Site Meter

Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

December 10, 2007

Polluter Pays Principle vs. Mothers Financial Booty

Filed under: Abortion, Contraception, Culture — shelray @ 12:53 pm

Found among the “letters to the editor” section of the Medical Journal of Australia or eMJA, is a proposal by a university professor of Obstetric Medicine to overturn a policy of providing Government type grants to families who have children, and to establish a new tax burden onto any of those who go beyond a recommended two children family for what is referred to as a, ”greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour”.

What then should we do as environmentally responsible medical practitioners? We should point out the consequences to all who fail to see them, including, if necessary, the ministers for health. Far from showering financial booty on new mothers and thereby rewarding greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour, a “Baby Levy” in the form of a carbon tax should apply, in line with the “polluter pays” principle..

Every family choosing to have more than a defined number of children should be charged a carbon tax that would fund the planting of enough trees to offset the carbon cost generated by a new human being. .

This infers a levy per child of at least $5000 at birth (to purchase the land needed and plant trees) and an annual tax of $400–$800 thereafter for the life of the child (for maintenance of the afforestation project) (based on 1990 figures,4 and probably much more now).

By the same reasoning, contraceptives, intrauterine devices, diaphragms, condoms and sterilisation procedures should attract carbon credits for the user and the prescriber that would offset their income taxes, and lead to rewards for family planning clinics and hospitals that provide such greenhouse-friendly services.

Ironic,  but even more pathetic on how these intellectual types like to assume we are as stupid as they think they would like us to be.  Honestly now, the revelation of a doc-tor’s illogical, eco-facist formula on carbon credits makes among the realms of possibilities a Federal Government totally reversing it’s well thought out policy of population replenishment? 

More likely among the realms of possibility is an embittered Ob-Gyn who has a disdain for Australia’s current policy of re-imbursing families who have children and is hell bent on destroying it by any means necessary. In this case, he exploits his position as a physician, a medical journal, and the hysteria associated with global warming for the purpose of promulgating a culture of animosity and fear - where the divine nature of pro-creation is reduced to a level of being little more than destructive pollution. I think it’s obvious these guys have no idea of what they’re talking about and are well aware that their science is totally flawed and that’s o.k. with them; because any facts about global warming is totally inconsequential to the real objective of manifesting hostility towards those who do not submit to the lies of contraception and abortion.  So transparent and predictible are buffoons and talking points, as cultivating the culture of death has never been and will never be about the truth, but accomplished through simple intimidation and emotional manipulation to induce feelings of fear, anger, guilt and despair.  

 Source 

TrackBack
Permalink


2 Comments »

  1. Thanks for pointing all this out…sick..

    Comment by mrs jackie parkes — December 11, 2007 @ 4:26 am

  2. MY NAME IS MARY I CURRENTLY STUDYING ENVIRONMENTAL HEATH IN SOTH AFRICA DOING MY THIRD YEAR.I HAVE PASSION FOR NATURE SEING THE WHOLE WORLD BEING POLLUTED IT MAKES ME SAD AND I DO HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF HELPING THE WORLD WITH NEW FRESH IDEAS WHICH ARE BEING NEEDED AS I AM 20YEARS THIS YEAR.I WOULD REALLY BE GLAD IF U CAN AT LEAST RESPOND ME.I BELIEVE IN PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE.

    Comment by mary — February 12, 2008 @ 3:49 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress