tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post111914416767080200..comments2024-03-14T11:50:14.761-04:00Comments on DarwinCatholic: Population & IdeologyDarwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-52164264437879349132011-12-03T01:30:40.431-05:002011-12-03T01:30:40.431-05:00Mary,
No, you didn't miss anything. I got bu...Mary,<br /><br />No, you didn't miss anything. I got busy, and then I forgot (though stayed busy too.) I'll see what I can do.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-81079570590959896102011-12-02T14:26:30.745-05:002011-12-02T14:26:30.745-05:00Darwin,
Did I miss your latest post on population?...Darwin,<br />Did I miss your latest post on population? I have been busy...but cannot find it.maryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05613163382453563548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-80590774513908873492011-10-26T11:56:17.158-04:002011-10-26T11:56:17.158-04:00Hi Darwin,
Thank you for your thoughtful and kindl...Hi Darwin,<br />Thank you for your thoughtful and kindly-worded response. I enjoy your blog and the words of Mrs. Darwin immensely (found you from Jen at Conversiondiary) I will look for your more in-depth coverage of the article to come. <br />However, I will say, that, as pro-life as I am, and as religious (I am currently practicing as a Lutheran although raised Catholic with a devout mother, to whom I am very close), time and time again, I come back to the realization that the way population biology works, is that there are boom and bust cycles, with the busts driven by intense competition for resources, die-off and predation. <br /><br />I acknowledge and understand the terrible consequences of the Pill, as it renders females utterly available and at the mercy of the intense male libido, however I maintain that, within a committed marriage, non-abortive birth control methods make sense. <br /><br />Also, to your point about the slowing of world birthrates, and the low birthrates in developed nations: true...but this has been achieved not ONLY via women's education and later marriage, but significantly through widespread contraceptive use and sadly, abortion. If you could show me a nation where the TFR hovered around 2.2, and all or most participants practiced NFP as the sole method of limiting births, then I might reconsider. Again (I have been on your site before as mary lee I think), I have no qualms whatsoever with any specific couple lovingly, and honestly deciding to bring many children into the world, but my view is shaped by an understanding that many other couples will contracept while others never marry. I live in a state with a European-style TFR (Massachusetts), so a large family here and there is a beautiful thing to see. <br /><br />If you read the comments section for the article I sent you, you see an unrelenting hatred of people who have many (or even several) children. Many seem ill-informed and ignorant, but many others truly believe that abortion and contraception are absolutely necessary to keep our numbers in check. <br /><br />Also...many Catholics I know urge early marriage, as a way to stop the ridiculous prolongation of adolescence in our culture through the twenties (something I agree with), and to place the intense erotic desire of the twenties where it belongs--in marriage--rather than let it drift through numerous premarital encounters.maryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05613163382453563548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-33476474811181595232011-10-25T15:03:47.817-04:002011-10-25T15:03:47.817-04:00Mary,
Thanks for the comment.
I'd like to wr...Mary,<br /><br />Thanks for the comment.<br /><br />I'd like to write an actual post dealing with the NY Times piece in a little more depth, so keep an eye out for that in a few days if you're a regular reader, but a few quick thoughts:<br /><br />- As the Times piece briefly nods to, the brakes are already on world population numbers, indeed by some estimates the world population will start shrinking during this current century.<br /><br />http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/24/population-decline-idUSL5E7LO0VD20111024<br /><br />- Again, as he notes, there are plenty of resources on Earth to support far more than 7 billion people, but not the way they're currently being allocated. One thing he doesn't seem to account for in his assessment is that price is generally much more efficient in dealing with scarcity than planning is. We have a lot of weird subsidies and incentives in the developed world that encourage the use of water, grain, land, etc. in ways that do not get the most efficient allocation of resources -- including getting those resources to those who need them in the developing world. Trying to shrink the population is not, to my mind, the right solution to that imbalance.<br /><br />- People aren't just resource hogs -- they're also the producers of resources and the inventors of new technologies and processes. Historically, I don't think that people have been very good at predicting how many people society will be able to support in the future. (Which he does acknowledge.)<br /><br />- While I tend to be strongly pro-natalist, I certainly wouldn't say that everyone "must" have children. If one can't support children, it's clearly not prudent to have them. I can imagine that in some times and places (perhaps more prevalent in the future in some places) this may be a more common problem. However, given my understanding of sex and marriage I'd tend to see not getting married (or getting married much later) as being a more appropriate solution to not wanting to have any or many children than trying to push a lot of sterilization and contraception, which I think separate sexuality and reproduction in a way that doesn't fit well with the human condition.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-51612602102921938842011-10-24T18:04:13.743-04:002011-10-24T18:04:13.743-04:00I would appreciate your thoughts on
http://www.ny...I would appreciate your thoughts on <br />http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/opinion/seven-billion.html<br /><br />I am surprised at the lack of dissonant voices in the comments. But the writer obviously has the chops. How do you answer him?marynoreply@blogger.com