I can’t even fathom the rudeness of the Muslim comments. By making comments like that, you are just screaming to the world how absolutely ignorant you are. How embarrassing it was to read those comments.

I agree, Sheba.

Wait, are discussions about religion even allowed here? I am shocked that Lulu’s incorrect/offensive/inflammatory comment about Muslims in the Western world were allowed to be posted. What does that even have to do with this topic? Neither Peter nor his wife mentioned their religion or anyone else’s.

As for the real topic, i think Peter raises a valid point. He wasn’t pushing his beliefs on anyone else (and since he has a bio baby, i’m sure he’s not totally opposed to it). He simply said that we should be talking about population control, which we should. And if he and his wife want to adopt, then i think that’s a wonderful choice.

What I find offensive about Peter’s remarks is his stridency — “We know better than everyone else.” I don’t care if he and his wife have another baby or not, but the pop control issue, WHILE VALID, comes off as celeb preaching, and that never comes off well.

As for the Muslim issue, I think many people find it frightening that Muslims are emigrating to Western countries but refusing to embrace their values. A valid point, IMO. Westerners who work or emigrate to Muslim countries are required to obey their rules and mores.

I have seen alot of enviromnetalists take the stance on not having children of their own. They truley believe thats their way of helping save the earth then hats off to them.

I like this childs name!

Sorry but I stongly disagree with the idea that people should adopt instead of having biological children beacuse of population control. Why should the people having the children that are available for adoption be aloud to have children they can’t take care of while people that can take care of their own biological children are looked down on for having too many children and adding to overpopulation. It makes no sense to say that i shouldn’t have as many bilogical children as i want and can care for just because so many other people have their children in an orphanage.

Lulu, it’s funny to me that you wont comment on a baby’s name because it’s mean to “attack a personal choice” but you say that Europeans are “allowing…Muslims to do(breeding) for them.” That’s dancing on the line of xenophobia, basically insinuating that there wont be any European people (ie, Caucasian)left if Muslims do all the “breeding” for them. Whoa. First, who cares if that even turns out to be true? Is Europe destined to only have white people, and the Middle East only people of the Muslim faith? I don’t get it. Second, people of the Muslim faith don’t have disproportionately larger number of children in relationship to other populations, such as devout Catholics in, say, South America. It’s a complicated issue what with religious considerations and the like, but I’m just really put off by that comment you made – it struck me as a little ignorant.

Regardless, anyone who reads a little about exponential population growth know it’s a serious issue. The planet cannot support endless number of humans – we consume to many resources! However, that’s not to say government should dictate reproductive choices. I just think we all should take a more holistic view of the issue. For instance, just because there isn’t a problem in Canada doesn’t mean the fact that there are huge and growing populations in India and China doesn’t affect Canada as well. It’s like saying, well we don’t have polution in Fiji so who cares about smog in LA? It’s one earth, and everything affects everyone else.

“I will deprive any future children of mine the chance at life because I want to make this political statement”

This struck me as a fairly bizarre statement. Do you really think the millions of gametes (eggs and sperm) in any given person have a right to form life? If one, then all? A woman loses one every month – should she mourn for that potential child? How do you distinguish between them? Deciding not to bear one or two children, from the billions of potential children you could have, doesn’t seem like depriving anyone in particular of their rights. To me, life is not a “right” as far as conception is concerned, it’s a miracle, whenever you consider how many odds are stacked against it in the first place. Just my opinion, of course.

As to the population control issue, to me it seems like a fairly responsible stance to take, just because our planet is already massively overpopulated and its resources can’t sustain our current way of life. Fewer people will mean better quality of life for the children who are born. Of course in an ideal world, every couple would have 2.0 children to replace themselves so that the population would remain stable over time, but with the birth rate much higher than that in just about all countries, the world’s population is increasing exponentially and it can’t just continue forever; there has to be a tipping point. For now, the people who choose to have no children just balance out the people who have many.

Having said all that, everything in the above is hypothetical and of course I fully support the notion of individual choice… no I’m not suggesting that there should be an enforced limit on how many children someone can have! If someone wants to have 19 children then more power to them. I’m just explaining why I think that Peter Reckell’s decision to take population control into account shouldn’t be ridiculed, and may in fact be a positive thing.

“In 30 to 50 years, that continent will be completely different because of the choice of individuals not to breed and to allow the Muslims to do it for them.”

Oh. My. God.

I seriously worry for the future of this planet, and it’s not because of the Muslims.

lulu—you wrote: “In 30 to 50 years, that continent will be completely different because of the choice of individuals not to breed and to allow the Muslims to do it for them.”

uh…huh? unless i misunderstand, your comment seems rather offensive to muslims (people like me).