luvofchrist
Full Member
"Gibson" the wonder pup
Posts: 233
|
Post by luvofchrist on Aug 25, 2006 13:14:38 GMT -5
This just in... thought it was interesting:
I have said for some time that if everyone was pro abortion or gay, wouldn't we go extinct?? Here's the article to prove it: Prof: U.S. liberals on slope to extinction WASHINGTON, Aug. 24 (UPI) -- U.S. liberals face extinction if they don't start having enough babies to keep up with conservatives, a Syracuse University professor told ABC News.
Professor Arthur Brooks said after studying numbers from the governmental General Social Survey, he found 100 unrelated liberal adults have 147 children, while 100 unrelated conservatives have 208 kids.
Brooks said that makes a difference, as 80 percent of people with political opinions vote like their parents.
In response, conservative pollster Kellyanne Conway told ABC liberals are creating their own fertility gap by their beliefs.
"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," Conway said.
The professor, meanwhile said he had advice for liberals who wanted to reverse the trend.
"Have babies! Forgo the cat, have kids," Brooks said.
|
|
|
Post by robdog on Aug 25, 2006 13:27:25 GMT -5
Does liberalism lead to extinction?
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on Aug 25, 2006 14:27:23 GMT -5
Oh my, that is a horrible piece (I say this from a journalistic stand point).
I'm pretty liberal, but hey know, abortion? No thanks.
Conway is clearly not all there, he stereotyped liberals.
|
|
|
Post by eric on Aug 29, 2006 7:32:30 GMT -5
I have two words for liberal couples that want to prevent extinction...
FULL QUIVER!!!
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on Aug 29, 2006 9:08:24 GMT -5
huh??
|
|
|
Post by robdog on Aug 29, 2006 10:44:42 GMT -5
Second that...are you referring to arrows? Like Robin Hood?
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on Aug 29, 2006 18:37:29 GMT -5
Second that...are you referring to arrows? Like Robin Hood? I'm kinda glad I'm not the only confused person. What does that mean??
|
|
|
Post by eric on Aug 29, 2006 20:00:57 GMT -5
Psalm 127 1Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.
2It is vain for you to rise up early, to sit up late, to eat the bread of sorrows: for so he giveth his beloved sleep.
3Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
4As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth.
5Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on Aug 29, 2006 20:12:27 GMT -5
Uh-huh ... well that convinved me ...
(I think we need to get this guy a straight-jacket)
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Sept 27, 2006 12:12:32 GMT -5
Does the study mention how many of those children survive to adulthood, how many of them stay out of prison, how many of them complete high school or secondary educations, or what kinds of jobs those children go on to? Does the study mention how many children those children in turn have when they grow up?
This "study" appears to be based on an insufficient sample size, with insufficient future reference points and demographic analysis to be valid.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Sept 27, 2006 12:14:05 GMT -5
I think we have a professor here.
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Sept 27, 2006 12:39:17 GMT -5
Heh Not quite a professor, and certainly not an expert in any field outside of computers, but I like to think I stay reasonably well-informed. As Mark Twain said, "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Numbers can be shown to mean pretty much anything one wants if surrounding data is ignored or isn't gathered.
|
|
|
Post by dale on Sept 27, 2006 12:44:53 GMT -5
The initial article is so ridiculous it really does not merit much attention
|
|