left to women, I believe families will be modest and well-managed. The population of the world over time will decrease and we'll find numerical harmony for the renewal of the planet.
I don't want to leave this article on a pessimistic note. To quote Matt Ridley, from, 'The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves', "Throughout the world, birth rates are falling. There is no country in the world that has a higher birth rate than it had in 1960, and in the less developed world as a whole the birth rate has approximately halved. Until 2002, the United Nations, when projecting future world population density, assumed that birth rates would never fall below 2.1 children per woman in most countries: that is the `replacement rate', at which a woman produces enough babies to replace her and her husband, with 0.1 babies added in to cover childhood deaths and a slightly male-biased sex ratio. But in 2002, the UN changed this assumption as it became clear that in country after country the decline in baby-making went straight through the 2.1 level and kept on dropping. If anything, the decline may accelerate as the effect of small family size compounds. Nearly half the world now has fertility below 2.1. Sri Lanka's birth rate, at 1.9, is already well below replacement level. Russia's population is falling so fast it will be one-third smaller in 2050 than it was at its peak in the early 1990s."
© 2019 - E. A. St. Amant