Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ModelBreaker

It’s not an easy thing to solve.

You can’t “force” people to have kids, and if you do, the kids are unwanted and not a good contribution to society in many cases.


7 posted on 08/21/2007 11:22:34 AM PDT by RockinRight (Fred Thompson once set fire to a crowd of liberals simply by puffing his cigar and staring real hard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: RockinRight

The article makes the point that “actual” childbearing falling short of “desired” childbearing is a widespread phenomenon. There are lots of couples that would have welcomed #3 but only had two, etc.

So the key is to make it more possible for married couples (I emphasize marriage)to have the children they want. Marrriage being a public signal that their commitment is serious and not just notional.

The major cause of couples having tiny families is that they don’t start childbearing until the wife is already in her 30’s and well past her peak fertility.

So I think one of the most important things would be to make it more feasible for recent college-grad couples to marry. That means dealing with college debts and downpayments.


34 posted on 08/21/2007 11:48:28 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (L'Chaim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: RockinRight
You can’t “force” people to have kids,

Of course not. Nobody's suggesting that. This issue is at the center of a problem that I'm not sure we will survive. The problem, put bluntly, is the pill combined with feminist theology. Women have had drummed into them for forty years now, that they have to have careers to be worth anything and that they sell themselves short by just being a mother. That they should wait until after they are fulfilled career-wise (say, about 40) before they start having kids, if at all. No more being a breeder for (ugh) men! And, the pill has given women complete control over conception with which to implement this set of ideas.

Maybe the feminist theology is a good and moral one. Doesn't matter. Feminist ideology will be replaced by non-feminist ideology--either in our culture or by whatever culture replaces it through having more babies. It's not clear whether the pill and self-actualization for women, combined, will or will not bring down western civilization. My sense is it's going to be a very near thing.

We are slaves to our biology and all the pretending in the world that women can have it all doesn't change that one little bit. Women can't have it all and still have a civilization remain for their great-grandchildren. Whoops. They probably won't have any great-grandchildren, so maybe it doesn't matter to them.

43 posted on 08/21/2007 11:57:43 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: RockinRight

I’ve got four. I’m a SAHM, so we function on one income.

I would have loved to have a couple more if we started earlier and if our taxes weren’t so high. We waited until our late 20s so we could be financially stable before had kids.


77 posted on 08/21/2007 2:53:02 PM PDT by Politicalmom (Of the potential GOP front runners, FT has one of the better records on immigration.- NumbersUSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: RockinRight

First you do away with Social Security, so people stop seeing the government as their safety net in old age.

Next, you lower taxes substantially, so people can keep what they earn and be able to afford more children and for mom to stay home.

The third thing is beyond government’s reach - encourage people to live close to their parents. Yes, you heard me! Women who have help in the form of grandma living close by, have more kids. That is a fact.


86 posted on 08/21/2007 3:12:52 PM PDT by Pining_4_TX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson