Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:30     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My family was small so I have 3 kids and we our shooting for a 4th.


Please, please stop breeding now. You are only bringing down the average intelligence of the human gene pool.


Not that pp, but what a troll! Mr. Troll -- and I do mean Mr. -- I know you'll never "breed" -- which will benefit the entire gene pool by your genes' absence.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:30     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The poors in the third world are the ones having too many kids, not Jack and Jill in Minnesota.


Nice try asshole. A family of 8 in a developing or undeveloped country Uses far fewer resources than a family of 4 in the America.


But then they walk across our southern border and stay...


The first of your ancestors to arrive in America - do you have a scanned copy of their immigration papers per chance?


Actually we do. Came through Ellis Island. Dad (now deceased) has enlistment papers for Army in 1942. He was part of D-Day invasion in Normandy in '44. Yours?


Ellis Island is a point of entry - it has nothing to do with immigrations status.

My parents became fully naturalized in 1968 and 1974, both before I was born. And yes, I have their original naturalization documents in a safety deposit box.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:28     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The poors in the third world are the ones having too many kids, not Jack and Jill in Minnesota.


Nice try asshole. A family of 8 in a developing or undeveloped country Uses far fewer resources than a family of 4 in the America.


But then they walk across our southern border and stay...


The first of your ancestors to arrive in America - do you have a scanned copy of their immigration papers per chance?


Yep. From Ancestry.com

Next question?


Really? San you post it for us? If I'm aware, Ancestry.com does not post immigration papers on their records.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:23     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The poors in the third world are the ones having too many kids, not Jack and Jill in Minnesota.


Nice try asshole. A family of 8 in a developing or undeveloped country Uses far fewer resources than a family of 4 in the America.


But then they walk across our southern border and stay...


The first of your ancestors to arrive in America - do you have a scanned copy of their immigration papers per chance?


Actually we do. Came through Ellis Island. Dad (now deceased) has enlistment papers for Army in 1942. He was part of D-Day invasion in Normandy in '44. Yours?
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:15     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The poors in the third world are the ones having too many kids, not Jack and Jill in Minnesota.


Nice try asshole. A family of 8 in a developing or undeveloped country Uses far fewer resources than a family of 4 in the America.


But then they walk across our southern border and stay...


The first of your ancestors to arrive in America - do you have a scanned copy of their immigration papers per chance?


Yep. From Ancestry.com

Next question?
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:14     Subject: Re:Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Does that mean very wealthy people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc should have a lot of children while poors shouldn't have any? I guess this is sort of what happens sometimes anyway when rich men have children with mistresses.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:11     Subject: Re:Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:well China instituted a two child policy, They saw the difficulties of feeding a billion + people and finding them all employment. (Now they are coming to America in droves, and also those from the other overpopulated county, India, but that is another topic).


It's a one child policy, Einstein.


Thank-you. I was off by one. Still the point remains that at least one very large and important country has decided as a matter of policy to limit the number of births.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 17:06     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
So, its okay until America becomes a third world country, then?

It won't be long now....
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 16:59     Subject: Re:Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:well China instituted a two child policy, They saw the difficulties of feeding a billion + people and finding them all employment. (Now they are coming to America in droves, and also those from the other overpopulated county, India, but that is another topic).


It's a one child policy, Einstein.
maril332
Post 09/28/2013 16:55     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Eh, the vast majority of the world's growth/birth rate is coming from the developing world. I'm not saying its a good idea for every family here to have six kids, but to act like a family who wants 4+ kids is draining the world of its resources is so incorrect it's funny.



In what way? Are families with 4+ kids not somehow subject to basic mathematics? If each of those four kids has four of their own, and each of those decides to have four.... That's a lot more kids than if two each had two and so on. To say that the problem of overpopulation is solely that of the developing world is incredibly ignorant. For one thing your average American uses far more resources, on just about every level than does someone in the developing world - even if you live on a totally self-sufficient farm (you dig your own well, septic field, and build your own roads, phone and cable lines? You grow your own flax and spin it into yarn and weave your own cloth?....) , there's zero guarantee that your children will choose the same, low impact lifestyle.

