A ban on humans!

September 23, 2008

So, everyone’s freaking out about banks collapsing; about taxpayers having to lend out $770 billion to bail out a bunch of really irresponsible people who were living way above their means and couldn’t make their house payments.  And the list of grievances goes on – urban sprawl, unemployment, depletion of natural resources, water and air pollution, food shortages – the world as we know it is going right down the tubes.

“What do we do?”  everyone shouts.

Well, I think the answer is pretty obvious, don’t you?


Stop having so many babies, you breeders!  Why do you have to have so many children?  Ladies – who cares if your “biological clock is ticking”?  Why do you have to be so selfish about feeling the joy of motherhood?  And guys – can’t you exert a little “self control” during sex, if you catch my drift?

Don’t you parents realize that every baby human that comes into the world is one more human mammal that needs to be fed, clothed, housed, educated, employed, health-insured, entertained, retired, adult-diapered and then finally embalmed, buried and/or cremated?   Think of all the food, water, fossil fuel, and other myriad resources being used by one human being.  Just think of how much one person throws away in the garbage in any given week.  I live in a small town, and yet the amount of garbage I see at my local transfer station is still so shocking to me.

Oh, but somehow, this is all trumped by how cute the little baby is, and her/his little pink/blue outfits, and witnessing those first coos and first words and first footsteps.  Yeah, all at the expense of their future prospects of life on this fragile planet.  Hey, don’t get me wrong – I love kids.   I’ve even WORKED with kids.  Kids are awesome – but let’s use our heads here, people.  We need LESS humans on the planet!  The efforts to teach people about birth control and family planning should be whole-heartedly supported, especially in Third World countries, where, instead, the stranglehold of Christian missionaries and their insidious ideas about sexual morality and being “open to the possibility of a child” every time the natives fuck have driven out every last shred of common sense and hope for pulling these natives out of the clutches of poverty and despair – and despite wild claims to the contrary, the Baby Jesus ain’t gonna feed all them little bastards’ starving mouths once the missionaries have packed up their Bibles and moved back to North Carolina or Utah or whichever red state where they were bred.

So, I say, when your suburban housewife friend proudly announces the conception of her 5th or even 1st or 2nd child, slap her and tell her she’s helping to destroy the very planet she wishes to populate.  How’s that for a conversation stopper at an otherwise boring baby shower?

9 Responses to “A ban on humans!”

  1. […] name Minds Erased has come up with a great idea for fixing the financial mess we’re in now: ban humans! Of course we’re stuck with the present bunch of humans — Minds doesn’t suggest […]

  2. seev78 Says:

    …euthanasia for the elderly as a solution, which I appreciate (ha ha) — but you certainly have a point which the Chinese already agree with. Clearly, we’re rapidly acquiring too many people on this planet and already our resources are under stress. So, when you say STOP BREEDING! you aren’t just a kidding! It’s important to do! And also, as you say, if we’d just keep those over zealous Christian missionaries away, unless of course they concentrated just on helping them, that would certainly help keep the population down. Oh, but how about just one little kid per family, Minds? Let’s not erase the whole human race but maybe save a baby or two, here and there, from being thrown out with the bath water, so to speak! BWAhahahahahaha

  3. Nathaniel Says:

    Wow, here I thought that when banks fail it has something to do with lending money to people who will not pay it back, people running the banks being foolish, or both.

    But I guess it really is about how many kids someone in Africa has. I’m sure a bright and clear line can be drawn from Lehman Brothers to kids in Africa.

    And while we admire the Chinese for lowering the number of new humans they bring to the world lets also thank them for all the other things they do to protect the planet. Such as building a new coal fired power plant every week. I bet the CO2 put out from these will form a protective covering around the world that will keep it safe, right?

    We cannot forget to take credit for the good things we do ourselves. After all, US family size has generally been shrinking for a while now. We haven’t reached the Chinese level of getting to 1 child per family but we have been getting it to a point that without all those people from other places we would have a shrinking population (kinda like parts of Europe). But as we go forward in this form of progress we should praise the Chinese for trying to match us in creating a worldwide layer of protective airborne CO2. Progress defined is few or no kids but at least 3 cars in/around/or parked as close as possible to a house that can only get bigger itself.

    On that last point, you would be surprised how much space you need to put things in with no kids around to distract you from this important task.

