Posted on 12/08/2007 3:13:57 PM PST by Jim W N
The president of Estonia goes on national TV to urge his countrymen to have more children. Russian President Vladimir Putin warns his parliament about "a serious crisis threatening Russia's survival": the nation's low birth rate. The government of Singapore is trying to reverse that country's birth dearth by sponsoring a massive taxpayer-funded matchmaking service.
In 1968, Paul Ehrlich published The Population Bomb, panicking the world with dire predictions of a population explosion. By the year 2000, he predicted, the world would be so crowded that hundreds of millions would die of starvation. Although Mr. Ehrlich's prophecies have turned out to be almost comically wrong, PBS has produced a documentary taking him seriously, and philanthropists like Ted Turner still donate millions to combat population growth.
But the problem today is not overpopulation; it's under-population. For a population to reproduce itself, the fertility rate must average 2.1 children per woman. (The .I allows for child mortality.) The fertility rate today among major developed nations is only 1.6.
The United States is rare among its peers in keeping its fertility rate at around the replacement level of 2.1, according to the Population Reference Bureau, which provided the fertility data cited here. Europe, though, is shrinking. Germany's rate is 1.3. Despite the stereo-type of large Catholic families, France has a fertility rate of 1.9 and Italy has one of the lowest in Europe, 1.3. At this rate, there will be only about half as many Italians in the next generation. There will also be fewer Russians, whose fertility rate is 1.3.
(Excerpt) Read more at abortionno.org ...
“We are the third most populous country on the globe. That freaked me out a little when I heard it. Of course we have China and India ahead of us, and I don’t see us catching up any time soon, even if we absorb the entire population of the mexican.”
We’re well on our way. 1/5th of the population of Messico now resides in this country illegally.
The fence was never built and in at the end of Hillary second POTUS term to insure another Dhimmcrat in the WH, she granted a general amnesty
Okay, I'm just fearmongering
I think its a sign of the imminent return of Jesus. There's biblical precedence for this. Twice, just before God performing a major deliverance, once upon the birth of Moses and also upon the birth of Jesus, infanticide is recorded in the Bible.
exactly. bttt.
50 million was just the number we were working with on the thread. Your figure of 44 million is actually closer to the last number I’d heard. Needless to say, only God knows the real toll of the American holocaust.
Suits me if they have NO children. That may destroy SS but it would be worth it to get rid of liberalism.
Off the abortion subject a bit, but still wrong thinking. Illegal immigration is a bona-fide problem that needs immediate correction and remedy ( that being shut the border to illegals now, deport illegal prisoners and deport all other illegals who won't submit to a citizenship screening process).
That said, population increase in a free country with a free market economy is a boom not a bust. The Liberals or those with confused economic thinking are the only ones who put a negative on people and (legal) population growth.
Imminently in God's time, in which each lifetime is the blink of an eye. But I believe you are correct. Mankind is due for his day of reckoning.
Nothing inevitable about it. Rx: Mandatory exile/repatriation for criminal cases. Voluntary Repatriation incentives for non-criminal cases.
Also, stop misleading the nation's actual citizens that we have to pay for absurd college degrees for our kids. Good, big families don't really cost that much.
Another precious gem!
I am convinced that degreed people in today’s economy are not needed to succeed under G-d’s rule. If so, then large families, while costly in the short term under working class wages, are nothing in costs compared to the benefits of long term objectives.
...and deportation for those who won't submit. Right there, you'll have a massive exodus.
Good, big families don't really cost that much.
In a free republic with a free economy, the cost of families is no one's business (or problem) but the family themselves.
A little off the abortion subject, but important nonetheless. Good post.
My comment was aimed at the first paragraph of the article.
We hear a lot and often from Euros and others that if only they could out birthrate the muslims among them then things would be ok. The muslim isn’t worried about or planning to ever need to achieve a voting majority to work their conquest.
