George Bush

[Socrates]

[quote name='the protector' date='Dec 13 2004, 03:25 AM'] Kudos to those of you who have expanded your world views. I may not agree with you on everything, but I do appreciate the fact that you haven't turned your head away from the atrocities of the current administration. It is clear that many of your fellow forum members have.

At the present, I grudgingly support the right to an abortion. It is mostly due toa population crisis that will gain momentum in the coming years. I don't live in a fantasy world with endless natural resources. That being said, I do agree that you can't just throw contraceptives and perform frivolous abortions to solve the population problem. Studies show that increased economic equality for women do wonders to curb population growth.

The current world population lies somewhere around 6 billion. The earth's carrying capacity is measured by some at around 2 billion. Planet earth is in overshoot. We've been able to sustain this bloated population due to cheap energy from oil.

A lack of cheap energy is another crisis waiting in the wings. It may much sooner than you think. However, the impending economic collapse has the potential to extend this peak through demand destruction. Maybe that we shock us into living simpler lives and consuming less resources.

If the average child per woman were 1.5, we could reach the goal of 2 billion within 100 years. Unfortunately, we haven shown little to no desire to mediate our growth. In that case, nature will correct the problem, which won't exactly be peaches and cream. [/quote]
The whole population issue is dealt with at greater length in another thread. The world will not become overpopulated. In fact, with great decreases in fertility rates (number of children per woman) in much of the world, the population will likely begin decreasing within this century! (Even the pro-population-control U.N.'s latest population report concedes this.) There is evidence that the decrease will come sooner and be steeper than the U.N. predicts. It has already begun in Europe.

And if abortion is necessary to save the planet, why not just legalize murder to help "save the earth"?

(I've always found it odd that none of these environmental extremists who keep howling about human population have voluntarily commited suicide "for the planet's sake." In fact, many of them do not even make sacrifices in lifestyle to use less resources.)

[Don John of Austria]

I would like to make a proposal, I thinke should simply execute all the upper middle class people in the united states say those who make more than about 75,000 dollars a year gross but under about 250,000, that will free up a huge amount of resources for other things, likethe poor of the world, they are the ones using most of the resources after all , but are not offering the return of the truely wealthy who create jobs and such.

What do ya'll think?

Edited December 14, 2004 by Don John of Austria

[Socrates]

Ah, class warfare lives!

[DancesforLove]

Yes we sided with the Church even though he went against the Popes wishes.

Although I am a religious person and I OF COURSE follow the Church and respect the Pope I do disagree about the war, I think it was needed even though war is a terrible thing it was needed.

[Mary's Knight, La]

Don, I really dislike your idea for well selfish reasons as that class is my goal.

As was mentioned earlier over population is a myth, read the facts the world is on it's way to dropping below equilibrium.

[Don John of Austria]

Ah come'on I mean it would solve all those nasty " resource problems" and we could save the world and all it would takeiss killing few million yuppies.

[Guest godslittlelamb]

edited out this isn't the board for me.

Edited December 15, 2004 by godslittlelamb

[Phatmasser777]

[quote name='DancesforLove' date='Dec 14 2004, 09:52 PM'] Yes we sided with the Church even though he went against the Popes wishes.

Although I am a religious person and I OF COURSE follow the Church and respect the Pope I do disagree about the war, I think it was needed even though war is a terrible thing it was needed. [/quote]
Then ur an American Catholic, not a Catholic American, also get a documentary called 'Uncovered: The Whole Truth about the Iraq War' www.truthuncovered.com has a transcript. The whole war was a lie, nothing but oil, corp. contracts and defence contracts.

[Guest Aluigi]

Not according to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who told the WHOLE CHURCH that any Catholic may disagree with the Pope on the matter of a specific application of either war or the death penalty.

phatmasser777 swings, phatmasser777 misses.

[Phatmasser777]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Dec 16 2004, 07:16 PM'] Not according to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who told the WHOLE CHURCH that any Catholic may disagree with the Pope on the matter of a specific application of either war or the death penalty.

phatmasser777 swings, phatmasser777 misses. [/quote]
War is a morality issue, an ethical issue. The Pope PUBLICLY stated his beliefs on it, doesnt that make it binding on all catholics? and even if its not, are you a supermarket catholic? Oh the popes says this, but I want this, oh the pope says this, but my President says that.

