If You Are Contracepting, You Are Part of A Very Big Problem

Madrid Blogspot ^ | January 27, 2009 | Patrick Madrid

[NYer]

Global aging, combined with plummeting birth rates, is a catastrophically dangerous menace that only a few people seem to be waking up to. You may not be familiar with terms like “global aging” and “demographic winter,” but you will be soon.

I've been giving public lectures on the problem of global aging for the past 7 years or so, and my audiences are always shocked and dumbfounded as I explain how the West's ever expanding population of old people (due, thank God, to the ever-improving capabilities of bio-medical science), while a good thing in itself, will soon become a prime target for the forced-euthanasia crowd as the decline in birth rates among women of child-bearing age throughout the West (as well as major non-Western countries like Japan and Russia) forces an ever-shrinking number of younger, working citizens to shoulder the economic burden of paying for the retirement benefits consumed by the ever-expanding population of retired, old folks.

This is a lethal combination that will, I am certain, begin playing itself out with horrifying new consequences within the next 10, 15, 20 years. Perhaps sooner. It's hard to predict. What we do know for sure, though, is that the West has been marinating for decades now in the bloody serum of legalized abortion, and it breathes the toxic atmosphere of ubiquitous pornography, consumerism, and the contraception mentality. What would have been unthinkable to Americans a mere 50 years ago (gay marriage, a billion-dollar abortion industry, the rise of euthanasia, etc.) has become commonplace and increasingly  unremarkable in this generation.

Where are we headed?

American economist Peter G. Peterson, in his book Gray Dawn: How the Coming Age Wave Will Transform America and the World (Random House, 1999), predicts: “Global aging will become the transcendent political and economic issue of the twenty-first century. I will argue [in this book] that — like it or not, and there's every reason to believe we won't like it — renegotiating the established social contract in reponse to global aging will soon dominate and daunt the public policy agendas or all the developed countries” (p. 5).

What Peterson means by “renegotiate the established social contract” is: You retired people, as well as all you who expect to retire in the next decade or two, don't expect that you'll be taken care of by the rest of us the way you now are or expect to be taken care of. Safety nets like Social Security and Medicare may have to be drastically downsized or even, if things get economically bad enough, eliminated. In other words, we may not be able to continue paying for the burdensome expenses old people impose on an ever-shrinking younger workforce (Thanks, contracepting couples! Thanks, abortion industry!). And what happens then? 

I've been saying for years now what is being reported yet again in this article. What is now known as the “right to die movement” is steadily morphing into what will soon become the “oblicagtion to die movement.” 

The politics of “young versus old” is rising, slowly but surely, and we will live to see its pernicious effects. Soon enough we will begin to see how the demographic winter results in an intergenerational struggle. The younger people, who have lived their entire lives learning from the media and our culture as a whole that other people are only useful or valuable insofar as they do one or more of a few things: give sexual pleasure, provide entertainment, make money, or produce some kind of product or service.

30+ years of legalized abortion has hardened millions of younger Americans into seeing unborn children as “parasites” who should be eliminated because they are inconvenient and unwanted.  50 years of the mainstreaming of pornography (thanks, Heff!) have educated a wide swath of Americans to look at others as objects for pleasure. And the aggressive cult of scientism has successfully swayed many people to look at unpleasant realities such as aging, pain, and lonliness as intolerable conditions that must be eliminated at all costs. 

So, barring some miracle (and while I do believe in miracles, I also believe in Divine Justice), I predict that the next step in the morbid evolution of the West's enmeshment in the culture of death will entail such horrors as forced euthansia and cloning human beings for body parts. This will begin to take shape as soon as enough people who have no belief in God and no regard for the value of human life begin to realize what “demographic winter” means for them financially.

With that in mind, please consider the chilling points made in this LifeSite article:

Celebrated columnist and pro-family leader Don Feder gave a jaw-dropping presentation on the coming 'Demographic Winter' at the Rose Dinner which closes the official March for Life festivities every year. Speaking to hundreds of attendees, Feder suggested that the demographic problem of worldwide declining birthrates "could result in the greatest crisis humanity will confront in this century" as "all over the world, children are disappearing."
 
