Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?  (Read 3651 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Marcelino

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1498
  • Reputation: +31/-3
  • Gender: Male
Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
« on: June 29, 2012, 08:25:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Why do you think people are having less children?  


    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7173/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #1 on: June 29, 2012, 08:36:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well for starters, Protestants look down upon having any more than 2 or 3 children because they tend to view children as a distraction rather than a blessing from God. Same with other non-Catholics.

    Even Novus Ordo Catholics fall into this same trap.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.


    Offline Nylndech

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 307
    • Reputation: +61/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #2 on: June 29, 2012, 11:13:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • any number of reasons

    dont know how to manage money for many kids

    or perceive many kids being too hard

    or divorce before having many kids

    or want a lifestyle that conflicts with being parent

    or want more money

    or see kids as distraction from career goals

    or separated child conception from sɛҳuąƖ pleasure

    seems like only people I know with many kids have them with multiple spouses
    can't tell if ninja

    or cryptotrad

    Online Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11662
    • Reputation: +6989/-498
    • Gender: Female
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #3 on: June 30, 2012, 01:04:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nylndech
    any number of reasons

    dont know how to manage money for many kids

    or perceive many kids being too hard

    or divorce before having many kids

    or want a lifestyle that conflicts with being parent

    or want more money

    or see kids as distraction from career goals

    or separated child conception from sɛҳuąƖ pleasure

    seems like only people I know with many kids have them with multiple spouses


    Marrying later in life.
    Delaying childbearing for financial reasons.
    Being duped into thinking fertility can be turned off and on again like a tap.
    Fertility problems

    Do excreted oral contraceptive compounds in drinking water contribute to male infertility? This is a questions asked at http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/ It's a good question to ponder.

    What about vaccination? We know that in certain countries like the Philippines, girls only were vaccinatied against a disease that affects both sexes. Why only girls? Later it was discovered that these girls were actually being rendered infertile. This was the deliberate intent of the orgainisers.

    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.

    Offline ggreg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3001
    • Reputation: +184/-179
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #4 on: June 30, 2012, 07:00:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Because most people are cowards and sheep who follow slavishly the fashions of the world without thinking about what they are doing, why and whether it makes them happy.

    It's a rare person who bucks the trend.


    Offline Capt McQuigg

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4671
    • Reputation: +2624/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #5 on: June 30, 2012, 11:57:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • People want less children because they have turned their back on God.

    Everything else is window dressing.

    Offline SaintBasil

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 182
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #6 on: June 30, 2012, 12:32:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Generally speaking, it requires 2 Incomes to just get by in AMeriKa today.

    The FED has inflated our money, debased our currency and purchasing power (95% since 1913).

    In the 1950s, a family could live nicely on 1 income, afford a nice suburban home, car,  Catholic schools and college for their children, and have a pension upon retirement.
    Those day are GONE.

    Jєωs sold Women (Social Engineering) on Feminism, TO further Tax the incomes  1/2 of the populace, and it worked, women took the bait.
    Couple this with the cost of living with student loans for college, debt et al, and this is the primary reason(s).

    Offline CathMomof7

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1049
    • Reputation: +1271/-13
    • Gender: Female
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #7 on: June 30, 2012, 03:47:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's simple.  Because they can.  Contraception makes it possible to not have children.  Since that is possible, people don't.  

    Protestants no longer see any moral implications to contraception.  In fact, they consider the use of contraception as responsible parenting.

    Now most people don't think that the sɛҳuąƖ act has anything to do, ultimately, with having children.   Giving birth now is either a "choice" or a "lapse in responsibility."

    Sad, but true.


    Offline SaintBasil

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 182
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #8 on: June 30, 2012, 04:23:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: CathMomof7
    It's simple.  Because they can.  Contraception makes it possible to not have children.  Since that is possible, people don't.  

    Protestants no longer see any moral implications to contraception.  In fact, they consider the use of contraception as responsible parenting.

    Now most people don't think that the sɛҳuąƖ act has anything to do, ultimately, with having children.   Giving birth now is either a "choice" or a "lapse in responsibility."

    Sad, but true.


    Conttraception (Pill) comes from a Jєω.  It is Satanic.



    BUT....
    The Vatican has NEVER Denounced and condmemned Fractional Reserve, Fiat, debt money and Central Banks.

