Overpopulation and sexual morality

[Z_Ninja]

And how sure are you that all eight of you are not using any form of artificial contraception? The most casual glance around Sunday Mass will find few if any double figure families, and I doubt very much this is down the the widespread use of NFP.

I don’t ask my siblings about their married sex life. I am concerned with my own. As for my wife and I, I know for sure that I do not purchase any condoms, nor is my wife on any contraceptives. I will say we are a mixed-faith marriage so she is not against the use of contraception. I have, however, expressed my feelings on the matter. I can pretty much know that one of my brothers and his wife either use NFP or do not use any form of child planning and leave it up to God, as I will say they are much more religious than I can say (sadly) for myself.

This is more than I really need to justify to you. After all this is an internet forum and we do not know each other on any personal level. That being said, you also place plenty of assumptions on many families just because they do not have 10 or more children. The fact of the matter is, if any one is using any form of artificial contraception, that is between them and God. Do you know personally know the families that have less than 10 children and conducted a poll to see if they use artificial contraception? I know society has placed a lot of acceptance on the use of such, even plenty of Catholics who may or may not know any better (possibly poorly catechized) and are okay with using artificial contraception.

I will admit, I knew better, but gave into and used artificial contraception. I think I have since grown wiser. But that remains to be seen. I am still a sinner.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

The reason populations are stabilising or even declining is because of contraception. If contraception disappeared we would rapidly see a return to the days when families of ten or more children were commonplace. And it doesn’t take a mathematical genius to see that a woman with ten children, having ten children of their own, will be grandmother of a hundred and great grandmother to a thousand…And such unfettered growth would certainly create famine and wars over resources…
.

Couple of issues with your argument-

1. You seem to be assuming that prior to ABCs that the norm was for all women of child bearing age to have 10 children. Please provide support for this.
2. That ABCs are the sole means by which we can limit the number of pregnancies. Please prove.
3. You seem to think the only valid means by which to curb our population growth is by limiting births. Ever watch the movie Logan’s Run?
4. Lastly, your argument implies that our current distribution of resources is a)valid and fair and b)so valid and fair as to require us to limit the population growth of those “without” in order to protect the resource rights of those “with.” Please prove.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

People like to believe this type of garbage because it makes the “other side” look radical and therefore they can just dismiss their ideas without thought or research. People that take that approach are as radical as the other side they criticize.

There are many of us that take the sensible approach based on facts (resources vs. population) and do not believe that abortion is the appropriate way to handle population growth.

My issue with the overpopulation issue (which frankly I believe to be a bunch of nonsense, but for the sake of argument we will assume it is real) is that all our resources are being used to limit population growth instead of actually trying to fix the resource distribution and utilization issues.

Currently our approach seems to be to kill off Uncle Bob and Cousin Billy because we can only grow enough food for 8 people (they make it 10) instead of plowing under our cash crop and plant more food (that would support more than 10).

 

[thistle]

Near the beginning, men were few, thus the order to procreate. Now, men are not so few, in fact we approach overpoulation. If we reach a state of overpopulation, where uncontrolled birthing of children is truly poor stewardship of natural resources, is it expected that the Church will change her position on certain issues of sexual morality?

The world is not overpopulated and never will be.

 

[GEddie]

The world is not overpopulated and never will be.

Overpopulation is physically possible. The earth has a finite mass. Only a tiny fraction of that can go into life, and only a tiny fraction of THAT can be formed into human bodies, so there is a maximum human head count.

However, this value is NOT ours to know or prevent. The world is not a leaking lifeboat where the captain is free to throw people off. It’s God’s world.

ICXC NIKA

 

[thistle]

Overpopulation is physically possible. The earth has a finite mass. Only a tiny fraction of that can go into life, and only a tiny fraction of THAT can be formed into human bodies, so there is a maximum human head count.

However, this value is NOT ours to know or prevent. The world is not a leaking lifeboat where the captain is free to throw people off. It’s God’s world.

