No "Green" without Population Control. There's too Much Brown!

There's a lot of blather about ecology and how to become "greener".

Stupid questions such as "Where should the city, county, state, country, world start working toward becoming a "greener" community ... world?" are continually asked. "What environmental issues should be given priority?"

Few are willing address the root cause of environmental problems. Politically incorrect. And those that do are labeled as racist, ungodly, or just anti-humanity.

"Green" is an issue simply because, one, there is too much brown -- that is, too much human waste of all kinds. And, two, too much energy and resource use. And the cause of those problems is simply out-of-control population growth almost everywhere.

Until the issue of out-of-control population growth is addressed by stopping it -- "green"? Fuggedaboudit.

Everyone's brown has to go somewhere. Everyone has to use energy and resources. Even if you reduce the amounts per person, the inexorable population growth means more brown to deal with, and dwindling energy and resources per person.

"Greening" attempts without population REDUCTION are like tilting at windmills. To get "green" will require changing religious attitudes towards birth control, abortion, and infanticide. To get "green" will require changing business and government attitudes about "growth is good" boosterism. To get "green" will require immediate ceasing of subsidizing litters of human spawn, which means ceasing funding for public schools, aid for dependent children, tax breaks for children, and other direct and indirect subsidies for breeding. You get more of anything you support and subsidize, and that especially includes children.

The only way to make a city, state, or country "green" is to make it child UNFRIENDLY. Deal with it!

You don't want to do what is necessary? Fine. Then forget "green". You can't have it both ways. Grow up and deal with it.

Whatever your cause, it's a lost cause without population control.