Current birth rates could produce Muslim domination

OneNews ^ | February 2, 2007 | Chad Groening

[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."

[rzeznikj at stout]

Agreed--and I'd even go one step further.

Buy space in campus newspapers/advertising...8^)

[SamuraiScot]

I doubt my family ever knew my contraceptive methods, my friends certainly didn't take a vote on them, and the method I used long-term was well established before I ever met my husband.

You've established that you've gone to some lengths to keep a tight rein on your fertility, shielding it from others' influence, even within marriage. The question would be why. (Since this is a public forum, the answer would be your business, not mine!)

Best regards, SS

[linda_22003]

The question might be why, but the answer is definitely that we all have the right (and ability, in this day and age) to make our own decisions about something as big as childbearing. I also married at a comparatively late age (31), and I would guess that most of the people you counsel are younger.

I certainly didn't make decisions about my fertility without any input from my husband; the method I was using was one that could easily be discontinued at any time, and he and I were agreed from the beginning about our "reproductive outlook". I think having a disagreement on such a large issue is not a good indicator, going into marriage.

[MinorityRepublican]

Notice that French colonies such as Algeria and Tunisia have fertility rates LOWER than France.

Now that's strange. Are the Muslims there secular?

[dangus]

>> Now that's strange. Are the Muslims there secular? <<

Algeria and Tunisia are two of the more progressive Islamic societies, but Muslim birth rates are exceptionally low in many countries recently.

Reproductive rates of various Islamic nations (Cherry-picked):
Albania, 2.03*
Algeria, 1.86 (9th largest Muslim nation)*
Azerbaijan, 2.05*
Bangladesh, 3.09 (3rd largest)
Egypt, 2.77 (4th largest)
Indonesia, 2.37 (largest Muslim nation)
Iran, 1.71 (6th largest)*
Kazakstan (only half Muslim), 1.88*
Morocco, 2.62 (10th largest)*
Tunisia, 1.73*
Syria, 1.60*
Turkey, 1.89 (5th largest)*

* birth rate insufficient to maintain population.

The Muslim population of China is also well-below replacement levels.