Of course, every child born, even to the most mentally and financially stable parents, puts a serious strain on common resources – like the land that fills up with 18 billion disposable diapers that are thrown away every year, and will remain in landfills 300 years from now. If that doesn’t disturb you, try this: It costs taxpayers about $350m annually to dispose of them, according to the Clean Air Council.
The consumption doesn’t stop once the baby gets potty-trained. Far from it. During the course of his lifetime, the Council says the average American will use 18 tons of paper, 23 tons of wood, 16 tons of metal and 32 tons of organic chemicals – and, according to the International Energy Agency, will emit about 20 metric tons of carbon dioxide for every year of his life.
What’s more, the world is currently so overpopulated that we’re driving over 50 species of plants and animals to extinction every day, destroying rain forests many times faster than they can regenerate and in some areas consuming fresh water at least 10 times faster than it is being replenished. So says the Minneapolis-based group World Population Balance. On its website, the organisation notes: “For several years, population has been increasing faster than many vital non-renewable and renewable resources. This means the amount of these resources per person is declining, in spite of modern technology.”
You’d think it would be perfectly logical for parents to be interested in helping to ensure a better world for their children. And yet each new birth makes the earth a more crowded, polluted, unhealthy place for babies – and the rest of us – to live in.
And they say the left is hostile towards families. I wonder why, with clear, reasoned thinking like this?
