On Oct 1, 2007, at 8:44 PM, mainstream20016 wrote:
You seem to be saying that 'so much social pressure to have kids' is
an artificial construct
You're sharp today, MS.
- and when 'that' relaxes, family size would naturally decrease
significantly.
Again, chalk up another point.
I contend that 'social pressure' reinforces the consensus collective
experience over many
millinia of how things work best and most effectively for the species.
In other words,
'social pressure ' reflects biology.
IOW, you're full of crapola. If biology mandated lots of kids, there
would be no *need* for social pressure. How many societies can you
think of have mandated that people had to have sex? None, because it's
clearly unnecessary.
And where exactly have you gotten the idea that huge amounts of
children "work best and most effectively for the species"? Been
channeling Darwin lately?
And for a look at modern societies that encourage obscene amounts of
children with little support in place once those kids are born, one
only has to look at most of the Muslim countries. Seems to be working
out real well for them, doesn't it? Oases of peace and prosperity, I
tell ya.
JOOC, how many kids you got, MS? Feel the need to procreate endlessly,
do you?
Which historical periods reinforce your statement that --'nearly
always'-- the number of
children in each family goes down dramatically when 'social pressure'
for large families
relaxes?
*This* one, genius.
Sal