Republican Catholics are AMERICANS then CATHOLIC.

[the protector]

[quote]50 years ago the earth could support 60 billion people using existing farmland. [/quote]
Where did you find that stat? It sounds ridiculously high to me. In their book "Limits to Growth", the [url="http://www.clubofrome.org/"]Club of Rome[/url] said that if the food supply was evenly distributed, and production was de-centralized, the planet could support around 8 billion at most.

Either way, it is not all about food. What about infrastructure, jobs, clothing, medicine etc.? Lou Dobbs reported last night that in a few decades, the US will need twice of what is has now in houses, hospitals etc. What the enviromental impact of 60 billion people? Look at the impact of 6 billion people. According to [url="http://www.foet.org/JeremyRifkin.htm"]Jeremy Rifkin[/url] Us Americans account for about 22 billion Chinese in terms of consumption and enviromental impact.

[quote]The world will not become overpopulated.[/quote]
The world IS overpopulated. We have been able to fight some of the effects of overpopulation because of cheap, abundant energy from oil. Energy staves off entropy. Thermodynamics. Do you really want to challenge the laws of physics?

Leibig's Law: whatever necessity is least abundant, relative to per-capita requirements, sets the environment's limit for the population of any given species.

Did anyone of you even bother to click on the link?

We are approaching a point where cheap oil will be in decline. What do you think will happen when the source of energy which fueled the growth in population?

The birth rate has slowed from historically of about 2% to 1.2 %.

[quote]And if abortion is necessary to save the planet, why not just legalize murder to help "save the earth"?[/quote]
Hey, wow, something I never said. Next.

[quote]In fact, with great decreases in fertility rates (number of children per woman) in much of the world, the population will likely begin decreasing within this century! (Even the pro-population-control U.N.'s latest population report concedes this.) There is evidence that the decrease will come sooner and be steeper than the U.N. predicts. It has already begun in Europe.[/quote]
What about those other 6 billon and counting? Is population in the third world declining? Due to immigration, even population in the US in not set to decline.

[quote](I've always found it odd that none of these environmental extremists who keep howling about human population have voluntarily commited suicide "for the planet's sake." In fact, many of them do not even make sacrifices in lifestyle to use less resources.) [/quote]
The Hollywood liberals don't, that's for sure. But what are you any better to tell people that it is a sin for a couple to limit the number of children they have? Are you totally oblivious to the limits of this planet?

[Kilroy the Ninja]

[quote name='Phatmasser777' date='Dec 17 2004, 01:26 AM'] Republican Catholics are AMERICANS then CATHOLIC. [/quote]
Have to take exception to this. I am a Catholic first, then a Texan, then a Republican.

Broad statements like yours assume a lot.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Phatmasser777' date='Dec 17 2004, 03:26 AM'] War is a morality issue, an ethical issue. The Pope PUBLICLY stated his beliefs on it, doesnt that make it binding on all catholics? and even if its not, are you a supermarket catholic? Oh the popes says this, but I want this, oh the pope says this, but my President says that.

Republican Catholics are AMERICANS then CATHOLIC. [/quote]
WRONG!!

Being Catholic transcends EVERY OTHER BOND.

First you are Catholic, everything else comes after.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Phatmasser777' date='Dec 17 2004, 02:26 AM'] Republican Catholics are AMERICANS then CATHOLIC. [/quote]
[img]http://members.lycos.co.uk/thematrixd/YouJack1.gif[/img]

[luciana]

[quote name='the protector' date='Dec 17 2004, 01:43 AM'] Either way, it is not all about food. What about infrastructure, jobs, clothing, medicine etc.?

......


[/quote]
He was refering to an unequal distribution of ALL resources; food is the one people obviously think about when we think of poverty.

[quote]The birth rate has slowed from historically of about 2% to 1.2 %.[/quote]

Even a little change in this number in reality is a big change. Look at the population skews that are happening in Europe whre the population is not replacing itself.

[quote]Due to immigration, even population in the US in not set to decline.[/quote]

Immigration is the ONLY reason that the US still has a population rate that is not in sharp decline like Europe.

[quote]The Hollywood liberals don't, that's for sure.  But what are you any better to tell people that it is a sin for a couple to limit the number of children they have?  Are you totally oblivious to the limits of this planet?[/quote]

You can't compare limiting consumption to limiting the number of a couple's children.