Often I've tried to warn that the bottom line of all liberal policies centers around population control and reduction. Most of the time I am met with scoffing, name calling, or eye rolling. Yet, President Biden's latest nominee, Tracy Stone-Manning, who he wants to run the Bureau of Land Management, wrote her Master's Thesis on that very subject. Her thesis goes so far as to say that a couple should have no more than two kids, and goes on to assert that one, or better yet none, are preferable.
What kind of reason could she have for this?
Read it in her own words: "The earth is only so big, and we can tap into it only so often. In America, we tap in often and hard. When we overpopulate, the earth notices it more. Stop at two. It could be the best thing you do for the planet."
Another statement from her thesis: "The origin of our abuses is us. If there were fewer of us, we would have less impact. We must consume less, and more importantly, we must breed fewer consuming humans."
Here you have it, in plain English, unvarnished, and out where everyone can see it.
The left's answer today is the same as it has always been, "make less people so we can better care for the ones we already have."
They fail to realize that this is not only detrimental to society as a whole, but also to the species as it is only by having more children that the genetic combinations of genius can emerge. They are rare enough as it is, but to reduce birth rates is only to reduce the number of people who can actually make an impact.
Less chances for doctors, artists, great musicians, unbelievably talented athletes, unrivaled scholars, and many more would be lost by this overarching policy.
This is what drives much of their ideology, even if they don't want to admit it. Their view on abortion? Yep. Their view on releasing dangerous prisoners back into society through prison reform? Yep. Their desire for free and constantly available birth control? Absolutely. Their support of the LGBTQ+ segment? Yep, even that.
I mean, what, after all are a few human lives either thrown away or prevented? We have to depopulate the planet anyway.
Make no mistake, while you go about your life, respecting life, and looking at life continuing and babies being born as a positive thing, people like Tracy Stone-Manning are sitting there scoffing and wishing that there were fewer of them. Every person born is an anathema to them. In fact, they believe their own rhetoric so vehemently, that I wonder if they have any children, and if they do, do they also view theirs as a plight upon the planet?
Likely, if the answer to the first is yes, the answer to the second is no.
But why am I even writing about this? Why take up time and blog space on this topic? The answer? Because it is important.
When you understand the underlying truth of what someone is attempting to say, you can more easily disarm their entire argument. For example, if someone is saying that abortion is ok, ask them if they feel that planetary depopulation is ok. If they even know what it is, they'll likely say yes because humanity is harming the plant.
NOW you're reached the core, their negative view of humanity and its existence. So what if a human life is extinguished, we need less people anyway.
The world needs people, it needs smart and brilliant people to help solve the issues of the 21st century and beyond. We need brilliant minds who can create the technology that we can only dream of today. You don't get those kinds of people when you're slaughtering entire populations of humanity. They're so rare that if you accidentally kill one, you may not get another in a hundred thousand births.
That is why population control measures are so very wrong. Humanity, and its continued existence and advancement, depend upon those people being there to lead us into the future.
It reminds me of a saying that I once heard:
Man to God: God, if you're so powerful, why don't you cure cancer?
God to Man: I sent you someone to do it, but you aborted them.
Every life lost through population control means is one less person that could be that one.
But that does not matter, after all, the only thing that matters is ensuring that there are less people on the planet "consuming."
Unless it is "your people," then of course there is an exemption.