A few months ago, I came across this article:

Couples who have more than two children are being “irresponsible” by creating an unbearable burden on the environment, the government’s green adviser has warned.

Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the government’s Sustainable Development Commission, says curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming.

.....

Porritt, who has two children, intends to persuade environmental pressure groups to make population a focus of campaigning.

...

Porritt, a former chairman of the Green party, says the government must improve family planning, even if it means shifting money from curing illness to increasing contraception and abortion.

Gee, do you think it's a coincidence that the number of "permissable" children according to this guy just happens to be the same number of children that he has?

This was the first time I had really thought about the connection between the global warming alarmists and the pro-abortion crowd, but upon reading this it made sense. If the far-left crazies think that abortion is necessary to "save the planet" then of course they will do everything they can to make abortion seem "acceptable" in mainstream society. After all, how can one encourage everyone to do something that they find repulsive? You do it in stages. First you try to convince everyone that abortion is perfectly ok. Then you have a socially "acceptable" solution to offer when you start telling people they need to limit their family size, to whatever the so-called "experts" say it should be.

Then abortion becomes not just ok, but it's for the "greater good." After all, anyone who doesn't choose to limit their family size is being "irresponsible" and selfish.

It's reprehensible. It would be easy enough to write this guy off as a quack but in fact he chairs the UK Sustainable Development Commission. As such he is in a position of some influence obviously in England, but to some extent here in the United States as well given our own government's (the liberals anyway) love affair with everything European and desire to follow them even if it means following them off a cliff.

Although Mr. Porritt keeps his suggestions in the realm of voluntary limitation of family size, it doesn't take a genius to see that others might continue the slide down that slippery slope and suggest forcing the matter, all in the name of the common good. It's not unprecedented. Consider China's "one child" limit - enforced in part through forced abortions. Again, easier to accomplish if society has been adequately convinced that abortion is acceptable.

Read full post >>

I first read about this a couple of months ago, and although I've been mainly focused on the out-of-control spending lately I want to make sure people are aware of it, because according to yesterday's news, this is being brought up again for consideration and it needs to be stopped.

The "U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child" essentially demotes parents to simply caregivers, and elevates the state as the ultimate authority on how children should be raised, giving the state the right to override any number of parental decisions.

Forget about homeschooling, imparting your religious values to your child, or teaching responsible behavior. Forget about setting appropriate limits on what your children may and may not do. If the state disagrees with you, this law would give them the power to intervene. If your CHILD disagrees with you (for instance, if you ground them or give them a curfew), they are empowered to seek state intervention to override you. This is yet another attack on the family.


The United States has signed the convention, but the Senate has not yet ratified it. We are the only nation, aside from Somalia which has no organized government, that has not yet ratified the treaty. Ratification is required to actually make it a binding law in the U.S. If that happens, because of our treaty law, this would nullify approximately 90% of existing family laws currently on the books at the state and local levels, and because it allows the U.N. authority, it would also seriously infringe on our national soveriegnty.

What can we do to stop this? Parentalrights.org is seeking to amend the Constitution to protect children by empowering parents. The text of their proposed amendment reads:

DRAFT PARENTAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT
FOR THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

SECTION 1
The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.

SECTION 2
Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

SECTION 3
No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

Click here to sign the petition.

Click here to learn more.

I'll continue to post updates here.

Read full post >>