!! ...fact is that population control IS necessary on almost all fronts,
!! and hardly anyone is taking responsibility for that fact. I cannot
!! overstate this position.
Lee... This tendency to mistake opinion for fact is one of the problems.
One of the biggest of the problems.
Whatever factor HOW MANY of us there are is,
HOW WE TREAT EACH OTHER far overshadows it.
There you have my (as valid as yours) point of view.
And, we are NOT just another member of the animal kingdom...
I will defer propounding the rest of my acknowledgement of what we ARE. I am
sorry you cannot see your own bias... it is not my job to correct it, but I
point out to you that you have spoken from a biased position... "FACT (not
theory, hypothesis, or opinion) that birth control is NECESSARY ON ALMOST ALL
FRONTS (not desirable from the point of view of some)" is hardly the language
of anybody without an agenda. Popes do not pontificate more absolutly.
Worrying about howmanypeoplethereare before correcting howwetreateachother
is as stupid as cleaning my teeth before turnequiting my servered artery...
Not only does it NOT help, it is looking the wrong way. It is, further,
getting in the way of anybody looking in the RIGHT direction.
I question (from a position of ignorance) your
1: assertion that population control was decided upon as needful
by American Indians. You speak as though they were of one heart
and one mind in deciding the philosophy of what should be their
culture. This is the language of ignorant white armchair theorists.
They did not have a culture. They had many, they were frequently
competetive, they did not have any one thing in common amongst them
all except (maybe) belief in God (singular or plural, named or
nameless) and (maybe) belief in a special relationship with God
that made them not just another element in the Animal Kingdom.
What study I have done has suggested that children were desired,
and not "in limited numbers because too many was bad for the
world".
2: assertion that the Mound-Builder culture was studied and discarded...
unless this was so your choice of words "obviously proved
unacceptable in terms of quality of life/use of resources" is
bogus.
3: assertion that birth control was practiced. Especially with a mind
"to make sure that there aren't too many of us". Seems the Crow
and the Pawnee and the Sioux did that enough for each other by
combat... I think you are reading your meaning into somebody
elses' poetry.
Oh... I just got to this part... I've been composing my reply while reading
your letter... the name is Brian, not Bruce... the least of the errors.
What would happen, you ask, if everybody hearkened to the Lord Jesus Christ
and obeyed the commandment God gave to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and
multiplied and replenished the Earth and filled it with Life? Ask Him. He's in
charge around here. But don't object to the philosophy behind my answer any
louder than you note in your speechmaking that you are on your own soapbox,
and please have the courtesy to mark your opinions as such, not as facts.
For myself I will say and say again that how we treat each other has more
impact on our quality of life than how much or what we own. You offer the
critic so many targets it is hard not to just flame the hell out of you. You
look upon our problems and potential problems and see (from what you rather
condecendingly and patronizingly say) population as the only adjustable
factor. Never mind the arms races that have drained resources better spent on
increasing the quality of life. Never mind the greed that excuses the
short-sightedness that results in the pollutions we now have. Never mind the
bigotry, pride, and predjudice that have corrupted political systems across
the world and have brought about Holocosts and ruined life and the quality of
it. Never mind the powerseeking and profitseeking that oblige all but the
strongwilled to the back of the political and economic bus. What we need, you
say, is to adjust our population. Please move this conversation to e-mail: I
am at brunner@kazoo.ssd.loral.com. I will need a non-bang-path name if you
have one, I'll try anything you give me. In this paragraph you spend time
worrying about my attitude. Check yours.
[ Moving the conversation to email seems as if it's not too bad an idea.
Perhaps I can set up a separate mailing list for people who want to go
on discussing the topic. Lee's non-bang address is lee@cavern.vortex.com
--Gary ]
"Clearly, American Indians drew the line of quality vs. quantity of
life at a reasonable point."
Like the Buffalo made a concious decision not to migrate to Mexico.
I am going to skip the rest of your philosophising. My anger is rising above
what I enjoy controlling.
brunner@kazoo.ssd.loral.com; Space Systems/Loral; Palo Alto, Calif.