Atheists on marriage
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2015, 07:49 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 06:24 AM)julep Wrote:  Nor would a downshift in worldwide population be a bad thing.

This is a common misconception. When population decreases due to famine, plague or natural disasters, the populations decrease but their demographics remain same more or less.
But in case of Japan, and to some extent Germany (they are fixing it with immigration), When population decreases, it's because fewer kids are being born than people dying. The end result is a huge population of old people (japanese have some of the longest lifespan in the world). This people don't contribute much to society since they have retired. They have huge healthcare costs (get ill often) , need pension and even get discounts. I am not saying this is wrong. I am just saying that a smaller and smaller group of young people will have to support them, since they are the main drive of the economy. End result is economic collapse.

The point? Population reversals in the way mentioned are catastrophic.

(07-08-2015 07:10 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  is nothing noble or good in giving birth to child that would be forced to live in poverty.

Are you saying the poor have no right to have children?

Meh. You do not convince that either Germany or Japan's population situation is dire, irreversible, and/or inevitably going to result in economic collapse, much less that encouraging young people to reproduce regardless of having resources to support their children is going to fix it. (Young people, in any event, are going to reproduce)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 07:59 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 07:48 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 07:42 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Romania has a falling birthrate and shrinking population, and 99% of the population identifies as religious.

And here we have our first guy who missed the disclaimer TWICE. Congrats, you receive the "scrapping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel IQ" award.

I already mentioned that i am not implying any correlation with atheism...
BTW, Does Romania have a problem with Emigration?

I think you'll find the word you're looking for is scraping. Scrapping would be something else entirely. Idiots in glass houses should probably avoid throwing rocks at concrete.

I read your facile little disclaimer, bro. I don't care about your whining. It would be a very special person indeed who claimed, despite explicitly framing a question to atheists, not to be discussing religion in any way...

But yes, demographic patterns are driven primarily by economics. My laconic offering of a sample data point in attestation of that seems to have gone above your head, pssy disclaimer notwithstanding. Pre-industrial societies experience high mortality and thus high fertility; there's a lag time for the latter to fall after the former does. Fertility rates within developed countries also track economic health, thus the contrast between higher rates in the United States, UK, and France, compared to the much lower rates in Eastern Europe or East Asia.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
07-08-2015, 08:10 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
Marriage is a legal contract, and not much more. Ir has a rather nasty history for women, recall that until the nineteen fucking nineties it was legal for a man to rape his wife. Since the stigma against unmarried couples is falling it's not terribly surprising that many (myself included) have opted not to marry.

I don't think that marriage has much to do with family or childbirth though. Economics have much more to do with it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like natachan's post
07-08-2015, 08:22 AM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 08:27 AM by π¶∆.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 07:59 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 07:48 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  And here we have our first guy who missed the disclaimer TWICE. Congrats, you receive the "scrapping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel IQ" award.

I already mentioned that i am not implying any correlation with atheism...
BTW, Does Romania have a problem with Emigration?

I think you'll find the word you're looking for is scraping. Scrapping would be something else entirely. Idiots in glass houses should probably avoid throwing rocks at concrete.

I read your facile little disclaimer, bro. I don't care about your whining. It would be a very special person indeed who claimed, despite explicitly framing a question to atheists, not to be discussing religion in any way...

But yes, demographic patterns are driven primarily by economics. My laconic offering of a sample data point in attestation of that seems to have gone above your head, pssy disclaimer notwithstanding. Pre-industrial societies experience high mortality and thus high fertility; there's a lag time for the latter to fall after the former does. Fertility rates within developed countries also track economic health, thus the contrast between higher rates in the United States, UK, and France, compared to the much lower rates in Eastern Europe or East Asia.


By forcing in words like "facile" and "laconic" you have assured me that you have a good command of english. Good job! But my issue with you was never with english. It was with you not taking me for my word. But of course, you know better than me what i want and why i made this thread. To hell with the disclaimer.


(07-08-2015 07:49 AM)julep Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  This is a common misconception. When population decreases due to famine, plague or natural disasters, the populations decrease but their demographics remain same more or less.
But in case of Japan, and to some extent Germany (they are fixing it with immigration), When population decreases, it's because fewer kids are being born than people dying. The end result is a huge population of old people (japanese have some of the longest lifespan in the world). This people don't contribute much to society since they have retired. They have huge healthcare costs (get ill often) , need pension and even get discounts. I am not saying this is wrong. I am just saying that a smaller and smaller group of young people will have to support them, since they are the main drive of the economy. End result is economic collapse.

