For abortion advocates, climate change equals the right to kill
In an abysmal demonstration of what logic is not, climate change activists are still touting the nonexistent connection between global overpopulation (which is also nonexistent) and climate change (also, arguably, nonexistent). First of all, global overpopulation simply isn’t a reality. Urban overpopulation is definitely a reality, but one that is chosen by the individuals who apparently weigh the pros of living in a big city more heavily against the cons (namely: it’s crowded). This video from the Population Research Institute outlines this basic principle.
Even more disturbing than the fact that people like Bill Gates constantly bemoan non-existent global overpopulation is what his ilk want to do about the contrived dilemma. In short, they want to reach into the past, bring back Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and re-hash all of her eugenic ideals into a modern-day reality.
But what would that look like? Certain populations would be coerced into believing that sterilization and permanent forms of birth control are better for them than fertility. Abortion would continue to be exploited on a global scale – a cause for which Gates worked hard for years. Recently, Melinda Gates announced that the foundation she and her husband fund would stop funding abortions, but apparently this decision was only made so that they could continue to fund other forms of “family planning” without the constant scrutiny from Pro-Lifers on their abortion ties.
To recap: the levels of denial that need to take place in order to believe in a connection between global overpopulation and climate change are laughable. Fundamentally, in order to perceive this connection, one must believe in myths. Unicorns, for example, are pretty and fantastical, but that doesn’t make them real. Blaming the global population for the potentiality of climate change might have worked on some level, had the reality of overpopulation been more real than, say, unicorns.