Proclamations of overpopulation have circulated for over a century. Are they
true?
First off, what is meant by the word “overpopulation”? It has nothing to
do with the amount of people but rather to the resources and the capacity
of the environment to sustain human activities.
To be overpopulated, a nation must have insufficient food, resources and
living space.
With the world population at around 6.8 billion last year, food and
living space are hardly a concern. In 1990, it was estimated that the
world could feed up to 35 billion people. Most sources estimate that the
global population will level out at around 9.2 billion in 2050, and then
start to decline.
Indian economist Raj Krishna estimates that India alone is capable of
increasing crop yields to the point of providing the entire world’s food
supply.
Lack of food is not the problem but rather the need for more efficient
distribution.
Another supposed problem is living space.
In 2003, the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of
Arkansas. The world may seem crowded, but it’s because humans cluster
together for trade and companionship, not for lack of room. Even so, there
are those who insist that we will continue to breed exponentially, causing
a population explosion.
Paul Ehrlich first introduced this idea in 1968 with his book, “The
Population Bomb.” It succeeded in scaring the masses, just as Thomas
Malthus did, but these theories suffer under the impression that humans
are the only thing fluctuating.
“Population rose six-fold in the next 200 years. But this is an increase,
not an explosion, because it has been accompanied, and in large part made
possible, by a productivity explosion, a resource explosion, a food
explosion, an information explosion, a communications explosion, a science
explosion, and a medical explosion,” wrote community development
specialist Abid Ullah Jan in an article earlier this year called
“Overpopulation: Myths, Facts, and Politics.”
Poverty, too, is not the effect of overpopulation, but rather the
aftermath of poor leadership. In Ethiopia, government officials are blamed
for causing poverty by confiscating food and exporting it to buy arms.
In Africa, economic problems are seen as a result of excessive government
spending, taxes on farmers, inflation, trade restrictions and too much
government ownership.
Depopulation is more likely to cause economic distress than these other
factors.
Consumers are the largest component of GDP. If you drop that, it drags
down the whole economy. Schools close for lack of students, neighborhoods
are void of children, labor shortages cramp productivity and the list goes
on.
With fewer children we would be faced with an aging population causing
generational warfare on government spending. Social Security and Medicare
are unsustainable unless each generation of taxpaying workers is larger
than the one before it. Fertility should be encouraged, not seen as a
crime.
The myth of overpopulation has been exposed as fertility rates continue to
fall drastically, in many cases below replacing rate. The lowest
replacement rate is 2.1 children per woman, yet many countries like Italy
and Russia are closer to 1.69.
Even without so-called “population control,” fertility rates have dropped
as women put off marriage and children to pursue higher education.
Population control, often mislabeled as “reproductive rights,” today
consists of sterilization, contraception, abortion and open discouragement
of fertility.
China’s notorious one-child policy which includes forced abortions and
sterilizations will lead to a collapsing culture as the population
plummets.
The sad reality of sterilization is if a woman has a child, and gets
sterilized afterwards, and her child tragically dies young, she can never
have another.
Not only are forced abortions a waste of human potential (which
developing child could have been the next Mozart or Einstein?), abortion
drugs administered to women in foreign countries also often cause serious
complications. Medical posts in Africa or Peru are filled with
contraceptives and other population control related items, but they often
lack basics needed for overall health.
These options are wrong, not just morally, but logically and medically
speaking. If the money spent on population control were moved to child
survival programs, imagine the positive results.
Instead of pushing so-called “safe sex” we should promote the Catholic
Church’s teachings on responsible parenthood. In this modern world, sex
has become solely a source of pleasure, with children as a side effect.
Sex should be recognized for what it is — an act of life.
Natural family planning, in which couples are open to the miracle of new
life, is the only form of spacing of children acceptable to the church
because it does not separate the two components of the sexual act — union
and procreation. Catholicism stresses heavily the importance of both
components being present.
Our faith calls us to be generous in welcoming children into this world.
Yes, our lifestyles need to change, but not in the way population control
advocates prescribe. The world’s problems cannot be defined by one false
theory.
The myth of overpopulation needs to be dispelled. The proof is before our
eyes.
0 comments:
Post a Comment