As most of you know, I'm the father of six beautiful children. I like children. No, I love children! I've heard all of the crass jokes and seen all the bewildered looks. Little on this subject surprises me any more.
A year ago or so, I became aware of a paper done by some folks at Harvard wherein they examined the possible side-effects of a world-wide population implosion. That's right - I didn't say "population explosion".
For years, all we've heard is that the earth is rapidly approaching overpopulation. Smaller families will make for a more sustainable economy, they said. We're running out of open spaces, they said. We'll all starve for lack of arable land, they said.
Now look what "they" are saying...
Here are just three examples of the latest trend in population thinking.
1.) South Korea needs babies. The government of South Korea, which once paid for vasectomies and tubal ligations under their national health care system, is now paying for reverse vasectomies and tubal ligations! Please read the whole article, but this quote tells much:
"Successful family planning, coupled with changing mores, led the birthrate to drop below the ideal population replacement level of 2.1 in the 1980s and then more precipitously in the mid-1990s. Now on average a South Korean woman will have 1.19 children in her lifetime - a rate lower than Japan's birthrate of 1.28, comparable to Taiwan's 1.22, and higher than Hong Kong's 0.94."
This means that the populations of all these places is presently shrinking. Let that soak in for a second...
2.) Australia needs "breeders". There is an entire branch of the Australian Treasury Department dedicated to trying to raise the national birth rate. The article I linked to addresses some of the reasons the rate has gotten so low. Among the conclusions of one particular study, I found this particularly interesting:
"Marrying – women who had not been in a de facto relationship that did not lead to marriage were 2.6 times more likely to progress to a third child."
In other words, women that don't get involved in a "live in but not married" style relationship are 2.6 times more likely to have at least three children. So much for the "try before you buy" theory of relationships, eh?
3.) Russia actually has a pregnancy contest! They actually give out prizes to women who manage to give birth on their national holiday. They, like so many other nations, need babies. This quote from the article is interesting:
"The tradition of awarding prizes for giving birth dates back to Soviet times, when women could be named 'Hero Mothers' for having especially large families."
I'm thinking of all the things my wife has been called because we have a large family, but "hero" certainly isn't one of them.
---
Please understand, I'm not saying that anyone has to have a specific number of children, nor am I arguing that "more children = more spiritual". I'm just pointing out what will almost undoubtedly be coming to American shores soon (especially if the next batch of politicians close our southern border).
Hatushili
3 comments:
Most interesting! Thanks for these excerpts...from a mother of almost seven, who hears more than my share of "overpopulation jargon", this is a most needed message.
Hmmm...I wonder if God already knew all of this?
I totally understand this experience. After having two children even some one in my church let me know that now I am set and I just need to get a dog. It is like I should not even think about more, or something is wrong with me. Society surely does not help married people or families very much. Mary
re: WW I'm with you - I suspect God knew what He was doing in the first place!
re: Mary It's so sad how little children are valued today, even within the walls of the church. I know of one particular couple that loves children but have yet to be able to conceive. They'd do almost anything to have a child. Yet so many today take children for granted and assume that no one in their "right mind" would want more than (at most) two.
Hatushili
Post a Comment