Eco-Parents Contributing to Worldwide Fiscal Failure
In reading the article “The Big Climate Change Lie: The CO2 Risk to the Planet” from the Epoch Times, you will identify a crucial conflict between traditional Judeo-Christianity and the religious conviction of Gaia or the eco-devout. In Genesis 1:28 God commands, in part, relative to the bearing of children, “be fruitful and multiply”, while Gaia worshippers will contend that people are a serious problem and we desperately need significantly less of them.
Economic experts will insist that low a birthrate is disastrous for the economy and the future. Without a sufficient number of younger people, who is going to farm, feed, work, and care for an aging population? Who is going to pay the taxes that sustain people too old or unable to work? Who will care for and nurse the sick and the elderly? Who will make merchandise and who is going to buy those goods? This is the exact opposite of the eco-population that worries incessantly about overpopulation and overconsumption. I explain some of the measures once suggested for reducing the population in my article entitled “Food Fight”.
The resident US population, as with most other countries, especially in the West, has been in sharp decline for quite some time. Even countries like China have relaxed their one-child-only policy – a major problem was aborting female children in want of a male and family name continuance. In 1950 the worldwide birth rate dropped drastically from an average of 4.7 to 2.4 children per family. The following chart illustrates American birthrate from 1990 to current.
Successive generations of women are having fewer children at every age. Some of the reasons the birthrate continues at a sluggish pace are:
Children are expensive;
Predictions of future economic uncertainty;
Careers are becoming more important;
The role of feminism has widened - as well as talk of pregnancy discrimination;
Aspirations of and for a self-centered lifestyle;
People having children later in life and thus losing fertility for multiple children;
Ease of access to various forms of birth control;
The basic fear of declining civility;
Elevation in Divorce and Separation Rates
The fear of climate change or the apprehension it will get worse.
In respect of the latter, Miley Cyrus claimed she will not be having a baby on a “piece-of-shit planet.” I suspect she is not distraught or saddened that Billy Ray did not share that opinion and further I imagine that a child would severely restrict and limit her rich and famous lifestyle.
The continuing family tradition inherited from his father and grandfather, Prince Henry, the Duke of Sussex said in a Vogue interview of having only a single child, “I always think to myself, whenever there’s another natural disaster, a huge increase in volcano eruptions or earthquakes or flooding, how many clues does nature have to give us before we actually learn, or wake ourselves up to the damage and the destruction that we’re causing?” Harry is an overindulgent, dominated prince, but certainly not a scientist.
He later said, one more baby may be in the offing but that would be it. According to the National Post, “The Vogue interview was published the same week Harry flew by private jet to an uber-exclusive, Google-sponsored climate crisis camp at a US$2,000-a-night seaside Sicilian resort.”
At times I do not like to disparage and demean these climate change campaigners like they do their foes, the dissenters, but many of them are what the younger generation, the Millenials, Generation Z, and Gen Alpha call influencers. These hypocrites are a big reason for the anxiety, disorders, and sicknesses blamed on the fictitious fairy tales of anthropogenic climate change.
The Epoch Times article is not so much on birthrates but is certainly worth the read.
