@Diligent Dave - Logan, UTFeb. 20, 2019 11:38 a.m."That
used to worked. But, those who claim to believe in Celestial marriage (LDS), as
a whole, have not had a replacement birth rate for over 30 years! ... As far as
I know, 'Celestial Marriage' isn't forcibly illegal anywhere.@Candace Owens Rocks is right. Celestial Marriage is a felony in Utah,
and if the LDS church practiced The Principle they would have a
beyond-replacement birth rate.
@WeThePeople, says—"This article confirms what the moral
among us already knew: that Utah and other morally upright states are keeping
our nation strong by maintaining its birthrates."As of 2017,
only South Dakota had a surplus birth rate (2.23), which is barely above
replacement. Utah, at 2.12 (in 2017), was then at exact replacement. At best,
Utah might still be at just exact replacement. This is the equivalent of a
farmer harvesting the exact same amount of wheat he planted in the ground. And
which farmer would plant seed only to harvest the same amount he put in the
ground?I wouldn't. Would you?So who, in this
regard, is who is "moral" among Americans?Supposedly,
Utah's birth rates, which hitherto have always been higher than other
states' birth rates, at least until 2017, was supposedly more
"moral" in having more children, because of a majority of its residents
were LDS (& here, we have more babies). But our birth rates only descended
slightly slower than other states.But as a whole, the US was only
"morally" in the positive territory in this regard in 1970, when it last
had any kind of a "surplus" birth rate. And this was a whole 3 years
prior to Roe v Wade!
Miss Piggie: "The Arabs [
] are basically Muslim. They continue to have
large families mostly because their 'scriptures' require that the
women are kept in relative seclusion. They can't get jobs, drive cars, or
leave the house without a male relative in accompaniment. Hence, they stay home
and have children.Not one "fact" offered in your comment is
correct. You are the victim of misinformation. --Only one in five
Muslims is Arabic. --Most Muslim women who are Arabic can get jobs,
leave the house without a male relative, etc., and all now live in countries
where driving is allowed for women. (Saudi Arabia was the only one that
disallowed it and that changed last year). --In Saudi Arabia itself,
the most repressive Muslim country for women, about 15% of the workforce is
female (2015) and women constituted 19.9% of legislators in 2014. That compares
to 20.2% in the 2017 Utah legislature. --Saudi Arabia is highly
unrepresentative of the Muslim world. In the world's largest Muslim
country, Indonesia, more than 50% of the workforce is female compared to only
47% in the United States. --The fertility rate in Indonesia is 2.34
per woman, in Turkey it's 2.03, in Iran, 1.66.
This article confirms what the moral among us already knew: that Utah and other
morally upright states are keeping our nation strong by maintaining its
birthrates.But the liberal's would never acknowledge that.
They want to see unrestricted immigration, and abortion on demand. They are
just fine if our society ends up in a permaent demographic tailspin.The rest of the country should pay Utah for its high birthrates. Instead the
liberal's and socialist want to tax us. They want us to feel bad about our
@Susan Roylance:"When I attended a conference in Berlin, Germany, all
you would see on the streets, with children, were Arab families."The Arabs you speak of are basically Muslim. They continue to have large
families mostly because their 'scriptures' require that the women are
kept in relative seclusion. They can't get jobs, drive cars, or leave the
house without a male relative in accompaniment. Hence, they stay home and have
children. "I have nothing against Arab families (in fact, I
love them), but they are the future of the world."This should be
very concerning to the world... including the US. Because, while the rest of
the world's reproduction rate is falling below replacement, the Muslim
religion's population is growing. The result means they could eventually
take over the world and install their religion, including Sharia Law,
everywhere. In which case, the world population would be required to pray five
times a day bowing to Mecca. "Just as those who thought the
potential population explosion was a problem, we need to promote motherhood --
to save the planet!"Good luck with that. Women are enjoying the
freedom of not having to contend with families.
Having lived in several parts of the US I have seen this trend borne out and
change dramatically in the last 20 years in my peer groups. Right now it is
extremely rare for families to have more than 2 children. Searching my memories
of families we have befriended I can only think of one couple that had more than
two children outside of the LDS Church.In the next 50 years Japan
and Europe are going to stop being global powers simply because their will not
be a next generation to fill the labor markets. One time our family was in
Hawaii waiting for a flight home. An elderly Japanese woman asked to hold our 1
year old and held onto that baby like she hadn't held one for 50 years.
Perhaps she hadn't. Statistics in Japan bear that out right now.
