A recently published piece in Vox highlights a new study which questions the popular mentality that having one fewer child is the best way to fight climate change. The author notes that some climate activists have questioned whether having children is “still morally acceptable” based on studies showing the outsized negative climate impacts of having a child. As Live Action News reported last fall, thousands of scientists are calling for “world population to be stabilized — and, ideally, gradually reduced” through contraception, abortion, and sterilization. Presidential candidates have even encouraged rescinding the pro-life Mexico City Policy as well as promoting taxpayer-funded abortion throughout the world to “address the climate catastrophe.”

Yet the Founders Pledge study claims that existing research advocating for fewer children has failed to account for two important variables: the downward trend of emissions in most advanced economies, and the effective decarbonization policies enacted by many countries. As a result, the study contends, our children will likely produce far less pollution than existing research has assumed, meaning that having one fewer child would have nowhere near as positive of an impact on the environment as some climate activists have argued.

WATCH: Pro-Life Replies: Is abortion necessary to prevent overpopulation?

Although the study’s authors admit their research is based on projections, they believe the macro trends they have identified — and which have been overlooked by many climate activists — are sound.

If valid, the new research could help pro-lifers push back against the ideological colonization of those who would use the climate crisis as justification to promote abortion and sterilization in developing countries. The issue is not only one of respecting human life, but also consists of basic fairness and respect for developing societies.

As even the Vox piece points out, “One of the problems with the discourse about population and climate is that it can be easily distorted for unprogressive goals, like promoting population control in poor regions. Since most rich countries already have very low birthrates, the argument that people should have fewer kids may disproportionately affect people of color in the developing world.” 

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!

A recently published piece in Vox highlights a new study which questions the popular mentality that having one fewer child is the best way to fight climate change. The author notes that some climate activists have questioned whether having children is “still morally acceptable” based on studies showing the outsized negative climate impacts of having a child. As Live Action News reported last fall, thousands of scientists are calling for “world population to be stabilized — and, ideally, gradually reduced” through contraception, abortion, and sterilization. Presidential candidates have even encouraged rescinding the pro-life Mexico City Policy as well as promoting taxpayer-funded abortion throughout the world to “address the climate catastrophe.”

Yet the Founders Pledge study claims that existing research advocating for fewer children has failed to account for two important variables: the downward trend of emissions in most advanced economies, and the effective decarbonization policies enacted by many countries. As a result, the study contends, our children will likely produce far less pollution than existing research has assumed, meaning that having one fewer child would have nowhere near as positive of an impact on the environment as some climate activists have argued.

WATCH: Pro-Life Replies: Is abortion necessary to prevent overpopulation?

Although the study’s authors admit their research is based on projections, they believe the macro trends they have identified — and which have been overlooked by many climate activists — are sound.

If valid, the new research could help pro-lifers push back against the ideological colonization of those who would use the climate crisis as justification to promote abortion and sterilization in developing countries. The issue is not only one of respecting human life, but also consists of basic fairness and respect for developing societies.

As even the Vox piece points out, “One of the problems with the discourse about population and climate is that it can be easily distorted for unprogressive goals, like promoting population control in poor regions. Since most rich countries already have very low birthrates, the argument that people should have fewer kids may disproportionately affect people of color in the developing world.” 

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!