Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00977)

JRC wrote:

> As I mentioned in a couple of posts (including the one you
> respond to) HPB wrote when population was but a quarter of what it is
> now, when the environmental effects of population on the animal and plant
> kingdoms was scientifically unknown, when (as someone else pointed out)
> the mother often lost her life in the procedure - in short, in a very,
> very different time. HPB's argument was that it was "against" nature -
> but when animal and plant populations begin to exceed carrying capacity,
> it becomes their "nature" to begin limiting themselves - fo their own
> self-preservation. Did you miss that part?

Nope, I didn't. What is most noticeable in your post, however, is the
reduction of HPB and her Masters to the scientific knowledge available at
that time. I assume you are saying that they couldn't see the trends into
the next century, and that was once a crime against nature would not be a
hundred years hence?

HPB claims to be speaking not from popular science or from the thought of the
day, but from the occult philosophy. She says that even if the mother
survives, her life will be shortened and her stay in Kamaloka will be
lengthened. This does not sound like a reliance or a concern with 19th
century science or demographics, and I am surprised you would limit HPB and
her Teachers in that way.

I also strongly doubt that any populations can exceed carrying capacity.
 When capacity is full, no more can come. It's a big planet, however, and
who among us knows its limits? The real problem right now, it seems to me,
is unequal distribution of resources and brutalization of the environment,
not simply "too many people."

I don't see how overpopulation is an argument for abortion of fetuses or
murder of any class of beings in general. Rather, overpopulation seems to
suggest more and better birth control and abstinence from sexual activity.
 No?

Rich