Skip to content
Breaking News Alert Report: Trump Rally Assassin Hid Gun On Site Before The Event

Who Are Biden Voters Saving The Planet For If None Of Them Are Having Children?

Just roughly 1 in 5 Biden supporters believe society would be better off by prioritizing marriage and children, according to Pew.

Share

A new report from the Pew Research Center released last week found that less than 20 percent of President Joe Biden’s supporters believe society would be better off prioritizing marriage and children. These are also the voters most likely to believe “climate change” represents an immediate existential threat to the future of the species, which raises the question, who are Biden voters saving the planet for if merely a fraction of them even want children?

A separate report from the Pew Research Center out last summer found Democrats overwhelmingly view climate change as a “major threat,” with 78 percent believing so compared to just 23 percent of Republicans. Democrats were also found to favor expensive remedies to confront the challenge, with 59 percent calling climate change a “top priority.”

At the same time, Democrats are more than twice as likely as Republicans to cite climate change as a “major reason” to remain childless, according to a 2020 survey by the Morning Consult. More than 32 percent of Democrats reported climate change as at least a minor reason for not having children compared to just 16 percent of Republicans who said the same.

The American birthrate fell to a record low in 2023, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). An analysis from Morgan Stanley three years ago warned investors the “movement to not have children owing to fears over climate change is growing and impacting fertility rates quicker than any preceding trend in the field of fertility decline.”

Many far-left climate activists, such as Biden’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Director Tracy Stone-Manning, have cautioned that children are an environmental burden who threaten to overwhelm the planet’s resources. Contrary to the constant depictions of a “world on fire,” however, the planet can and will sustain future generations. Michael Shellenberger explained in his 2020 book, Apocalypse Never, that many of the mid-20th century predictions of worldwide environmental catastrophe from overpopulation never materialized.

“Danish economist Ester Boserup, working for the [Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)], did historical research finding that as the human population increased, people had long found ways to increase food production,” Shellenberger wrote. “By 1987, demographers knew the number of humans added annually to the global population had reached its peak.”

The weather on planet Earth today, meanwhile, is the safest it’s ever been thanks to rapid innovation and reliable energy in the form of fossil fuels.

Climate-related deaths have dropped more than 98 percent since 1900. Weather has been to blame for 0.07 percent of deaths worldwide and 0.01 percent of deaths in the United States between 1980 and 2014. The falling rate of climate mortality comes after the planet warmed 1 degree Celsius since the Little Ice Age century of the 1800s despite far higher atmospheric pollution than previously existed.

Hurricanes and wildfires are also on the decline, pushing down the cost of climate-related disasters as a share of GDP.

President Biden, however, has made fighting “climate change” to save the planet a hallmark of his White House agenda, with tens of billions spent to subsidize environmentally toxic renewable energy products. But if his own supporters don’t plan to procreate, for whom is the Earth even worth allegedly “saving?”


1
0
Access Commentsx
()
x