Abortion Is Like Draft-Dodging
If you come from only a natural point of view, and speak only of what nature requires for species to survive, what is paramount is first, reproduction and second, defense against predators and raiders. Species that abort are at a reproductive disadvantage. So are species where the males, physically more powerful and faster than females, will not do battle to protect themselves, their mates or offspring. Ergo, abortion and draft-dodging are against nature and against the survival of species that practice them substantially.
Current example: Europe, presently nearly incapable, physically and mentally, of making war, and whose long decline in birthrates is increasingly injuring their economies. Another cautionary example is Russia, with perhaps the highest abortion rates in the world. Some demographers believe the Russian population to be past the point of no return, where the number of fertile women is too small to make the population grow again. The Russian population is expected to shrink by around 50% in the next 25 years.
This argument leaves out every moral consideration, which is an unrealistic, fatal flaw. Nevertheless, simply on the purely natural and secular grounds used by women who refuse to have at least three children* and by men who will not risk their own lives to protect country, women and children, they are wrong.
Such men and women at best would preserve only themselves, regardless of the effect on their species. Nature would never tolerate the survival of such a suicidal species. No wonder some of them look forward to a future world cleansed of the human race they so profoundly disdain.
Both aborters and draft-dodgers are roughly equal in their effects on their species. And a generation that produced so many of both has much to answer for.
_________________________
* (2.1 children per woman are required for mere replacement of the population. Since having 0.1 children is impossible biologically, 3 would be the target number.)
Current example: Europe, presently nearly incapable, physically and mentally, of making war, and whose long decline in birthrates is increasingly injuring their economies. Another cautionary example is Russia, with perhaps the highest abortion rates in the world. Some demographers believe the Russian population to be past the point of no return, where the number of fertile women is too small to make the population grow again. The Russian population is expected to shrink by around 50% in the next 25 years.
This argument leaves out every moral consideration, which is an unrealistic, fatal flaw. Nevertheless, simply on the purely natural and secular grounds used by women who refuse to have at least three children* and by men who will not risk their own lives to protect country, women and children, they are wrong.
Such men and women at best would preserve only themselves, regardless of the effect on their species. Nature would never tolerate the survival of such a suicidal species. No wonder some of them look forward to a future world cleansed of the human race they so profoundly disdain.
Both aborters and draft-dodgers are roughly equal in their effects on their species. And a generation that produced so many of both has much to answer for.
_________________________
* (2.1 children per woman are required for mere replacement of the population. Since having 0.1 children is impossible biologically, 3 would be the target number.)
posted by Old Neocon at 8:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home