    Thanks to us all and those who try to be like us in how responsible they are. Let us not forget Global Warming is obviously the fault of big families in the 3rd world where house may not even be responsible enough to have electrical power. We are forced to make up for them. Well off to buy a new SUV to do my part.

  4. A subject very dear to my heart. So happy to see this thorny subject being discussed more often these days. Thank you for adding your voice. One can only hope for the 100th monkey syndrome to kick in and people all over the world stop bloody breeding.

    And don’t get me started on the stupid “two is just replacement” idea. Eh, that may be so if the parents topped themselves the moment the second rugrat popped into the world. Not that keeping the numbers as they are is actually desirable anyway.

    Good (but very long) video on Youtube on Arithmetic, Population and Energy.

    Disclosure: I pointed my website link to the page on population.

  5. mindserased Says:

    Nathaniel – point taken. I know, I know, my whole line of thinking is a bit of a stretch – but, when you think about it, if people had exerted a little bit of control in the family planning department the last couple of generations, we might not have found ourselves in such a pickle now. It’s like when economist Steven Levitt pointed out the link between legalized abortion and lowered crime rates, people went nuts – but who cares whether we offend the wacko pro-lifers? This is precisely the type of critical thought that is needed. What do we do about the surplus of humans we find ourselves among? Well, I’m certainly no advocate for genocide. I just think those of who are left holding the humanity bag need to start thinking more globally and, well, um, stop having so many fucking kids!

    Judy, thanks for your $.02 as well. Welcome aboard. I am off now to check out your links.

  6. Nathaniel Says:

    Actually, despite not being conservative in most ways myself (frequently vote Democratic and was a dues paying member till my membership lapsed earlier this year), I’ll refer you to one to point out that there are some reasons to doubt that abortion actually prevents crime. http://www.isteve.com/abortion.htm

    You may want to consider that “wacko” Pro-Life include a very wide range of folks including hyper religious people (often are or put themselves in the press) that beat up on gay people for simply wanting to live their lives to hyper secular Libertarians (in the press less) who want to let gay people marry as they please and pot users smoke as they will. I tend to find myself agreeing with the latter on many “social issues”.

    Now you know my biases. However, one of the other things I like is history and I know that cries of “overpopulation” (in the past related to food production rather than the environment) didn’t pan out. This tends to make me wonder if fixing “overpopulation” isn’t a solution in search of a problem. Note that some of overpopulation theory of at least the past has aspects of racism or the wealthy complaining about the poor. I tend to think that people who live in manors really don’t have that much reason to gripe.

    On that last point it is notable that the wealthy tend to be about the worst people (in environmental terms) on the planet and attempts to fix “overpopulation” tend to miss them.

    Wars, crime, and pollution have happened in places where there are many people and where there are few. I think they are problems that should addressed directly-and limiting the number of people doesn’t do that. So family planning in years past may not have fixed anything.

    Judy, I’ve seen some of this man’s lectures before. They are so boring I usually don’t watch them all the way through so maybe I’m missing something. But I noticed he likes to talk about exponential growth. The problem with this is that the human population is projected to peak at or before we reach 12 billion (and then start dropping). I think that his explanations (and maybe I missed it) don’t note this. Also estimates of the number of people that could be fed on the planet Earth have ranged from 2 to 40 billion. That is a huge variation, and that we aren’t even projected to reach its midpoint makes me question if things aren’t being overblown on at least some fronts.

  7. mindserased Says:

    Hey Nathaniel, I’m pickin’ up what you’re puttin’ down about how the rich seem to get off scot-free in most matters, as if their wealth can shield them from the world and all its ills. Sadly, though, money has an ability – and a tendency – to do just that. Perhaps you are suggesting that all of these terrible things – war, pollution, poverty, crime, etc. etc. – will occur with precise regularity, regardless of however many human mammals are taking up space on this planet? If that’s what you meant, then I wholly (and sadly) agree with you.

  8. Nathaniel Says:

    Thanks, though I wouldn’t say “precise” I would expect them to continue (which is unfortunate in general).

  9. Emissary Says:

    Actually, our fertility rate right now is about 2.1, which is just right to stabilize the population. If people start having fewer children, our population will actually start decreasing in a couple of generations. That is what is happening in Europe right now. Their replacement rates are all below 2, so their countries are graying and “dying”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: