The title of this blog reflects the title of a recent article in Australia's Daily Telegraph.
It seems, if you took this article seriously, that couples having children and thus increasing the Australian fertility rate is cause for concern, if not alarm, at least among those who keep statistics and appear dedicated to preserving the country's ecological balance.
This analysis is so astounding to me that I would prefer to first quote it and then make my comments on what appears to be the latest twist in the culture of death's ongoing efforts to rid the world of babies. The article states,
FORGET those plans to have a third child for the country because further increases in the birth rate could harm the economy, the nation's productivity watchdog has warned.
A major analysis of the nation's increasing fertility rate said it was at its highest level for 25 years – but the Productivity Commission yesterday warned further increases may aggravate rather than solve the problem of the ageing of the population.
This is because it will shift women out of the workforce while they care for babies, depressing labour supply and reducing the taxation base as our population ages, the Daily Telegraph reported.
The small number of extra babies born would make little difference to the rate of population ageing, the commission said.
I have seen many tactics employed by the architects of the culture of death, but this is one of the most incredibly arrogant mind games I have seen. And the problem with it is that this article presents no alternative perspective. For many, particularly those in the aging population, the article could fuel the idea that population control is the only way to care for the elderly. Such an oxymoronic concept should not be worthy of ink in anyone's newspaper, but in fact the opposite has happened in more countries than just Australia.
It is well known that because of the developed nations' declining work force (caused in large part by so many abortions), the cost of caring for the aging is becoming very expensive. This provides arguments for euthanizing the elderly who spent their lives contributing to the tax base as they prepared for their retirement. The sacrifices of the past could well result in their early demise if attitudes toward fertility and ageing do not change, not only in Australia, but also around the world.
In a recent article, Dennis Howard, an expert in analyzing population data, explained the following:
The abortion boom is also behind the coming crisis in Social Security and Medicare. The problem is that we used to have as many as 16 people in the workforce for every person on Social Security. Soon, there will be only two. To save these programs from bankruptcy, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that tax rates may have to rise as high as 82%. As one of the survivors of the abortion boom, guess who will pay the bill? Meanwhile, the downstream loss in future tax revenues that will result from the more than 48.5 million abortions that have already occurred amounts to an estimated $18 trillion, or more than twice our current national debt. We don't have a debt crisis. We have a death crisis.
While Howard examines the problem in the United States, one could also argue that the same problems will develop and evolve into a crisis in every country where the birth rate falls below two children per family. It makes eminent sense, then, to argue in favor of married couples having more, not less, children. And yet, Australian authorities disagree, and I imagine they are joined by many, including so-called American experts.
Biill Muehlenberg, a pro-life commentator, explained the following in a commentary opposing euthanasia:
The euthanasia mentality leads to the dehumanisation of man and the desacrilisation [sic] of life. The sacredness of human life becomes viewed as mere sentimentalism, and expediency takes priority.
Consider, for example, a report issued last year by EPAC, the Economic Planning and Advisory Council, a government think-tank. The report discussed the rising costs of medical care for the elderly, and rising hospital costs in general, and actually suggested that euthanasia might be an option in dealing with this crisis. There was no mention of suffering or the humane treatment of dying human beings. Instead, cold utilitarian considerations of cost-cutting were given as the reason to consider euthanasia.
If we put this in the context of the Australian article, coupled with my recent discussions with a young man in Vienna, it is not hard to see where the culture of death is attempting to take the human race. Inhumanity towards man, as a solution to economic problems (that actually have a very simple solution) is not only an evil recommendation – it is downright idiotic.
That old saying, GROW OR DIE, has taken on new meaning. If families don't grow. the human race will die – and that's a fact.
