recipes. whatever is true. adoption. whatever is just. redemption. whatever is honorable. modesty. whatever is pure. motherhood. whatever is lovely. think about it.

Friday, October 26, 2007

To The Editor... Continued from 10/25 Blog Posting

To the Editor:

I find it appalling that the article written by Marianne Gabel was given such credence by your newspaper. I was shocked that you chose to print such a highly debatable topic without any measure given to the other side of the argument. The notion that families would be encouraged or even forced to limit their family size for the 'sake of the nation' is dangerous on many different levels. Ethically it is incomprehensible and economically it is disastrous.

Consider the implications that China is currently experiencing. Journalist Matt Rosenburg states that, "China's one child policy was established by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in 1979 to limit communist China's population growth. Although designated a "temporary measure," it continues a quarter-century after its establishment. The policy limits couples to one child. Fines, pressures to abort a pregnancy, and even forced sterilization accompanied second or subsequent pregnancies. This rule has caused a disdain for female infants; abortion, neglect, abandonment, and even infanticide have been known to occur to female infants."

Data shows that the population of 143 million Russians today will drop drastically to 111 million in 2050. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently directed his nation's parliament to develop a plan to reduce the country's falling birthrate. Putin called the problem of this dramatically declining population, "The most acute problem of contemporary Russia." Their youths are encouraged to take part in mass wedding ceremony's at camps with the purpose of "procreating for the motherland".

An article taken from a recent U.S. census bureau finding states that the U.S. population growth rate is slowing. "Despite these large increases in the number of persons in the population, the rate of population growth is projected to decrease during the next six decades by about 50 percent, from 1.10 between 1990 and 1995 to 0.54 between 2040 and 2050. The decrease in the rate of growth is predominantly due to the aging of the population and, consequently, a dramatic increase in the number of deaths. From 2030 to 2050, the United States would grow more slowly than ever before in its history."

The issue of Social Security in the U.S. is troubling. There is less Social Security money because there are less workers and there are less workers because 45 million people have been aborted since 1973. The economy will collapse unless we do something to raise the birth rate. The decrease in childbearing and the increase in contraception and abortion over the last thirty years have, in part, brought us to the point that we are today.

A desire for balance should be pursued to live well and enjoy the earth we live on. When ecology, however, arbitrates morality, we all suffer.

3 comments:

Melissa said...

Angel,
I am so thankful that you were able to sum up in a letter to the editor exactly what I was thinking but did not know how to properly articulate! I completely agree with you that it was disgusting.
Melissa S.

Jim Fedako said...

I also sent a letter to editor and commented on this article on my blog. antipositivist.blogspot.com

Cross-linked your article.

Bet you didn't know that Gabel is a longtime member of the Delaware City Schools board of education.

http://antipositivist.blogspot.com/2007/11/children-burden-absolutely-not.html

Susan said...

You mean to tell me that someone with this attitude toward children is on the Board of Education in Delaware? Unreal.