|
|
Bad choice, "Litigation." Increasing or disruptive litigation is not an
obvious result of increasing population. We'll delete it with our next major
revision of "ThinkPopulation.org." But in the meantime, what were we
thinking
when we added it to our list of things negatively affected by rampant
population growth? Perhaps something like this:
Should a couple with three, two, one, or no children pay more income tax than
another family with identical Adjusted Gross Income, but with four or more
children? Since the U.S. has the highest birth & fertility rate of any developed
nation in the world and since U.S. population is now the third largest of all
the nations in the world, does it seem logical that Congress would want to
encourage even faster population growth? Is Congress opposed to family planning
and therefore taxes those who practice it more than those who do not? Does
Congress favor religions which are opposed to family planning? What is the
logical basis for asking those who limit the size of their families to subsidize
those who do not? What is the Constitutional basis for such discrimination?
Is it time for that basis to be challenged in court? In other words, is it
time for litigation?
That explains how "Litigation" became an "Action By Effect"
item on "ThinkPopulation.org." Now, the question is, is there
an organization concerned with such discrimination and willing
to take the issue to court? Would FILE (Friends of Immigration
Law Enforcement--see "Think Public Safety") do so? Is there
another organization which might be interested in doing so?
If you know of such an organization, please click on "Contact
Us" and tell us about yourself and about that organization.
|
|
|
 |
