However, on one hand they work to reduce deaths from diseases[0] while on the other, people are just a drain on natural resources.[1] It's not consistent.
[0] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/malaria/Pages/home.aspx etc.
[1] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/infographics/Pages/family-pla...
The page claims -- I don't know whether it's correct, but actually that isn't relevant for this purpose -- that universal access to contraception could prevent about 90k maternal deaths, 640k infant deaths, and 14M unsafe abortions, per year.
The only thing on that page that at all resembles "people are just a drain on natural resources" is this: at the end of the page there are five "Additional benefits for society": reduced HIV transmission, reduced pressure on natural resources, improved education and employment opportunities for women, improved economic growth, improved status for women.
So. They give many reasons for supporting family planning. They say it saves lives and improves health and helps the economy and improves the status of women. Tucked in towards the end is the remark that, by the way, it also reduces "pressure on natural resources".
Do you, really, think it is fair to summarize this by saying they think that "people are just a drain on natural resources"?
Personally, I think it's grotesquely dishonest.
Personally, I think you're sounding defensive.
I don't know what you think I'm trying to defend, other than people being accused of inconsistencies that aren't really there. For the avoidance of doubt, though: I have no connection of any sort with the Gates Foundation.