To pretend that the reproductive choices and health care available to women in the US at all relates to those available to women in developing nations is offensive. They're frequently denied the ability to use birth control, when it's even available, and due to a lack of available medical care, they're far more likely to lose children to all sorts of diseases. Your decision large family has every bit as much impact as does large families elsewhere.


But by your logic this isnt a bad thing.


I'm not the PP you are responding to. but the problem is that the only reason it doesn't make a difference when some American woman has 6 kids is because MOST American women DON'T have that many kids. Because, if most American women did have that many kids, our resources would be strained and we'd have to bully other places into giving us theirs. And we wouldn't have the leveling of numbers that disease contributes to. It's not that disease is a "good" thing, but it does follow that it counters the large numbers of children women have in those regions. But usually, when sanitation improves, quality of life improves, availability of medical resources (which simultaneously means reduced fatalities to disease but ALSO increased access to birth control), then women do actually start having fewer children.

It is a bad thing when young children suffer and die in large numbers. The far better thing is to improve the conditions and reduce the birthrate. Access to medical services usually achieves both because it improves conditions but also gives women choices.


+1
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 14:15     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Eh, the vast majority of the world's growth/birth rate is coming from the developing world. I'm not saying its a good idea for every family here to have six kids, but to act like a family who wants 4+ kids is draining the world of its resources is so incorrect it's funny.



In what way? Are families with 4+ kids not somehow subject to basic mathematics? If each of those four kids has four of their own, and each of those decides to have four.... That's a lot more kids than if two each had two and so on. To say that the problem of overpopulation is solely that of the developing world is incredibly ignorant. For one thing your average American uses far more resources, on just about every level than does someone in the developing world - even if you live on a totally self-sufficient farm (you dig your own well, septic field, and build your own roads, phone and cable lines? You grow your own flax and spin it into yarn and weave your own cloth?....) , there's zero guarantee that your children will choose the same, low impact lifestyle.

To pretend that the reproductive choices and health care available to women in the US at all relates to those available to women in developing nations is offensive. They're frequently denied the ability to use birth control, when it's even available, and due to a lack of available medical care, they're far more likely to lose children to all sorts of diseases. Your decision large family has every bit as much impact as does large families elsewhere.


But by your logic this isnt a bad thing.


I'm the poster you quoted, and you're a monster. Where did I say it's a good thing if children die? Where? Because I think it's a terrible tragedy that children die, especially when they die for want of basic things like clean water and vaccines. Once people are here, we have every responsibility to see that they grow up as healthy and well educated as possible. Although if you're concluding that because I'm concerned about overpopulation I must also wish death to every "extra" person, I'm going to have to question some of your basic assumptions and beliefs about the world.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 14:14     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Wait, because we are not in the middle of a plague, it is somehow acceptable to be a sh*tty parent to your 6 kids?

No.

Everyone I know with 3+ is overwhelmed, or pretend to be overwhelmed. Can't the get the hint and close their legs, frankly?

I mean really, you only have sex every 18 months anyway, whats the difference if you spread it out more and give us all a break?

Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 14:02     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Eh, the vast majority of the world's growth/birth rate is coming from the developing world. I'm not saying its a good idea for every family here to have six kids, but to act like a family who wants 4+ kids is draining the world of its resources is so incorrect it's funny.



In what way? Are families with 4+ kids not somehow subject to basic mathematics? If each of those four kids has four of their own, and each of those decides to have four.... That's a lot more kids than if two each had two and so on. To say that the problem of overpopulation is solely that of the developing world is incredibly ignorant. For one thing your average American uses far more resources, on just about every level than does someone in the developing world - even if you live on a totally self-sufficient farm (you dig your own well, septic field, and build your own roads, phone and cable lines? You grow your own flax and spin it into yarn and weave your own cloth?....) , there's zero guarantee that your children will choose the same, low impact lifestyle.

