I don't really have much faith in religion (pun intended), so I'll take the "authoritative principle" approach to dogmatics 101.

I believe that many of our societal problems stem from the fact that there are too many people on the planet and that there are a limited amount of resources. As our population continues to increase, our quality of life will decrease. I think it's quite likely that we, as a species, will cause our own demise. This is a somewhat Malthusian perspective and, while I hope that technology can save us, I wouldn't bet it.

Where do these beliefs come from?

Admittedly, I am not well read so most of my beliefs stem from observations and contemplation. Here's a layman's example. It seems obvious that places with higher populations, have higher rates of crime. Yes, this might just be due to the fact that there are more people, but this doesn't account for the fact that the crimes are more severe, malicious, and violent. My theory is that this is about resources. If people had more space and more resources, they wouldn't be as aggressive. The problem here is that resources, both locally and globally, are dwindling while the population steadily increases. More people and fewer resources equals more crime. More crime equals a lower quality of life. This isn't just about crime either... this is about air, water, land, food, disease, pollution, etc.

Add to this the notion that population control is an unpopular, and perhaps unrelenting, social problem. Those who strive to do something about it ultimately lose as they don't have many children with similar beliefs to keep up the fight. Meanwhile, those who don't care, continue to reproduce, consume, and promote belief systems which aggravate the problem, while still preaching compassion to those they can't provide for. There is a slight chance that nature may do it's own population management (a la plague), but it's equally likely that a plague may strike our food supply.

So... if population control isn't an option, increasing the amount of resources is the only alternative. In some ways we can see progress. We are getting better and better at growing high quality food more efficiently and producing renewable/sustainable energy. On the other hand, the total amount of land the planet is (relatively) fixed and global warming continues to threaten our food supply both on land and in the oceans. Moreover, we're doing dumb things by restricting potentially planet saving technology (via patents) and, similarly, producing homogeneous crops that can't reproduce.

What does it mean?

My beliefs about the population and the quality of life influence the way I feel about (and vote on) many everyday societal issues. I support population control measures which include contraception, abortion, euthanasia, suicide, and the death penalty. I have mixed feelings about war... in the big picture, war is good for keeping our numbers down, but stupid wars are still stupid. (If we were civil, we could have computerized wars like that old Star Trek episode). Despite this somewhat gloomy outlook, I am still an optimist and, in my own way, I strive to bring more to the planet than I take from it.

I'll save my thoughts Singularity for another day/task.

Obviously, I'm generalizing to keep this relatively brief and, admittedly, there are a lot of holes left unplugged. None-the-less, I welcome comments, feedback, and brainstorming (either here or over a cup of joe).