by Elaine Arthur

Created on: November 20, 2007

Overpopulation? The scourge of the modern age. As a person who came of age in the 1970s, I can look back with a fair amount of perspective on the subject of overpopulation. Nearly every social ill, from crime, to pollution, to factory farming, stems from unchecked population growth. So any time someone makes even a "modest proposal" aimed at fighting it, I'm willing to listen.

However, while I am of the firm opinion that overpopulation is paving the way for the decline of civilization as we know it, I'm still unwilling to favor AIDS as a means of "natural population control."

AIDS is tied in too strongly with human behavior. It is preventable and now more treatable than ever. As a "natural form of population control," it's a loser.

In addition, the long-term cost of AIDS makes it hardly worth it. Does it really help humanity to have millions of orphans left to an uncertain future? Do we really need men raping children in the hopes that sex with a virgin will protect them from AIDS?

For natural population control, I vote for tsunamis, earthquakes, and hurricanes. They happen, you can't prevent them, and you can't blame anyone for their occurrence. You can't run a political campaign by promising to keep California from sliding into the sea. You can't judge the hapless victims of a natural disaster.

And, of course, you don't have to try to convince anyone that floods really aren't contagious
, you don't have to try to convince anyone that floods really aren't contagious

Learn more about this author, Elaine Arthur.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.