breeders?

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement
http://vhemt.org/

Phasing out the human race by voluntarily ceasing to breed will allow Earth's biosphere to return to good health. Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become less dense.

The Breeders said:
I like all the different people
I like sticky everywhere
Look around, you bet I'll be there!
Hot metal in the sun
Pony in the air
Sooey and saints at the fair

Saints alive you're saying
Walk in ... squares
The hid are out, out for the year
It's a lot of face
A lot of crank air
Eroding around here

Summer's ready
Summer is ready when you are

I like all the different people
I like every kind of fair
In the crowd, you bet I'll be there!
Walkin' around
Going nowhere
Seeing Sooey and saints at the fair

Summer is ready when you are [2x]
Summer's ready
Summer is ready when you are
Summer's ready
Summer is ready when you are

It's a lot of face, crank air

Summer's ready
Summer is ready when you are
 

littleneko

Member
Great idea.

Somehow I don't think it will ever take off in the mainstream.

I think humans are going to crowd out every other species on earth if we don't reduce our population/population growth dramatically.

As a species with our special qualities.. we have a responsibility to try to maintain the balance on our planet, and not just spread and spread and spread like a bacteria until we cover every inch of the earth.

f'ckn breeders.

It makes me sick that possessing a functioning reproductive system is all it takes to be considered suitable to have a child. Oh, unless you're gay.. :roll:
 

sabbath

Banned
It sux that I have to quietly listen to all the breeders at work talking about: pregnancies, babies, kids, schools, etc. endlessly. There always seems to be one or two women at work who are pregnant. None of them adopt. Meanwhile they are overpopulating the planet. Seems to me breeding is mostly ego driven.
 

Kinetik

Well-known member
The western world is not overpopulating the planet by any means. You need to realize that it takes an average of 2.1 children per family to maintain the exact same population over time. It was only in the past, when families of 5, 6 or more children were common, that the European population skyrocketed. Very few people in the first world can feasibly have families that size these days, which is why many populations in the west are actually going down. We have in fact reached a relatively healthy and stable equilibrium in that regard. The real problems now come from pollution, urban sprawl, (e)migration, and developing countries where poverty is rife and families are still very large. However, give it time and that should balance out eventually as well. Once that happens, and we find out how to take (much) better care of our planet, we can all enjoy a sustainable existence more or less indefinitely. We're not hurtling towards some sort of apocalypse as people often seem to think.
 
Last edited:

this_portrait

Well-known member
As a girl, I'd like to pose this question::

Who in their right f*cking mind would want to go through 9 months of a fetus in your gut, being restricted to certain types of food and/or other things, and then go through the hell of actually pushing the damn thing out? That's an awful lot of pain to go through just to be mainstream. . .

Oh, but wait, here comes the real hell. . .

Who wants to deal with the responsibility of having to raise someone, making sure he/she gets all the basic necessities, and teaching him/her right and wrong? People don't seem to realize that, in order to raise a child, it requires a lot of time, energy, patience, and money. If you don't have all of those, you're screwed.

I hate how people idealize the whole concept of 'having a family', as if it's the best thing anyone could ever do. Maybe some people are satisfied with it, but there are many people who aren't, and they wish over and over every day that they would've never had kids or got married or whatever. People need to use their brains more, if you ask me.
 

scarletlee

Well-known member
You must know that a lot of parents or “breeders” as you call them visit this site. Did you not think that this post would offend them? I know it’s posted in ‘Off Topic’ and it is your opinion which of course is your right to express, I guess I just find it suprising and a little insensitive that you would post something that would quite obviously offend some viewers especially with that sort of negative judgement, ironic as this is a forum for people that suffer from SA who fear exactly that. Anyway that's just my 2c. And yes, I’m an evil breeder ;)
 

sabbath

Banned
We're not hurtling towards some sort of apocalypse as people often seem to think.

By the time third world population rates start to decrease I think it'll be too late. People have been using the ocean / planet as a trash dump, including dumping radioactive waste into the water. Once the oceans die, it won't be long before the rest of the life on Earth is gone.

Great Barrier Reef will be gone in 20 years, says Charlie Veron - Times Online

From The Times
July 7, 2009
Great Barrier Reef will be gone in 20 years, says Charlie Veron
by Frank Pope, Ocean Correspondent

The Great Barrier Reef will be so degraded by warming waters that it will be unrecognisable within 20 years, an eminent marine scientist has said.

Charlie Veron, former chief scientist of the Australian Institute of Marine Science, told The Times: “There is no way out, no loopholes. The Great Barrier Reef will be over within 20 years or so.”

Once carbon dioxide had hit the levels predicted for between 2030 and 2060, all coral reefs were doomed to extinction, he said. “They would be the world’s first global ecosystem to collapse. I have the backing of every coral reef scientist, every research organisation. I’ve spoken to them all. This is critical. This is reality.”

Dr Veron’s comments came as the Zoological Society of London, the Royal Society and the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) held a crucial meeting on the future of coral reefs in London yesterday. In a joint statement they warned that by mid-century extinctions of coral reefs around the world would be inevitable.

Warming water causes coral polyps to eject the symbiotic algae that provide them with nutrients. These “bleaching events” were widespread during the El Niño of 1997-98, and localised occurrences are becoming more frequent. (During an El Niño, much of the tropical Pacific becomes unusually warm.) Reefs take decades to recover but by 2030 to 2050, depending on emissions and feedback effects, bleaching will be occurring annually or biannually.

Although surface sea temperatures are rising fastest in tropical regions the other big threat to coral reefs comes from the higher latitudes. The cold water there absorbs atmospheric carbon dioxide more readily than warm water and acidifies more easily.

When carbon dioxide concentrations reach between 480 and 500 parts per million warm water is no barrier to acidification, and the pH in equatorial regions will have dropped so far, meaning higher acidity, that coral reef growth becomes impossible anywhere in the ocean.

“Coral reefs are the most sensitive of marine ecosystems,” said Alex Rogers, scientific director of IPSO.

“Increased temperature and decreased pH will have a double-whammy effect. Reefs were safe at CO2 levels of 350 parts per million. We are at 387ppm today. Beyond 450 the fate of corals is sealed.”

In the five mass extinction events in geological history, key was the carbon cycle, in which carbon dioxide is the primary currency. Its concentration in the atmosphere is higher than it has been for 20 million years. In the Permian extinction, as in all the big extinctions, tropical marine life was the hardest hit. Reef-building corals took more than ten million years to return.

The Great Barrier Reef, the world’s largest and most diverse marine ecosystem, is worth $4.5 billion (£2.8 billion) a year to Australia. Worldwide, reefs are worth $300 billion. “But that is trivial compared with the costs if coral reefs fail,” Dr Veron said. “Then it won’t be a matter of no income, it will be a matter of damage to livelihoods, economies and ecosystems.”

Yesterday’s meeting renewed calls for networks of marine conservation zones to boost the resilience of reefs.

also check this out http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6837799.ece
 
Last edited:

Sinar_Matahari

Well-known member
If there is anyone in Europe who is having a lot of kids, it's the Muslims. If it makes you feel any better, I am not having more kids. One is enough for me. That is unless the government starts paying me a couple of grand every month for each kid. lol
 

Emma

Well-known member
No breeding for me *shudders* I can't stand the idea of having to host someone for 9 months while they plot to tear my innards apart on their way out:eek::eek::eek::confused:
 
Top