Be Fruitful and Multiply: Time to Reject the Malthusian Lie of the Population Planners

3/25/2013

(Page 2 of 2)

government.

But, although wrong, dead, and gone, Malthus is not forgotten. One of his more recent disciples was Paul Ehrlich, who wrote The Population Bomb in 1968, essentially parroting Malthus' mistakes. Ehrlich began his book with the statement, "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate ... " He thought it was too late to avoid Malthusian disasters such as severe famines, the spread of disease, social unrest, and other negative consequences of overpopulation, but for those who survived he advocated Malthus' preventive solutions, the easiest possible availability of birth control and abortions.

In his 1977 textbook, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, he said, "A far better choice, in our view, is to expand the use of milder methods of influencing family size preferences, while redoubling efforts to ensure that the means of birth control, including abortion and sterilization, are accessible to every human being on Earth within the shortest possible time." Clearly the United States was NOT involved in famine or any food shortages in the 1970's or thereafter, but amazingly this man is still at Stanford University and continues to perform policy research concerning population and resource issues, and promote his positive solutions of birth control and abortion. Bad ideas apparently die hard.

What is hard to understand is that both these men have been proven wrong, and should have become laughing stocks. But they didn't. Instead, their ideas, and the policies that stem from their positive solutions to a nonexistent problem have become part of the mantra of the left, and have sadly become part of our culture. Still, Malthus wrote his treatise in 1800, and you did not see a precipitous fall in family size until over 150 years later. Why was that the case?

Traditionally there were two reasons that people had children. One was that God instituted marriage to create families where parents could produce and raise children, thus sustaining and reproducing themselves and the human race. These families were the basic unit of society, which banded together to form tribes for mutual protection, and then developed governments. In our increasingly secular society today, the government feels free to dictate what is the basic unit of society, which apparently will be the "household", consisting of whatever combination of sexes the government decides is licit. The other reason people had children was because God endowed them with a strong sex drive that was to be coupled with marital vows in a sacramental union.

Therefore, what has happened is a decoupling of that marital union. In the 1960's convenient contraception for the first time pulled the rug from under God's plan for people to be fruitful and multiply. Soon, not having children was seen as a "right", which was actually a product of radical individualism, which is basically the drastic reduction of limits to personal gratification. Individualism was always a feature of classical liberalism, on which our country was founded, but it was kept in check and prevented from becoming pure hedonism by religion, morality, and law based on the first two. It is understandable in view of the general debasement of society that has taken place since the 1960's that we now have more cohabitation, more divorces, a huge number of fatherless children, millions murdered in abortion facilities creating a culture of death, and increased crime and general social malaise as a result. What is not clear, however, is why our married, stable families are often failing to reproduce themselves by having no children, or at most one or two.

There are many reasons for this phenomenon. People marry later than they used to, and wait until they feel financially secure and emotionally mature before having children, so that their reproductive years do not last long enough to have many children. There can be many other reasons why this occurs, but they have always been the case. The question is, why do so many people nowadays say, "I don't want to have any kids"?

Again, there can be many reasons why this may be the case, but in general they can be attributed to the same radical individualism that is everywhere seen in our society today. Children are simply not convenient. Abortion of course is the ultimate form of individualism, where a mother decides that her body is her own to do with as she pleases, and she has the right to snuff out the life that is temporarily sharing it with her. Not having children when there is not a compelling reason not to is the same in kind, though not in degree. Although the Church condones Natural Family Planning, it does so only providing there is a grave reason not to have children. Examples can be given, which include the mother's health, temporary economic crisis, etc., but these are generally assumed to be temporary. NFP with the goal of having no children is not morally acceptable. Marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman, and their mutual commitment is required, but the fruit of that union needs to be children.

There is no question that society makes having children today expensive. Think what sort of a vehicle you would need to buy if you have many small children, each of whom must be belted into a bomb-proof car seat the size and weight of a floor safe. People assume that they must pay more than their house is worth to send each child to the college of his choice, after 18 years of electronic gadgets, clothes, cars, and luxury that would have made Louis XIV envious. But all that is not necessary. Recently, opera star Andrea Bocelli thanked his mother for not aborting him when she was medically advised to do so because he might be born with a deformity, despite the fact that he is blind. Similarly, would children regret being born because you could not afford to give them all iPhones and send them to Ivy League schools?

