[backtothestreets]

Yep, a lot of assumptions, but the 1960 birthrate data is significant, and a reliable base.

The question of the "sexual revolution" is one I've pondered many times. I think the birth control pill did move sexual activity into the realm of a recreational activity. Had the "sexual revolution" occurred without contraceptives, it might have led to birth rates well beyond the 1960 level.

Looking back, I think the rise in homosexuality was, like group sex, piggy-backed the "sexual revolution". It might also be argued drug usage increased as the pill offered a sense of immunity for ones actions.

One thing the census numbers do show absolutely. We are supplementing low birth rates with immigration. I've long suspected the government (both political parties) are lenient with immigration because they know workers will be needed to support the baby boom generation retirees. Unfortunately, many of those immigrants entered the country as adults, and will be retiring at or near the same time as the baby boomers.

BTW, thanks for taking me to task on the numbers I first posted. It made me look further. I appreciate that. I was astounded how many abortions the CDC reported. At 857,000 abortions last year, it was nearly equal to the population of the State of Montana (909,000). If all the children aborted last year ALONE were assembled in a single city by themselves, that city would rank number 11 in population among all US cities (CDC).

[dsc]

"If all the children aborted last year ALONE were assembled in a single city by themselves, that city would rank number 11 in population among all US cities (CDC)."

Agnus Dei, qui tolis peccata mundi, miserere nobis.