I support this movement!
The only thing dumber than this:
“We can’t be breeding right now,” says Les Knight. “It’s obvious that the intentional creation of another [human being] by anyone anywhere can’t be justified today.”
Knight is the founder of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, an informal network of people dedicated to phasing out the human race in the interest of the health of the Earth.
Is when ace reporter Gregory Dicum says:
Knight’s position might sound extreme at first blush, but there’s an undeniable logic to it: Human activities — from development to travel, from farming to just turning on the lights at night — are damaging the biosphere. More people means more damage. So if fewer people means less destruction, wouldn’t no people at all be the best solution for the planet?
No, Mr. Dicum, it sounds extreme at first blush and any subsequent blush. The fact that you’re trying to pass it off as logical may be one of the most irresponsible things I’ve seen. And to all you folks who think this is a good idea, I’m glad you’re choosing not to breed. One more:
“May we live long and die out,” says Naomi Thompson, quoting the VHEMT slogan. Thompson, who is in her late 20s and works as an analyst for Wells Fargo in San Francisco, has also concluded that childbearing is irresponsible. “It’s not about wanting to kill people, but it’s selfish to have a kid at this point when so many aren’t getting the love and attention that they deserve.”
No wonder they’re taking guns from you people.
Via Bob.
November 17th, 2005 at 10:45 am
So she may not want to bring new children in, and she apparently has feelings for the many children who don’t have enough “love and attention they deserve.” So perhaps the better use for her energies is to adopt some of these children and give them the “love and attention they deserve”, rather than encourage some nutcase to wipe out humanity. Which is what the first jerk is insinuating….
Haven’t these morons heard of a volcanic eruption?
Heh. I just thought of this: The next time Mt. St. Helens erupts, it will be blamed on W not signing Kyoto….
November 17th, 2005 at 11:01 am
What’s frightening is that – as much as they may try to hide the fact from the vast majority of the public – most environmental groups (even “mainstream” groups like the Sierra Club, etc) have supported and still support variations of this in the past.
John Muir, the founder of the Sierra Club is of course most famous for his statement that “Man is always and everywhere a blight on the landscape.” John Davis, of th eEarth First Journal has stated “Human beings as a species, have no more value than slugs.” Ingrid Newkirk, founder of PETA, said “I do not believe that a human being has a right to life . . . I would rather have medical experiments on on our children than on animals.” Dave Foreman – who I had the displeasure of having to sit through as a guest instructor in a number of classes in law school – the founder of Earth First! and a former member of the Sierra Club board of directors things that “Phasing out the human race will sove every problem on eath, social nd environmental” Finally, what would any discussion of environmental wackos be without also mentioning Paul Ehrlich – Stanford professor and perennially wrong in his predictions of environmental catastrophe (as well as the author of The Population Bomb – the book that started the Death to Humanity Movement) who thinks the workds problems are too many rich peoples and said – to keep things here focused back on teh 2nd Amendment – “Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine g.”
November 17th, 2005 at 11:01 am
that last quote should end with Machine Gun.
November 17th, 2005 at 11:15 am
George Carlin said it best:
“Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet…
The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We’ve been here, what, a hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we’ve only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we’re a threat?”
I’ve always liked this rant, found it at http://www.chaparyan.com/2005/04/george-carlins-planet-is-fine.php
November 17th, 2005 at 11:49 am
Now if I can only get you people who want to breed to pay for your own damn kid’s education. I really could use the property tax break.
Although, yea, being forcibly limited to how many kids you can have by the overlords is a little scary.
Still is this lady advocating anything other than voluntary compliance?
From the linked source: “Knight is the founder of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement,”
November 17th, 2005 at 11:49 am
When did it become the Planet instead of the World. That word has become as blacklisted as the December holiday we dare not name.
Also, how long until one of these nut cases gets ahold of some virus and trys to spread it aroundin order to kill off those awful Humans. I wish these people would pull a Jim Jones; the world would be well rid of them,
November 17th, 2005 at 1:49 pm
There’s a problem even with less-extreme versions of this view. Sure, one could argue that if pollution isn’t arrested we could wind up in a sinking ship, and people’s activities are causing pollution.
However, de-population will also cause a great deal of harm, and on a much shorter time scale. That harm will come in the form of collapsed economies and the ruin of social welfare programs (particularly retirement and healthcare programs) that require new blood to pay for the benefits of the elderly. If de-population trends continue, we’ll see serious problems in the former Soviet states and somewhat lesser problems in highly socialistic countries in Europe.
Note that de-population is a fundamentally local event. Global populations might rise or stay steady. It’s the de-population of individual political systems that’s the problem.
November 17th, 2005 at 3:53 pm
I think that most people who advocate this sort of thing couldn’t get laid any way.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Umm, I’m pretty sure VHEMT is largely tongue-in-cheek.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:53 pm
What needs to be set up is a system to get these people hysterectomies and visectomies before they change their minds and further corrupt the gene pool.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:47 pm
I think tgirsch is right especially looking at this in the FAQ (and read the question before that one as well). If they were truly serious they would kill themselves immediately. Its probably got more to do with not wanting children (a lot of my friends in SF have no inclination to have children..more a lifestyle choice than anything else though).