POST SCRIPT • Study reveals just how much the Green Movement hates people
by: COURTESY OF JUPITER IMAGES, A recent Portland Tribune article featured a study that measured the carbon impact of having a child – one reader responds to the Murtaugh-Schlax study, calling it “a deplorable abuse of science.”

Have you hugged your 'carbon footprint' today? According to a mathematical study of human reproduction choices referenced in the Tribune's Sustainable Life section, 'Is having a baby not so carbon friendly?' (Sept. 10), a woman who has a baby is leaving behind a carbon legacy due to her 'behavior,' i.e., having a baby.

As a retired community health educator, pro-life activist and an adoptive mother, I find the Murtaugh-Schlax study to be a deplorable abuse of science. It is an example of people-hating that is so prevalent in the Green Movement. It's your fault. It's your children. It's time to put a spotlight on this disparaging kind of talk.

In the Tribune article, Stan Jones-Umberger indirectly suggests that children are cruel to the environment and we need to 'change (our) behavior.' He and his wife chose not to have children to protect the planet. I concur with him that humans are unique. Individual uniqueness is one of the reasons why we pro-lifers want to defend and protect life!

At the rate we are aborting American children - 50 million since the Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973 - we are already limiting family size. We do not need advice from the Greens on this topic. For now, family limitation is voluntary. Will the Greens use studies like this to justify lobbying for a government-enforced one-child policy, as exists in China? This could happen now that we have a Green president who has the most extreme views on abortion of any president in history. President Obama's science czar, John Holdren, once backed forced abortions, an abhorrent recommendation.

What I am alarmed about is that Planned Parenthood has joined the 'sustainability' bandwagon to enhance its marketing to young people. Until recently, Planned Parenthood's population control goals have been hidden from public scrutiny. Here in Portland, Planned Parenthood's new regional service center on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard is being built by a 'green' construction company, B and G Builders Inc., that touts 'sustainable options' on its signs.

But this goes beyond green building. Evidence shows that Planned Parenthood views abortion as the solution to a sustainable ecosystem. Planned Parenthood's new LEED-certified facility in Orem, Utah, gives referrals for abortion, a surgical procedure that ends life, but has a 'living garden' on its roof. 'Responsible choices for now and the future,' reads the Web site. 'Stabilization of the population brings about long-term environmental sustainability, and is the driving force behind some of today's most serious problems, including climate change and higher energy costs.' Population control through abortion is not a farfetched idea any more; it's happening in our neighborhoods. It ought to concern everyone.

Another concern is the flawed science that climate change is based on. There is no hard scientific evidence that manmade carbon dioxide emissions are causing climate change. Besides, there is a very large number of scientists (31,000) who are not in agreement with the United Nations global warming consensus endorsed by only 2,000 scientists.

I showed the Murtaugh-Schlax study to Steve Milloy, founder of Junk Science and author of Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan To Control Your Life and What You Can Do About It. He shared his opinion of the study, saying it 'presupposes that current and projected levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are undesirable.' CO2 is plant food. Since humans and animals eat plants, CO2 is necessary to sustain life. 'There is no evidence that current or projected levels of CO2 in the atmosphere will do anything but provide more plant food. Yes, more people will use more energy and emit more CO2. But more CO2 isn't a problem - it's a boon. We should be looking to increase atmospheric CO2.'

The world cannot afford to fall for global warming hysteria as a basis for population control. The real population crisis is a declining population. According to a 2008 report by the United Nations Population Division, 'Globally, total fertility is expected to fall from 2.56 children per woman in 2005-2010 to 2.02 in 2040-2050.' The report further states that, 'Most developed countries have had below-replacement fertility (below 2.1 children per woman) for two or three decades.' Emphasis added.

The Greens are just wrong and show a disregard for human life while elevating plant and animal life.

Nina Rhea is the founder of Pro-Life Action of Oregon and is an associate of the American Life League.

Go to top
Template by JoomlaShine