    That is what is behind most birth control imo, the economic issue, for many American families that would love to have more children but cannot afford more daycare, private school tuttion, babystitters, food, et al

    Im playing devils advocate of course, but that is the pervasive issue.
    The FED and ALL Central Jєω Banks, must be abolished.

    Offline songbird

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4670
    • Reputation: +1765/-353
    • Gender: Female
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #9 on: June 30, 2012, 07:43:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What I see are couples who both have to work.  We were military in the 70's and 80's.  I stayed at home and I really budgeted!  But with both couples having to work to get by is obvious.  Another reason is the error of birth control.  Low fertility to infertility is also a problem due to the STRESS of both working.  There is more fear than faith in the couples hearts possibly.  Everyone has their position to consider.

    Offline morningstar

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 61
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #10 on: June 30, 2012, 08:00:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: songbird
    What I see are couples who both have to work.  We were military in the 70's and 80's.  I stayed at home and I really budgeted!  But with both couples having to work to get by is obvious.  Another reason is the error of birth control.  Low fertility to infertility is also a problem due to the STRESS of both working.  There is more fear than faith in the couples hearts possibly.  Everyone has their position to consider.


    All the while GOD'S position which is neither changeable nor moveable, is scoffed and scorned.  He will not be mocked!


    Online Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11662
    • Reputation: +6989/-498
    • Gender: Female
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #11 on: June 30, 2012, 09:49:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: CathMomof7
    It's simple.  Because they can.  Contraception makes it possible to not have children.  Since that is possible, people don't.  

    Protestants no longer see any moral implications to contraception.  In fact, they consider the use of contraception as responsible parenting.

    Now most people don't think that the sɛҳuąƖ act has anything to do, ultimately, with having children.   Giving birth now is either a "choice" or a "lapse in responsibility."

    Sad, but true.

    CM7, I agree with everything you say here except for
    Quote
    Contraception makes it possible to not have children.


    Contraception does not necessarily stop women conceiving. Sometimes it works to stop ovulation, sometimes no. If ovulation occurs, conception is possible. In these cases it is not a contraceptive at all.

    A healthy fertile woman having a normal sex life can conceive, on average, once per year while on the pill. So there is a built in mechanism which makes the womb an inhospitable place for a baby to nestle in and make its home for the rest of the pregnancy. That child is sloughed off without the knowlege of the woman. This is abortion and what is aborted? - a child, who misses the opportunity for Baptism. This significantly raises the abortion rate, doesn't it! And of course the more abortions the fewer surviving children.

    Does anybody out there know of any other so-called medication, whose express purpose is the rendering of a disability in women?
    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.

    Offline Marcelino

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1498
    • Reputation: +31/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #12 on: June 30, 2012, 11:07:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nadir
    Quote from: CathMomof7
    It's simple.  Because they can.  Contraception makes it possible to not have children.  Since that is possible, people don't.  

    Protestants no longer see any moral implications to contraception.  In fact, they consider the use of contraception as responsible parenting.

    Now most people don't think that the sɛҳuąƖ act has anything to do, ultimately, with having children.   Giving birth now is either a "choice" or a "lapse in responsibility."

    Sad, but true.

    CM7, I agree with everything you say here except for
    Quote
    Contraception makes it possible to not have children.


    Contraception does not necessarily stop women conceiving. Sometimes it works to stop ovulation, sometimes no. If ovulation occurs, conception is possible. In these cases it is not a contraceptive at all.

    A healthy fertile woman having a normal sex life can conceive, on average, once per year while on the pill. So there is a built in mechanism which makes the womb an inhospitable place for a baby to nestle in and make its home for the rest of the pregnancy. That child is sloughed off without the knowlege of the woman. This is abortion and what is aborted? - a child, who misses the opportunity for Baptism. This significantly raises the abortion rate, doesn't it! And of course the more abortions the fewer surviving children.

    Does anybody out there know of any other so-called medication, whose express purpose is the rendering of a disability in women?



    Are you sure?  Does the pill really do that?  

    Online Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11662
    • Reputation: +6989/-498
    • Gender: Female
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #13 on: July 01, 2012, 02:10:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Marcelino
    Quote from: Nadir

    CM7, I agree with everything you say here except for
    Quote
    Contraception makes it possible to not have children.


    Contraception does not necessarily stop women conceiving. Sometimes it works to stop ovulation, sometimes no. If ovulation occurs, conception is possible. In these cases it is not a contraceptive at all.

