March 10, 2013

Daily Beast writers Harry Siegel and Allison Yarrow get the vapors over the possibility that conservative religion...

... might be the only viable solution to America's low birth rate problem. They get the vapors, they might be vapid, and Harry vapes.



Listen to the desperation as they sidetrack into the topic of whether the children of conservative religionists will veer into decently acceptable liberalism (and become... tattoo artists!). They never return to the issue of whether religion is needed to keep the population going into the future. If the offspring don't maintain the conservative values that caused their parents to have children, how do you get the next generation?

113 comments:

Matthew Sablan said...

How do you get the next generation?

Beakers and immigrants.

FedkaTheConvict said...

Pipettes and turkey basters.

Ann Althouse said...

In the movie, Allison Yarrow can be played by Zosia Mamet.

Big Mike said...

Listen to the desperation as the sidetrack into the topic of whether the children of conservative religionists will veer into decently acceptable liberalism...

I can't bring myself to listen, not even for 242 seconds. But I can answer the question pretty easily. Since Ann Coulter is perfectly correct -- modern liberalism is a form of religion in its own right, complete to mythology and dogma -- not many will change their religion.

EDH said...

Somebody needs to knock some sense into that guy.

Chuck Currie said...

It's all about income...not religion

http://youtu.be/ezVk1ahRF78

Cheers

Shouting Thomas said...

Unless we can l live up to liberal idealism, the human race should just commit suicide.

wyo sis said...

From the bottom of a long glass tube.

Shouting Thomas said...

The effectiveness of PC indoctrination in the educational system is awesome.

Every single graduate is a member in good standing of the herd of critical thinkers.

Were we this stupid when we were kids?

chickelit said...

Freud scathes their disconsolate joy.

AJ Lynch said...

Why is her head so misshapen? Does the test tube method do that to you?

chickelit said...

The woman seems more earnestly engaged in defining the problem. The man is lost in his clouded haze. Never before has a problem's solution suggested itself more clearly.

Joe Schmoe said...

too stupid; didn't listen

edutcher said...

Hysterical.

The Lefties are confronted with the unintended consequences of all their anti-family policies and how it will impact the Welfare State and the only solution is - families who are (gasp!!!!) religious.

The guy's, "Hummunna, hummunna, hummunna...", response is priceless.

gbarto said...

In a lot of sci-fi dystopias, the children are born in test tubes and raised by the government. When I read Brave New World though, I hadn't realized that the real reason why the state was in charge of all this is that people would stop reproducung in a socialust utopia. I now suspect that whatever Huxley may have thought when he introduced this element he actually had an intuition that the children of alphas would get into the right daycare, then preschool, then prep school, then university, the betas would go to public schools in good neighborhoods, then state universities and so on. And once the game was completely rigged by the meritocratic "elite" humanity would realize that trying ti have and raise their own kids wasn't worth the bother.

Renee said...

You only need on religious nut in the family to compensate for everyone.

That's me.

I say that with loving humor.

---------




Renee said...

Also I've been guilty of talking about this issue in a manner, that makes it sound like we should only have children for the sake of the economy.

Children aren't economical, they're a part of nature. The outcomes though of at least not being more accepting of larger families (for those who want them) though do have economic repercussions.

To only 'produce' one productive citizen takes immense time and energy. The reason why Massachusetts has for example really good educational outcomes, is partly because of smaller families, so two parents can afford the costs of college for one child. How can two professional parents even help out for three or four children when it comes to college???

William said...

The subtext of that conversation, no matter what they're saying, is that the woman wants to get married and the guy wants to get laid. Other subtext: isn't it a shame that people as enlightened as us don't want to have ten children.

Quayle said...

I though the younger generations were supposed to challenge and criticize the prevailing pillars of society.

These two have swallowed them whole: hook, line, sinker, more line, tip top, line guide, - heck, the entire fishing pole and half the fisherman's arm.

(Or should I say fisherwoman's arm?)

bpm4532 said...

Darwin shrugged.

Shouting Thomas said...

You want to send more kids to college to incur preposterous debt in order to receive this indoctrination?

