Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: AGW: a bigger issue than overpopulation? [View all]GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)22. I read this, and I'm still a bit in the dark on one thing.
I'm not sure what Ehrlich means by the word "right". Is he talking about a moral, legal or natural right? who or what confers those "rights"? I'm enough of an anarchist to say, "Wait a second, I have to have someone give me the right to exercise a natural function? Isn't that as boneheaded as making it wrong to smoke a plant?"
I'm quite sure that the laws of thermodynamics will take care of any longage of people that has developed. In fact, if my graph is right, they're just about to do that...
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
AGW. But then, I've always held nature & wildlife in higher regard than people. nt
raouldukelives
Jan 2013
#18
‘Population Bomb’ scientist: ‘Nobody’ has the right to ‘as many children as they want’
Judi Lynn
Jan 2013
#20
Nope, no special powers. And I'm just as human and illusion-ridden as the next schmoe.
GliderGuider
Jan 2013
#35
Your scenario (roughly double the death rate) would still be 'overpopulation'
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2013
#23
You said "Climate change will fix that (overpopulation)" is your position
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2013
#33