The point? Population reversals in the way mentioned are catastrophic.


Are you saying the poor have no right to have children?

Meh. You do not convince that either Germany or Japan's population situation is dire, irreversible, and/or inevitably going to result in economic collapse, much less that encouraging young people to reproduce regardless of having resources to support their children is going to fix it. (Young people, in any event, are going to reproduce)


Germany less so, as i mentioned they are fixing this with immigration, but Japan's situation really is dire. Many studies on the subject can be found. The thing is Japanese are not poor, their per capita income is more than sufficient to support and care for children. It's that they just don't want to have kids. Which is their prerogative I guess.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 08:26 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 08:22 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  By forcing in words like "facile" and "laconic" you have assured me that you have a good command of english. Good job!

Don't get whiny and resentful just because a native speaker has a better vocabulary, mate. It's not becoming.

I did not "force" any words into my post. I chose ones that seemed most apt in expressing the ideas I wished to.

(07-08-2015 08:22 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  But my issue with you was never with english. It was with you not taking me for my word. But of course, you know better than me what i want and why i made this thread. To hell with the disclaimer.

I literally just explained this to you. One cannot explicitly address "atheists" and simultaneously maintain one is not addressing the presence and role of religion. The category of atheism is inseparable from the existence of religion. Do you understand this?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
07-08-2015, 08:29 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 08:22 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  Germany less so, as i mentioned they are fixing this with immigration, but Japan's situation really is dire. Many studies on the subject can be found. The thing is Japanese are not poor, their per capita income is more than sufficient to support and care for children. It's that they just don't want to have kids. Which is their prerogative I guess.

Nobody said Japan was poor. A wealthy economy can still perform poorly, which, of course, is precisely what happened in Japan.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 08:30 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 08:26 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 08:22 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  By forcing in words like "facile" and "laconic" you have assured me that you have a good command of english. Good job!

Don't get whiny and resentful just because a native speaker has a better vocabulary, mate. It's not becoming.

I did not "force" any words into my post. I chose ones that seemed most apt in expressing the ideas I wished to.

(07-08-2015 08:22 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  But my issue with you was never with english. It was with you not taking me for my word. But of course, you know better than me what i want and why i made this thread. To hell with the disclaimer.

I literally just explained this to you. One cannot explicitly address "atheists" and simultaneously maintain one is not addressing the presence and role of religion. The category of atheism is inseparable from the existence of religion. Do you understand this?

Woe to me for arguing with the village idiot. I most certainly can do what you say i cannot, by simply mentioning what my intentions for said query are. Do you see me saying anywhere that "oh the heathens are behind this!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 08:33 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 07:40 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 07:10 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  is nothing noble or good in giving birth to child that would be forced to live in poverty.

Are you saying the poor have no right to have children?

You have trouble with reading? Or you just looking for opportunity to do some trolling?

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Szuchow's post
07-08-2015, 08:33 AM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 08:29 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 08:22 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  Germany less so, as i mentioned they are fixing this with immigration, but Japan's situation really is dire. Many studies on the subject can be found. The thing is Japanese are not poor, their per capita income is more than sufficient to support and care for children. It's that they just don't want to have kids. Which is their prerogative I guess.

Nobody said Japan was poor. A wealthy economy can still perform poorly, which, of course, is precisely what happened in Japan.

Which is precisely why i mentioned per capita income.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 08:35 AM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 08:39 AM by cjlr.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 08:30 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  Woe to me for arguing with the village idiot.

So that's a "no", then. You don't understand. Oh, well.

(07-08-2015 08:30 AM)π¶∆ Wrote:  I most certainly can do what you say i cannot, by simply mentioning what my intentions for said query are.

Perhaps I should have been more explicit. You're free do do so. You cannot do so and remain coherent. Since I'm feeling very generous this morning, I'll attribute the gap in your understanding to you being a non-native English speaker, instead of merely an asshole.

I could start a discussion about the use of nuclear weapons and then demand that nobody mention WWII, but that would be an insane demand. Do you understand that some topics are closely related to each other, no matter how hard you whine otherwise?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: