4 ms·

Except that she's in favor of population control...

by jonah 14y ago

gsk 14y ago
I am sure you recognize a better reflection of what she favors is in the life-changing work that Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is doing.
- jonah 14y ago
  They definitely do good work in many areas. However, on one hand they work to reduce deaths from diseases[0] while on the other, people are just a drain on natural resources.[1] It's not consistent. [0] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/malaria/Pages/home.aspx http://www.gatesfoundation.org/malaria/Pages/home.aspx etc. [1] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/infographics/Pages/family-planning-saves-lives-info.aspx http://www.gatesfoundation.org/infographics/Pages/family-pla...
  - gjm11 14y ago
    The document you cite as [1] does not, in fact, say anything even slightly like "people are just a drain on natural resources". Here are the first few things it says: (1) "Family planning saves the lives of mothers and infants." (2) It "can significantly improve the health of women and their families." (3) "It can save millions of lives per year." The page claims -- I don't know whether it's correct, but actually that isn't relevant for this purpose -- that universal access to contraception could prevent about 90k maternal deaths, 640k infant deaths, and 14M unsafe abortions, per year. The only thing on that page that at all resembles "people are just a drain on natural resources" is this: at the end of the page there are five "Additional benefits for society": reduced HIV transmission, reduced pressure on natural resources, improved education and employment opportunities for women, improved economic growth, improved status for women. So. They give many reasons for supporting family planning. They say it saves lives and improves health and helps the economy and improves the status of women. Tucked in towards the end is the remark that, by the way, it also reduces "pressure on natural resources". Do you, really, think it is fair to summarize this by saying they think that "people are just a drain on natural resources"? Personally, I think it's grotesquely dishonest.
    - jonah 14y ago
      I wasn't trying to summarize anything - I just pointed out something that struck me as dissonant while looking at that info graphic. Personally, I think you're sounding defensive.
      - gjm11 14y ago
        But the infographic neither says nor implies what you say they think. Where, please, is the dissonance between supporting contraception and thinking that people are valuable? I don't know what you think I'm trying to defend, other than people being accused of inconsistencies that aren't really there. For the avoidance of doubt, though: I have no connection of any sort with the Gates Foundation.
adaml_623 14y ago
You are misquoting her. She is in favour of contraception. That gives a woman control over whether her body will become pregnant. I think you should elaborate. Your view is not very clear.
- jonah 14y ago
  Not really. Birth control reduces the number of people born. I'm not saying anything about motives or whether it's the right thing to do or not, rather simply pointing it out. http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/jul/11/rich-countries-pledge-family-planning-women http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/jul/11/ric... http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/Search.aspx?meta=MDContentType%3aGrant%3bMDTopic%3aFamily+Planning http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/Search.aspx?meta=MDCont...
  - adaml_623 14y ago
    Slightly deeper philosophical point I think you're getting at there but I think reducing the number of people born is not equivalent to not valuing a life.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - andreasvc 14y ago
    Birth control doesn't have to reduce the number of people that are born. It means having a choice, which reduces the number of unwanted children or children who cannot be cared for, which can ultimately to a happier, more productive and reproductive population, given that the children who are born can be better nurtured. Are you against birth control for religious reasons?

Except that she's in favor of population control...

by jonah 14y ago

Except that she's in favor of population control...

gsk 14y ago

I am sure you recognize a better reflection of what she favors is in the life-changing work that Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is doing.

jonah 14y ago
They definitely do good work in many areas. However, on one hand they work to reduce deaths from diseases[0] while on the other, people are just a drain on natural resources.[1] It's not consistent. [0] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/malaria/Pages/home.aspx http://www.gatesfoundation.org/malaria/Pages/home.aspx etc. [1] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/infographics/Pages/family-planning-saves-lives-info.aspx http://www.gatesfoundation.org/infographics/Pages/family-pla...
- gjm11 14y ago
  The document you cite as [1] does not, in fact, say anything even slightly like "people are just a drain on natural resources". Here are the first few things it says: (1) "Family planning saves the lives of mothers and infants." (2) It "can significantly improve the health of women and their families." (3) "It can save millions of lives per year." The page claims -- I don't know whether it's correct, but actually that isn't relevant for this purpose -- that universal access to contraception could prevent about 90k maternal deaths, 640k infant deaths, and 14M unsafe abortions, per year. The only thing on that page that at all resembles "people are just a drain on natural resources" is this: at the end of the page there are five "Additional benefits for society": reduced HIV transmission, reduced pressure on natural resources, improved education and employment opportunities for women, improved economic growth, improved status for women. So. They give many reasons for supporting family planning. They say it saves lives and improves health and helps the economy and improves the status of women. Tucked in towards the end is the remark that, by the way, it also reduces "pressure on natural resources". Do you, really, think it is fair to summarize this by saying they think that "people are just a drain on natural resources"? Personally, I think it's grotesquely dishonest.
  - jonah 14y ago
    I wasn't trying to summarize anything - I just pointed out something that struck me as dissonant while looking at that info graphic. Personally, I think you're sounding defensive.
    - gjm11 14y ago
      But the infographic neither says nor implies what you say they think. Where, please, is the dissonance between supporting contraception and thinking that people are valuable? I don't know what you think I'm trying to defend, other than people being accused of inconsistencies that aren't really there. For the avoidance of doubt, though: I have no connection of any sort with the Gates Foundation.

adaml_623 14y ago

You are misquoting her. She is in favour of contraception. That gives a woman control over whether her body will become pregnant. I think you should elaborate. Your view is not very clear.

jonah 14y ago
Not really. Birth control reduces the number of people born. I'm not saying anything about motives or whether it's the right thing to do or not, rather simply pointing it out. http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/jul/11/rich-countries-pledge-family-planning-women http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/jul/11/ric... http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/Search.aspx?meta=MDContentType%3aGrant%3bMDTopic%3aFamily+Planning http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/Search.aspx?meta=MDCont...
- adaml_623 14y ago
  Slightly deeper philosophical point I think you're getting at there but I think reducing the number of people born is not equivalent to not valuing a life.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- andreasvc 14y ago
  Birth control doesn't have to reduce the number of people that are born. It means having a choice, which reduces the number of unwanted children or children who cannot be cared for, which can ultimately to a happier, more productive and reproductive population, given that the children who are born can be better nurtured. Are you against birth control for religious reasons?