Shouting Thomas said...

I wonder what the reaction of these kids will be when they read these comments (as they will)?

elkh1 said...

Liberals' solution: cloning. Their next generations will be more devious.

Michael said...

We need, desperately, to bring back shame. You only have one kid, John? Can't get it up, eh? Firing blanks.

I keep thinking of that thread of a week or so ago that was based on the picture of college kids in the 60s and there were no fat people in the pics. None. I have since been looking at other pictures from the period and am finding it hard to find fatties in the pictures: crowd scenes, street scenes, family snap shots. A dearth of fatties. Fattie fattie two by four.... Shame works.

Michael said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shouting Thomas said...

Of course, what is really going on here is a religious movement.

Sexual reproduction = Original Sin

The sins of humans are going to be expunged, and the great Utopia will be brought to fruition by asexual reproduction.

This is why the homos are supposed to be morally superior to heteros in liberal dogma.

elkh1 said...

Shouting Thomas said...
"You want to send more kids to college to incur preposterous debt in order to receive this indoctrination?"

Don't worry, liberals will make education from pre-school to post-doc free. The evil capitalists will be taxed to death to provide the freebies.

Christopher said...

Meh, it has been known for quite a long time that there is not a single irreligious group out there that has shown an ability sustain/grow their own society.

That those who consider themselves educated are only now noticing this indicates just how slow our schools leave their graduates.

Over the long term I'm not worried about it as the ideals that cause a loss of interest in having families will die off and those that promote it will grow. It is, however, going to suck in the short term.


And on a side note I would like to state my belief that a species that is dependent upon technology to even conceive the numbers necessary to maintain their existence is already extinct (it's just a matter of waiting).

chuck said...

Ha, Ha, I raised that very topic back in the early 70's but didn't manage to garner any interest. There is no reward for being 40 years ahead of the times.

Renee said...

"We need, desperately, to bring back shame. You only have one kid, John? Can't get it up, eh? Firing blanks. "

Can you imagine someone trying to shame Mary and Joseph for only having Jesus?

Awkward.

You don't know why a couple has no children or one child.... it may have nothing to do with being selfish. All couples eventually experience natural infertility.

Renee said...

Most people with liberal ideals, believe the world in over populated.

That even if it means an economic contraction of significant means, we're better off having no children/one child generations.

As for myself and with those who children, we can do our best with lowering our carbon foot print in how we consume. We can have more people, if we 'consume' less.

wyo sis said...

Renee
Do you maintain that college is a prerequisite for being a productive citizen?

Renee said...

wyo,

In Massachusetts, yes.

Renee said...

Plus a graduate degree....

What else would parents be able to brag about?

YoungHegelian said...

Another shock to the social democratic idea of a just society is the realization that far more than economic considerations go into a woman's decision to have children.

The social democrats thought that if women got free childcare, maternity leave, etc. that the burden of child-rearing would lessen & women would naturally have more kids.

It didn't work that way. Women cannot be bribed into having kids. Well, at least not by any amount that a modern society can afford to pay.

The ugly truth is that if a woman doesn't want to have children for her own internal reasons, there's absolutely nothing that a society can do to change that fact.

Saint Croix said...

They get the vapors, they might be vapid, and Harry vapes.

Hilarious! You can almost see his little mind explode.

Oh, the faces he makes.

YoungHegelian said...

Never, ever, ask a northeastern urban ethnic (e.g. Harry Siegel) about the state of the American republic.

Because, if you do, you'll get a naval-gazing answer like he gives. That's right, Harry, the prime example of religious conservatives in the US are the Haredim, which are what, 0.8% of the population?

But, Ms Yarrow, from the South blows his musings away with one simple empirical fact: "Well the South is still clinging to it's God & guns, right?" That may have something to do with the fact that Ms Yarrow has seen a form of southern Protestantism that represents about 40% of the country up close & personal.

chickelit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chickelit said...

I just noticed how the man tries to blow erotic smoke rings at the woman towards the end but fails.

Writ Small said...

