I can't speak for Ron, but I can say no, I am not willing to make any sacrifices for "the environment" and yes limiting births is too great a sacrifice, IMO.
Which brings us to apples and oranges. I think you are right, we are talking apples and oranges because <<You guys are talking who survives and I'm talking the survival of the environment>>. To me, people and individual rights are more important (even supremely important) and the "environment" is at best tertiary where it meets with human interests. The environment has no intrinsic value, but is of value only to those that value, ie human beings. People first in my book.
If we're talking species threatening dangers, such as approaching the carrying capacity of this planet, then by all means, in that sense I become an environmentalist. But if we're talking the Greenpeace sense, then no I have no interest in saving the Earth, whatever that means. You see Pezz, the Earth will be here long after human beings are extinct, and it will be as if we never were. Thinking that human beings can destroy the Earth is pure hubris, IMHO. |