Young couples, talk to your parents about this. If you come from a large family, ask them about the decisions they made, and how things worked out, though you pretty much know the answer! If you come from a small family, ask your folks how they feel now, and if they would have done anything differently. It would be rare indeed to find older parents who wish they didn't have kids to come to visit them, while lonely old people are sadly everywhere. The West is at a critical juncture due to its failure to procreate, and our Social Security System is failing for exactly this reason. We no longer have enough young people to help support their aging parents who no longer can support themselves. This economic reality coupled with radical individualism and hedonism means that euthanasia and the famed "death panels" of obamacare are already being openly discussed. These "final solutions" were never even considered before, but then, neither was contraception prior to the Episcopalian Lambeth Conference in 1930.

The Lord commanded us to, "Be fruitful and multiply". To borrow the title from the 1960's television show, "Father Knows Best".

----------

Dr. Frederick Liewehr is an endodontist who teaches and works in private practice. He converted from Protestantism to Catholicism in 1983, having been drawn ineluctably to Christ's Church by the light of Truth. He is a member of St. Benedict parish in Richmond, a Fourth Degree Knight of Columbus and a Cooperator of Opus Dei.

- - -

Pope Benedict XVI's Prayer Intentions for January 2013
General Intention: The Faith of Christians. That in this Year of Faith Christians may deepen their knowledge of the mystery of Christ and witness joyfully to the gift of faith in him.
Missionary Intention: Middle Eastern Christians. That the Christian communities of the Middle East, often discriminated against, may receive from the Holy Spirit the strength of fidelity and perseverance.

Keywords: population, population control, culture of death, Thomas Malthus, Paul Ehrlich, anti-life, malthusian, family planning, Frederick Liewehr

NEWSLETTERS »

Previous Page 1 | 2

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 11 Comments

Erika
2 months ago
@Josephine Brown: Environment issues are a big problem, but I think it's not an issue of population but what that population is doing. I believe I've seen stats in many places saying that the U.S. disproportionately (based on population) contributes to greenhouse gases. Over-use of cars and other lifestyle choices are causing environmental damage, not the number of people. If we all could run off of energy that didn't emit environmental contaminants, I think we could have an even larger population and still get along better with our planet.
Robert LePage
2 months ago
The problem with the "facts" in this article is that they do not take into account that for countries like Singapore to survive with their 7,301 per square kilometre, they are taking the food from another country where famine is the norm.
Only on an infinite flat earth can an perpetual growing state exist. Ask the people from Easter island.
Michael
2 months ago
The stated reasons for their Malthusian positions are simply pseudo-scientific justificatory distractions for the average person to run down that rabbit hole. Their true motivations are anti-human and satanic in origin.

www.principalitiesandpowers.org
Ruth
2 months ago
What many fail to see is that many of the 'enviromental/overpopulation' supporters hate humans. There is no inherent dignity in human life and no sacredness given by God. We ARE called to be stewards of the earth and we are responsible for not damaging the enviroment but that is a far cry from wanting to destroy families and babies.

Currently the population numbers in the world are going up mostly through longer living (something Malthus would hate--he thought we should encourage earlier death.) But unless the birth rates start rising, the world is set to see a drop in population in another 30-50 years, slow at first and then rapid. It will be difficult to reverse at this point.

We can all set back and watch China implode for now. Each young couple is now responsible for supporting their parents (4), grandparents (8) and possibly great-grandparents (up to 16) while caring for themselves (2) and their child (1). 15 to 31 people.

The upshot of having few children is a more and more selfish generation. After a couple of generations of a single child policy, one child could be the object of all the hopes, dreams and attention of their parens and grandparents (10 adults).

Even in our own country, I see the current generation of children and their parents obsessing about having EVERY material and social opportunity. Parents move to new towns so that their daughters can make a cheerleading squad or the mother in Texas who took out a contract on her daughter's rival's mother. Their one child or two children just has to HAVE everything.

