They've Aborted All Their Children. Now They Want Ours.

"Be right wing and multiply" - that's how Peter Schweizer titled his National Post article. But the facts are - it's not really the "right wingers" who need encouragement from Mr. Schweizer. And that's what the article is about.

Most of the facts outlined in the article are well known. We know that many self-absorbed liberals would rather pamper themselves than have children. Mr. Schweizer just adds some statistical data: Over half of the women of childbearing age (15 to 44) in liberal bastions such as the District of Columbia, Vermont and Massachusetts are childless. Or as they proudly call themselves - "child free". If there's anything there that surprises me - it's that they still manage to maintain a fertility rate of 1.47 children per family. Especially now, when on top of the usual selfishness we also have all those phony environmentalists with their myth that "babies are bad for the environment".

And, since the trend is clearly noticeable, no wonder that some of them begin to worry about their political future:

This birth gap presents a quandary for politically active liberals. Not wanting to be inconvenienced with raising their own children, they still want to see their ideas perpetuated. Professor Darren Sherkat of Southern Illinois University worries that because conservatives "who have lots of children" are not being matched by those on the political left who "may well not have kids," these demographic trends will push the country in a more conservative direction. (Data indicates that 80% of children end up adopting the political attitudes of their parents.) To counterbalance this trend, he argues for increasing immigration and expanding the black population. He also hopes that childless liberals will "be able to reproduce themselves in strangers," by taking on jobs as teachers, writers and other people of influence. The idea is to let conservatives raise their children, while liberals influence them through the schools and universities.

Another lefty concurs: "I'd say that the author of a popular book has far more aggregate influence than do one set of parents. So if the book is very popular and captures the imaginations of kids, presto, you've done a lot to insure that the ideas that are important to you live long after you pass on… If it's the ideas that matter then I suppose that there are ways that folks like you can propagate the ideas without having your own kids be your lab rats."

More >>>

So they've aborted all their children and now they want ours, which they look forward to indoctrinate through public schools and popular books.

That however is unlikely to work. As the "progressive" culture drifts further and further away from traditional family values; as it becomes more of a socially perverse than "socially progressive", it will become harder for someone raised in a traditionalist family to accept its dogmas. Even if a child (or a teenager) does get briefly excited with the personal freedom (not to say - personal anarchy) which "progressive" culture offers, he'll have a hard time handling the spiritual emptiness and moral depravity that come with it.