Jump to content
IGNORED

The world is not overpopulated take 3


Boogalou

Recommended Posts

The first time I heard about a housing agreement banning line-drying, I was like "Well, how are they meant to do it?" I think I was 18 the first time I ever had/used a dryer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The earth will adapt, even if that means the end of humanity. While it's a sad thought, what makes people think humanity go on forever? That's also not saying go hog wild either and squander. I don't know why I always think that, but I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't the argument made earlier.

Rather is was the none of us (in the west) have *any more moral claim* on said resources than anyone else.

does anyone disagree with that? Or is that also somehow contentious?

But, at the same time, if most of us decided to live on only the resources that were common to most people in other parts of the world, it would be illegal in the US. Many of the living situations and practices that we have criticized on here, and even considered child abuse if children were forced to live in them, are pretty resource efficient, but not desirable ways to live.

Would you consider someone who stacked their children on shelving or had them sleep in a closet morally superior to someone who had one or two children to a bedroom, because they were saving space? Or someone who fed her family a diet of mostly squash and sweet potatoes better, because she wasn't giving them meat or shipping in out of season produce from overseas? There are a lot of things that won't fly in the US precisely because the government has established a certain standard of living as acceptable, and it is based on western norms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We aren't allowed to hang things from the ceiling either. Subsidized housing has lots of crazy rules. Like, we aren't allowed to anchor things to the walls, which sucks because I have a china hutch and a baby that has discovered climbing. We aren't allowed to have satellite dishes on the front of the apartment, so most of the tenants have them in the back. In my particular building, the back does not get a direct view of the satellite so most of my immediate neighbors have Charter, which is crazy expensive. One has their dish inside their home, looking out the front window. lol I guess some people really need their TV. It's funny that living without cable=not an option.

When it is warm in here I hang some laundry in the bathrooms. I personally like the way hanging laundry looks, so I don't know why it is specifically disallowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

\

No I understand. It isn't lecture-y. I suppose I just disagree. I'm all for eco friendly-ness and feminism. I just like them to be considered separately. I realise they have a history. Suffragettes were often vegetarian. But I think feminism needs to be a big tent. I just think eco feminism is a bit silly and I might get flamed for this, but whatever. Animals are animals. They are not people. I'm not saying that they should be treated unfairly or abused, but the notion that I should hold them to be on the same level as a human being capable of reasoning and complex thought is just ridiculous. What do these ecofeminists propose we do to test medicines, test them entirely on humans? I'm of the opinion that there is a hierarchy to the natural world and if humans can use animals to make advances, we ought to. Again, not to the level of abuse, but they are still animals. The idea that I should treat an animal as a person because my sex was once treated as chattle is ridiculous.

I think that should read "British Suffragettes" I have never found anything that backs it up for Americans. From what I know of the vegetarian movment in the late 1800's- early 1900's it was for health, not animal rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, at the same time, if most of us decided to live on only the resources that were common to most people in other parts of the world, it would be illegal in the US. Many of the living situations and practices that we have criticized on here, and even considered child abuse if children were forced to live in them, are pretty resource efficient, but not desirable ways to live.

Would you consider someone who stacked their children on shelving or had them sleep in a closet morally superior to someone who had one or two children to a bedroom, because they were saving space? Or someone who fed her family a diet of mostly squash and sweet potatoes better, because she wasn't giving them meat or shipping in out of season produce from overseas? There are a lot of things that won't fly in the US precisely because the government has established a certain standard of living as acceptable, and it is based on western norms.

If I ask it this way is it clearer?

Do we (the west) have any more moral claim than anyone else (eg: all Asians)?

It's about the system, not your personal consumption. Your personal consumption fits into the system - is part of the system - but it's not the system itself.

So, leaving it aside - do you think we (the west) somehow have a greater moral right to use resources because we use them now, than does any other group that might aspire to use them?

There's a long way between western and say sub-saharan african refugee living standards or only eating sweet potato etc... Most people in the world are not living in absolute poverty or are malnourished.

The whole thing has to change. It's not we either all live poorly or we all live as we do well; rather we adjust so a much larger number of people can live well. however, living well =/= western living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Saw this on msn wonderwall today. I did a search and found this thread. So apparently J'chelle has been saying this incredibly stupid stuff for a while now, since this thread was from last July. Yet it is still news? The entire population fitting into Jacksonville? WTF? How many people believe this?

And they had 19 children . . . the stupid, it multiplies.

wonderwall.msn.com/tv/michelle-duggar-says-overpopulation-is-a-lie-1674012.story?gt1=28135

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhat off topic, but I always wonder how those people who can't walk five steps (just to clarify, I don't mean people who are physically disabled and actually can't, I mean people like those mentioned above who drive around the parking lot until a good space opens up) ever got through college. At my university, even if you buy the most expensive parking permit you're still going to have to walk quite a bit to get to all your classes throughout the day. On the average school day I spend at least 40 minutes walking. Outside of my apartment building (which is technically on campus) is about as good a parking spot as I could ask for (parking has gotten really horrible in the last year since they keep getting rid of parking lots to build more science buildings).

One thing about Orange County, CA is that it's one of the most Republican counties in the state, as it has the now defunct Crystal Cathedral and the TBN studios that are lit up like a Christmas tree at night next to the 405 freeway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.