Journalist Robert Walker was describing the overpopulation problem:
If population continues to rise, but resource availability declines, we could be headed for disaster. It's not a question of whether Michelle Duggar and her husband can care for another child. The bigger, and more urgent, question is, "Can our planet handle an additional 2.5 billion humans by mid-century?"
As Americans, we have been raised to believe that bigger is always better. And maybe that's why "18 kids and Counting" has been such popular show. But in a world beset by critical environmental challenges and a shrinking resource base, bigger is not better. It is, in fact, a whole lot worse.
Winona Daily News
And here's my reply:
The Duggars are producing responsible, well-trained, happy children with IQs over 120.
The third world will produce more than ten times as many children, but they'll have IQs in the mid to low 90s, be impoverished, uneducated and probably hate the rest of us for having more than they.
Perhaps the future of avoiding overpopulation is more Michelle Duggar and less third world aid.
I realize you cannot mention this in your article because it's taboo, but being dishonest has always caused humanity problems, don't you agree?
I guess my point to Mr. Walker is this -- most human endeavors on this earth fail, so why do we get upset if one of the ones that's succeeding breeds a little more? Isn't that how we got here, the smart prosperous apes outbreeding the slackers?
Well, let's not panic and drop the phone. Stop third world aid. Stop aid to the impoverished. Keep encouraging the Duggars and their ilk to have as many kids as they want. The IQ and health of the average human being on earth will keep rising that way.