God's first command to humans in the bible is: Be fruitful and multiply. It is a call to love and unselfish behavior. It is a call to add to eternity. "Nothing that is not eternal is of any use in eternity." (CS Lewis). What is more eternal a gift than a human soul?
Michael Lardelli
2 months ago
I saw a great talk once by Richard Heinberg, the author of "The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies". He shows the growth curve of a yeast culture in wine making. The number of yeast rocket up and, as metabolic waste products (pollution) accumulate and resources (sugar/food) run out, the yeast population reaches a peak and then crashes. Drawing obvious parallels to the human situation he then asked, "Are humans smarter than yeast"? Reading this article confirms to me that the answer, sadly, is no.

The love of God may be infinite but the Earth he/she created is most definitely not so. Our numbers (and consumption) have now become so great that we are already consuming more than the Earth can renewably provide. We are eating into the Earth's capital and the results are disappearing forests, plants and animal species and growing conflicts as food prices rise and people no longer have the means to pay. What do you think sparked the "Arab Spring"? You can ignore the signs that surround you but is there any greater sin than wilful ignorance?
Proteios1
2 months ago
Hey, even us scientists need our version of the Millerites. Aren't those the protestants who are the contemporary 'the world will end on..." group. And every time it didn't end, they just cited a calculation error and et a new date?

Anyways, two thoughts.
1. Apply this faulty logic to other things...oh no, there won't be enough shoes or blue jeans for more people because we will never built more factories or hire some of these new people to make the products.
2. I though global climat change was causing droughts and famines?
Tara Brelinsky
2 months ago
Thank you for this well written and truthful article. I have written about and discussed this very topic many times, but it needs to remain in the forefront until people grasp the reality of the agenda at play. Namely, the culture of death which is based on this idea of de-population.

As an NFP teacher I wholeheartedly agree that NFP can be used to postpone if the couple prayerfully discerns a serious reason to do so, but I can attest that the terms "grave," and "serious" are often disputed and substituted with the term "just." What "just" may have once meant is arguable, but nowadays just can mean we just don't want anymore kids. Sadly, NFP has been tainted and is sometimes sold as a licit means of reaching the same ends, avoiding additional children. I have "argued" at length with NFP teachers over this and if you stumble on a blog that touches on this topic you are likely to read comments arguing both sides. In fact, one method specifically asks couples to state whether they are working to achieve or avoid pregnancy (period) The couple is required to decide and inform a third party (their teacher or doctor). When I informed a teacher of that method that we neither work to achieve or postpone, I got the impression she considered us to be immature in our ability to sexually restrain ourselves!

The understanding that we are called to be generous and trust that Father knows best and will not be outdone in generosity, is laughed at. As the mother of seven wonderful living children, six heavenly and one anticipated, I can attest to the truth that complete surrender to God's Will is a tremendous vocation and one that I will never regret. God has not been outdone and He truly knows what is best for all of us.

Thanks again for this thoughtful piece.
Chris Danze
2 months ago
Excellent article, thank you for writing it.
Josephine Boone
2 months ago
The writer describes one fact that is true: Malthus, Ehrlich and were wrong about the time frame of global carrying capacity for population and their proposed remedies were odious. However, he wrongly infers from this that population growth is a “nonexistent problem”. Over population is a real issue which has more dimensions than simply availability of food. Technological advances “the green revolution” have greatly expanded global food production. Today the most serious pressure comes from availability of clean water and the issue of global warming due to the use of fossil fuels. These are very serious challenges and it is folly to ignore them.
abey
2 months ago
It comes down to just one word "Faith", a total lack of it. To the preventive checks, this article misses out the core aspect to not only as a means to control population but also to the production of sin, that to total destruction coming about Physically & Spiritually portrayed through the "Gay Agendas" not just contradicting but going against the very basic structure of Creation & its Family & against the subsequent natural laws come off God. To say, the gifts of satan are but curses in disguise.

Prev12 Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment