One Child Per Family

A couple of days ago, I blogged that in December there will be a United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Dec. 7-18 in which a world government will be formed, according to Lord Christopher Monckton who told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience on Thursday at Bethel University in St. Paul.

Now I want you to see another side of the environmental issue.

Andrew Revkin, who reports on environmental issues for The New York Times, floated an idea last week for combating global warming: Give carbon credits to couples that limit themselves to having one child.

Revkin participated via Web camera in an Oct. 14 panel discussion on “Covering Climate: What’s Population Got to Do With It” that was held at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. The other participants on the panel were Dennis Dimick, executive editor of National Geographic, and Emily Douglas, web editor for The Nation magazine.

“And I have even proposed recently. . .the single-most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the lights or driving a Prius, it's having fewer kids, having fewer children," said Revkin.

When CNSNews.com later followed up with questions about his comments, Revkin responded in an e-mail.

Revkin wrote, “. . .if one were serious about the population-climate intersection, it'd be hard to avoid asking hard questions about USA population growth. By raising the notion of carbon credits for, say, single-child American families,” he continued, “I was aiming to provoke some thinking about where the brunt of emissions are still coming from on a per-capita basis.”
Revkin cited an August 2009 study by the London School of Economics that highlighted having fewer children as a solution to diminishing our carbon footprint.

The study was sponsored by the British activist group Optimum Population Trust, which advocates reduced population growth.

“More children equal more carbon dioxide emissions,” blogged Revkin. “And recent research has resulted in renewed coverage of the notion that one of the cheapest ways to curb emissions in coming decades would be to provide access to birth control for tens of millions of women around the world who say they desire it.

Furthermore, he blogged: “But the issue is one that is rarely discussed in climate treaty talks or in debates over United States climate legislation. If anything, the population-climate question is more pressing in the United States than in developing countries, given the high per-capita carbon dioxide emissions here and the rate of population growth. If giving women a way to limit family size is such a cheap win for emissions, why isn’t it in the mix?”

Comments: Do you see how ludicrous these people are? What country do you know that limits one child per family? Communist China, right? And with this sort of restriction in mind, what do most of the families in China seek to raise? A boy! Girls are aborted. If you are told to have only one child, why not have a boy? In the process, just keep aborting the girls until the boy shows up. Over there this is done because of the ideologies of the communist government regarding population control.

However, over here in the West, the same idea is being floated for the sake of saving the environment. You see, according to these far left environmentalists, humans are the greatest cause of destroying the environment. Why? Is it because they tend to cut too many trees down? No. Is it because they tend to drive gas guzzling cars? No. Is it because they enjoy far too many BBQs? No. Is it because they use far too much energy? No. Then what is it? It’s because humans contribute to the degeneration of the environment through their exhaling. That’s right. Every time a person exhales, carbon emissions enter the atmosphere. And if you have over six billion people exhaling carbon or CO2s, then according to these people, that’s by far the biggest reason for global warming.

Therefore, the cheapest way to save the environment is to strongly encourage (force will be used you can count on it) families to have one child and pay them for doing so. Can you see how radical this is?

So, in December, when the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen takes place and a one world government is formed, expect to see this idea made into law sometime shortly there after.

Now the bible does not specifically talk about population control, but it does discuss a great deal about being “fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:22, 28; 8:17; 9:1, 7). And add this to what we know – Satan will always go in the exact opposite of God’s commands. Remember, he is the great counterfeiter and he aims to create doubt and suspicion on what God says. (Example: “Has not God said. . .” Gen. 3:1).

So if God gives a cultural mandate to fill the earth, Satan will come along and create doubt, fear and suspicion so that God’s command is not carried out fully. This is what we have been seeing and it will only escalate.

Again, keep your eyes on the Climate Treaty in Copenhagen this December. Prophecy is being fulfilled right before our eyes.