While those in Russia are celebrating Procreation Day, the wonderful folks at Slate have offered up a powerful opportunity for discussion on cutting back kids this week with Daniel Engber’s article titled “Global Swarming.”

We talk about going green, but we often fail to bring population control into the discussion. It’s a topic that carries with it issues of human rights on various fronts, and it’s certainly created conversations about ethical violations in China.

In fact, as Engber describes, the topic is often met with great hostility, as it was when Bill McKibben proposed some measures of control in his book Only One. As a social policy, says Engber, population control can seem like a violation of rights. But he asserts that we shouldn’t throw it out of discussion as a possibility for personal consideration. 

"These days, we tend to think of saving the environment in terms of personal choice, rather than government programs. We're obsessed with our green lifestyles—eating local, driving hybrids, paying off our excess carbon-dioxide emissions. From that perspective, voluntary familial extinction (or at least reduction) might not be such a bad idea. If you want to reduce your carbon footprint, cutting back on kids is the best choice you can possibly make.”

Engber continues the discussion in more profound terms than I can hope to. In case you missed the link, here it is again. Bottom line: this article made me think, and though I’m not positive what my position is, I’d be interested in your thoughts.