On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:47:12 -0600, flipper wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:10:17 -0500, PeterD wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:56:23 -0600, "Bo" wrote:

Seems that the difference in our views can be summarized by saying, I
have faith in and that the people of the USA have the ability and
resources to sustain themselves as a whole, whereas you do not. I
wonder which countries you think are not overpopulated? and what your
definition of overpopulated is?

This is a good discussion, and I think it should continue, but it is way
off-topic here and perhaps we should move it elsewhere.

Yes, I'm a bit (tiny bit!) radical on population... My utopian society
is about the smallest that anyone would ever consider.

I don't think it is a case of "we can make it work" but a case of "If we
control our population, then some of the problems we have today will
cease to be problems".

You see a happy future, I'm a bit more pessimistic however.

Treating people like cattle only seems 'better' to those who fancy
themselves cattle barons.

The pro-"life"rs believe that women are cattle. In their twisted little
version of reality, if a woman becomes pregnant, she no longer has any
rights - only the fetus has rights.

Gawd, I hate pro-lifers. :-[

Thanks.
Rich