Papal Irresponsibility

So the latest Catholic muppet displays the usual religious stupidity.

He calls on the congregation to have more children and says that an increasing population is a sign of a successful society.

Given that the world is already overpopulated by Humans and that the population is increasing by an estimated 87 million a year, shouldn't he be discouraging us from breeding.

Isn't this just a sign that the Catholic church is worried by the more rapidly expanding Islamic population?

Once again, the sheer narrow mindedness of religion and its belief and desire for its followers to constitute the entire population of "Chosen" people in the world, places us all at risk of extinction.

Originally posted by howardgee
So the latest Catholic muppet displays the usual religious stupidity.

He calls on the congregation to have more children and says that an increasing population is a sign of a successful society.

Given that the world is already overpopulated by Humans and that the population is increasing by an estimated 87 million a year, shouldn't he be discouragin ...[text shortened]... te the entire population of "Chosen" people in the world, places us all at risk of extinction.

Originally posted by howardgee
So the latest Catholic muppet displays the usual religious stupidity.

He calls on the congregation to have more children and says that an increasing population is a sign of a successful society.

Given that the world is already overpopulated by Humans and that the population is increasing by an estimated 87 million a year, shouldn't he be discouragin ...[text shortened]... te the entire population of "Chosen" people in the world, places us all at risk of extinction.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Howardgee: "He calls on the congregation to have more children and says that an increasing population is a sign of a successful society."


Can you provide a link so we can read his statements in their proper context ?

Originally posted by Nemesio
It took me 5 minutes to find it, Ivanhoe. Don't be lazy.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2005/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20050831_en.html

http://www.cathnews.com/news/509/3.php

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1762858,00.html

Nemesio

A declining birth-rate sets big problems for a society if it keeps declining. Every economist knows this ..... I hope. There's nothing wrong with the Pope's statements regarding this demographic problem that certain countries are facing

Originally posted by howardgee
So the latest Catholic muppet displays the usual religious stupidity.

Originally posted by howardgee
He calls on the congregation to have more children and says that an increasing population is a sign of a successful society.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I have sent a little sprite to whisper in Papa Ben's ear, "Instruct your priests that they shall marry and raise vast quantities of children. This measure will improve the overall morale and quality of the priesthood".

Is the Cat in the Hat looking at the bigger picture? Population explosion does seem to be a problem in the world overall; Europe ...[text shortened]... tion growth and urge the rest of the faithful--say, in the Phillipines--to follow their example.

Originally posted by frogstomp
he could unleash the power of pregnant nuns , that could work.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Entire convents could be reassigned to do the holy work of increasing the population of the faithful. The Devils of Loudun come home to roost.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
A declining birth-rate sets big problems for a society if it keeps declining. Every economist knows this ..... I hope. There's nothing wrong with the Pope's statements regarding this demographic problem that certain countries are facing.

As a one-time, somekinduva economist—

At some point, declining birthrates could be problematic for an economy—given natural resources, technology, how closed the economy is, etc.—over the long run. For example, a shrinking labor force, a declining consumer sector (with declining demand for goods and services, with a declining demand for investment capital&hellip😉, and an aging demographic profile (with strains on social services, etc.). It really depends on how a whole host of factors balance out.

Two extreme examples: (1) Evidence shows that hunter-gatherer societies tend to have relatively low birthrates on the whole, supporting small bands; this makes sense, given reliance on nature for food and materials, and the systemic travel from locale to locale, etc. (2) Agricultural economies tend to have much higher birthrates and larger families; midwest American farmers, for example, used to talk about having a bunch of kids to help out on the farm (this is probably alleviated, all things considered) with advanced farm technology). One explanation for these differences is caloric: the higher consumed calories in the agricultural society simply, biologically leads to higher birthrates and, ceteris paribus a burgeoning population; and vice versa. (Interestingly, agricultural societies can also be more subject to the devastation of famine, it seems.)

Telerion could address all this more accurately and with better detail; or Palynka perhaps…

Caveats, however—

1) I think we’re talking about long run, sustained decline here; a sharp change in birthrates can cause waves in the economy (e.g., the US’s present controversies over Social Security are related to the aging of the Post WWII “baby boom” generation).

2) Rising birthrates (within a given economy) can be problematic in the other direction.

3) Global population growth is probably one of the severest problems facing humanity, with a global strain on resources.

4) Does anyone really want to talk about social engineering of birthrates for the sake of balancing economic resources? Or as a strategy by one group or another to achieve some kind of economic (and political) hegemony? Can you say “brave (maybe) new world?”

I think the far-and-away greatest demographic problem facing the world today is overall population growth, period. So I generally think that purposefully promoting higher birthrates among any population group is irresponsible. [Note how carefully I’m trying to tread here…] Are there countervailing moral issues? I don’t know—but pursuing policies that increase the strain on available natural resources to sustain life, with the attendant conflicts, suffering and death, does not seem to be a morally positive tack.

Big caveat: Population and demographic issues are complex (and my specialties were labor market studies and retirement/pension issues: micro-economics).

Originally posted by vistesd
As a one-time, somekinduva economist—

At some point, declining birthrates could be problematic for an economy—given natural resources, technology, how closed the economy is, etc.—over the long run. For example, a shrinking labor force, a declining consumer sector (with declining demand for goods and services, with a declining demand for in ...[text shortened]... (and my specialties were labor market studies and retirement/pension issues: micro-economics).

Originally posted by ivanhoe

Pope Benedict XV: "We can easily think of those societies today that are lacking in energy and hope because of a declining birth-rate."