The Anti-Human Baby Tax

Just so you know where these people are coming from…

A news story out of Australia reports that some global warming nuts want to tax families with children. Tax them $5000 at the birth of each child and an additional carbon tax of $800 per year per child. Why? Because those little bundles of joy are carbon-spewing polluters, that's why! Not only will they use up natural resources for 80 years but, get this, they exhale carbon dioxide and emit methane from the other end. Babies are greenhouse gas bags!

Is this just the view of one extremist? No, instead it is an increasingly common underlying theme in the global warming movement: fewer humans = healthier planet. So don't be surprised when an environmentalist is also adamantly pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, and anti-development and modernization of the third world. Remember these fruit-loops in the news recently? Global warming devotees are aborting babies and getting themselves sterilized in order to reduce their carbon footprint.

[Note–the abortions are a tragic loss of innocent life but I'm actually in favor of sterilizing self-congratulating, self-centered idiot liberals. If only it were mandatory. Imagine:

"Hello, I like want to apply for a baby license."

"Okay ma'am, just answer this question: a baby human and a baby polar bear are trapped in a burning building and you can only save one. Which one do you save?"

"…like, that's tough; like what would AlGore do?"

"Think hard, ma'am, your license depends on it."

"…like, the baby polar bear?"

"Next!"]

Writer Kathleen Parker warns that, "once such utilitarian concerns edge out our humanity - and once human life is deemed to have no greater value than any other life form - how long before we begin tidying up other inconveniences? Wouldn't it be helpful to eliminate some of the less productive members of society who, like the cows they no doubt eat, are emitting hazardous methane, one of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming?"