Fundies and Environmental Peril (part 2): Overpopulation

The Rapture is imminent

In part 1, we looked at how fundies don’t seem at all concerned about the environmental problems we face, apparently believing that their magical sky daddy will somehow fix things or prevent things from getting too bad. Not only are they not concerned, but many fundie leaders actually parrot (sorry, PL!) Bush administration talking points on issues such as global warming.

The issue I wanted to focus on today is overpopulation. Like global warming, fundies seem to be in complete denial. Let’s look at the reasons.

A recent article at LifeSiteNews is titled “[Ted] Turner’s Depopulation Plan”.

First of all, you should know that fundies hate Ted Turner. Ted Turner is a big supporter of the United Nations. Fundies hate the U.N., because they view it as the world government foretold in the book of Revelation. The end result of this is that fundies will hate anything that Ted Turner likes. If Ted likes environmentalism, then the fundies will hate it. If Ted likes nuclear disarmament, then the fundies will hate it. If Ted likes puppies, then the fundies will hate it. If Ted likes Jane Fonda, then the—oh wait. They already hate Jane Fonda.

The article begins:

In a wide-ranging hour-long interview on PBS, CNN Founder and billionaire environmental extremist Ted Turner…

Everybody on Ted’s end of the political spectrum is an “extremist” to these people.

…let the cat out of the bag on the real goal of climate change extremists—depopulation.

See? Anybody who believes in global warming is an extremist. I guess the majority of the population are extremists too, then.

Now here we begin to see the link between overpopulation denialism and global warming denialism. As we’re about to see, the overpopulation issue treads on fundie turf. So in fact it may be that the fundies’ anti-global warming stance is actually the result of their anti-overpopulation stance. (Since anti-abortion activists like to call themselves “pro-life”, I guess we should call the anti-anti-global warming people the “pro-warmers”. We can call the anti-anti-overpopulation people the “Duggars”!)

Before looking at the entirety of the next sentence, I want to examine one piece of it first:

…global warming, retooled to ‘climate change’,…

What’s wrong, fundies? Don’t like “climate change”? Tough, because it’s your word, or more accurately, the product of your beloved Republican White House!

Let’s take a side trip down mammary memory lane (Sorry. I shouldn’t daydream when I write these.). The substitution of “climate change” for “global warming” is the handiwork of Republican political strategist Frank Luntz. He found “climate change” to have more positive connotations among viewers, vs. “global warming”, which was more negative. I guess that’s one talking-points memo that the fundies never got.

Now let’s get back to the entire sentence:

Pro-life activists who have attended UN environment meetings where such issues were discussed have often been the subject of ridicule and derision for pointing out that the massive movement behind global warming, retooled to ‘climate change’, works hand in hand with the culture of death with the aim of depopulation.

So you see them admitting right there that the reason they refuse to acknowledge global warming as real is because they think it’s a clever plot by the Liberal Agenda to promote abortion!

And abortion, as well as other forms of the “culture of death”, is the reason they refuse to acknowledge the problems caused by overpopulation.

Although you mostly hear about abortion, the other half of this so-called “culture of death” is the pro-euthanasia, or death with dignity, movement. If somebody is terminally ill with a painful disease—or worse yet, brain-dead—the fundies absolutely refuse to allow that person to end the misery and die with dignity. Instead, they have to hang on and suffer in misery for many more months.

Fundies love suffering. The more you suffer, the closer to God you are. And it’s probably true that you are closer to God at that point. If you read the Old Testament, you’ll see that God inflicts more suffering than any other character in the book.

BTW, to a fundie, death with dignity is more than just allowing somebody who is suffering to end his life. Fundies apparently think that death with dignity is just step one on the Liberal Agenda to kill all sick people. And that is part of the “evolutionists” plan to remake society in the image of God Darwin’s survival of the fittest Nazi master race plan. As near as I can tell anyway. Fundies have such muddled logic, it’s hard to follow.

Turner stated plainly that next to nuclear disarmament the most pressing world concern is “global climate change”…. “We’re too many people. That’s why we have global warming,” explained Turner….

“Too many people” goes into the fundie brain, where it is translated into “Babies and sick people must die!”

Last year China boasted that its one-child policy, which has been criticized by many nations for including forced abortion and sterilization, had reduced greenhouse gases.

Nobody is in favor of forced abortion and sterilization, but here the article is implying that if the rest of the world tries to control population, they will all adopt such policies. China has a brutal totalitarian government. How they implement population control is in no way indicative of how it would be implemented elsewhere.

There are actually two parts to the population problem. The first is arresting our insane population growth, before we outstrip the carrying capacity of the Earth. The second part is bringing the population down to a sustainable level.

As I’ve shown in this article, the fundies are opposed to any population control measures, because they assume that means more abortions and Terry Schiavos. The fundies are already thinking ahead to the matter of depopulation. They don’t like that one bit. We’ll look at that in part 3 of this series.

