Overpopulation - How not to solve the problem.

Tim the plumber wrote:

Talk of solving a none problem with billions of deaths is utterly evil.

You are evil.

trafn wrote:
@Jakob - there's a considerable amount of literature about reversing tubal ligation in women and vasectomies in men. The initial results were not good, as they were attempted on patients who were sterilized without reversibility in mind. Now there are new procedures for both men and women (vasectomy; tubal ligation) which are done so that they are more easy to reverse later on if the patient so desires in the future. While there is never a guarantee that the reversal will be successful, the rates of reversibility have improved over the years.

trafn wrote:
@Jakob - Please DO come back often. Your posts here are very interesting and very important to the subject of climate change.
* spam *

Jakob wrote:
­


How do you handle it in the USA if a citizen is not allowed to breed but still wants to..?



­

trafn wrote:
@Jakob - I not aware of any common cases where people want to have children but are not allowed to. Some exceptions might be:

1. If you are under age (younger than 18 years old).

2. You are mentally handicapped and have a legal guardian who stands in the way.

3. You are in prison without access to your "breeding" partner.

Other than those, I can't think of any examples in the USA.

trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote This procedure is also quite available optionally today, yet you claim there is a population problem. Are you suggesting this be required of all by law?

1. As a physician, I am unaware of any high death rates associated with voluntary surgical sterilization procedures. A far greater percentage of smokers die from lung cancer than do people who have and then die from voluntary surgical sterilization.

trafn wrote:
2. If a person was interested in voluntarily participating in a program designed to help reduce the planet's population, then this is one option they should learn about.

trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you are very fond of accusing others of posting spam, yet you do not recognize that your consistent negative comments towards others who post here is also spam.
* spam *

trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote: 'Underage', mentally handicapped, and prison all allow you to breed. No legal guardian can stand in the way of this.

Legally, yes they can.

In some States, a person who is underage can, if their parents/guardians decide, have their unborn child surgically removed against their will.

trafn wrote:
The same goes for a mentally handicapped person who is legally bound to a guardian.

trafn wrote:
Many prisons, especially high security ones, do not have to allow conjugal visits to all prisoners.

Tim the plumber wrote:
Thank fuck I'm not the only one who considers talk of mass killings/sterilisation as utterly evil.

Just as to post it again;

https://overpopulationisamyth.com/

trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote Personally, I consider offering this form of sterilization as a method of voluntary birth control an ethical violation for any physician.

That is an interesting position which some people do take today, though not as commonly as they used to. The American Medical Association, The American Osteopathic Association and the American Bar Association have all published many position papers over the years which substantially support the opposite view.

trafn wrote:

@Into the Night - in the same post you also wrote It is you that qualified it as a high death rate.

Actually, what I wrote (and you quoted) was "I am unaware of any high death rates associated with voluntary surgical sterilization procedures." If I qualified it as anything, it was as not being a high death rate.

trafn wrote:

@Into the Night - additionally, in the same post you also wrote They could hardly miss the advertisements for it, could they?

You made this statement after quoting me about population control options. There were no advertisements being made in the quoted content.

Totototo wrote:
Into the Night - Will you please answer my question? It's like, a hundred posts above but you seem to have skipped it.

Jakob wrote:
­


­
Thanks again for all answers.

I think most nations already have strong tools that they use to prevent people from breeding but normal people are just not aware of it.

In Denmark if at women has a child but no income the social worker may tell her that if she breeds another child they will take the first child away from her.


I am not so happy about that and I hope we can do better.
But it shows a way, and maybe we can agree about what the state can do for a little money it can also do for the climate..?




­

trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - you see evil in much of what you disagree with. The perception of evil in others is often a projection of our own fears and insecurities.

If I post a statement saying that mass murder has been used in the past (which it has, as in Cambodia) and may be used in the future as a form of population control, this is not the same as advocating it. It is merely a statement of historical fact, something which is neither good or evil.

If I post a statement saying that nuclear bombs could be used in the future as a form of population control, something others have repeatedly discussed in the past (e.g. - General MacArthur's Korea-China Dead Zone Proposal), this is not the same as advocating it. It is merely a statement of a potential future reality, something which is also neither good or evil.