To pretend that the reproductive choices and health care available to women in the US at all relates to those available to women in developing nations is offensive. They're frequently denied the ability to use birth control, when it's even available, and due to a lack of available medical care, they're far more likely to lose children to all sorts of diseases. Your decision large family has every bit as much impact as does large families elsewhere.


But by your logic this isnt a bad thing.


I'm not the PP you are responding to. but the problem is that the only reason it doesn't make a difference when some American woman has 6 kids is because MOST American women DON'T have that many kids. Because, if most American women did have that many kids, our resources would be strained and we'd have to bully other places into giving us theirs. And we wouldn't have the leveling of numbers that disease contributes to. It's not that disease is a "good" thing, but it does follow that it counters the large numbers of children women have in those regions. But usually, when sanitation improves, quality of life improves, availability of medical resources (which simultaneously means reduced fatalities to disease but ALSO increased access to birth control), then women do actually start having fewer children.

It is a bad thing when young children suffer and die in large numbers. The far better thing is to improve the conditions and reduce the birthrate. Access to medical services usually achieves both because it improves conditions but also gives women choices.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 13:56     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Eh, the vast majority of the world's growth/birth rate is coming from the developing world. I'm not saying its a good idea for every family here to have six kids, but to act like a family who wants 4+ kids is draining the world of its resources is so incorrect it's funny.



In what way? Are families with 4+ kids not somehow subject to basic mathematics? If each of those four kids has four of their own, and each of those decides to have four.... That's a lot more kids than if two each had two and so on. To say that the problem of overpopulation is solely that of the developing world is incredibly ignorant. For one thing your average American uses far more resources, on just about every level than does someone in the developing world - even if you live on a totally self-sufficient farm (you dig your own well, septic field, and build your own roads, phone and cable lines? You grow your own flax and spin it into yarn and weave your own cloth?....) , there's zero guarantee that your children will choose the same, low impact lifestyle.

To pretend that the reproductive choices and health care available to women in the US at all relates to those available to women in developing nations is offensive. They're frequently denied the ability to use birth control, when it's even available, and due to a lack of available medical care, they're far more likely to lose children to all sorts of diseases. Your decision large family has every bit as much impact as does large families elsewhere.


+1 The sheer ignorance of thinking that some upper middle class American woman's 5 kids somehow don't "count" toward overpopulation just because she happens to be able to raise them in a part of the world that has a huge military and a stronghold over a good percentage of the world's resources amazes me.
Anonymous
Post 09/28/2013 13:53     Subject: Why do DCUMs claim "overpopulation"...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Eh, the vast majority of the world's growth/birth rate is coming from the developing world. I'm not saying its a good idea for every family here to have six kids, but to act like a family who wants 4+ kids is draining the world of its resources is so incorrect it's funny.



In what way? Are families with 4+ kids not somehow subject to basic mathematics? If each of those four kids has four of their own, and each of those decides to have four.... That's a lot more kids than if two each had two and so on. To say that the problem of overpopulation is solely that of the developing world is incredibly ignorant. For one thing your average American uses far more resources, on just about every level than does someone in the developing world - even if you live on a totally self-sufficient farm (you dig your own well, septic field, and build your own roads, phone and cable lines? You grow your own flax and spin it into yarn and weave your own cloth?....) , there's zero guarantee that your children will choose the same, low impact lifestyle.

To pretend that the reproductive choices and health care available to women in the US at all relates to those available to women in developing nations is offensive. They're frequently denied the ability to use birth control, when it's even available, and due to a lack of available medical care, they're far more likely to lose children to all sorts of diseases. Your decision large family has every bit as much impact as does large families elsewhere.


But by your logic this isnt a bad thing.