Pro-life movement threatened by the climate scare

And they apparently still support this objective. For example, in the wake of the overturn of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court last year, Sierra published "Why Environmental Justice Is Part of Reproductive Justice | Sierra Club," a convoluted article that attributed the court's decision to relegate abortion law to the states to "ecofacism."

Other enviro groups have been saying similar things for years, presumably for the same reason:

• ·An open letter in support of Planned Parenthood, sent on March 22, 2017, to leading federal elected officials was signed by:
  • Alaska Wilderness League
  • Green For All
  • Green Latinos
  • League of Conservation Voters
  • Natural Resources Defense Council
  • Oil Change International
  • Safe Climate Campaign
  • Sierra Club
  • The Climate Reality Project

• World Wildlife Federation (WWF) published "Healthy People, Healthy Ecosystems, A Manual on Integrating Health and Family Planning into Conservation Projects" in which they stated:

Reproductive health programs include such activities as…reducing the practice of unsafe abortion, providing post-abortion care…" =

• Center for Biological Diversity opposed Republican plans to defund Planned Parenthood's reproductive health services and pass a 6-week abortion ban. Their online article, TACKLING THE POPULATION PROBLEM stated bluntly:

Human population growth is at the root of our most pressing environmental issues…

• World Watch Institute has decried "The legal absurdity of decreasing access to safe abortion in developing countries puts the US administration in clear violation of the 1994 Cairo Program of Action." In World Watch Magazine, March/April 2007, Volume 20, No. 2, by Richard Hayes was stated:

There's no reason we can't draw lines that protect abortion rights and medical research while prohibiting applications of genetic science that open the door to profoundly undesirable outcomes."

Some media agree. In "Is Having A Baby In 2021 Pure Environmental Vandalism?" Vogue Magazine writer Nell Frizzell worried:

...feverishly about the strain on the earth's resources that another Western child would add. The food he [the child she was originally considering having] ate, the nappies he wore, the electricity he would use; before he'd even started sitting up, my child would have already contributed far more to climate change than his counterpart in, say, Kerala or South Sudan.

University of Ottawa Gwartney Professor of Economic Education and Research Dr. Peter Jacobson demonstrated in an article that pro-life advocates should study that her fears are generally misguided.

Or how about "Kids are cute but they're not really eco-friendly" a 2017 Times Trends article being shared on the Web (and refuted in"Does the value of children depend on their usefulness? - Children are a gift, not a liability").