For the last few years the traditional family has been under attack from gay marriage activists. Now the traditional family is being attacked by another group of activists, the eco-nazis. Yes, Satan has launched a two-pronged, flanking action against the traditional family. This should come as no surprise, however. The family is the core unit of the Plan of Salvation and he would like nothing more than to tear it down.
Who are the eco-nazis? They come in many different shapes and sizes, but the most dangerous are the “enlightened” intelligentsia who live in ivory towers and work in great and spacious buildings on university and government campuses. They are suggesting that couples limit the number of children they have to minimize humanity’s carbon footprint.
Casey Jones, a member of the Salt Lake Tribune editorial board recently rang the overpopulation alarm with this statement: “We can start teaching our kids the new math, the socially, environmentally and fiscally responsible, not to mention carbon neutral, math -- 1 adult + 1 adult = 2 children. That way we can carry on the species without straining our schools and the planet.” http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_12978247
A group of statisticians from Oregon State University recently suggested that people reduce carbon footprinting by limiting the number of kids they have. Statistician Paul Murtaugh stated: “"In discussions about climate change, we tend to focus on the carbon emissions of an individual over his or her lifetime. . . . But an added challenge facing us is continuing population growth and increasing global consumption of resources.”
And Dr. John Holdren, President Obama’s recent pick as the science and technology czar, has, in the past, made dire predictions about the impact of population growth. Here were his shocking recommendations: “There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated. . . . [I]t has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society. . . . If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility.”
We should be good and proper stewards of the earth and its resources, but when we use carbon footprinting as an excuse for not having children, we’ve gone too far. When carbon footprinting takes precedence over people’s wishes to have children, we’ve gone too far.
The only footprints parents should be concerned about are the ones they get on cardstock in the hospital delivery room after their babies arrive, and the muddy ones they find on the kitchen floor as their children grow up.