Author Topic: West-funded worldwide birth control/contraception program?  (Read 186 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5547
West-funded worldwide birth control/contraception program?
« on: April 15, 2018, 03:38:42 pm »
High birthrate and overpopulation is a massive problem, especially in less economically developed countries. It keeps people in poverty, especially mothers and children, and contributes dramatically to CO2 output, environmental degredation, rising worldwide food prices etc.  With improved access to food and medicine and maternal/child health, poorer countries have seen their populations explode in the last 50 years, good examples being China, India, and much of Africa.

Let's say I'm POTUS.  I would propose a global program, funded by the richer mostly western countries, to give everyone in poor countries free access to condoms and birth control bills.  The main string attached being everyone rich and poor and no matter ethnicity/religion etc, should be given unrestricted access.  There's still barriers based on culture and religion for people to actually use the birth control, but it will help.  Why spend all this money on carbon taxes etc when doing something like this will make much more of a difference?
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Why spend all this money on carbon taxes etc when doing something like this will make much more of a difference?
Because that would not give alarmists an excuse to lecture people in developed countries for their carbon "sins". Remember that climate change policy is driven by the tenets of the eco-religion rather than common sense.

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 362
  • I'm outta here...
  • Location: Vancouver Island
How odd.  In the face of rising populations we have seen the greatest decline in poverty rates in these very countries.

We also see China spending as much, or more, on solar power as the ROW combined.

As for giving out birth control: take it up with the religious right everywhere.

I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
We also see China spending as much, or more, on solar power as the ROW combined.
China spends more than the ROW on almost everything. That does not mean the spending is effective or sustainable in the long run. Note that despite the spending solar supplies a miniscule percentage of China's power and that is not expected to change significantly as the 40 or new nuclear plants come online.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8466
Because that would not give alarmists an excuse to lecture people in developed countries for their carbon "sins". Remember that climate change policy is driven by the tenets of the eco-religion rather than common sense.

No it's actually driven by the VAST majority of climate scientists. But I would agree that better access to birth control would help. Less people would burn less fossil fuels, and if the economies of over populated countries were improved it would help enable them to support the move away from them, such as the rest of the world is doing.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6509
Do both, CO2 emissions aren't the only downside of over population.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline Peter F

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • Location: I'd rather be in Quebec...
No it's actually driven by the VAST majority of climate scientists. But I would agree that better access to birth control would help. Less people would burn less fossil fuels, and if the economies of over populated countries were improved it would help enable them to support the move away from them, such as the rest of the world is doing.

Sure, access is fine. However one of the great accomplishments of many lives is the having and raising of children. Thats a tough habit to break and I'm not sure its something that should be broken.
"Never take on the role of management"
-- C.A.W. Shop Steward's manual.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8466
Sure, access is fine. However one of the great accomplishments of many lives is the having and raising of children. Thats a tough habit to break and I'm not sure its something that should be broken.

I certainly would never suggest stopping people from having children, just allowing them to control the size of their families. I've roamed around certain countries in Africa for instance where you can see the struggles families, (often mostly the mothers) go through with 6 kids. Perhaps if they had 2 and then accessed birth control that situation would improve.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Peter F

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • Location: I'd rather be in Quebec...
Certainly. Poonlight says much the same. I agree.   
"Never take on the role of management"
-- C.A.W. Shop Steward's manual.

Offline bcsapper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1377
I would.  But then, I'm worried about climate change.
Time for bed said Zebedee...

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1186
Quote
High birthrate and overpopulation is a massive problem, especially in less economically developed countries. It keeps people in poverty, especially mothers and children, and contributes dramatically to CO2 output, environmental degredation, rising worldwide food prices etc.

People in poverty stricken areas barely have a carbon footprint.  We're the problem, not them.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2018, 09:28:05 pm by BC_cheque »

Offline bcsapper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1377
People in poverty stricken areas barely have a carbon footprint.  We're the problem, not them.

Hey, I'm not saying we should be special.
Time for bed said Zebedee...

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1186
I was addressing the OP, sorry.  I'll insert a quote to make the distinction.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
People in poverty stricken areas barely have a carbon footprint.  We're the problem, not them.
David Suzuki himself pointed out that moving people from a low emission society to a high emission society is very bad for CO2 emissions. The planet needs people to be poor and miserable. Embrace the change!
Dumb Dumb x 5 View List

guest4

  • Guest
High birthrate and overpopulation is a massive problem, especially in less economically developed countries. It keeps people in poverty, especially mothers and children, and contributes dramatically to CO2 output, environmental degredation, rising worldwide food prices etc.  With improved access to food and medicine and maternal/child health, poorer countries have seen their populations explode in the last 50 years, good examples being China, India, and much of Africa.

Let's say I'm POTUS.  I would propose a global program, funded by the richer mostly western countries, to give everyone in poor countries free access to condoms and birth control bills.  The main string attached being everyone rich and poor and no matter ethnicity/religion etc, should be given unrestricted access.  There's still barriers based on culture and religion for people to actually use the birth control, but it will help.  Why spend all this money on carbon taxes etc when doing something like this will make much more of a difference?

1.  Here is someone who believes world population will begin to shrink in the next 100 years or so, due to increasing wealth in third world countries, leading to improved health and longer lives, which leads to decreased birthrates.  There is already signs that birth rates in these countries have begun to decline. 
Quote
https://youtu.be/2LyzBoHo5EI

2. What turned me off Harper Government was the decision to pull funding to third world clinics that provided birth control and provided family planning information, along with pre-and post-natal care because they also provided abortion.  His reason was because it created controversy, but its odd that that controversy did not stop Democrats or Liberals from providing funding to those clinics.
Informative Informative x 1 View List