| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 09/04/2005 : 3:00:43 PM
http://www.vhemt.org/
I'm in. You've heard me say millions of times before. The earth is overpopulated. This is the only humanitarian way to deal with the problem. |
| 7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 09/05/2005 : 3:58:05 PM
Ok so 100 million couples a day, which results in 910,000 pregnancies of which 55% don't make it. This results in 359,000 births a day. Which means 131,035,000 births per year or thereabouts. basically it means that out of the 100 million people having sex a day only 359,000 of those will produce a baby. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 09/05/2005 : 04:21:26 AM
910,000 pregnancies
A day? I don't understand how those percents work out. 3.3% have sex a day. Out of that number 359,000 go on to be pregnant? So then on the next day another 910,000 pregnancies occur? That would be over 165 Billion people in a year. Somehow that's not right and that whole thing doesn't make any sense. Last time I checked there were only around 7 Billion people on earth. Did I misread that somehow? |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 09/04/2005 : 6:02:04 PM
Ya that's kinda what I was getting at. We can incorporate the values that the tribal or communal way of life has. Many people still live like this like your example, but I think it would have to be expanded further for problems from the "ignorant" people breeding. Since sadly not as many people have the blessing you and your child have. I was just suggesting that we move away from such strong indepenence and realize we need each other to surrvive.
Silky, no one said anything about people not having sex. Check out what VHEMT says
quote:
Q: Do we have to stop having sex?
Sex is the way most babies are started, but is sexual intercourse really the primary cause of human reproduction? Let's consider the statistics:
The World Health Organization estimates that 100 million couples engage in sexual intercourse on an average day, which is only 3.3% of the world's six billion humans. This pitifully low amount of love-making results in around 910,000 pregnancies, thanks in part to contraceptives and sterility. For a variety of reasons, 55% of these zygotes don't make it through fetushood to live birth. According to a current U.S. Census Bureau estimate, 359,000 do make it daily.
So, less than 0.4% of each day's heterosexual trysts result in the creation of new humans -- a statistically insignificant correlation for proving causation. In fact, it rounds to zero.
Try it for yourself. Estimate how many times you've engaged in sexual activity in your lifetime. Now estimate how many times you were trying to make a baby. Divide the little number by the big number to give you the percent of times sex and procreation have simultaneously motivated you.
Perhaps if there were more opportunities for sexual gratification, so many people wouldn't feel the need to fill a nagging emptiness with a needy dependent.
[Note: the above shows how statistics may be manipulated. If we approach the equation from the other end, more than 99% of us were started by sexual intercourse.]
It's kinda sad only 3.3% of people will have sex today. I can't help but to think that more people making love in general more often might help the earth out a little. |
| Robin |
Posted - 09/04/2005 : 5:52:27 PM
You don't necessarily have to "go back to a tribal way" to have the support of like minded individuals. I live in a wonderful place and stayed home to raise my son. I had a group of friends, some of whom I met through having a home birth.Most of our families live far or we don't have ties with. We formed a little after baby yoga group and then many of us shared chores and childcare. We all didn't have t.v.'s and had similar enough values that it worked. Now that our kids are all teenagers it's really nice to have the support. The kids are really like cousins, and they enlist the help and advice of any of us as well as each other.In essence you can create a Village of sorts with out having to sacrifice contemporary values if that's what you choose. |
| Silky The Pimp |
Posted - 09/04/2005 : 5:37:21 PM
Sure, we can get people to stop fucking... and after that miracle, I'll go punch out god. |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 09/04/2005 : 4:36:52 PM
First I commend you for stopping at one (no offense to those who chose to have more). Second, I agree that if people concerned for the future of earth stop having kids and the only people that are having kids are the so called ignorant people it poses a problem. In fact it is already a problem. Myself, if I ever to choose to have kids it will be through adoption. The only thing is that with this I would say comes the responsibilty of moving society back to having tribal values. Not a tribal lifestyle (even though you probably know I've envoked the tribal lifestyle in the past would support that movement as well) but the family type of values that seem to be displayed by tribal peoples throughout the earth or at least where they are still left to live at least mostly in the traditional ways.
What I mean is that they actually tend to make child raising a community effort in most cases. Of course they usually also tend to work less then us allowing them time to actually play and live with their children. So much of the time now days kids are raised by TV's and not humans. I think that if this was to work we would have to make a shift towards actually having communities of people that depended on each other instead of todays self centered, exlusive, and generally, keep to yourself because everbodies crazy type of attitude. Anyway here is what VHEMT has to say about it.
quote:
Q: Aren't the wrong people making babies these days?
Some say, "The wrong people are having children these days." How many times have you heard this expressed? We can be sure they're not talking about themselves: it's those wrong people. It's "those stupid, slack-jawed degenerates who shouldn't breed. Those too poor to raise children, or so warped they don't even like children and might abuse them." Certainly, this logic follows, "bad genetic specimens should never duplicate their defects."
Implicit in these opinions is the attitude that some people are the right people to pass along their genes. Smart, financially secure, responsible, socially aware people with superior genes ought to make more of each other. After all, someone is going to, right?
Maybe so, but even if intelligence could be measured or inherited, there's no evidence that smart people's exhaust stinks less than morons'. And, since the wealthy are better able to provide materially for their dependents than are the economically disadvantaged, they're also likely to do the most damage to the environment with their excessive consumption.
Some say that their religious or political belief system needs more members to make the world a better place, but there's no guarantee that offspring will follow the traditions of their parents. In fact, just the opposite seems to be the norm in modern societies. Besides, if the only people who will accept a belief system are those born into it, there must be some serious flaws in that system.
Others contend that their race or ethnic group is in the minority, or will be soon if they don't keep up. Carrying on the family name has long been an unquestioned justification for reproduction, and when a couple says they want to "have one of our own," they mean "make one that has our genes." The mindset behind this bloodline mentality is deep and strong: more of "Us" and less of "Them". Smell like racism to you? When couples try to conceive a specific gender, sexism is also in the wind. It goes beyond elitism for us to create replicas of ourselves while tens of thousands of Others' children die from lack of care each day.
Anyway, simply increasing the sheer numbers of people who share a philosophy or genetic makeup doesn't always improve their status. "Breeding wars" between rival groups have shifted political power in a few majority-rule governments, however, members of those groups usually aren't any better off just by being in a larger voting block. Breeding for power is a remnant of that ancient tradition of mass murder we call genocide. The motivation remains the same.
Really, as VHEMT Volunteers know, it's the wrong species "having children". Regardless of our superficial differences, we are all Homo sapiens. As long as extinctions of wildlife continue at an outrageous pace, the intentional creation of another one of us can't be justified.
|
| Robin |
Posted - 09/04/2005 : 3:23:23 PM
It sounds good in theory,but I wonder who will actually do it.
And what about whoever isn't participating in this, and are already having a lot of kids,will they be the ones that will populate the earth? If all the conscious and aware people stop creating baby humans, then who ends up making the choices for the future? Though I have to admit this whole "brighter future" thing's not going so well as it is. BTW, Zero Population has been touting this for years sans humor, (which made it kind of annoying). Personally, I stopped after one child because I felt the planet didn't need more of us. And a lot of people thought that was weird.
Peace, Robin |
|
|
