Babies & the Economy

I just read an article this morning about women who won't have babies, because it is not eco friendly. One lady Toni Vernelli had an abortion, because she felt that having a baby would be bad for the environment. "Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet. Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population," she said.

She tried for several years to find a doctor who would sterilize her,as most refused. Finally, it happened, and her boyfriend gave her a card of congrats. Later she stated, "We feel we can have one long-haul flight a year (talking about a vacation to Africa), as we are vegan and childless, thereby greatly reducing our carbon footprint and combating over-population."

Another woman Sarah Irving also commented, "I realized then that a baby would pollute the planet - and that never having a child was the most environmentally friendly thing I could do." She broke up with all of her boyfriends that wanted children, and eventually married someone who had a similar mindset. Her husband chose to have a vasectomy, as that proved simpler than herself being sterilized.

Her husband said, "Sarah and I live as green a life a possible. We don't have a car, cycle everywhere instead, and we never fly. We recycle, use low-energy light bulbs and eat only organic, locally produced food. In short, we do everything we can to reduce our carbon footprint. But all this would be undone if we had a child. That's why I had a vasectomy. It would be morally wrong for me to add to climate change and the destruction of Earth."

The former lady stated that if she wanted children, then she could adopt. Actually it would be correct to state that she used to say that, "We used to say that if ever we did want children, we'd adopt, as there are so many children in need of a loving family." There doesn't seem to be any indication that she is going to adopt or help others adopt, or even help orphans. She and her husband just take vacations to various continents. So her theory is flawed. She is probably wasting just as much jet fuel as the parents who tote around their 4 kids in a mini-van. Furthermore, even if not having kids would help the environment, you would still need to do more than refrain from childbearing.

If only a relatively small percentage of the world would adopt orphans, we could get hypothetically take care of all the orphans in the world. You can get into the debate about how you would house all these orphans that are being adopted, but there are less orphans in the world than one might realize. You could also choose to just financially help out orphanages or provide money to people in third world countries to prevent kids from being orphans. The orphans don't have to all be shipped over to America.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-495495/Meet-women-wont-babies--theyre-eco-friendly.html