Posted on 02/06/2007 6:24:53 AM PST by NYer
The Population Research Institute says the Western world is facing a crisis as virtually every country has birth rates well below the replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman.Hear This Report
A pro-family organization has done extensive research into birth rates around the world and has concluded that if the Western world wants to survive, it better start having more children. The Population Research Institute (PRI) says virtually every Western or Westernized nation on the planet is slowly dying off because birth rates have fallen below the 2.1-child-per-woman replacement level.
PRI spokesman Joseph D'Agostino says for the most part, only Muslims have high birth rates. "It's because Christians and Jews are refusing to have children, refusing to get married, [and] having such low birth rates that the Muslims are going to inherit the Earth," he explains. "It's not anything the Muslims are doing; it's what Christians and Jews are not doing."
D'Agostino says the future of the world will certainly be quite different if Muslims become the dominate population group in the coming decades. "I think we can see what life is like in Islamic countries," he says. "I think Christians know that it's a false religion. And we can see that the Muslim world is becoming actually more radical and, in many ways, is headed backwards into its barbaric phase."
D'Agostino notes that it is only through immigration that the U.S. population continues to grow -- and that the current situation begs a pragmatic solution: "If you don't want the world to turn into Saudi Arabia, maybe people other than Muslims need to start having some kids at the rate the Muslims are having kids."
Turban sprawl is the muslims plan to conquer America. They already have one member in the House of Representatives (thank you Minnesota, helluva job). What do you think when they have majority control of the democratic party?
And of course, demography undeniably becomes destiny; given current trends, it is but a matter of time until Muslims grow dominant in their numbers, and dominate much of the Earth.
But where the article fails, is to presume that the Christians of The West will ever resume producing children on a level commensurate to that at which the Muslims are reproducing.
They will not. In a free society, you cannot force people to produce more children than they wish to, nor prevent them from having none at all, if that is how they so choose. Well, you COULD "force them" to do so, but then it ain't gonna be a free society no more.
The "unspoken alternative" is that _Muslim_ birthrates must be effectively reduced to Western levels, by whatever means necessary. Or face the consequences.
By whatever means necessary.
- John
Don't be to worried about a baby gap in the USA. look who is not having them.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-03-13-babybust_x.htm
I suggest an ad campaign featuring an announcer reading off the side-effects of the Pill. That may begin to wean people from the idea that tossing human pesticide into one's wife is somehow sexy.
And perhaps another ad, featuring a picture of scores of women in burkhas, next to a picture of a big, fat baby.
Over it, a headline: "What's in your futureTHIS OR THIS? You decide."
This is thanks to politicians who want more immigration of the wrong kind. The right policy would be to give a huge tax deduction for children and to close the borders to infestation from countries that sponsor terrorism.
I'm getting married in June. My wife (to-be) and I want four children. We're doing our part.
Outlaw islam and banish the crazies forever. Problem solved.
"that tossing human pesticide into one's wife"
I didn't realize that men made the decision about how their wives contracepted. Sounds like we're getting closer to Muslim-style decisionmaking in any case! :-/
BIRTH RATES OF MAJOR, PREDOMINANTLY MUSLIM NATIONS:
Algeria 7.37 (1977) -> 1.86
Bangladesh 3.85 (1991)-> 3.09
Egypt 6.05 (1977) -> 2.77
Indonesia 5.76 (1966), 4.68 (1979) -> 2.37
Iran 6.2 (1986) -> 1.72
Libya 7.96 (1973) -> 3.21
Morocco 5.90 (1980) -> 2.62
Pakistan 6.92 (1987) -> 3.86
Saudi Arabia 7.59 (1974) -> 3.94
Syria 7.77 (1981) -> 3.31
Tunisia 4.51 (1984) -> 1.73
Turkey 4.87 (1978) -> 1.89
A lot of people presume France's birth rate is rebounding because of the Muslims in France. This is not true. Notice that French colonies such as Algeria and Tunisia have fertility rates LOWER than France.
These nations will have (or, have had) their birth rate drop below replacement levels (2.10) in the following years:
Algeria, 2003
Bangladesh, unknown
Egypt, unknown (c. 2040?)
Indonesia, 2017
Iran, 1998
Libya, unknown (c. 2040?)
Morocco, 2020
Pakistan, unknown (c. 2040?)
Saudi Arabia, unknown (c. 2050?)
Syria, 2030
Tunisia, 1998
Turkey, 2001
(The following are nations with large Muslim populations that were excluded because they were not predominantly Muslim: China, India, Nigeria, Sudan. Iraq and Afghanistan were excluded because of ongoing warfare.)
That's how the theory goes...
Let's say I have 10 kids and you have one. My offspring outnumbers yours 10 : 1. Big difference.
However, lets say each of my kids has only 2 offspring and each of their kids has two offspring and each of their kids has two offspring. After 4 generations (and assuming the last generation is the only surviving generation) I will have 80 descendants. On the other hand, if your one child has 4 kids and each of those kids has 4 kids etc etc, then after 4 generations you will have 64 offspring.
That's a situation of near equality starting from a 10:1 differential. And one more generation will see your descendants in the majority if those rates are maintained.
A facile example, I know but it gets the point across. Given the trouble Muslims cause when they constitute less than 10% of the population, I would say that they would have critical mass well before they reach an absolute majority.
What proof is there that the Muslim birthrate in Europe is exponential? I haven't seen any firm fertility rates for European Muslims- are they having 3 children a piece or 10? What is the birthrate for first versus second generation Muslim women in Europe?
Yes, and this has all happened before - in Rome, Greee, and other civilizations that considered themselves advanced.
"Those who do not learn from history, are forced to repeat it". ... Santayana
Thank you for your beautiful post! Most people today feel 'obligated' to limit the size of their families, to comply with societal norms. They neglect to consider the long term impact of such decisions, on their children.
Congratulations!
My wife (to-be) and I want four children. We're doing our part.
How about .... "My wife and I plan to have, love and cherish the number of children God sends to us".
And, if you truly care about your wife (to be), you should discuss Natural Family Planning over the use of artificial contraceptives. (see some of the posts above about the effects of hormones on a woman's body).
May your new life together as husband and wife, be blessed with joy, and happiness.
Sheep are no match for wolves even when they outnumber the wolves.
We have to get rid of political correctness and multi culturalism, and deal with the real world. Show Islam for what it really is, as written in the Koran and Hadiths. - tom
Natural Family Planning is NOT a form of contraception. It does not actively thwart conception.
It is a form of birth control, as it requires control and allows for birth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.