China's One Child policy led to selective abortion of 40 million baby
girls. Now there are 40 million adult men who will never have wives and children
of their own in China. The Chinese government is now promoting having two
children, but it is not working. Japan is losing people so fast that they are
inviting immigration, and there are millions of abandoned houses. The population growth for the next 30 years is just an echo of previous
growth, like the Baby Boom. The number of children per woman of child bearing
age is falling below the 2.1 replacement rate even in the less developed world.
The rate of overall growth is slowing and will level out soon, and then drop
quickly. The government Ponzi schemes like Social Security have depended on a
large younger base of earners supporting a small group of retirees. As younger
age groups shrink, the payouts to retirees will have to shrink, even as retirees
live longer. While my wife and I have only 3 adult kids, we have 16
grandchildren. The LDS families I see in Church are similar, with 4 to 6 kids.
The Church will continue growing, including among Spanish speaking immigrants.
Rita B - I think fathers/husbands helping more is relative. I know
my mom says the husbands she sees in our family circle (cousins, uncles, kids,
ect) do much more with the kids then her generation did for better or worse.
Almost all my siblings (9, 6 girls) have a 4 year or greater college education
but all of my sisters but 2 stay at home with their kids because they want to.
Not sure what you mean by fathers needing to do more. In what used to be a
traditional family moms did more with the kids because they worked out of the
house most of the day. If both parents work then yes you have to figure that out
but it really depends on the family dynamic. Most families tend to be more moms
and dads working and more kids being raised by baby sitters, day care workers,
and so on. That in and of itself is a major concern but not the topic at hand. I
just feel like saying husbands need to do more is a big blanket statement that
doesn't apply in alot of situations maybe yours?
"When I attended a conference in Berlin, Germany, all you would see on the
streets, with children, were Arab families. "Ok... and then I
stopped reading. That is such a false statement, it is almost indefensible. I
spent four years working in Germany - Heidelberg to be exact - and travelled
during those times extensively through out the country.The bias here
completely discredits this report, which I thought was actually reasonable. But
considering the bias... absurd. There are a lot of immigrants to Germany,
because of its vibrant economy, and workers rights. But the large part of
those immigrants are from places like India, Turkey, other EU nations and former
soviet block countries, pretty much in that order. The change over
to a knowledge worker economy from agrarian is having impacts around the world.
Parents rely less on their kids for their retirement security. Mortality rates
also dictate that fewer children are need to provide that security.This is not an "abortion" debate... though some seem to see the world
through a very narrow lens. This isn't a problem of too many having
abortions, but people delaying marriage, and kids, because they can.
Don't assume a smaller population is bad. In the future there will be fewer
jobs due to AI and robotics. If population returned to 70s level, the economy
would need to change but climate and mankind would greatly benefit. Learn about
peak population. Only with a smaller global population can everyone be
affluent.Countries in poverty will follow developed countries in declining
population when education increases and women actually get an opportunity to
decline becoming pregnant.A smaller global population would benefit the
climate more than any other climate initiative and it is not even close. But it
will require a shift out of a labor centric economy.Alternatively,
population increase beyond the planet's limitations is an unimaginable
Sorry, before reading the article, the one thing that comes to my mind reading
the headline is:They called Ender a "Third." Such a future
might indicate the Buggers are on their way.
There you go again: Perhaps a quick look at the the Democratic
Party Platform would be in order, which gives a women the right to do anything
with 'her body', but nary a word about the rights of the unborn child
she carries. What nation that proclaims God as its King (Oh, I forgot, the
Democratic party voted to eliminate God from its platform recently) would
participate and condone such injustice? The Republican platform
asserts: 'we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn
child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a
human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the
FourteenthAmendment’s protections apply to children before
birth.' You are right and saying that both Democrats and
Republicans have participated in this mass infanticide of our most valued
possession here and the hereafter. For those who flippantly cast
off these children as if they have no rights because a parent was irresponsible
is an unusual argument at its face. We react with horror about the Holocaust,
but just blink when 60 million innocents since Roe V Wade have been thrown away.
@Million "Do these people have blinders on their eyes? There are way to(o)
many people on earth now."Says who? JackBuckeye w_his D&C
104:17 quote "the earth is full & there is enough & to spare" is
right. Also, God speaking through Isaiah made things clear— For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the
earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed
it to be inhabited ...—Isaiah 45:18@Candace Owens
Rocks"Legalize Celestial Marriage - that is the best way to
ensure a replacement birth rate while minimizing government
interference."That used to worked. But, those who claim to
believe in Celestial marriage (LDS), as a whole, have not had a replacement
birth rate for over 30 years! The number of missionaries available to serve is
constantly shrinking, as LDS birth rates continue to decline. Babies
haven't been a source of growth for LDS since earlier in the 1980's.