11 Responses to “Fundies and Environmental Peril (part 2): Overpopulation”

  1. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Cool I was mentioned in the article! Woo hoo! 😉

    The problem with euthanasia is that right now the term refers to two completely separate issues. One is somebody deciding to kill a patient because there’s “no hope” without the patient’s consent (which nobody is arguing for) and the other is a patient (or a brain-dead patient’s family) deciding when to terminate their life. They are clearly distinct, but as you said, muddled in the fundie brain to mean the same thing. The type of euthanasia or assisted suicide people are advocating for (so-called “death with dignity”) is simply an extension of the “living will” concept. The only difference is the specification of exactly when, if, and how death should occur.

    The Schiavo case was a perfect example. The family (husband versus mother/father) court cases were perfectly legitimate, in my opinion. After all, there is no turning back from dead, so you want to make sure the system has thoroughly vetted the situation in the absence of a living will. The courts did that. Terry was to be let to die, naturally, with what dignity she had left. The problem was legislators trying to overturn the perfectly valid court decision which had been going on for years and years. You never hear the epilogue of the story from the fundies: Terry’s brain was, in fact, complete mush according to the autopsy. There was NO chance she would ever be brain functioning again. No argument. Case closed.

    Having had to make the EXACT same decision for my first wife, I have great sympathy with Michael Schiavo (husband). There is simply nothing on this planet that is tougher. I am thankful my first wife’s parents agreed 100% with me. My first wife was brain dead. We let her go. It was impossibly tough, but we did it, and it was the right decision. I would have wanted the same thing if it was me instead of her.

    BTW, after you lose a loved one like that, you get letters from churches expressing their sympathy and trying to sell you on their snake oil by promising to see your loved one again if you just start attending their church, basically. So apparently they have people scouring the obituaries and sending out these letters. Preying on the weak.

    But back to overpopulation. Another thing to consider is that birth control is essentially equivalent to abortion to many fundies, so when they talk about depopulation and the culture of death, it’s more than just abortions and death with dignity, it’s also about birth control. In fact, child-free types like myself who voluntarily get sterilized might even be worse than “abortionists.” 🙂

    This is how they think:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNgotUM4gk8

  2. Ron Britton Says:

    Parrotlover:

    My sympathies on your first wife. I can’t imagine what that would be like. I have enough trouble euthanizing a pet.

    You’re right about making the distinction between a very narrowly pre-defined set of rules regarding carrying out a patient’s wishes vs. the occasional case you hear about a rogue doctor or nurse who secretly administered a fatal drug overdose just because they thought the patient was hopeless.

    The fundies can’t tolerate any termination of a human life, no matter how justified (unless it’s the death penalty—funny contradiction!). Aside from that, they are afraid that death with dignity could be the first step along the road to looser rules for euthanasia. It’s very easy to imagine a dystopian future where society kills the very old who get sick.

    You’re also right about how the fundies are opposed to birth control. I keep thinking that the Protestant fundies are only opposed to birth control methods that involve termination of fertilized embryos (such as day-after pills). There seems to be more and more pharmacists who refuse to dispense the old-fashioned prevent-conception birth control pills, and not all of them are Catholic. I guess most fundies think there’s something unseemly about interfering with fertility. Any government population control measures, even if they’re merely in the way of disincentives, would be seen as the government interfering in God’s will. I can imagine that is extremely distasteful to them.

  3. Ron Britton Says:

    One more thing. The fundies are responsible for Terry Schiavo’s cruel death. What is needed in a case like that is the administration of drugs to painlessly terminate the patient’s life. That is currently against the law, thanks to the fundies. Instead, the only option the doctors had was to remove the feeding tubes and allow Schiavo to die of dehydration over the course of more than a week.

  4. Parrotlover77 Says:

    You are right about the starvation versus “painkiller overdose” mode of heart/body death for Terry Shiavo (it’s important to remember that she had been brain dead for many years). My circumstance was not that cruel. My first wife’s heart was in poor shape due to the circumstances ultimately leading to her death (hyperthermia), so once life support was removed (breathing assistance and blood pressure “pressers”), she was gone in less than 30 minutes. I have a suspicion the physician may have administered a slightly higher than normal dose of pain killers as well, but it’s just a suspicion based on the look of a nurses face when he told her to give my wife “another dose” after removal of the breathing tubes. Again, she was brain dead, as confirmed by a host of doctors (two neurologists and several other general ICU doctors), so I was thankful. No evidence, just a suspicion (don’t want to get anybody in trouble here).

    Anyway, you made a good point in that the Schiavo case is a very, very rare case. Usually it’s more cut and dry (like my case). Even if I had not ordered termination of life support, she maybe would have only lived for another few weeks.

    Life will always have grey areas, this is true. But the “slippery slope” argument is a fallacy. They use the same argument for stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. There’s no “desensitization” to the value of life going on here. Quite the contrary, we are elevating the value of life. We are saying it is such an important right that you get to make the decision, not the government (or the church). And with regard to research, we value life so much that we are exploring new and exciting modes of extending it and healing the sick! And since we are not concerned about eternal bliss or damnation, we do everything we can to make the most of the time we have here, instead of just preparing for an afterlife that may not exist.

