LEAVE NO TRACE: have a vasectomy
posted by Chloe Hartstein | December 3, 2011
- Login or register to post comments
- Print this page
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
IcerocketHow is the wealth to be spread equitably amongst a US population of 300 million? It won't. Not until we begin talking about the elephant in the room (or world for that matter) being breeding. We look at 3rd world countries and cringe at the hungry population, and judge- their population needs to significantly reduce. Why not have this same conversation at home? It would surely be a start if Americans decided that they want a material humble existence, only what they need, maybe a little more. Less consumption is beautiful. But with a population of 300 million mouths - I don't care how much we all raise our vibration- this county, this earth has too many people- 7 billion. And unless raising our frequencies has embedded in it the hidden virtue of people consciously having LESS children (which it very well could, time will tell), we will continue to tango with our sharing of resources and our discontent with policy makers. I've never once heard our media take on the taboo subject- and God forbid, of, people: have less children. Anyone in the OWS movement holding a "Thank You For Not Breeding"? I look at it this way: The world population will HAVE to decrease, be it mother nature will see to it if not some dastardly esoteric agenda gets to it first. Do you want MASSES of people dying and suffering (which as you savvy amazing RS readers already know is already happening) or less people born to suffer. The unborn will not suffer. The born will. Thank you for not breeding. Thank you for breeding consciously and with love. XO Chloe
ps, if you have a big family and are reading this- that is in the past. love your big family!
Comments
This reminded me of
— Dec 06, 2011
This reminded me of something Terence McKenna said when he "queried the mushroom" about what to do about the growing population, and "it responded" basically, "if every woman had only one child..." along those lines; I'm just remembering from a video I watched a few years ago. I think there is something to that interaction, which is why I mention it, whatever metaphor you prefer [channeling, accessing the larger consciousness system, whatever]. But the math is clear enough, too. And I think within the context of living for the whole, or other, not just the self, it makes perfect pragmatic sense in our current situation. It's no exception to "be the change you want", but there lies that perpetual problem; how do we effectively effect "7 billion" people to get in touch with the bigger picture and change themselves. Infinite patience brings immediate results. Though I don't know if that's good enough when it seems that we're slipping off the edge. But I will remain optimistic.
Easy there
— Dec 06, 2011
This kind of thinking is dangerous and is the basis of the NAZI eugenics causes.
Let's compromise
— Dec 07, 2011
"the basis of the NAZI eugenics causes" ...You may have jumped a little too far in that assessment, onetrilliondiamonds. No one is talking about controlling anyone other than themselves, for one, and two, "the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics" - eugenics, has nothing to do with Chloe or my thoughts. Unless you were being facetious.
YOUR kind of thinking...
— Dec 12, 2011
Huge jump "onetrilliondiamonds". My advise to you is to read and listen before stating your irrelevant and accusatory mantra. I was entirely and effectively careful not to implore the slightest notion of breeding control unless self-regulated. NO government/ agency should ever tell a woman how many children she can bare, ie China or nazi eugenics babble. This is the unfavorable esoteric agenda scenario I had mentioned above , and who knows it could be more sinister than a mere policy. This is where people looking out for people comes into play- we are all on the same team, no? I believe the world population is a giant root to many if not most of the worlds problems and is very little discussed in practical terms. I hear only about world population as a negative when it is directed, by the mediacrits, towards India or China or any of the several countries not as fortunate as the material rich USA . Which is such a scam, population and sustainability is a problematic for everyone and caused by those having a metric ton of children, and is absolutely irrelevant as to what one's financial situation is. Lets take India for example. Materially poor and spiritually rich. To proclaim "if you can't afford to have children, then don't" implores the exclusives rights to those materially enhanced (ie you're not eating out of a garbage dump, instead you are standing inline at Walmart on black friday). As long as one can raise children with love and virtues: you're entitled. So lets just limit the amount of children we have and do us all a favor and share resources and the planet.
Chloe