"In the Western world, birthrates are falling and populations are aging," said Feder. "The consequences for your children and grandchildren could well be catastrophic."
 
Feder noted, "In 30 years, worldwide, birth rates have fallen by more than 50%. In 1979, the average woman on this planet had 6 children. Today, the average is 2.9 children, and falling."  He explained the situation noting, "demographers tell us that with a birthrate of 1.3, everything else being equal, a nation will lose half of its population every 45 years."
 
Beyond an inability to pay for pensions, it is likely that euthanasia will be one looked-to solution to the aging crisis, he said.

"Demographic Winter is the terminal stage in the suicide of the West - the culmination of a century of evil ideas and poisonous policies,'" he said.  Among them he listed:
 
"Abortion - As I mentioned a moment ago, worldwide, we're killing 42 million people a year. It's as if an invading army killed every man woman and child in Italy - then repeated the process every year.
 
"Contraception - For the first time in history, just under half the world's population of childbearing age uses some form of birth control. Some of us remember when births weren't controlled and pregnancies weren't planned. With all the wailing about man-made Global Warming, carbon footprints and the ozone layer, wouldn't it be ironic if what did us in wasn't the SUV but the IUD? . . . (read article)

 

[NYer]

Annalex: As a nation we are better off with the American underclass fecund than with the American underclass replaced by immigrant labor.

Niuhuru: Are you sure?

Take a look at what's left of Europe. The Italians, French, British ... and others, reduced their birthrates through contraception. With a scaled down workforce, they looked to the Middle East for cheap laborers. The Muslims have settled in nicely, reproducing like rabbits. Do the math ... how long before they outnumber the natives?

Which brings us to the next phase of Europe. The following is a description (slightly modified) from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat. www.frontline.org.za/books_videos/sti.htm

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness.

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs [Europe, Australia, USA and Japan]. Six percent of US prison inmates are Muslim. Like any other minority, they won’t integrate, but work to build their own separate community.

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. South Africa's Muslim population is 2%, but they control 35% of the businesses, a large percentage of the banks and have five Cabinet seats while Christians (77% of the population) have none.

They will push for the introduction of halaal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves (along with threats for failure to comply).

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia; Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world, but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. (Ei: car-burnings in France last October.) Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats.

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning (India, Mindanao, Philippines).

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare [Indonesia].

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya (infidel tax). (Sudan, Kosovo, Lebanon and Egypt).

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide [Western Papua (New Guinea), Iran, Biafra, Turkey and North Nigeria].

100% will usher in the peace of "Dar-es-Salaam" - House of Peace - as in Saudi Arabia, Libya and Yemen.

[allmendream]

http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

Is the U.S.A. not “the West”?

Log on and watch the U.S. population, as well as the world population, CLIMB.

[annalex]

This “can’t afford children” is often an illusion, especially since you mention the tax rate that improves with more dependents. I am in California too and I see 6-8-kid families filling entire pews in church. They are single provider families that often struggle to pay bills, but they are not on welfare. It is a choice: you drive an older car, the kids learn to go without expensive clothes, take care of the little siblings, and share rooms, and are better off for it.

[Patrick Madrid]

“So, what ‘cost cutting’ measure will save taxpayer dollars when I’m 85?”

Simply put: Forced Euthanasia. That’s what will very likely come to the fore as a result of this global aging problem.

When you’re 85, and most likely long before then, you’ll simply be too much of a financial burden on those paying for your food, medicine, etc., and you’ll have to check out. That’s about as basic a “cost cutting measure” as you can get.

[Secret Agent Man]

I was just making the point that the article statement tends to imply that today all we have are planned and wanted pregnancies. ;)

[Jack of all Trades]

We haven’t paid into anything. It’s an unsustainable, income tax based welfare program. Current tax revenue goes to pay current retirees. The rest get blown by the government and replaced by promises to tax future generations.