When he was going through the litany of issues religious people bring to the society, I kept waiting for him to say "intolerance of others." I assume the thought occurred and that's why he turned into Ralph Kramden.

jacksonjay said...


"Ain't nobody got time for dat!"

Darrell said...

She'd be the woman being the man with two cigarettes, but she'd probably become a human torch before she finishes.

Astro said...

"how do you get the next generation?"

Require newlyweds to watch 'Idiocracy', then quadruple the tax deduction for having kids in 2-parent households.

David said...

Maybe I'll watch this later. I'm having too nice a day to do it now.

Petunia said...

Good grief, those two are dumb.

Erika said...

I'm not going to watch those two goobers, but I will say that yesterday my family and I were at the gun counter of an army/navy store, and next in line to be helped was a family with six children, the oldest of which was maybe 8 and the youngest was on the mom's hip. Feel safe in assuming that they were in church this morning, and that their genes and values are going to prevail over the self-defeating Amanda Marcottes of the world.

Jeff with one 'f' said...

Erika wins the thread.

Darleen said...

Children are tangible proof of parents' faith & hope in a future.

Leftism/nihilism is Peggy Lee's "Is that all there is" writ as philosophy.

somefeller said...

Erika says:I'm not going to watch those two goobers, but I will say that yesterday my family and I were at the gun counter of an army/navy store, and next in line to be helped was a family with six children, the oldest of which was maybe 8 and the youngest was on the mom's hip. Feel safe in assuming that they were in church this morning, and that their genes and values are going to prevail over the self-defeating Amanda Marcottes of the world.

That's a distinct possibility. The first ten minutes or so of the movie "Idiocracy" addressed this and I'm sure you're doing your part.

On the other hand, in the words of Judge Smalls in "Caddyshack", the world needs ditch diggers too. So that's another possibility.

It's amazing how much wisdom one can find in comedy films.

AprilApple said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LarsPorsena said...

It's obvious that leftism is an evolutionary dead end for its' adherents.

Kev said...

(the other kev)

The look on Siegel's face is priceless. It's the look you get when your credit card is declined and you're wondering if you have enough cash to pay for the meal you just ate.

It's also a look we'll see a lot of in the future.

AprilApple said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AprilApple said...

How do these progressive kids define "modern"?
Modern = we need a good old fashioned leftist dictator to save us.
Yeah. Modern.

AprilApple said...

box typing on an old lap top. fuck.

The final statement is all you need to hear:
Oh the eternal frustration of the progressive leftist:
How can the progressive leftist, who knows all, inspire silly bible thumpers to relinquish their silly bible-thumping ways?
Leftism is the religion you need. Can't you see!?

It’s so frustrating that people thump bibles instead of worship at the altar of the liberal progressive leftwing statist big government sacred golden cow. The statist teat will take care of you. You don’t need a steeeenking Bible. Religion is poison.

Rick67 said...

I figured out something recently. Generally speaking leftists/statists do not have as many children. And yet they have so much control over our education system, entertainment culture, and political system.

Here is what I figured out. They are happy for *others* to reproduce and have children, and invest all the time, pain, sweat, money, effort, and so on to create and care for those children...

So long as they get to take those children and turn them into good little progressive statists. Have you ever noticed how much it bothers them that conservative and/or religious people might pass on their values to their children? And yet never seem concerned that leftist/progressive parents (who do exist) pass on their values to their children? The purpose of college is to help young people "question everything they were taught", but apparently not what they were taught by leftist/progressive parents. How does one explain the consistency of this inconsistency?

"You do all the work. We reap the benefits. You plough and plant. We get the harvest."

AprilApple said...

Are democrats who attend Church on Sunday - Bible thumpers too?


rcocean said...

Lot of code words and wink,wink, nod, nods. going on in that conversation. Notice for example the use of the phrase "ultra-religious" vs. the usual left-wing "Religious Right". You can also see a a lot hesitant self-censoring by Harry.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

Evolutionary fitness is the principal imperative which directs description of criteria for classifying behaviors for normalization, tolerance, and rejection.