    A healthy fertile woman having a normal sex life can conceive, on average, once per year while on the pill. So there is a built in mechanism which makes the womb an inhospitable place for a baby to nestle in and make its home for the rest of the pregnancy. That child is sloughed off without the knowlege of the woman. This is abortion and what is aborted? - a child, who misses the opportunity for Baptism. This significantly raises the abortion rate, doesn't it! And of course the more abortions the fewer surviving children.

    Does anybody out there know of any other so-called medication, whose express purpose is the rendering of a disability in women?



    Are you sure?  Does the pill really do that?  


    I guess you refer to the abortifacient nature of the pill here.

    Phartmacist for Life, John Wilks, has written a great book, A Consumer's Guide to the Pill and Other Drugs.

    It is the the third way that I refer to, which he explains here:

    An excerpt from
    The Pill – How it works and fails.
    http://www.pfli.org/faq_oc.html  

    Q. How does the pill really work?

    A. There are four ways the pill acts to stop sperm reaching an egg (ovum).

    First, the hormones in the pill try to stop an ovum being released from your ovary each month. This is known as the suppression of ovulation. Research has shown that neither the progesterone-only pill nor the combined progesterone-oestrogen formulations always stop ovulation.

    Second, all formulations of the pill cause changes to the cervical mucus that your body produces. The cervical mucus may become thicker and more difficult for sperm to fertilize an ovum.

    Third, all formulations of the pill cause changes to the lining of the womb (properly known as the endometrium). Under the influence of the chemicals in the pill, the lining of the womb doesn’t grow to the proper thickness. You will notice that your periods are lighter when you are on the pill. This is because the lining of the womb has not developed properly. But this change also means that the womb is not in the right stage of development to allow a fertilized egg to attach properly (this attachment process is known as implantation). This action of the pill will be discussed again in this booklet.

    Fourth, the pill causes changes to the movement of the Fallopian tubes. This effect may reduce the possibility of the ovum being fertilised.

    It is very important for you to understand that none of these ways the pill works is completely reliable. Ovulation is not always stopped, cervical mucus does not always stop the movement of sperm the damage to the lining of the womb sometimes allows for implantation to occur, and Fallopian tube activity does not always stop sperm and ovum from joining to create a new human person.

    © John Wilks B.Pharm. M.P.S., M.A.C.P.P. Oct 1998
    E-mail: bpharm@ozemail.com.au
    Fax: +61 2 9624 1072 (Australia )

    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.

    Online Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11662
    • Reputation: +6989/-498
    • Gender: Female
    Why Do You Think People Are Having Less Children?
    « Reply #14 on: July 01, 2012, 03:27:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here is the bit he refers to when he says;
    Quote
    This action of the pill will be discussed again in this booklet.


    Q. I have heard some people say the pill has an abortifacient capacity. What does this word mean, and is it really true anyway?

    A. Before answering this question it is very important that we all have a correct understanding of the key biological terms related to pregnancy. The following definitions have been accept by major medical texts for decades.


    'Conception' refers to the moment at which the sperm penetrates and fertilises the ovum to form a viable zygote. It does not refer to the process of implantation of the newly created human embryo, which is a separate event, occurring about 7-8 day’s after conception. A woman is pregnant because conception has occurred, not because implantation has occurred. This distinction is important.


    At the precise and unique moment of conception, a woman is 'pregnant' with "a new individual ". This is an accurate and informed medical description. It is the same terminology used by Prof. John Dwyer, pre-eminent Australian AIDS expert and researcher, who has described the moment that the sperm enters the ovum as the creation of a "new and unique individual". Well known medical writer, Professor Derek Llewellyn-Jones, author of Everywoman, has also written that when the male genetic material from the sperm joins with the female genetic material in the ovum, " a new individual is formed".


    To stop conception occurring, that is, to stop sperm and ovum joining, is contraception. Condoms, diaphragms, spermicides, vasectomy and tubal ligation are accurately described as methods of contraception. Obviously any drug or device used after conception has occurred cannot be termed a contraceptive.


    The correct term to describe any interference with the pregnancy after conception has occurred is ‘abortifacient’. This is the precise biological description for any drug or device that acts to end a pregnancy once it has begun at conception.


