In the beginning of Genesis, after He created human beings, God told them to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” British Vogue, though, is sending a bit of a different message.
A writer for the fashion magazine asked in a column published Sunday if having a baby nowadays is “pure environmental vandalism” and pondered if it’s even “possible to live an ecologically responsible life while adding yet another person to our overstretched planet.”
“For the scientifically-engaged person,” Nell Frizzell wrote, “there are few questions more troubling when looking at the current climate emergency than that of having a baby. Whether your body throbs to reproduce, you passively believe that it is on the cards for you one day, or you actively seek to remain child-free, the declining health of the planet cannot help but factor in your thinking.”
Frizzell — who admittedly has a son — went on to write she “worried feverishly about the strain on the earth’s resources that another Western child would add.”
“I also worried about the sort of world that I would bring my child into — where we have perhaps just another 60 harvests left before our overworked soil gives out and we are running out of fresh water,” she wrote. “Could I really have a baby, knowing that by the time he was my father’s age, he may be living on a dry and barren earth?”
Even with such existential questions, Frizzell said she’d have another kid if her partner agreed to it.
Human Progress, a Cato Institute project sharing “evidence from individual scholars, academic institutions, and international organizations” to show “dramatic improvements in human well-being throughout much of the world,” argued an increase in reproduction is “correlated with an increase in resource abundance.”