Since we also recognize individual dignity, and that individuals may contribute indirectly to the fitness of a society through means other than procreation, we compromise and tolerate unproductive behaviors.

We reject behaviors which are strictly dysfunctional, typically those which violate individual dignity or prematurely and capriciously abort a human life, and tolerate others when they do not require involuntary or fraudulent exploitation.

We also reject behaviors which are otherwise tolerated when they achieve some critical mass in a society and exhibit an uncontrolled progression to dysfunctional convergence.

It's a tragic irony that people who place their faith in evolution as a description of origin, reject evolutionary principles as inconvenient and are therefore justified to selectively adhere to its principles.

It is possible to reconcile the natural order, human morality, and dreams of material, physical, and ego gratification; but, it will not be done through normalization of dysfunctional behaviors, especially through those which denigrate individual dignity and devalue human life.

On the other hand, the principles of evolution do not necessarily apply to a species as a whole, but to select minorities. Who will control the population through abortion and indoctrination to increase their fitness. Who will replace inferior or obstinate members with legal and illegal aliens.

It is perplexing when certain people do not respect individual dignity or refer to human men and women as breeders. As if they are lower forms of life, mere animals to be exploited in service of their interests. As if pursing an enlightened state and perpetuating humanity is not the goal. Only dreams of material, physical, and ego instant (or immediate) gratification is worthy of their ambitions.

Religion may not be strictly required for optimal conformance with evolutionary principles; but, certain individuals demonstrate a superior appreciation of evolutionary fitness and human morality. Their faith engenders principles which promotes individual and general Welfare, for themselves and their Posterity.

n.n said...

elkh1:

Their solution is indoctrination. Unfortunately, a mother and father have first rights, and external indoctrination efforts often fail. This is where emotional extortion comes into play. We are especially susceptible to this form of exploitation when we are young, have limited awareness and limited self-control.

Erika said...

Somefeller, so is everyone with a large family stupid and lives in a trailer park?

n.n said...

Christopher:

The prime directive given in Genesis is to be fruitful and multiply. It may just be a coincidence, but the principles described in this text are progenitors to modern evolutionary theory (less the article of faith which describes our simian heritage).

Saint Croix said...

The ugly truth is that if a woman doesn't want to have children for her own internal reasons, there's absolutely nothing that a society can do to change that fact.

But who doesn't have an urge to have sex? I think our sex urge is a reproductive urge. Reproduction is why we have sex urges! Our bodies want us to reproduce and pass genes to offspring.

Why are virgins aware of the opposite sex? Why are they interested? They haven't had sex, and they're interested in sex. Why?

Biology. Our urge to breed is locked in. Sex underlies much of what we do and say. But sex is far more than stimulation. Sex is primal and basic.

Sex is baby.

Saint Croix said...

We've mandated birth control education. And we've taught kids that the world is overpopulated. We've done this for so long that many young adults are now terrified of having kids.

We need to reorient kids to the idea that having a baby is normal and good. In fact, having a baby is why sex is what it is.

As part of sex education, kids should be taken on field trips to maternity wards to see babies and preemies.

People are always going to have sex. We don't have to worry about that! But what we can work on is re-establishing the link between sex and reproduction in people's minds.

ken in sc said...

One of my wife's sisters is a Unitarian/Universalist. They are almost uniformly progressive. Sometimes she goes to church with us and we return the favor with her. We attend Methodist and Presbyterian churches, depending on where we are. It is noticeable that the Unitarian/Universalist church has almost no children. Not true for Methodists and Presbyterians.

chickelit said...

"Be fruitless and divide"

Genecyst 1:28

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

On the other hand, in the words of Judge Smalls in "Caddyshack", the world needs ditch diggers too. So that's another possibility.

It's amazing how much wisdom one can find in comedy films.


If one's criterion for wisdom is that low.

somefeller said...

Erika asks:Somefeller, so is everyone with a large family stupid and lives in a trailer park?

Obviously not. Like everything else in life, it depends on the individual case. But if the shoe fits...

And this is your latest installment of simple answers to simple questions.

Inga said...

