Birth Control Pills are Pollutants – UK Environmental Agencies Say

You’ve already heard about the pregnant man. But what about the she-man fish? “Intersex” freshwater fish are all the rage. But unlike the pregnant man, these scaly androgynes didn’t ask to take on the sexual characteristics of both genders: humans are doing it to them. (Where’s the freedom to choose?!) And the reason these fish are doubling up could make hash of orthodoxies dating back to the sexual revolution.

Estrogen pollution from contraceptive and abortion pills could be the culprit behind these piscine switcheroos. And thus the two holiest of holies for the left may be on a collision course. It promises to be quite the show.

In his book “The Really Inconvenient Truths: Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don’t Want You to Know About — Because They Helped Cause Them” (Regnery, 2008), Iain Murray writes: “Why don’t we have more outcries about hormones, and campaigns to save the fish populations? Why aren’t environmentalists lobbying on Capitol Hill to keep these chemicals from being dumped into our rivers?” He answers his own question: “Maybe because the source of these chemicals is not some corporate polluter, but something a little more dear to the Left: human birth-control pills, morning-after pills, and abortion pills.”

The turnaround won’t come, however, without some whiplash. Ironically, the environmental groups have long been on the same page as the abortion-industry foot soldiers, embracing anything that assuages fears of overpopulation (no longer a worry, as Western countries, particularly in Europe, face plummeting birth rates). “The protection of the quality of our environment is impossible in the face of the present rate of population growth,” and therefore, “Laws, policies, and attitudes that foster population growth or big families, or that restrict abortion and contraception … should be abandoned; [and] comprehensive and realistic birth control programs should be available to every member of our society.” That’s not from Planned Parenthood; it’s a Sierra Club resolution from 1970.

This is from Planned Parenthood: “Prominent women in the global environmental movement … believe there are strong links between the health of the environment, the ability of women to engage and lead their communities, and their ability to exercise their inherent reproductive rights. Women have a stake in a clean environment because they are often the main providers of food and water, and their reproductive health can be adversely affected by environmental degradation.”

But, Murray writes, “By any standard typically used by environmentalists, the pill is a pollutant. It does the same thing, just worse, as other chemicals they call pollutants.”

So what does that mean for us and the fish? Nothing straight away, Murray tells me. There’s more than pollution at stake here for the left, so, expect “outright denial at there being a problem, obfuscation of the science when strong arguments are presented, attempts to deflect attention onto much rarer and less harmful industrial estrogen, and ad hominem accusations, in this case an allegation of religious zealotry/being in the pay of the ‘very well-funded pro-life industry’ I imagine. The effort will be based on making it unacceptable to bring up the issue in polite conversation, such that anyone who does so will end up stigmatized (astonishing how often the left resorts to shame, rather than thinking about guilt). Some radical Greens may actually be honest enough to admit there is a problem. They will be marginalized by the environmental-industrial-entertainment complex (to paraphrase Fox Mulder).”

With the science out there, Murray argues solving the problem wouldn’t be out of the realm of possibility if we could all be adult about it. “The EPA and FDA (ought) to have the courage to do what their counterparts in the U.K. had the courage to do and label the pill as the pollutant it is.“… (Source)

Now that the carcinegous and environmentally irresponsible birth control pill is being widely exposed for its health consequences, we will have to see how this shakes out in our little world of politically correct poker.   The two combatants:  the feminists vs. the environmentalists.  Problem is, they largely share the same constituency.  That’s not a problem, but an opportunity to split their alliance. They will have to choose sides.  As more and more evidence mounts against the Pill, I see the environmentalists winning. 

And that means, of course, one less option for artificial sex.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
23 + 3 =