Excessive Global Population

I started corresponding on the subject of excessive global population about 10 years ago with a letter in an Asian Magazine! I argued then and argue now that the problem of the world population reaching 6.6 billion people in 2007 is not that a large population of itself is bad, but that human beings are negligent and even ignorant in bringing so many extra mouths to feed and educate into the world when the resources are not available. It is partly an argument on contraception, but stated plainly, men and women should not have children that they cannot look after and plan for. How they do that is their own affair The fault lies not in a mere statistic of 6.6 billion, but in the inability of human beings to plan ahead for all those extra children.
The (Christian) religious view seems to be that we are ordered 'to go forth and multiply'. We seem to be good at doing that! But another translation say 'go forth and replenish the earth' (after the flood?). There is a great difference between 'multiplying for ever' in an already crowded world and 'replenishing' an empty earth.
Now I am assuming that I have some personal (protestant?)responsibility for putting things right and leaving the earth a healthy and prosperous place. But it has slowly dawned upon me that I am arguing at cross-purposes with my Roman Catholic friends. I think they take the view that God's plan is unfolding as it ought to do, and they are not going to interfere at all with what happens - even if millions are to die in the meantime. That must be a part of God's plan, mustn't it. That is an excellent argument for doing nothing.

There is the rather more sophisticated Christian (theological) argument that an omnipotent God has no need of us at all and no amount of good deeds can save the individual - only God' grace can do that and in that we have no say at all. He will save whom he wants to save for reasons of His own. This view is not expounded very clearly to the faithful on most Sundays, who often remain in ignorance that good deeds do not help very much!

Similarly, one might argue that death is a minor incident on the road to eternity, so even a few deaths from negligence or indeed from assassination do not deserve much punishment, as God at any time can restore the status quo ante! In certain hands this must be perceived (by guilty governments?) as a licence to use violence!
So when I worry that very soon the global population will reach 7 billion souls and feel I ought to do something about it, I represent a tradition that is at logger-heads with Roman and Anglican Christianity - I think we are not helpless while they think that what happens is God's will and there is nothing they can do except obey the rules. (and however wicked they may have been, there is still a good chance they will be forgiven because forgiveness has nothing to with behaviour and conduct, but with 'grace').

So while my idea is that I have a responsibility to solve problems, I am faced with a contrary argument that if there is an excessive global population, God's remedies will be brought into play - pestilence and plague, famine and drought, and finally war and violence. These weapons to be deployed by God for solving excessive population are certainly very effective and will indeed solve the problem. I am left feeling a certain sense of horror (in the real meaning of the word) that I am free to watch millions upon millions of children die without a qualm of conscience. I hear the theological argument that the responsibility is not mine but God's!
And then I have the practical problem of my own conduct. I look after seven grandchildren of my wife. I love them even though I have no blood relationship with them. On the arguments presented above, I get the nmessage that I could abandon them at a moment's notice as money dwindles away. What happens to them will be God's will. I need not to worry - whether they live or die, I have no responsibility, -------or do I? I am my brother's keeper!