St. Croix, so are elderly or post menopausal women who have sexual desire a fluke? Beyond childbearing years should couples no longer engage in sexual activity? Would it be weird? What about elderly men, is it OK because they could still father children?

traditionalguy said...

This discussion posits a need to create a next generation. As nervous as that makes the orthodox liberal environmentalist, he does admit that there is a question.

To understand real enemy of Judeo-Christian faith procreation affirming culture we have to contrast them with the increasing numbers of Malthsians who are pushing to eliminate surplus people.

In the late 1800s the rational Philosophers merged Malthus' arithmetic about human food supply with Darwin's new doctrine that all life progresses by a continuous contest among existing life forms to kill the others and steal their stuff first in order to survive.

Of course that gives us the basic Nazi teaching which only had to add a "Master Race" concept into it based upon mythical Caucasians who who still had pure inbred Psychic Powers.

You can take PETA, and Greenpeace and the UN Species Protection racquet and all you get is another murderous Nazi cult.

Not that there is anything wrong with that since it culls the population by first killing the Jews and then killing the Christians. Problem solved.

traditionalguy said...

This discussion posits a need to create a next generation. As nervous as that makes the orthodox liberal environmentalist, he does admit that there is a question.

To understand real enemy of Judeo-Christian faith procreation affirming culture we have to contrast them with the increasing numbers of Malthsians who are pushing to eliminate surplus people.

In the late 1800s the rational Philosophers merged Malthus' arithmetic about human food supply with Darwin's new doctrine that all life progresses by a continuous contest among existing life forms to kill the others and steal their stuff first in order to survive.

Of course that gives us the basic Nazi teaching which only had to add a "Master Race" concept into it based upon mythical Caucasians who who still had pure inbred Psychic Powers.

You can take PETA, and Greenpeace and the UN Species Protection racquet and all you get is another murderous Nazi cult.

Not that there is anything wrong with that since it culls the population by first killing the Jews and then killing the Christians. Problem solved.

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

Somefeller, so is everyone with a large family stupid and lives in a trailer park?

Obviously not. Like everything else in life, it depends on the individual case. But if the shoe fits...

And this is your latest installment of simple answers to simple questions.


some phony folksy, in his usual unthinking arrogance, lets the cat out of the bag by telling us the Lefties really don't care about people, as such, but they do need thralls to justify their existence.

Actually, many large families have at least 2, and sometimes more, degrees between them. Some phony folksy takes a look around Mom's basement and figures everybody smart is just like him.

Which, of course, is wrong on at least a couple of counts.

chrisnavin.com said...

It's interesting to witness Siegel discussing the State Of The Nation from inside The Daily Beast, sucking on an electronic cigarette.

He's a modern guy.

Erika said...

Somefeller, I mentioned my encounter with a large family that appeared to align with clinger-y cultural values, and you immediately compared that with Idiocracy, suggesting that those people--whom you have never met and know nothing about--are stupid, uncultured, etc. You also implied the same about me. I am asking on what evidence you are basing your claims. You have provided none.

somefeller said...

I am asking on what evidence you are basing your claims. You have provided none.

From what I've seen, your comments provide all the evidence necessary. But please, continue.

edutcher said...

Erika, a lot of people with big families are as college-educated as the DINKs.

One of my product managers when i was in insurance had 11 kids.

The Blonde's best bud's second daughter (she's a nurse, he's a minister) has 4, working on #5, and wants 8. One of her nieces (hubbo is also a nurse and an accredited chef) has 3 and will have #4 when she finishes her 2nd nursing degree.

As the shrinking proportion of black people in this country tends to suggest, a good many of the poor are aborting their kids; the welfare queen of the 50s and 60s with 15 kids and a different father for each one is a thing of the past.

edutcher said...

somefeller said...

I am asking on what evidence you are basing your claims. You have provided none.

From what I've seen, your comments provide all the evidence necessary. But please, continue.


IOW, I have none, but I'm going to try to bluff my way through with my usual insouciant snark.

Inga said...

"... the welfare queen of the 50s and 60s with 15 kids and a different father for each one is a thing of the past."

