BreakPoint Blog

Banner
Banner
Fertility and economics


"As Japanese, European, Chinese and American women have fewer children, is the global economy endangered?" The New York Times has a roundtable considering this question from various points of view. Included are W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project, and Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute.

Comments:

While I didn't have time to read all of the material, I found that what I did read was disappointingly *progressive*. I have heard most of the arguments for decreasing the population, and none of the arguments for increasing it. The whole rhetoric is becoming boring.

What about the arguments for a Creational God Who knew exactly how many people the earth would serve? How about crediting Him with a) the good sense not to make more people than we can support, and b) revealing new technologies for supporting those people as we go along. Why not the argument that God has created/will create as many souls as He needs to populate heaven? Etc., etc., etc.

So, bottom line: I want so badly to "take on" the most astute, the most brilliant of these progressives, and offer a suggestion: if you are convinced that your perspective is the correct one, I think the only way to prove it is for him/her to murder every blood relative s/he has, and then commit suicide. Fair enough?