A professor says the problem with liberals is that we just don’t have enough babies.
And this failure to replenish their ranks is a reason why they lose elections. Call it a fertility gap."The political right is having a lot more kids than the political left," Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks says. "The gap is actually 41 percent."
Studying numbers from the General Social Survey -- a government survey of social trends -- Brooks found that 100 unrelated liberal adults have 147 children, while 100 unrelated conservatives have 208 kids.
That makes a difference, Brooks says, because "80 percent of people that express a political party preference are voting like their folks."
Hence, more Republicans.
Naturally the conservatives are jumping on the study, throwing out theories to why liberals are going to die out:
"They're for abortion policy, they're for same-sex marriage, they're for many of the agenda items that eventually mean you probably don't have children in the household," [conservative pollster Kellyanne] Conway said.
Liberals hate babies! Brooks sees the results of the study as a call to procreate: "Have babies! Forgo the cat, have kids." Yeah, but I like my cat. Sigh.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Have babies...for the good of the party.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/3838
ObSp: forego.
The catch is that you dont have to actualy *birth* children, you just have to inculcate them with your liberal values. Active parenting is the best way to accomplish that, though not the only way.
Your cat also likes you, but wishes you'd clean the litter box more often.
But, but... aren't all the colleges in the country filled with leftie liberals who use their exalted positions of teacherdom to indoctrinate all of their students into the evil ways of Democrats? That's what the conservatives tell us, anyway. So, which is it? Are we dying out from not having enough children, or taking over the world through education?
Oh, and wouldn't that make a great t-shirt? "Taking over the world through education"
Oh boy! Dr. Strangelove post-apocalyptic endgame scenario!
This reminds me of the last time I went to a Catholic mass. It was at a large cathedral in Washington DC, and the priest was giving his homily on why the church is opposed to birth control. He maintained that it was not due to any moral concern on the church's part, but rather for "survival of the species" ... as if the dwindling number of Catholics is because they're not procreating. Not because the church is oppressive at all or anything. Lovely logic all around.
Carlie,
That's why the republican party is so anti-facts and anti-education, especially for women. If women stay home and raise their kids, they will be the dominate educational force in their lives, so they will raise perfect little intolerant, willfully ignorant bastards (not in the original sense of the word).
I also like how they take the fact that they have won elections during Bush's tenure to mean that there are more Republicans. Actually, I think it's much more likey that people were SCARED SHITLESS. When that happens you get a "rally 'round the incumbent" effect that has nothing to do with party lines.
If women stay home and raise their kids, they will be the dominate educational force in their lives, so they will raise perfect little intolerant, willfully ignorant bastards (not in the original sense of the word).
Wow. I'm the daughter of a stay-at-home Republican mom. Yet while growing up I echoed the party line, I developed my own opinions during my early teens - thanks to reading, school and following the news.
The Repubs must be pretty dense if they think their kids are destined to be their parents' mini-mes.
But then, maybe that's why homeschooling is catching on with them. *shudder*
Obviously, every good American woman must be made to bear as many children as possible. I suggest the following policies:
1. Professional organizations like the ABA are to be nationalized, and to expel all female members.
2. All birth control is to be outlawed, except for immigrants, atheists, and other undesirables.
3. Every American woman who bears many children is to receive generous welfare paymets, and to be given special awards: a small one at child #4, a medium one at #6, and a big one at #8.
4. College education is to be deemphasized and made to be about American ideology. The idea that knowledge, even science, is independent of that, is part of the internationalist conspiracy to take over America.
I completely disagree with Brooks on this issue. Imagine, someone who thinks they're liberal encouraging overpopulation! Has adoption even crossed his mind?
Boy, this is one of those issues that seperate the real liberals from the Americans. I mean, overpopulation is only the hugest problem in the world. I can maybe understand when liberals want to have 1 kid of their own (if everyone in the world did this, the population would soon halve). But I still consider having babies very selfish.
There are thousands, millions of children who need parents to care for them. Is your selfish need to have children of your own greater than their needs?
The problem with Brooks's argument is that he doesn't provide any evidence. Note that he mentions a raw data set, not an actual study.
How does one check that his argument is true?
The 59-41 percent or 208-147 disparity may be accurate, but the 80 percent figure is a laugh.
Cheers,
TH
"Boy, this is one of those issues that seperate the real liberals from the Americans."
Because...British and European and South American and Asian and African liberals don't make babies? Really? I must say, that is not something I noticed while living in London or travelling in France--I saw quite a lot of pregnant women over there.
Your argument may make rational sense, but few people have children for rational reasons, and calling people selfish isn't really going to help your cause.