3/10/13, 5:03 PM

Is that a good thing, or a bad thing?

Erika said...

Oh, Ed, don't worry, I know full well that somefeller is full of shit. It's just that I prefer to ask people to explain their thought process when they are saying things I believe to be untrue.

Somefeller, I'm not seeing anything in your comments other than "People I don't like are stupid! And you're stupid too!" Can you explain your thinking in better depth so that I can give it proper consideration?

somefeller said...

Somefeller, I'm not seeing anything in your comments other than "People I don't like are stupid! And you're stupid too!"

Of course you don't see anything else. That is to be expected.

Can you explain your thinking in better depth so that I can give it proper consideration?

Observation, analysis and then judgment. It's a fairly straightforward process.

Erika said...

Observation of what?

somefeller said...

Observation of what?

Your comments, obviously. Or at least the ones I've seen and noticed. But perhaps those comments reflect a sort of performance art. In which case, bravo! Your persona is very convincing.

The Godfather said...

When I was growing up in the '50's and '60's, all enlightened thinkers worried that the lower orders of human kind would outbreed the higher orders, and overwhelm us. If you think that the push for legalized abortion was ONLY about sexual liberation, you weren't around then, or weren't paying attention -- it was also about reducing the numbers of the "lesser breeds without the law".

Now, China is beginning to see the consequences of its one-child-per-family policies, in the excess of males over females (more females having been aborted), and in the aging of the population (fewer young workers relative to the older generation that needs to be supported). The crisis of Social Security in the US also reflects the fact that we current retirees didn't produce enough off-spring to support us.

If liberals don't want the religious folks to take over the country, you better get going and propagate!

edutcher said...

Erika, he hasn't got anything.

You called him on it and he can't even give you a progression of thought to justify his remarks. All he can say is, "Because I want to think it's that way".

You win, kid.

Inga said...

... the welfare queen of the 50s and 60s with 15 kids and a different father for each one is a thing of the past.

Is that a good thing, or a bad thing?


From which side of the aisle?

dbp said...

The Shakers were a small Christian sect which did not believe in "being fruitful". All that remains is a style of furniture. For all I know, they all got into heaven--which would mean that their beliefs were right. But right or not, they were not enduring.

Progressivism is much the same, but in different degrees. They do reproduce, if at low rates. There are lots more progressives than there ever were of Shakers. They will die-out, it will take longer and they will leave behind some cultural relics.

The future belongs to those who show up.

somefeller said...

Erika, I see you have edutcher on your side. In most cultures, that is not a good sign. But you can always choose your friends.

On the other hand, maybe he can tell you his theories about how Obama didn't really win the election and Andy Warhol was a failed weatherman in Indiana. He's quite the storyteller.

edutcher said...

And maybe some phony folksy can actually come up with something to back up his mouth.

I usually do.

Birches said...

I went to Church today. The children outnumbered the adults. And (just a guess -- never actually asked -- but judging by professions) the amount of men and women without at least a Bachelor's degree is probably under 30%.

The Sanity Inspector said...

So now we see the end result of all the Left's social engineering. People whose attitude is "The future? Just keep the checks coming til I'm dead, and the future can go hang!" Can't really imagine this present lot planting oak trees, under whose shade they will never sit.

wyo sis said...

They are right to be worried. In the long run.

Conservatives are right to be worried. In the short run.

When it all falls apart posterity will decide, and those who have posterity will perpetuate their values. The anarchist tattoo artists might depend on the kindness of conservatives.

Saint Croix said...

St. Croix, so are elderly or post menopausal women who have sexual desire a fluke?

Biologically speaking, I guess you could call it a fluke. Chemistry changes, ardor cools. I don't think old people are as horny as young people.

Beyond childbearing years should couples no longer engage in sexual activity?

Why would you stop?

Would it be weird?

Biologically speaking, it would be irrelevant. It's like mastubration. Fun, but it doesn't have anything to do with making a baby.

What about elderly men, is it OK because they could still father children?

I think women find older men attractive because they can have babies, and also because they can financially support those babies.