To improve both the quality of your posts as well as your interactions with other members on this website, might I invite you to release any underlying fear or insecurities which might be influencing your posting mannerisms by posting in the Sharing Ideas sub-forum. There, you will have a moderator who can assist you in posting in a fear-free and insecurity-free manner.

Jakob wrote:
­­

Tim the plumber wrote:

Talk of solving a none problem with billions of deaths is utterly evil.

You are evil.

If it is to you all about preventing people from dying you should come along with a lot better climate policy on this subject.

Clearly less people being born in a year will in the end cause less people to die.

Is that equation too difficult for you to see..?
I think not so you just turn around and work for both the climate and the future people on earth. They will also want some oil to cut pipes.

I wish you the best. It was for your sake I made an exception and wrote this post. I am mostly not here.
If you still think I am evil it is also okay. I may need that in you to scare you off if I have to come back again.

­

Totototo wrote:
@Into the Night - http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/overpopulation-how-not-to-solve-the-problem--d6-e783.php#post_4182

My question about natural law.

trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - you wrote Just by putting forward the wrong idea that the world is over populated you invite mass murder. This is evil.

Okay Tim, I get it, you're a retard. You consistently make accusations like this without any proof and then repeatedly antagonize other with statements you refuse to back up with any evidence. You are a troll and should be banned from this website.

Again in this thread you wrote another version of your often repeated accusation when you wrote Talk of over population is evil because the world is not over populated and there is no need to reduce the human population.

And again you give no proof of why this is evil. You continue to behave in troll-like fashion and continue to need to be banned from this website until you either grow up or get a brain (preferably both).

What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?

Totototo wrote:
@Into the Night - http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/overpopulation-how-not-to-solve-the-problem--d6-e783.php#post_4182

My question about natural law.

Ceist wrote:
Hey! I wonder if some anti-science zealots don't worry about overpopulation because they believe they will be Raptured.... any day now.

Apparently "pro-life", anti-contraception religious websites are acceptable as sources in this thread, so here's some er...'evidence' that the earth won't become overpopulated because... Jesus.

http://www.endtime.com/when-is-the-rapture/

trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote So...what? Are you condoning kidnapping as the solution? What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?

Jakob merely stated a social policy in Denmark that protects children from being born into, and raised in unsafe conditions. Why would you equate this with kidnapping? The United States, as well as many other developed nations, have similar policies. You are merely trying to add confusion to the conversation.

People like you are trolls who should be banned from this website for repeatedly and consistently posting in this way.

Jakob wrote:
­



@Tim the plumber

I am glad math finally makes it clear that my suggestions is not about more but less people dying pr. year.

So now all you have to see is that the future is not going to be the nicest place for people if too many people before them has polluted and drained the earth for things you need to get the nicest life.
That must be easy too for you.

I also think it must be possible for you to imagine a situation where less breeding can be a good thing or at least less evil than alternatives.
If you think that is not today you may still understand it is in the peoples best interest to have good methods prepared for a situation like that and therefor talking about ways to solve such a problem is not evil but a very good thing.

­

trafn wrote:
@Ceist - many people are actually under the impression that Adam and Eve where the first couple in the Garden of Eden. They were not.

In fact, the first two people to establish a personal, intimate relationship in the Garden of Eden were Adam and God, and God groomed Adam by creating the following conditions:

1. I will keep you in a garden.
2. I will keep you naked all the time.
2. I will watch you all the time.

As such, this is also the first recorded instance of a homosexual relationship in history. Unfortunately, as Adam is the Son of God, this is also the first known case of sexual abuse, as a father is keeping his son (Adam) naked and confined in a restricted space for his own (God's) purposes.

Perhaps we should look up the number for the Intergalactic Police and report God for the child molester that he obviously is.

Jakob wrote:
­@Into the Night

What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?

They get killed immediately of course and sold as mink food they give a good contribution to the economy.

Are you a total fool..?

@trafn
However forgetting questions and quoting from another place without giving a link to the place is about to make this debate pretty unreadable.

­