Comments on: The Secular Shakers

By: Gaius

Gaius — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 02:52:03 +0000

But you’re now into a nature versus nurture argument. Is it the people or the “education” they are receiving?

I suspect the latter is lacking.

By: fletch

fletch — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 02:30:39 +0000

Gaius-

On the bright side, ideas like this tend to die out rather rapidly for obvious reasons.

Unless they keep breeding… Reasearch the “Hapsburg lip”- (and the current rulers of England) )

I will admit my “prejudice” as a “non-breeding” hetero…

But, I stiil live -(where I live):
-”inner cities” where a 75% “graduation rate” is a cause for celebration,
-$13K/student/yr elementary schools (where 30+% will “drop out” before 10th grade),
-Almost 60% of the 35% ‘college-bound’ HS grads who attend college will be required to take at least one “remedial” (i.e.- “HS- level”) class. (Math and/or Basic English ‘Composition’),
-In 10% of all schools in the District- 99% of the 4th graders cannot pass a 4th grade skills test in Math or English… (yet, 80% of those ‘failures’ will be ‘promoted’ to 5th grade– and 10% will ‘graduate’ while still being unable to pass a 9th grade skills test after 7 attempts…)

By: Kill your baby, save the world. But why not go all the way? | BitsBlog

Kill your baby, save the world. But why not go all the way? | BitsBlog — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 00:25:26 +0000

[...] Van Der Galiën Gazette, Fellow Swamp Stomper Blue Crab Boulevard, Hot Air, Jules Crittenden, Don Surber, and The Jawa Report, as well a a pile more at [...]

By: McGehee

McGehee — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 23:48:42 +0000

In response to obeatiologist, I would merely point to the beginning of the post and ask, “How influential are the Shakers today?”

By: obeatiologist

obeatiologist — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 20:32:32 +0000

This story worries me. A couple of premises that I see popping up here are a) this is her right to feel this way and b) she will just be ridding the planet of people like herself who view humanity as a scourge by not reproducing. Both are problematic for me. Firstly, although it is anyones right not to reproduce what makes you think she’s going to be happy living out her life and just not reproducing? She (or someone like her) isn’t going to stop there. If that was the case, there wouldn’t be a story b/c there would be no notions of a higher calling to this woman’s decision. What would be special about a woman that doesn’t want to have a child? Thats “dog bites man”. However, this woman is saving the planet by her actions. And sooner or later she’s going to start saving the planet by affecting your actions. Its starts with lobbying groups pressuring governments to restrict the number of children you can have and it ends with things that are far worse, directly reducing the worlds population for the sake of gaia. Secondly, this is not a genetically inheritable trait that is going to die with her. How could it be? If this was an inheritable trait, her parents would’ve had it and therefore never had her. Unless of course its recessive, but you get my point. This has very little to do with genetics, and everything to do with a social mentality of apologizing to the universe for your existence. This ideas won’t die with her, they spread the same way all ideas do. I have no idea how serious people like this are or how many there are, but this sort of mentality is potentially dangerous.

By: sam

sam — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 20:22:50 +0000

I read this article linked from Pajamas Media and left a comment on the Daily Mail website thanking Toni and the others quoted in the article for saving the planet for my children and grandchildren. I also quoted Mark Steyn: “The future belongs to those who show up for it.”

By: Americaneocon

Americaneocon — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 19:11:05 +0000

Interesting interpretation. However one looks at this, it’s not a good picture for the demographic health of the industrialized democracies.

The growth of postmaterialist ideology is a well-studied phenomenon in the political science literature. According to Ronald Inglehart, following World War II, as the Western industrialized democracies recovered from material hardship and deprivation, many in the younger generations coming of age rejected the societal ethos of materialistic consumption in favor of more progressive views on environmentalism and the support for non-traditional values.

The decisions cited here, of the women to denounce childbearing as a threat to the survival of the world, is explicable according to this paradigm. Still, these views could be seen as representing the ideological demonization of childbearing. Without all those kids in tow, suburban moms won’t need those big, carbon-busting SUVs!