Organization calls upon the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to not have a third child for “environmental reasons”

kate and william

Mind your own business.

From Daily Mail: Royal-watchers have been speculating on whether the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will choose to add to their brood with another little Prince or Princess.

But one organisation has controversially called on William and Kate to ‘lead by example’ and stop at two children for environmental reasons.

Having Kids, which promotes smaller families, wrote an open letter to the royal couple this week urging them to ‘consider forgoing having a third child (…) in favour of modelling a smaller, sustainable family.’

They point to factors including climate change, economic equality and the distribution of ‘resources’.

Kate, 35, recently hinted she’d like a third child after being handed a gift designed for newborns during the couple’s royal tour of Poland and Germany. She was seen turning to William at the business event in Warsaw and saying: ‘We will just have to have more babies.’

The organisation said that Kate’s comments raised ‘compelling issues of sustainability and equity’.

Having Kids executive director Anne Green said: ‘William and Kate have a tremendous opportunity to model their choice of having a smaller family. By doing so, they set an example as to what has the most potential for mitigating climate change and its impacts, including severe flooding, deadlier heatwaves, increase in diseases, and wildlife extinctions.

She added: ‘Moreover, given the vast economic inequalities in the world today, the couple also has the opportunity to model a simple principle: That every child deserves as fair start in life’.

But the organisation’s open letter has been met with some skepticism, with one woman writing on Facebook: ‘This is beyond the most ridiculous thing I have ever read.

If someone wrote a letter to me suggesting how many children I should have, regardless of my societal status, I’d be sure to kindly return the letter, straight into their a**. Although there may not be enough room since their head is already so far up their a**.’

On its website, the San Francisco-based organisation says its mission is to promote and protect ‘every child’s right to a fair start in life by replacing parent-centered family planning models with the child-centered Fair Start family planning model.’ 

A third child for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would mean a little brother or sister for Prince George, four and two-year old Princess Charlotte – currently third and fourth in line to the throne.

MailOnline has contacted Having Kids for further information.


20 responses to “Organization calls upon the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to not have a third child for “environmental reasons”

  1. Wonder if Having Kids is lecturing Muslims with multiple wives and dozens
    of children living off the dole in what used to be the UK?

    Liked by 6 people

  2. How come environmentalists don’t ever tell non-whites to breed less?

    Liked by 8 people

  3. Muslims can have 4 wives and over 20 kids. Whites are going to be extinct. Countries have bigamy laws but muslims get exempt, go figure, right?

    Liked by 5 people

  4. Of all the people in the world that should be having children, obviously these two are destined to have children that are well educated, and will actually do more for society than be a person standing there with their hand’s out! It certainly does make one wonder why “these save the worlder’s” don’t hammer on those who do not have a pot to piss in, or a window to throw it out of, rather than rail at educated people who function on a high level. I do truly wonder how it is that Muslimes get away with the multiple wives that breed oodles of children, that We The People, get to support.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Auntie Lulu, you are so very right, MUSLIMES are the humans’ rats, they breed just by breathing, they invade and cannot be controlled unless exterminated at the core. Royals take pride in their children to continue their bloodline. I like the royals, no longer the stiff upper lip, royals of this era are different, young, modern, they marry out of the bloodline, they promote causes, they create charities for the less fortunate, mingle with the ill and wounded and are revered world over, maintaining the royal aura people like. I applaud their wish to have children

      Liked by 3 people

  5. Royals smell good. Muslimes stink.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. The have kids folks would be better served if they offed themselves, you know, since they’re taking up resources and causing global warming.
    Just an idea.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I am NO FRIEND of the Royal Family: I am certain they are a “wretched hive of scum and villainy.” Be that as it may, Not Having Kids can serve by example and commit the suicide they want everyone else to commit!
    Something extremely important and extremely terrible is going on: There has been so much contraception and abortion, the replacement rate for almost every single nation on Earth has fallen to about 1.3—far below the 2.2 needed for replacement. As a result, the world population will crest at about 9 to 10 billion around 2050, and then begin to decline. This has already begun in China: Now at around 1.3 billion people, that “problem” will soon reverse by Century’s end, and it WILL go down. The demographics of the entire world is changing, and not for the better.
    Not Having Kids is just another deputized death cult doing the Devil’s business, and doing it at the behest of the Crown. We’re not afraid of human life—THEY ARE.
    May the Devil take them—soon.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. When the eugenics theory became popular, lives of the offspring of people such as the royals were deemed acceptable for existence; it was the lives of the aliens who should have been limited in number. What happened and why? Lucifer’s last days?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. — Auntie LuLu and Alma — I agree with both of you. I have to laugh at your comment Auntie LuLu about the “pot to piss in.” I understand this comment because when my mother was growing up having a chamber pot by the bed was something to be proud of and had a certain amount of success attached to it. My mother used that comment a lot!

    Liked by 1 person

  10. “Having Kids” seems to have a pretty Socialistic attitude. ‘Fraid I can’t agree with ’em. Besides,they’re wanting everyone else to endorse THEIR idea of what’s good for the World;I doubt they can win their argument if ALL the facts are laid bare….

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Liberals can’t mind their own business, it’s not in their DNA. It was pushed out by the transgender gene. Also, can’t be a victim without having their noses planted firmly where it doesn’t belong.

    In the good ole days when someone invaded your privacy you punched them in the face. Come to think of it…many problems used to be fixed this way. I can say this with all honesty, I’m happy to have more days behind me than in front of me.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. What a group. Trying to discourage the very people that pay for the others. Sounds like they are on a self destruction mission.
    Where is their outrage of all the groups that breed like rabbits? The very groups that would kill them in a nano.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Typical Marxist nonsense. Parents are responsible for the upbringing of their own offspring. Those who should have fewer kids are those who lack the resources to care properly for them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s