Skip to main content

VHEMT (Vehement) is a anti-procreation movement

"Here's a novel idea to save the planet: Remove the main cause of its woes - homo sapiens. The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT - pronounced "vehement") proposes the phasing out the human race. "When every human chooses to stop breeding, Earth's biosphere will be allowed to return to its former glory, and all remaining creatures will be free to live, die, and evolve (if they believe in evolution)," offers the movement's website. But 'it's going to take all of us going'." See www.vhemt.org

SOURCE: Email invite.

I thought I was the only one who thought like this. Everyone I know thanks the universe that I didn't study microbiology. I would have developed a human-specific killer virus. WE are the vermin.

Comments

smithadri said…
hmm, ok, so if we are going to reverse current status by not breeding, how about getting rid of ourselves as well. Drain on resources would immediately improve and we would also be certain that we didn't change our minds later.

It would seem as though to be human is of no value, and to have human relationships is of no value, yet the uninhabited Earth has infinite value. Huh? ok, if that's the case lets get it over and done with.

Who's first?

Adrian
Tanya Pretorius said…
Me! Me! I want to go first! Pick me!

<--wry smile--> I really would. This is what makes me feel inhuman and worthless: I wrote this post in response to animal abuse. I got to a point where I really felt that I wished all the animals would die en masse, so that there would be no more suffering for them, no new generation of animals to hurt. Then I thought it was like when Golda Meir was faced with a Bill to give a curfew to women because there were too many rapes, and she turned around and said, Give the curfew to men.

I play with ideas here in my blog, not regularly enough, but now and then if I want to see how they sound.

Thanks for responding! I LOVE IT! Am off to read your blog... Cover to Cover.
smithadri said…
sorry, don't really have a blog yet...

would you say that those creatures who have power to do bad (e.g. animal abuse, although I would argue there are immoralities of far greater priority) also have power to do good (protection of animals, species, responsible stewardship of the earth?) Is it fair to throw the baby out with the bathwater?

although I would agree with your prognosis that leaving things in their current state is not an option. But I am not sure VHEMT provides any meaningful hope? And it's global goal isn't really going to happen is it?
Tanya Pretorius said…
This exchange has really gotten my imagination going! Thanks smithadri!

Nope, sorry, I don't believe that we will do it. I can believe that we could do it, but I can't believe that we will do it. Even if we had the power, there are always the naysayers, standing poised to chop anyone off at the knees. I can be such a cynic.

But I have to say that this exchange has brought me to my first Christian thought. I am sure it is very unpolished, but here it is for polishing, and to honor my intellectual playspace.

I wondered why I hesitate to sacrifice myself (along with everyone else). We humans have not perfected the kill-all-people virus, and that silly atom bomb is not all it's cracked up to be. The only 'person' with that power is God and if he asked me to go first, and promised me he would drown everyone in a deluge, I would gladly sacrifice myself. Me first.
smithadri said…
We agree then... man as such is without hope in this endeavour also (as with most important endeavours?), although it seems as if he has something noble fragmented aspiration that believes that either he could or he should...

ok, so a suggested solution - to redeem the earth by the removal of man, only possible by a God-like force. Is it only the earth that is worth redeeming?

The solution to the problem of man and the earth has two possibilities:
1. eradicate man and redeem the earth
2. redeem man and redeem the earth

The first is not only a solution, it may just be justice too.
The second is not only a solution, it may be love (what other reason could there be?) but it is not justice.

"The only 'person' with that power is God and if he asked me to go first, and promised me he would drown everyone in a deluge, I would gladly sacrifice myself. Me first."

What would being first accomplish? Isn't it the same as being last?
Tanya Pretorius said…
Ooh, what about being the last of the possible procreators. There's an idea. Would the last two not want to cheat and start the whole process up again in the current belief that they would be the stewards, would they start to worry that God wanted them to say no to dying in the deluge.

Nope, there must be a no-redemption, all-justice solution. And you are right, I should go last. God would choose wisely in putting me in this position. I would choose wisely. OK, now that the question of who goes last is sorted, who goes first?

You absolutely have to start a blog now! We can solve the earthly problems, look how well we sorted this one out in a jiffy. I know that I am addicted to the internet and that most people have this under control. Don't feel the pressure.

Popular posts from this blog

Richard Dawkins on militant atheism

Dawkins has become outspoken in his atheism , coining the word "bright" (as an alternate to atheist), and encouraging fellow non-believers to stand up and be identified. intelligent design is creationism redressed creationists are right that evolution is hostile to evolution statistical improbability of the complexity of design - intelligent design but the intelligent designer wouldn't have made such a hash - why would the designer be bothered with disapproving of our sex lives, favor our side in the war Dawkins suggest rocking the boat - attack religion as a whole taboo of speaking ill about religion - Douglas Adams said, sacred ideas at the heart of religion, holy cows, you can support any operating system you want, but the challenge of religious ideas is off limits science and religion are corrosive to each other - religious explanations are trivial and improbably, teaches people to accept authoritarianism takes the example of famous scientists and imagines

Mary Daly explains the pejoration (of one) of the words related to women

Of Death and Conscience: Brief thoughts on gender role and the values of the dominant culture in medicine : "“Under the influence of the Church and the newly formed male-dominated medical establishment, the word “witch,” which originally meant “wise one,” became a term of scorn. It took a reign of terror lasting several hundred years to radically alter a way of life thousands of years old. Millions of women who carried the healing lineage were systematically killed (see The Church and the Second Sex by Mary Daly).”"