“Population control condoms” promote CBD anti-humanism

Environmentalists are slowly but surely coming out of the closet. The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) has just come out bluntly proclaiming their anti-humanism while denying it as revealed by a story published yesterday in The College Fix which is the newspaper of the University of Wisconsin Madison. The publication describes a so-called population control program by distributing condoms on nearly 800 college and university campuses making the pitch for the effort by linking it to wildlife extinction.

According to CBD spokesperson Leigh Moyer, the group began the 2009 campaign because we realized that even though we at the Center for Biological Diversity are doing great work protecting endangered species and preserving wild spaces, we will always be playing catch up until we addressed the main driver of climate change, desertification, deforestation, ocean acidification, pollution, habitat loss and the sixth mass extinction: an unsustainable human population.

Moyer denies her organization is anti-human but followed up by saying that the human population is growing at an alarming rate, noting almost 300,000 people are born every day. What we want to stress is that limiting the number of children you have and using contraceptives to plan your family is not only beneficial for couples, but for the environment. She said. The real message is that wildlife is disappearing—going extinct—at 1000 times the normal background rate and scientist agree that the sixth mass extinction, the one we are currently in, is caused by humans and human activities.

The claim that humans are the cause of so many disasters and (in this case) animal species extinction is specious at best. Species go extinct for a number of reasons and to state that humans are the cause of deaths of creatures is not only wrong it is immoral. It is based on a long debunked Malthusian premise that resources and Earth space is finite and there is not enough food or space to accommodate increases in population. This idea was the basis of the book The Population Bomb and the ideas in it and its author have been shown to be horribly wrong.

There have been many animal species throughout the Earth’s history that have become extinct and have returned. The Myanmar Jerdon blabber once thought eradicated was discovered during March of this year in which the bird changed its habitat. Humans are part of the environment and, like animals, we are carbon-based life forms. If there was any doubt that environmentalists are anti-human let this news story stand as an example. They may deny they are against humans but groups like CBD do not have mankind’s best interests at heart no matter what they may say.

5 thoughts on ““Population control condoms” promote CBD anti-humanism

  1. What happens to populations of animals when they reach the limits of their finite resources of space and food? Extrapolate this to human beings. I would rather continue to buy plentiful groceries at the store than fight for scarce resources. We increased our ability to provide food with mechanized farming after WWII. Maybe technology will keep up with the pace of population growth and we will be okay, but that depends a lot on social and economic stability. I don’t see a worldwide push to choose when to have children and how many to have to be anything other than positive. Trust me, as a teacher I see plenty of kids whose parents didn’t plan for them, don’t care for them, and don’t show them that they are in any way wanted. I appreciate your take on things. I hope for all our sake that you are right, but the implications are tremendous if you are wrong.

    Also, I have to take issue with your statement that environmentalists are anti-human. A better description would be people who seek to be good stewards of the land, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to make sure there are resources for our children and our children’s children.


    • Thank you for your comments and I respectfully disagree. The Peak Oil claim is proof resources are not finite. It was claimed for many years that we would soon run out of oil but there have been innovations (such as fracking) that enable extracting oil from shales and tar sands once thought impossible or too expensive to do so.


    • It is one thing to advocate people being “good stewards” of the planet, but that assumes people are mindless, wasteful people who could care less about the Earth and the beings that make it up. Including the air and water. Thanks to capitalism the US and Western counties are not only wealthier but use less resources than those in the developing world making our lives better overall. Please consider reading the archives of my site as I go into all of this.


  2. I don’t think I’m assuming people are mindless, though they can be wasteful. And I do think that money plays a role. We are a capitalist society after all, which drives our resource use. In addition, when it comes to discussing these issues, I think there is a lot of information out there, much of it misinformation. People are not necessarily educated about the issues they tend to espouse. I come from a science background, where I studied population dynamics of various species. True, they didn’t have engineering and technology on their side as we do, but they fall prey to the same resource restrictions. When populations reach their limits, there is competition, disease, and death. The population is in constant need to balance its needs with the availability of its resources. Through technology and engineering, we have been able to raise our carrying capacity to a level that supports more humans than previously possible. The question is, will we be able to continue to do that? And how will that impact the other creatures that share the planet with us?

    I’m just curious as to what the benefit is to allowing population to rise unabated? (Just for the record, I believe in personal freedoms, but also in personal responsibility.)

    Thanks for your perspective. I enjoyed reading something that is different from what I believe. I try to challenge myself and have an open mind. I look forward to looking back at some of your other posts.


    • Oh yes we will be able to continue to raise not only our carrying capacity as well as our standard of living through technology and engineering. As long as mankind is free to use their minds to the best of their abilities there will always be solutions to the problems. If the growth of Western civilization is any indication the ability of people to think and reason for themselves is a testament to this.

      I will be posting a video lecture by a gentleman who has written a book that discusses much of what you mention in your reply. I have also posted videos and cited an economist named Julian Simon who before he died wrote and spoke extensively about issues of population growth. Bjorn Lomborg’s views on population and the environment were changed dramatically after he read one of Simon’s books. While teaching statistics at the University of Denmark Lomborg reviewed the research Simon had included in his book “The State of Humanity” and discovered Simon was right on every one of his claims.

      Thank you for your interest and your messages. I encourage you to continue to read the posts and watch the videos up on this site. I am glad you are willing to consider the other side of the debate on issues related to the environment and population.


Comments are closed.