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

To: Lurker
I am very tired of this "If you could just figure it out, your Nobel Prize would be in the mail." It is very simple to figure out.

Women who are *forced* into marriage as teenagers, who aren't allowed to finish high school or go to college, who are traded like cattle in these Islamic or tribal African countries have high birth rates. As soon as women are educated and *free* to reject marriage if they wish, or where marriage itself gets reformed so that their husbands don't treat them worse than the camels or goats, then family sizes decrease.

You can prove this to yourself by looking at the fertility and birth rates of countries in the 2001 CIA World Fact book. EVERY country that is on the road to civilizing itself has lower fertility AND birth rates than countries in which women are still brutalized and traded like animals.

This is considered an extremely politically incorrect assertion by the "right," because it goes against a particular conservative fantasy of a return to six and seven children per family. While there will always be a small percentage of people in the civilized countries who will *choose* to have large families, the general pattern seems to be that if women have the choice not to marry, or not to have large families if they do marry, that most will choose not to. In other words, to ensure a high birth rate on a population basis, you have to force women into it. This is what *conservatives* are going to have to deal with, rather than indulging in nostalgic 19th century fantasies, and I say this *as a conservative.*

37 posted on 11/10/2001 8:09:58 AM PST by ikanakattara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: ikanakattara
A correct analysis. The lifespan stuff hasn't been factored in either. For example, pople may believe (correctly or incorrectly) that having two children who expect to live to 40 is not necessarily better than having one child who expects to live to 80. The original article would make a good foot note to the book "The Republican War on Women" which I have seen in bookstores over the last few years.
45 posted on 11/10/2001 2:32:23 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: ikanakattara
Yeah, there are those of us who do take a great deal of joy in our children, as much or more as others do in really important things like a good book, movie, or a fine wine (or whine.) It beats being crabby, especially on a Saturday.
46 posted on 11/10/2001 2:35:20 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: ikanakattara
Yes, everything seems reversed from the way it should be. Poor uneducated women who can't feed their children if they don't have a man around tend to have the most, but it should be the other way, educated conservative women have a far better chance of providing for their children even if widowed or abandoned, and they should take advantage of it and have many kids.
54 posted on 11/11/2001 8:49:42 AM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

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