With the UN report on the danger of losing one million species to extinction within our lifetime and continued reports on the growing perils of systemic global climate disruption, we must confront the fact of human overpopulation.

The World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision stated, “The current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach 8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100.”

Early in 2017 The Hill reported that the Trump administration reinstated “an executive order blocking foreign aid or federal funding for international nongovernmental organizations that provide or ‘promote’ abortions. The so-called Mexico City policy, established by Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1984, blocks federal funding for international family-planning charities that provide abortions or actively promote the procedure.”

Meanwhile, Ohio recently passed a law that not only bans abortions after six weeks, when most women do not even know they are pregnant, but extends this ban to private health insurance, not just taxpayer funded health coverage like Medicaid and Medicare.

“Then, there’s the ‘banning drugs or devices used to prevent the implementation of a fertilized ovum,’ ” the Daily Kos reports, “…which includes IUDs, birth control pills, Implanon and so forth.”

This is just one of many similar laws being passed by Republican legislatures across the country—the same party that declares global warming to be a Chinese hoax. Washington State University finds that forty percent of births in the US are unintended. In view of the dire consequences of human activities across the globe, this is exactly the wrong time to be restricting birth control measures.

My contention has long been that LGBT couples are less likely to procreate than straight couples. Several studies show that same-gender couples have biological children at a lower rate than heterosexual couples. (See references below.) Although in years past many LGBT individuals who married into opposite-sex unions at a young age had biological children before they came out, now with greater acceptance of LGBT people, fewer such marriages are occurring and thus there are fewer children from such unions.

At the same time, studies show that same-gender couples are adopting children at a higher rate than their opposite-gender counterparts and providing more homes for unwanted children who were brought into the world by others.

I once posted a remark on Facebook suggesting that homosexuality should be encouraged rather than stigmatized because LGBT folks had fewer children. A comment on my feed took me to task suggesting that homosexuality was not a choice. I agree. One’s sexuality is a NOT a choice. But in the past, LGBTQ folks had to decide whether to remain in the closet and conform to hetero expectations or not. For many living in conservative, restrictive communities there was little choice. Many homosexuals have been coerced into making the choice for marriage and procreation by the dominant pronatality culture.
(See the movie To Kid Or Not To Kid, www.tokidornottokid.com/)

If more LGBT individuals were made to feel comfortable with their identity, there would be fewer of these inconvenient marriages and fewer resulting children.

I am not saying that same-gender couples should not have children if they so choose, or that their children exhibit any less self-esteem, quality of life, psychological adjustment, or social functioning. The Williams Institute’s “Research Report on LGB-Parent Families” finds that “studies comparing LG and heterosexual parents in regard to mental health, parenting stress, and parenting competence have found few differences based on family structure.”

Washington State University finds that “Americans constitute 5% of the world’s population but consume 24% of the world’s energy,” and “On average, one American [the USA is the third most populous nation] consumes as much energy as 31 Indians [the world’s second most populous nation].” “Next time you hear about a woman in India who has seven children, remember that she’d have to have more than 20 children to match the impact of an American woman with just one child.” (See WSU reference below.)

By destigmatizing the LGBT community in America, we would encourage more people to feel comfortable in their own skin, encourage fewer births in our nation, and reduce our use of the world’s resources. Perhaps homosexuals were put on earth just for the purpose of limiting the human population.

—Jeff Stookey, May 2019


References and links:

all accessed 05-10-2019

“World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision,” 21 June 2017

“Trump reinstates ban on US funding for abortion overseas,” by Jessie Hellmann, 01/23/17

“Hot off prosecuting 11-year old rape victims, Ohio GOP following up with #HumanCentipedeBill,” Brainwrap, Thursday, May 09, 2019

Washington State University, “Consumption by the United States”

Williams Institute website

“Research Report on LGB-Parent Families”

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/research/parenting/how-many-same-sex-parents-in-us/  “How many same-sex couples in the U.S. are raising children?” Shoshana K. Goldberg and Kerith J. Conron, July 2018

“As Overall Percentage Of Same-Sex Couples Raising Children Declines, Those Adopting Almost Doubles – Significant Diversity Among Lesbian and Gay Families”

“Family formation and raising children among same-sex couples” by Gary J. Gates

“Demographics of Same-Sex Couple Households with Children,” Kristy M. Krivickas, Daphne Lofquist, U.S. Census Bureau Fertility & Family Statistics Branch, SEHSD Working Paper Number 2011-11

Family Equality Council, “LGBTQ Family Fact Sheet: In Support of August 2017 presentation toNAC Undercount of Young Children Working Group”



Share This