As far as I know, 'Celestial Marriage' isn't forcibly illegal
anywhere.@H Drummond - Having surplus rates of babies is not a Ponzi
scheme. Having sub-replacement rates are, because it causes collapse. @F Alger - And that is a negative thing,
We currently have an unpayable national debt. We are, as a nation, bankrupt and
have forestalled the effects of it through borrowing. We could potentially grow
ourselves out of our debt situation if our populace and GDP expanded
sufficiently (and we stopped further borrowing). However, with a shrinking
populace usually comes a recession / depression as the economy shrinks
proportionate to the populace. Some of this could be mitigated through
automation, but then we would need a massive STEM engineering force, which we
don't have. Already thousands of STEM jobs go unfilled. Taken together it
paints a potentially bleak picture of economic austerity for our nation by
mid-century. We will have unsustainable social and defense programs, too much
debt, and too few contributors to keep things running.
All of the comments linking members of the Democratic Party to abortion somehow
neglect to mention, for example, that Republican icon Ronald Reagan signed into
law an abortion bill that led to the deaths of over 2,000,000.All of
the comments linking members of the Democratic Party to abortion somehow gloss
over the probability that there are Republicans who have made a choice to abort
a pregnancy.Condemn members of the Democratic Party...No
problem.Condem members of the Republican Party...Silence.
Many Children used to be considered "Cheap" Farm hands now Children are
seen as a huge expense in both Money and emotion.
@ I M LDS 2Sometimes the truth is unpleasant. Democrats want
abortion to remain legal, but insist we allow illegal immigrants into the
country to "increase the population". I can't think of anything
more twisted than that.
Earth scientists speculate that we can only really have 18-20 billion people on
the planet at any given time before climate change, hostile environments, mass
disease, war and famine prevent most of us from obtaining a quality way of life.
Advances in technology and medicine will only go so far. Overpopulation is a big
concern for the future of the planet, and many in well-educated parts of the
world (Japan, Europe, parts of the US and Canada, Scandinavia) realize this and
choose not to have as many children. Like the article states,
families in less-educated parts of the world (parts of Latin America, Africa,
and rural communities here in the US) will continue to have lots of children and
balance out the population decline you see in urban areas.
Somewhere between 2/3's & 3/4's of all nations in the world are
having babies at sub-replacement levels. The US has been since 1971. Mormons
have been for over 30 years. Utah in 2017 with a TFR (Total Fertility Rate) of
2.12, was then at exact replacement, not surplus birth rate (SD then was at
2.23, above UT).Ibbitson's comment, "...governments
everywhere should....make it easier for people to have children,...especially
policy that helps women to remain in the workforce and to not sacrifice a
career..."I would contend women working outside home is the
biggest reason they don't have a surplus birth rate anymore. Student loans
that must be repaid forces women to work to do so. With 3 (or more) of every 5
college students being female since 1980, women are planning to provide salary
for family. LDS Proclamation on the Family contends it should be men doing
this.Socialism (SS, MediCare, etc) will collapse. Too few wage
earners to fund enough taxes. Boomers only had 17 babies for every 20 of
them.Isaiah spoke of socialism like Frederic Bastiat did—as
oppression— "And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another,
and every one by his neighbor" —2 Nephi 13:5
"Overpopulation is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting
world, mostly exacerbated and perjured by our progressive, abortion minded,
malcontents."What a twisted and unpleasant opinion. Sad.
"The problem is how to handle the large aging population during the
transition period."We adapt. Eat healthier. Get more exercise.
Stay productive longer.
Overpopulation is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting world,
mostly exacerbated and perjured by our progressive, abortion minded,
malcontents. First, women were propagandized to believe that their worth is in
the marketplace, not the home, then abortion became something not just for the
noveau riche, but reached its epic aggrandizement with the poor and middle
class, then faith, values, and living the golden rule were lampooned and laughed
at by the media and all the willing, valueless consorts, and finally we arrive
at the elevated intelligence that the world is not only not overpopulated, but
people don't even care or know why that matters. God has said there is
enough and to spare. 'Free people don't exhaust resources; they
create them.' The lack of educated thought is stifling! When I was a kid
we were supposed to have mass starvation and entering a new ice age. Now we
have climate change as a reason to stop living and the frantic search for self
absorption, which obviously doesn't include babies. Now, we want the
false God of Socialism to solve our problems. How sad, uneducated, and wrong.
America, get your act together!
Interesting book. Ultimately they are arguing that we're caught up in
something of a population Ponzi scheme. Ultimately having a smaller population
will bring many benefits but the problem is how to handle the large aging
population during the transition period.
