Is having a large family a crime against the earth? (quick: somebody arrest the Duggars, and no conjugal visits!)

Filed under: Activities: Babies, Siblings

Global climate change has been everywhere in the news lately, and it seems like the issue has finally reached a tipping point where the public is no longer going to give much credence to the demagogues and propagandists on the right who continue to claim the entire body of science is a hoax. But to the interest of parents, a new study was published yesterday that says the cheapest and most effective personal strategy for tackling global climate change was stopping at two children. The study claims that having excessively large families should be considered an "eco-crime" and that adding a third child to a family increases that family's carbon footprint by the equivalent of 620 round-trip flights between London and New York.

The Optimum Population Trust (OPT) said a lower birth rate in the countries of the developed world would seriously help cut carbon dioxide emissions and help eliminate the nearly 750 tons of carbon dioxide that the average Briton, for example, will create over the course of his or her lifetime. With developed nations like Britain the the United States using a shockingly disproportionate amount of energy and creating and equally shocking disproportionate amount of waste, this certainly makes sense (and considering the legally-mandated one-child policy in energy-hungry China, it isn't even that big of a sacrifice.

Still, something tells me the OPT is not going to convince any advocates of the Quiverfull movement or the Duggars that they should cease and desist their exponential baby-making activities.

ReaderComments (Page 1 of 2)



Flickr RSS



AdviceMama Says:
Start by teaching him that it is safe to do so.