Being almost 45, I’ll never see a dime of it. Welcome to my boat - save or work until you die.

The money to pay projected retirees won’t come from trimming the budget here and there. The amounts are in the tens of Trillions of dollars, although in today’s economy that magnitude doesn’t seem to mean much anymore.

[annalex]

We are lucky we have predominantly Christian Latino immigration, and not Muslim like in Europe, but as a nation we are best maintaining our own ethnic stock, just like for Mexico it is best to maintain Hispanic ethnic stock. It is not a matter of chauvinism or racism, — I am myself an immigrant in the US, — it is simply that nations have a collective talent that is reduced when nationalities mix indiscriminately. Some mixing is fine (just look at my children), mixing to the point of erasing the ethnic characteristic is not good.

But the point of the article is not even about that; having a healthy ratio of worker to elderly is a matter of economic survival. It is best to have indigenous population procreate in robust numbers, but failing that, immigration has to fill the need, at the cost of the loss of national identity.

[Tax-chick]

Everyone I know who “can’t afford more children” has a more expensive house than my family’s. It’s simply a matter of prioritizing.

[bassmaner]

Children are a gift from God, not a financial burden. There are natural means of preventing birth. The rest is up to God.

Unfortunately, that's no longer the case in today's nanny-state society.

When parents lose their rights to raise their children as they see fit (ie. to discipline them without fear of being accused of 'abuse' by overbearing government agencies with police powers), then they are merely the means by which government creates future taxpayers. When you couple that with 'deadbeat dad' child-support laws that are predicated on assumption that all non-custodial fathers are potential criminals, then it's not hard to imagine why more and more people are choosing to remain childless.

[annalex]

Yeah, exactly. And 1.2 kids in it, with $200 sneakers.

[Tax-chick]

If you were 85 now, you could come live with us, as long as you like reptiles and bluegrass music. Unfortunately (for such a scenario), we’re almost as old as you are.

I expect to work until I die, unless Tom becomes a TV star, Elen marries rich, or Pat invents cold fusion and ftl travel.

[Mad Dawgg]

"Definition of "underclass:" Anyone less educated, less cultured, less affluent than I."

Definition of the Rich. Anyone who has more money than me.

(Its why the Democrats can always get away with raising Taxes on the Rich, because most folks think they are not rich.)

[Niuhuru]

You actually have a good point there. To be frank, if not for the terrorist scum and the others, it would actually provide a breather for dear old Mother Earth if our population went down for a while.

But unfortunately the Mud-slimes are busy reproducing like crazy and not bothering to educate them except for their demented religion.

The world will fall apart, but not because of pollution, but because there won’t be enough smart, non self destructive people to maintain everything that we have now.

[Tax-chick]

And a pool ;-). But seriesly, paying half what most people of similar income spend on the house leaves us plenty for nine children, pets, a car, a truck, a van, music, wine, charity, education, etc., etc.

I realize that many people live in places with horrific housing costs, compared to ours, but many others don’t.

[The Great RJ]

However having the human race die off solves a host of “problems”. No humans no global warming, no Social Security problem and no one to tear down Lord Obama’s effigies.

[nickcarraway]

First of all, that’s not true. Second, why would you come to a conservative web site, if you believe all the leftwing garbage you hear?

[Tax-chick]

Strangler Figs or kudzu would get the effigies, eventually.

[murron]

Many times when people say they can’t afford to bring more children in the world, what they actually mean is that they can’t afford a 2nd new car, or trips to Disneyworld. When you have a lot of kids, there are sacrifices to be made, but children are a gift, not a commodity. Right now, the Muslims, who do not contracept, are outnumbering non-Muslims in Europe. Soon, this will be the case in the U.S.

[MahatmaGandu]

Read the book “Caliphate” - it’s a pretty scary (and demographically accurate) story of what’s in the cards for the near future of Europe.

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

FREERIDER PING!!!!!