Interesting, this is the fourth article the DN has published about declines in
population. Each time it is presented as doom and gloom. Does it
have to be a negative?I see a bigger issue than a decrease in
population. It is a decrease in available jobs. Automation and AI are surely to
decrease the jobs available. I also don't think our current population is
educated/equipped to take on the next set of jobs.I see many people
needing a handout or some type of government job to keep them afloat. I worry
more about high unemployment and people who are not engaged. This could lead to
more violence and civil unrest. Our focus should be on equipping our current
population with the best tools to help them flourish in the 21st century.
Now that women have more of a choice about how many children they are going to
have, if we want women to have more children, we need to do things that will
support them in that. For example, better maternity and paternity leave would
help immensely. More affordable child care would also help. Traditionally, the
burden of caring for babies and children has fallen primarily upon the
mother's shoulders. If fathers would step up and share that burden more, I
bet women would be more willing to have more children. If you look at South
Korea, where men are having a hard time moving away from traditional male roles,
the modern women there don't even want to get married, let alone have
children. Men need to do their part to help solve this problem.
Doctrine & Covenants 104:17 For the earth is full, and there is enough and
to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to
be agents unto themselves.Nevertheless, depopulation is the
overreaching agenda of Western elites.
In1995, when I attended the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, the
paramount worry for the world was an expected population explosion. Now, we are
facing the result of the misguided policies that have contributed to population
decline, and the loss of some cultures in Europe, as the immigrants are bringing
change. When I attended a conference in Berlin, Germany, all you would see on
the streets, with children, were Arab families. I have nothing against Arab
families (in fact, I love them), but they are the future of the world. However,
in the more developed Arab countries, they are also experiencing population
decline, with fertility rates below replacement. This is partially due to more
women graduating from college and having different goals -- which do not include
motherhood. I'm not sure if it is possible to turn this around.
It seems to me that once women choose not to be mothers it is hard to get them
to sacrifice to bring children into the world, and care for them. Just
as those who thought the potential population explosion was a problem, we need
to promote motherhood -- to save the planet!
Do these people have blinders on their eyes? There are way to many people on
earth now. It would actually be a blessing to slow down the birth rate. The
world is over populated. If it hadn't been for the introduction of
artificial fertilizer to create larger plant yields then the world would be
starving at this time. On the flip side we are seeing the disaster of algae
blooms from the runoff of that fertilizer. Moderation in all things.
It is interesting to speculate how far the population will fall before it swings
back around the other way. Will earth's population get down to 1 billion,
or less? Perhaps it depends on when de-urbanization starts occurring.
I believe that these gentlemen are correct with their analysis of current
trends. I think it is a mistake to assume that these trends will continue
forever. We'll see. As far as the UN is concerned, of course
they are all doom and gloom, and you need to give them power to make it right.
Everything we do has consequences, including our choices that we make. In the
1960s, Proabortion activist groups (including Planned Parenthood) promoted
abortion as a tool to prevent unwanted pregnancies and help control worldwide
population growth. European countries bought on early to this, now they are
facing population decline. According to some estimates, more than 70 million
babies were aborted in the US alone since the legalization of abortion. As we try to have the same gadgets as our neighbors, having children
become inconvenience or obstacles. Unfortunately, having less or no children at
all become the solution to many couples. As generations have fewer children than
the previous ones, overpopulation growth is not one of the consequences. As
European countries want more immigrants to meet their labor shortages, sooner or
later we will have the same problem here in this country. That is why we should
have a robust not a free for all immigration policy to counter this population
The threat to global resources and exacerbation of climate change from
earth's human population aren't future threats. They are current
crises. One way or another the population must come down--in every country. The
trick will be to manage it. Anyone who says it's a neutral thing for the
human load on the planet to be reduced isn't paying attention.
Fortunately, most immigrants are hard working and contribute a great deal to our
society. They are willing to take jobs (often multiple) that native-born
Americans who prefer welfare won’t. They appreciate the American dream and
are willing to work to have a better life for themselves and their family. Many
are also highly educated and bring much-needed skills. Unfortunately, President Trump eliminating personal exemptions for children
hurts families with multiple children, or in essence punishes or discourages
having multiple children.
I do believe that world population will peak sooner rather than laterI do not believe robust immigration into developed countries will magically
solve the economic problem... especially when the lure is the socialist party
package that will be in place in the next 10-40 years instead of economic
This has everything to do with the plight of hired labor centering on
Marx's surplus value. Search YouTube for "Marx Lives."
Does no good to raise rate through immigration unless the people coming can and
do work. Those that come and end up on public assistance will only make the
situation worse. It has become so expensive to have a family, home,
education, and pay child care it is no wonder we are in the situation we are