jabbajabba
This would only apply to western families whom choose to have lots of children?
For instance;
2 adults and 1 child (living in a western country).
1 house powered by the local fossil / nuclear power station pumping out carbon.
2 cars.
Over 20 electrical goods on average.
Packaged food and other items found in plastic / paper packaging.
Treated water (avg use of 500 litres a day).
2 adults and 15 children (in a third world country)
Live in hut - no electrical power.
No Car.
No Packaged food (albeit a small amount).
5 to 10 liters a day of water use (from a well).
Have a few plastic bags which they bury in the ground (i am struggling here!).
Erm...
^ian^
- satan-the-redeema wrote:
HAVING large families should be frowned upon as an environmental friendly in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.
Ahhh yes, it doesn't take long for the extremists to wander down this path. In the same way that Greenpeace lends its support to VHE (Voluntary Human Extinction) we now see criticism for people wanting to have large families.
Whilst I somewhat agree driving a tank masked as a SUV is st00pid and frequent long haul flights are for n00bs with no life but their career, I don't see any right in some green lobby criticising people for their choices to have large families.
The solution is relatively quite simple. Round up all these knuckleheads, put them in a rather big rocketship (might require a couple) and blast them into the sun. They'll be doing us a service by providing a nano-seconds more atomic fuel for our sun.
satan-the-redeema
HAVING large families should be frowned upon as an environmental friendly in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.