    For the record, I haven’t euthanized a pet yet — I’m the guy that plops down $10,000 at the vet to fight for my birds’ lives without batting an eyelash. 🙂 If I had one who was in a dire incurable condition and extreme pain, I would consider it, however. That’s how valuable I think life is, I even apply the same standards I do to humans as my animal companions.

  5. Ron Britton Says:

    Parrotlover:

    For the record, I haven’t euthanized a pet yet

    You’re lucky that parrots live so long. My guys only live 2-3 years, and I’ve ultimately had to euthanize almost all of them. When they’re terminal and in pain, it’s the morally correct thing to do.

  6. Parrotlover77 Says:

    That is sad. Rats are awesome (had a friend back in high school who had a few — they were so much fun)! It is a damn shame they don’t live longer.

  7. Brian Says:

    Parrotlover,

    My condolences on the loss of your first wife. Isn’t it typical of smug fundies to lecture us on matters of life and death when they’ve almost certainly never faced a situation like you have? I also just love how the churches can’t wait to take a person’s overwhelming anguish and translate it into a weekly tithe. Frakking parasites.

    If anything good can be said to have come from the Schiavo fiasco, I suppose more people are aware of what might happen to them, and how things might get out of hand if some concrete agreements are not made immediately. I know my wife and I are certainly on the same page, and our parents know how we both feel.

    Speaking of family, a few years ago my brother asked me if I would, upon his untimely death, consent to allow his body to be donated to science, provided it was in a proper condition. Of course I agreed, as this is something I have been considering myself. Here in Ohio, a decedent cannot simply make prior arrangements for such a donation on their own. A close family member must sign off on it as well. I was not surprised when certain members of my family, each quite drunk on the jesus-juice, objected and claimed he would be guilty of some sin and would burn in hell. There really are no depths to which the fundie mind cannot sink.

    One more thing on the Schiavo case. I think most Americans finally got a small taste of what a theocracy would be like. Like abortion, most rational people look upon end-of-life decisions as a matter of privacy, something for which religion has no respect. Polls at the time were clearly on the side of Mr. Schiavo, so despite our collective penchant for tolerating ignorance, we still possess the capacity to recognize right from wrong, and identify when our freedoms are in danger. I may be going out on a limb here, but I feel that, for as religious as this country is, we love our porn, our booze, our kinky sex far too much to give it up just because some bible-toting dickwad threatens us with hellfire. We have become too used to being free to ever tolerate anything less. Sure, we have become extraordinarily complacent and have permitted sneaky infringements upon our freedom without all alarms going off, but once the government/religious authorities decree that it is now illegal to get drunk or boff whoever you wish in your own home, well, then, the shit be on.

  8. Sue Blue Says:

    Apparently these fundies don’t know the meaning of irony. Here they are, calling Democrats, liberals, and atheists the “Culture of Death” when they themselves are warmongers who support the deaths of thousands of Iraqis and American soldiers. They really do love suffering, especially if it’s not their own.

    Parrotlover, I can’t imagine having to make such a wrenching decision – and I can’t imagine why these fundies think they have the right to tell anyone in that position what to do. But they seem to love inflicting pain and suffering on everyone else. I’m so sorry to hear about your wife.

  9. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Here in Ohio, a decedent cannot simply make prior arrangements for such a donation on their own.

    I’m not sure how it works in every state, but in NC you can’t donate organs unless a family member signs off too, same as the donate to science thing for you. I let everybody know that I want my unused organs to be donated in case of my untimely death as well. I met a widow in Canada through an online support group back after my first wife passed and eventually the subject was brought up about comparing health care systems. Of course she loved the Canadian system and debunked every myth I had heard from the conservatives about it (such as the massive waiting periods and so forth). One thing that was interesting is that in Canada, when you say you want to donate your organs, NOBODY can veto that decision (unlike here where your family can say “no” and your pre-death plans to save another life with your donated organs can immediately be overturned). Apparently the waiting list is shorter in Canada, possibly as a result of this. Her husband had CF and died from complications after a lung transplant, but he was only on the lung waiting list for three weeks! THREE WEEKS! I don’t have first hand experience, but I’ve seen a lot of shows on Discovery Health showing much longer waiting periods in US hospitals for lungs.

    As for “going to hell” for donating your body for research. Why on earth? Where in the bible does it say you can’t do that? Or is it just because they hate science so much they assume that’s a “sinful” thing. I mean I can usually follow the fundie flawed logic from A to Z, but this… huh?

  10. Mick Says:

    Malthusianism is dead. You have to be such a retard to still believe in it.

  11. Ron Britton Says:

    Mick:

    You obviously know nothing of population biology. All populations are at the mercy of their environment. When the population exceeds what the environment can support, famine brings the population down. This happens in nature every day. The problem with retards like you, is that you think you’re immune to the basic laws of nature.