Posted on 03/29/2011 11:30:11 AM PDT by wagglebee
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Well, it’s mathematically correct. I just don’t think it’s a great argument against abortion; nor does it address the real problem of Social Security.
Birth control pill inventor laments demographic ‘catastrophe’
Vienna, Austria, Jan 11, 2009 / 02:10 am
The chemist who made a key discovery leading to the invention of the birth control pill has written a commentary calling demographic decline in Europe a “horror scenario” and a “catastrophe” brought on in part by the pill’s invention.
Mr. Carl Djerassi, now 85 years old, was one of three researchers whose formulation of the synthetic progestagen Norethisterone marked a key step in the creation of the first oral contraceptive pill, the Guardian reports.
In a personal commentary in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard, Djerassi said his invention is partly to blame for demographic imbalance in Europe. On the continent, he argued, there is now “no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction.”
“This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete,” he wrote.
Djerassi described families who had decided against reproduction as “wanting to enjoy their schnitzels while leaving the rest of the world to get on with it.”
The fall in the birth rate, he claimed, was an “epidemic” far worse but less highlighted than obesity. In his view, young Austrians who fail to procreate are committing national suicide.
If it is not possible to reverse the demographic decline, an “intelligent immigration policy” will be necessary, Djerassi said.
According to the Guardian, Archbishop of Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schonborn told Austrian TV that Pope Paul VI had predicted the pill would cause a dramatic fall in the birth rate.
“Somebody above suspicion like Carl Djerassi ... is saying that each family has to produce three children to maintain population levels, but we’re far away from that,” the cardinal said.
No, he isn’t. Adding more workers to the pool of people looking for jobs would have increased unemployment even more than it is today.
Logic anyone?
It is not correct. What you would have is more people competing for jobs that currently don’t exist.
One branch of the nihilist Left pushes the idea of family planning and curtailing population growth. At the same time, another branch of the nihilist Left pushes womb-to-tomb benefits for a Socialized culture.
The resulting economic stress (not enough workers to produce the goods and services needed to keep the scheme going) results in calls to open the immigration floodgates, admitting quantities of second- and third-worlders that are so large as to change the demographic and political balance of the culture.
At this point Europe is further along in this progression than we are, but we're catching up fast.
It’s just common sense, but common sense is not particularly common these days, especially with the irreligious left.
Yup. That’s how a Ponzi scheme works.
It was working very well before a succession of Presidents exported jobs to the world and called it 'fair trade'.
didn’t think of that one. you’re right!
In the Liberal mindset, human lives may be worth no more than Social Security payees or recipients (drones to serve the State), or perhaps useful idiots to be used in union demonstrations/hooliganism. Santorum might have been trying to bring the discussion down to the Liberal level, but in doing, he’s taken himself down there as well.
Unemployment is another question in this scenario.
Mr. Santorum’s conjectures are based on the idea that the missing people would be solid, hard working citizens. I wonder how many of these aborted babies would have been born to poor, sickly, marginal people, and/or disfunctional families which could have ended up as welfare cases, special education kids, medicade recipients, juvenile delinquents, among the 20% plus unemployed among certain groups of the population, and ultimately in prison. With almost 9% unemployed now, how many more would have been unemployed. Does anyone have more information on this thought?
Nothing new, only been screamed about for twenty years now. Glad the idiot had an epiphany come lately.
I agree, but it sounds good, especially for a potential candidate.
Not really. What Santorum is doing is trying to say that more people eligible for the workforce would translate into more entitlement (welfare) money. He shows his ignorance of economics and the true nature of the nanny state.
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.