Annie. In my opinion, if we can’t end the occupation of Iraq we’ll just be able to do less and less, for the rest of our lives. So, work to end the war.

Still the point is how do we help overwhelmed parents in the world in May 2008? A point that seems to have been missed.

Edwin, many of the world’s problems are partly or wholly caused by the U.S.’ actions. Your “gated community” attitude is tantamount to stealing something, then declaring an immediate truce and freezing possessions “as they are.” It is not fair, and it will not be accepted by the swindled.

Loathing people who reproduce without economic means is rancid behavior. Reproduction is a human right on par with survival. You do the capitalists’ dirty work for them if you discourage the poor and oppressed from breeding simply because of their condition.

Incidentally, I am troubled by the desire of so many to see a population crash that they see as “deserved.” Such a wish is the death lust of the “progressive” community, similar to the Book of Revelations for the religiously sick.

Offering the solution of death to the troubles of life is evil. Unadulterated.

I dispute that our wonderful planet, with a blazing, healthy sun nearby, cannot support much more life, even luxurious human life, than it does now. Do you think we are drawing on the full power of the solar system? What an arrogant attitude that would be, if that is your claim. We have the potential to be much greater than this. Your grim predictions only apply if we fail to develop any further, and if we continue crippling ourselves for the benefit of parasitic elites with a dead-end evolutionary strategy of inbreeding and ignorance.

Believe in us! Life finds a way.

First my thanks to Susan Rosenthal for having the courage to allow a debate that includes diverse viewpoints. I find most blog owners just delete out posts they disagree with.

I certainly agree there is a great amount of greed and immoral distribution of resources and all that we can do to improve the situation is good and will benefit many.

I disagree that a concern for population going above the carrying capacity of the land is racist. I would say the US is beyond the carrying capacity and we should aim to lower the population say to 150 million from 300 million. This applies to all Americans (across the whole spectrum of race, color, religion, national origin, etc). I have no wish to suffer the effects of pollution regardless of the race of the polluter.

On the other hand I like humans. I certainly want a continuity of humankind. The 3 billion year ingrained will to reproduce will not go away even if we promote responsible 2 children per couple norms/guidelines/rules/laws/???. It will just mean we can skip the starving people (children, youth, young adults, middle aged, adults, old) part. This is not something any nation should put on another nation this should strictly be an internal issue. Let each nation decide for themselves. But having the responsible nations bankrupt themselves trying to fix the impossible choices made by irresponsible nations makes no sense to me. Yes I can understand there is a religious perspective that calls for feeding the poor regardless of the future. It certainly is the right of any America to send as much of their money to feed who ever they choose. Or to travel to any place they choose to do whatever good works they choose. But it is not a right to import the worlds problems into the US. In so doing you impact on my rights (and my children’s right and my grand children’s …) to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Great discussion. Thanks.

Susan Rosenthal, the author of this commendable article, has mentioned Hurricane Katrina and the dreadful way mostly poor black people were abandoned to their watery and preventable fate.

The hypocrisy from Ma Bush http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/06/2236366.htm?section=world “takes the biscuit.’

Has she no shame or is she an amnesiac? There are now at least 22,000 dead in Burma and the people’s misery is extreme. The U.S. offered Burma a paltry $250,000 in aid. Compare that to the $3 trillion war her husband has conducted, and consider how many Iraqi mothers and children have been killed or maimed and their lives ruined!

Attacks on the “immorality” of individuals (poor or not) divert attention from the immorality of capitalism and those who profit from it.

No poor person has ever invaded or bombed another nation, executed an innocent, abandoned people to die (Katrina), deprived sick people of health care, etc., etc.

Moralistic, blame-the-victim arguments are PR for capitalism, plan and simple. They should be soundly rejected.

Yea, divorce is high for the instant-gratification generation, and their children suffer.

Nothing immoral about the son of an acquaintance of mine who has 25 children by almost as many women and involved in none of the lives of his children, although not totally his fault as he has spent half his adult life in prison; in prison now for murder.

Nothing wrong with the single 18 y/o mother with 4 who spends most of her social program funds on fake nails and weaves while her children go hungry and unparented b/c momma is at the club.

Another problem with the “liberal left” – they expect nothing of their followers, other than blind agreement on every social program that comes down the pike, anything goes b/c someone else can pay for it. And the children pay the highest price.

I’m eager to see the illegitimacy rate of white America hit 70% since it’s no problem for black America. Get busy white girls and catch up to who’s yo daddy.

But gee, we wouldn’t want to force morality or family values on anyone, someone might call us right wing. And besides, we have the man, the “rich white man” to blame it all on.

evie: Whites tend to divorce. Is that “out of wedlock”? Many of those children face similar problems that those immoral “out of wedlock” children face. Yet divorce is not consider “immoral” yet you imply that African Americans behavior of “out of wedlock” mothers are.

The big difference is that divorce is not considered immoral because more whites divorce and because whites have more money, thus they are judged differently than the poor and African-Americans. It’s unfortunate that you buy into the supremacist rhetoric of blaming the poor and subjugated.

Deadbeat: I also don’t believe the world is overpopulated, and I will agree there is a poor distribution of income worldwide.

But the “real problem” is morality – not resources. No matter how trendy Brangelina or Kurt and Goldie make it appear, or how many social programs we create to excuse it and fund it.

And btw I’m black and believe morality has no color. When 70% of black babies and 28% of white babies in the US are born out of wedlock – it’s not capitalism or racism – it is the content of our character, not the contents of our wallet.

Ms. Rosenthal is correct. Notice that when the discussion is about the poor they tend to be brown and black. Thus this talk about “overpopulation” has a RACIST tinge to it.

The richer nations are more wasteful of resources, thus the child in a rich nation will consume more of the world resources than a poor child. Which means that the rich nation’s procreation is more “irresponsible”.

The real problem is capitalism and the mal-distribution of wealth and resources. However I don’t think that the rich nations are ready to share their ill-gotten gains.