Are human beings an environmental burden? Many environmentalists seem to think so. Let me begin by quoting from someone you would know: the late Jacques Cousteau. This advocate for the oceans said, "One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladehis. This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it."
Of course you have to wonder about people who are more dedicated to saving whales than saving human beings. But that perhaps demonstrates the priorities of many in the environmental movement. And many of these priorities will soon be codified into international laws as the UN Millenium Summit and other international meetings convene in September.
Let's hear from a man who is less known to the public, but is in a position to implement the priorities of the green agenda. His name is Maurice Strong. This wealthy Canadian developer currently serves as the right-hand man to the Secretary General of the United Nations. He has said, "it is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable."
This is the concept of sustainable development, which is defined as "meeting the needs of the present generation without damaging the Earth's resources in such a way that would prevent future generations from meeting [their needs]." So be forewarned. In the next few weeks we will be hearing about a green agenda at the UN that sees human beings not as an asset but as a liability. The solution they propose is to reduce our populations and our standard of living to a level of sustainable development.
I'm Kerby Anderson of Probe Ministries, and that's my opinion.