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


1 posted on 09/16/2005 5:14:38 PM PDT by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
To: Crackingham
It called for government and companies to make it easier for women to choose to have children at a younger age, and said: "Free choices cannot be made with partial knowledge, economic disadvantage for mothers, and unsupportive workplaces."

Ooooh, I'm sure more government intervention will fix everything right up.

2 posted on 09/16/2005 5:17:45 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Start the revolution - I'll bring the tea and muffins!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

They have a good point about the age. Never before in history could the majority women wait to the age of grandmotherhood to bear children.

Government Intervention (in the U.S.) would mean lowering/eliminating taxes so families could actually LIVE on one income.


5 posted on 09/16/2005 5:23:35 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham
They wrote: "Women want to 'have it all' but biology is unchanged, deferring defies nature and risks heartbreak. If women want room for manoeuvre they are unwise to wait till their thirties."

Dr Bewley added: "You cannot suddenly emerge at 45 and say, 'Now I want children'. I appreciate we want it all and some will get it. But there is a window for reproduction where there isn't for work."

I can hear feminists now, "Don't tell ME what to do! How dare you try to box me in with your paternalistic limitations!" etc..

A lot of women don't seem to realize that they are really arguing with God, not men.

tick tock, tick tock, tick tock, tick tock...

Women's fertility starts to decline after 27.

One starting place is to stop treating young women, 15-19 like they are children. They are not children at that age, they are young adult women and should be regarded as such for their own benefit.

6 posted on 09/16/2005 5:28:29 PM PDT by Lester Moore (islam's allah is Satan and is NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

Holy Cow! This smacks of Commie China. Hard core government domination. Absolutism. Unbelievable.


7 posted on 09/16/2005 5:31:35 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

Technically speaking, you're ready for childbirth when your body changes to enable it to happen. It's civilization that's put the future of our race in danger - sure, heartbreak is bad, but there's so much more at risk. The later you wait, the smaller your chances of having more than one child, or any at all.


8 posted on 09/16/2005 5:33:32 PM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham
The editorial claimed employers and health planners were to blame for encouraging women to delay motherhood to focus on careers and financial stability

Um, no.

The blame actually lies on '60s feminists, with their glorification of careers and their denigration of stay-at-home moms.

Radical '60s feminism was adopted as gospel by the mainstream media, and promoted in countless TV programs that glamorized women lawyers, judges, doctors, police, etc. ad nauseum.

By now several generations of little girls have swallowed that television pap. They've modeled themselves after all those actresses who look so glamorous playing those tough, career-woman roles.

Sadly, these girls often don't fully realize that the world doesn't really work that way, and that they've been duped, until they're well into their 30s.

9 posted on 09/16/2005 5:34:36 PM PDT by shhrubbery! (The 'right to choose' = The right to choose death --for somebody else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

I've read somewhere that putting off childbirth has increases the chances for women developing breast cancer.


10 posted on 09/16/2005 5:36:15 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

A friend of mine waited until her late 30's to try to have kids. She found out that she was nearly infertile, and after a lot of frustrating attempts involving a lot of medical technology, she and her husband ended up having to find an egg donor. I think the professional feminists aren't being upfront with women about what can happen as a result of waiting to have children.


11 posted on 09/16/2005 5:38:41 PM PDT by John Jorsett (scam never sleeps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

Downs syndrome is increased at 35. 1 out of 365 births have Downs


13 posted on 09/16/2005 5:45:51 PM PDT by Luigi Vasellini (60% of Saudis, 58%of Iraqis, 55%of Kuwaitis,50% of Jordanians married 1st or 2nd cousins. LOL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

"Putting off childbirth defies nature, claim doctors"

You don't want to put it off much more than nine months, or you get really grumpy.


16 posted on 09/16/2005 5:58:44 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Start the revolution - I'll bring the tea and muffins!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

More women should make a "career" raising their own children. Might have to skip the extra BMW though.


17 posted on 09/16/2005 6:06:11 PM PDT by foofoopowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

I don't want to start a flame war, please. No offense to anyone that wants kids. Really.

I am a 50 yr old male w/o children and can't figure out why someone wants kids. If I had a farm or millions of$$, of course, I would want to pass that on. But being a normal working person that looks forward to retirement at around 70, why would someone want to pass this life style on????????


18 posted on 09/16/2005 6:07:16 PM PDT by MrPiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

Let's not forget about who the age difference means the most to - the kids. I want to go golfing with my kids when they are in their 30s, 40s, and 50s - not be dead while they go golfing. I want to be young enough to enjoy grandchildren, not be just a memory told to them by their parents. Personally, I think the problem is that kids have not picked up responsibility at the same rate as their forefathers - it seems that for many, childhood doesn't end until the kids are 25, a few years out of college and perhaps picking up their first job. This then delays their entry into the world of grownups, marriage, childrearing and so on. My opinion is that the best age to have kids at is 25.


22 posted on 09/16/2005 6:14:03 PM PDT by Asfarastheeastisfromthewest...
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

This country (world) is just going nuts!


32 posted on 09/16/2005 6:28:21 PM PDT by ladyinred (It is all my fault okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

There are indeed natural laws? Who would have denied such? Oh yes, those who have alternative agendas.


34 posted on 09/16/2005 6:32:56 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

Hey, it's not a problem if American women want to put off childbirth until it's too late - we are importing plenty of young mothers from Mexico. ;)


35 posted on 09/16/2005 6:33:42 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Violence never settles anything." Genghis Khan, 1162-1227)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

I agree with this. Girls should get through college, then a family. You're going to change careers a few times anyway, and by the time you're 50 you'll be a different person altogether.


46 posted on 09/16/2005 6:45:48 PM PDT by GVnana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

It's not only fertility that's an issue, but the incidence of Downs Syndrome. Consider the following:

RELATIONSHIP OF DOWN SYNDROME INCIDENCE TO MOTHERS' AGE

Mothers Age
Incidence of Down Syndrome

Under 30 Less than 1 in 1,000
30 1 in 900
35 1 in 400
36 1 in 300
37 1 in 230
38 1 in 180
39 1 in 135
40 1 in 105
42 1 in 60
44 1 in 35
46 1 in 20
48 1 in 16
49 1 in 12
Source: Hook, E.G., Lindsjo, A. Down Syndrome in Live Births by Single Year Maternal Age.


57 posted on 09/16/2005 7:01:41 PM PDT by freedom4me (...Error alone needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.--Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham
They're all overlooking the perfect solution. Young women should get pregnant, have the children, freeze-dry them for a decade or so, and thaw them out when their careers and savings accounts will allow.

I'm really sorry I have to put this /sarcasm tag on this post.

64 posted on 09/16/2005 7:08:24 PM PDT by GretchenM (Hooked on porn and hating it? Visit http://www.theophostic.com .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Crackingham

Once again destructive feminism has to have its face rubbed in reality.


105 posted on 09/16/2005 9:32:59 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

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