    You might be interested to know that many major medical dictionaries have definitions of ‘conception’, ‘pregnancy’ and ‘contraception’ that are the same as those listed above.


    It is medically dishonest to break from these definitions. And yet, this is precisely what some scientists have recently started to do. They seek to define pregnancy as beginning with implantation, not fertilization. But as I mentioned ealier, implantation occurs 7-8 days after the new human person has come into existence. The pregnancy, and the new human person, are already many days old by the time implantation has occurred.


    Therefore, what these scientists are trying to doing is get people to think that abortifacient drugs such as the pill are really just contraceptive drugs. Do you see the clever shift in definitions these scientists are trying to make? Redefine when a pregnancy and new human life begins, and you redefine the key characteristic of the drug – how it works!


    Obviously many people object to abortifacient drugs because they can cause a loss of human life. Not so many people object to methods of contraception (condoms, diaphrams etc), because these methods prevent new human life being created. Hence, if scientists succeed in convincing people that human life begins after implantation, eventually most people will have no objection to the pill. They will have been tricked into believing that human life had not begun when the pill exerted its anti-implantation effect.


    Q. So how do you prove that the pill acts as an abortifacient?


    A. The answer to this question can be found by comparing the rate of break-through ovulation and the detected pregnancy rate. The ovulation rate has been reported to be about 27 ovulations in 100 women using the pill for one year. But the detected pregnancy rate is much lower at around 4 pregnancies per 100 women using the pill for one year.


    As you can see, there is a big difference between the number of women who ovulation (27) and the number of detected pregnancies (4). What has happened within the woman’s body to reduce the high ovulation rate to such a low number of detected pregnancies? I suggest that one answer to this important question is that pregnancies have begun, because ovulation and fertilization have occurred, but some of these pregnancies are terminated because implantation cannot take place. The pill has damaged the lining of the womb, stopping implanation.


    Q. You talk about the pill causing damage to the lining of the womb, but what does this really mean?


    A. The process of implantation of the human embryo into the lining of the womb is a very complex and delicate process. Proper attachment and successful implantation is under the guidance and control of a vast array of ‘implantation factors’. These chemical factors, with names such as interleukins, PAF and LIF, actually cause what is referred to in medical journals as "cross-talk" between the embryo and the cells which line the womb. That is, the cells of the new human embryo and the cells of the lining of the womb chemically speak to each other. The purpose of this chemical communication is so the womb will be fully prepared and ready to bind with the human embryo when it attempts to implant.


    The pill’s role in all of this is that it alters the levels of these implantation factors. Too much estrogen and progesterone, via the pill, causes harmful changes to the levels of these implantation factors. Recent research has shown that implantation fails if the levels of estrogen and progesterone are too high.


    It is because the levels of these two hormones are wrong that the week-old embryo cannot attach to the womb. Cell talk fails, the proper development of the womb doesn’t occur, and the embryo dies from a lack of nutrition normally supplied to it from the lining of the womb. In fact, wrong levels of artifical progesterone have been shown to cause a very thin lining of the womb, making implantation impossible.


    You can understand this concept more fully by considering the example of a space shuttle, low on fuel and oxygen, which urgently needs to dock with the space station. The mother ship and the shuttle communicate with each other so that the shuttle knows which docking bay to go to. Importantly, the mother ship knows which bay to make ready. If this electronic communication fails – disrupted "cell-talk" --, the shuttle may go to the wrong docking bay, fail to attach to the mother ship, drift away, and the crew dies from a lack of food and oxygen. Or it might go to the right bay but not find all the docking apparatus in place. Again, the attachment between the two fails due to faulty communication and the crew dies.


    As well, there are a special group of molecules found both on the lining of the womb and on the 7-8 day old human embryo known as integrins. Integrins are referred to as ‘adhesion molecules’. Researchers have shown that these adhesion molecules greatly assist the process of implantation. Going back to our example of the docking process between a space shuttle and the mother ship, integrins could be thought of as grappling hooks that ‘hold’ the human embryo onto the womb whilst the process of implantation is completed. The artifical hormones in the pill have been shown to damage the ability of integrins – the implantation ‘hooks’— to function properly. Because of this damage to the proper functioning of integrins, the limited amount of time the human embryonic person has for attached, known as the ‘window of implantation’, is closed. As a result, the human embryonic person dies.


    As you can see, the pill acts as the great communication wrecker.
    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.