Liberals much less likely to have children

[GloriaPatri4]

Opinion
The liberal baby bust
By Phillip Longman Tue Mar 14, 6:56 AM ET

What’s the difference between Seattle and Salt Lake City? There are many differences, of course, but here’s one you might not know. In Seattle, there are nearly 45% more dogs than children. In Salt Lake City, there are nearly 19% more kids than dogs.

This curious fact might at first seem trivial, but it reflects a much broader and little-noticed demographic trend that has deep implications for the future of global culture and politics. It’s not that people in a progressive city such as Seattle are so much fonder of dogs than are people in a conservative city such as Salt Lake City. It’s that progressives are so much less likely to have children.

It’s a pattern found throughout the world, and it augers a far more conservative future - one in which patriarchy and other traditional values make a comeback, if only by default. Childlessness and small families are increasingly the norm today among progressive secularists. As a consequence, an increasing share of all children born into the world are descended from a share of the population whose conservative values have led them to raise large families.

news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060314/cm_usatoday/theliberalbabybust;_ylt=Asq8zpkVI47ww3H1YNajEems0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3YWFzYnA2BHNlYwM3NDI

 

[BlindSheep]

Of course, you can’t be sure the children of conservatives won’t become liberal, or vice versa.

 

[Horab]

yeah, but even if there’s a 50/50 change that a child will follow the parents political beliefs, ovwer time. conservatives would still increase

and there’s the Roe Effect right at play here

not to mention the groups that lean left like gays, can’t even have kids

even Canada’s turning right