Women have a tremendous amount of sex power when they are young, and they lose it when they are older.

Diana Rigg talks about how annoyed she was with all the attention she got from men. And then one day the attention went away. All of a sudden she felt invisible.

Reproduction is a very basic part of sex and we ignore it at our peril.

SH said...

Shouting Thomas said...

"Were we this stupid when we were kids?"

Nope

tim maguire said...

They've already separated sex from pregnancy, now all that's needed is to separate parents from pregnancy and child rearing.

Every April 15, we hand over our taxes and a pre-assessed amount of sperm or number of eggs; the state will handle the rest.

tim maguire said...

The only thing left, then will be to figure out a way to enable women to give sperm or men to give eggs, should they so desire, in the name of equality.

paul a'barge said...

In the movie, Allison Yarrow can be played by Zosia Mamet

Bad knock on Zosia. Her father is a pretty cool guy.

Why insult her?

newton said...

"The future belongs to those who show up."

This + 1 million.

As a conservative woman and mother of two, who knows plenty of other conservatives who have about two or more children (from three to seven) who are also religious, I sure am enjoying every single minute of the cries of desperation coming from those two.

Dave said...

Harry has a point there. Ultra-religious communities (e.g. Muslims in Europe, Orthodox in Israel, FLDS in Arizona) can only maintain their high birthrates with the generous support of a welfare state to which they contribute very little. Not having to work frees up a lot of energy for religious study, prayer, and baby-making. It also reduces the need to interact with non-believers.

Then again, whose idea was the welfare state?

Tad said...

These conversations always bring to mind Logan's Run

Dark Eden said...

"Ultra-religious communities" have "maintained their high birthrates" without "generous support of a welfare state" for thousands of years.

What the hell are you talking about?

Dark Eden said...

"Ultra-religious communities" have "maintained their high birthrates" without "generous support of a welfare state" for thousands of years.

What the hell are you talking about?

justamom said...

Does anyone reading this have more than 2.5 kids?? I have 9 and I know many families with 6+ kids in my neck of the woods. (Note: we are all of a certain religious persuasion, but NOT one mentioned in the video)

NONE of these families, including my own, has ever been on welfare and most of the mothers are SAHMs. I have no idea where that notion comes from.

Religious belief encourages procreation for many reasons. One that is hardly ever mentioned is that it is just basically looked at as GOOD, for individuals and society! Do you know anyone - even liberal/progressive minded people- who tell you they regret having children? THINKING about having a lot of kids is scary, actually HAVING the kids, while it may be hard and require self-sacrifice and self-control, is really quite enjoyable and enriching in so many ways.

And, yes, I love telling the horrified people who ask me "Are they ALL yours?!?" that my kids and others of like minds will some day take over the world.

p kerit said...

In 1950 we had 150 million, now we have 330 million. Where is the problem?

p kerit said...

In 1950 we had 150 million, now we have 330 million. Where is the problem?

Rich Vail said...

Ann, this is why the Liberal Left is hanging on so desperately to Academia...they need to in order to indoctrinate the next generation of Liberals...after all, they are literally breeding themselves out of the picture.

SukieTawdry said...

The Mormons will save the nation. Cue the ominous music.

Eric said...

Were we this stupid when we were kids?

The problem is education is far more nationalized and homogenized than it used to be. Kids today are coming out of the system as critical thinkers that all just happen to believe the same things.

mishu said...

That guy on the left sounds like Barwy Kwipke from the Big Bang Theory

mishu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Thucydides said...

The law of unintended consequences is awesome!

What is even better is the cohort of religious youths are going to be expected to pay for the pensions and social security of the Boomer generation. As religious people, they may well decide to do so out of the goodness of their hearts and as charity, but they will be busy evangelizing as their part of the deal in return.

The alternative is they refuse to pay for welfare, social security and government pensions, which may be a more fitting end for the Boomer generation, having to atone for their sins in the end.....

John Lynch said...

I think that American religion might be the only solution to the illegitimacy problem. That's a much bigger issue.

John Lynch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.