The immigration problems we face are the result of decades of purposeful erosion of our national sovereignty. We need to start there and fix that first.
We are a sovereign nation and no one has any right to be here without our nation’s express permission. Anyone here under other circumstances is an invader.
And, abortionists are just another reiteration of the same evil baby sacrificing cults that humanity has always been plagued with. Just in case I wasn’t clear in my meaning on that last bit.
Now look at what we have done. In formerly Christian nations, abortion is legal except some countries in South America, but first I think it was some European countries. We have not only legalized and practiced it ourselves; we have exported it to other nations, that and birth control (invented here primarily), some might not see the latter as a bad thing. I'm not sure where I am with it, but I'm not real keen on going into other nations with a medical team and sterilizing women (this was done in Egypt by a team from my town maybe 25 years ago). I have no way of knowing the truth of this, but a friend told me back in the 70's that we had dumped defective IUD's on third-world nations, I think she mentioned Mexico?
Now look at which large religion, for all its faults, eschews abortion and to which countries they have immigrated. Here some, Europe a lot more.
Couple that with blatant homosexual decadence in parades, etc. Please don't interpret that to mean I dislike and despise all homosexuals because I don't. I don't like the lewd behavior in public, just as I object to heterosexual lewdness in public.
I'm beginning to wonder . . .is God trying to tell us something? I see some of the things that are happening in our society as judgement. Others may not see it that way. Still we had the scourge of two world wars which caused much loss here before any of that was legal or commonplace, but we didn't have so much violence in our society as a whole, just pockets of it with the mobs and in the south.
Rev 9:21: Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
I don't have anyone to discuss this with. What would sorceries encompass in our times besides new age theology, voodoo, that sort of thing?
I’m no theologian, but, then again, few theologians ever won G-d’s approval.
That said, we’re in deep doo-doo. If you take things literally, America has legally given rights to 40-50 million sacrifices to Molech. How long does a righteous G-d forgive?
Good, big families don’t really cost that much.
**
Well said.
I originally thought the demographic problem was like Atlas Shrugged. People were not having kids because it wasn’t advantageous to them. That is true to a certain extent, but it wasn’t because of what I thought it was.
Turns out it’s freaking day care. In European Countries where there is government paid childcare the birthrates are turning around. People will have the kids, but refuse to actually rear them themselves.
One meaning of sorceries is the use of hallucinogenic drugs, a liberal mainstay.
He is slow to anger. Good thing I am not he, and I always hasten to add that I am compassionate towards people in unplanned/unwanted pregnancies, just think killing the child is the wrong answer to the multiple-choice question on the final exam. If years mean anything, biblically we are coming up to 2012 as the 40-year-mark. Doesn't 40 have biblical significance, or do we have to suffer along to 70? I won't be here then (maybe if embryonic stem cells turn back my biological clock, no thanks), but my children and grandchildren may well be.
Interesting comment about college BTW. Coming from a family that has always practically deified education, I'm taking a new look at that. It is true if you aspire to be a professional something, college is essential, but at what price?
I read that Erlich book in my prime childbearing years and was influenced by it, I won't deny, but not to the point of not having yet one more child. Before I saw it bandied about here, I concluded later that it was a lot of bunk. My ex and I could have easily sacrificed some and had 10 children (good thing I didn't maybe), but food wasn't that expensive, they can share rooms, he got regular raises, we could have found a way, thrift shops, discount stores, all things I now do anyway even if I don't have to . . .I could have been a stay-at-home mom, too, we could take the bus, school was close, etc.
So many professions I would constantly be faced with temptation to moral compromise, especially but not limited to the health fields.
No, I'm no theologian by any means, and don't presume to know what everything in the bible means, good thing.
I see Oprah now has a church going now, high priestess of what? Afternoon nirvana? It was a euphemism in an AP article I'm sure, but she really does have one of sorts and quite a following, certainly an odd way to introduce an article about her backing Obama.
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.