ICXC NIKA

All the UN studies agree that the population will peak at around 10 billion and come down to below what it is today. The world will not become overpopulated.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Overpopulation is physically possible. The earth has a finite mass. Only a tiny fraction of that can go into life, and only a tiny fraction of THAT can be formed into human bodies, so there is a maximum human head count.

However, this value is NOT ours to know or prevent. The world is not a leaking lifeboat where the captain is free to throw people off. It’s God’s world.

But surely it makes sense, in certain extreme scenarios, not to make more people. After all, we do control that.

 

[Gilly_flower]

Overpopulation is physically possible. The earth has a finite mass. Only a tiny fraction of that can go into life, and only a tiny fraction of THAT can be formed into human bodies, so there is a maximum human head count.

However, this value is NOT ours to know or prevent. The world is not a leaking lifeboat where the captain is free to throw people off. It’s God’s world.

ICXC NIKA

That was the point I was trying to make…however you calculate the figures a finite resource cannot support an infinite number of people.

I have no idea sure what point ninja was trying to make as he has no idea how his siblings have regulated their families so the fact they have relatively few between them is neither here nor there.

And just for the record I have a larger than average family and am against abortion.

 

[Z_Ninja]

That was the point I was trying to make…however you calculate the figures a finite resource cannot support an infinite number of people.

I have no idea sure what point ninja was trying to make as he has no idea how his siblings have regulated their families so the fact they have relatively few between them is neither here nor there.

And just for the record I have a larger than average family and am against abortion.

I was answering the question of whether the Church must change her stance on sexual morality. As far as overpopulation, yes it is physically possible. But highly unlikely to happen since people die just as people are born. but to the OP, the Church will not change her stance.

Also your statement being, “without contraception we will rapidly return to days when people have 10 children or more…” (paraphrasing) which is a false since neither You nor I know how any family is planning their future family, whether through artificial means or NFP. This is also making assumptions. I admit I don’t know. Catholic families should try NFP and not artificial means.

I understood your post to be saying contraception is aiding in the prevention of overpopulation. I apologize if I read more into what you were saying. Plus, I’ve been in the middle of moving and a renovation for the past 3 weeks and am extremely tired having slept only a few hours, I may have taken offense to the issue of having a large family as I am in one. i’m grumpy.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

My issue with the overpopulation issue (which frankly I believe to be a bunch of nonsense, but for the sake of argument we will assume it is real) is that all our resources are being used to limit population growth instead of actually trying to fix the resource distribution and utilization issues.

People tend to focus on different things with regard to this issue, which is why nobody ever agrees. It’s actually a very easy concept to understand: population levels are dependent upon the resources available in the environment. The only real issue is how many resources are available and at what rate they can be used.

Well, we do know some things. For one, current population levels are only possible through intense use of fossil fuel resources. So this issues is are fossil fuels unlimited (not likely since we are using in days what nature took millions of years to create) or is there another “unlimited” source available (not yet found).

Obviously, people will simply ignore the issue, and nature will take care of itself. Always has, always will.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

All the UN studies agree that the population will peak at around 10 billion and come down to below what it is today. The world will not become overpopulated.

Technically, the world only becomes overpopulated for a brief time. Nature quickly corrects itself, and the population levels quickly readjusts itself to the resources available in the environment.

 

[Z_Ninja]

We can just move some people to the Moon and/or Mars, although the trip to Mars is quite a bit longer, though only a few hundred days or so… we won’t have to worry about overpopulation. Also the ISS in orbit can be enlarged to house some folks. and even more, we can build underwater cities as seen in SeaQuest DSV tv series.

there you go, nothing to worry about at all.

 

[JimG]

The reason populations are stabilising or even declining is because of contraception. If contraception disappeared we would rapidly see a return to the days when families of ten or more children were commonplace. And it doesn’t take a mathematical genius to see that a woman with ten children, having ten children of their own, will be grandmother of a hundred and great grandmother to a thousand…And such unfettered growth would certainly create famine and wars over resources…
.

Or it might lead to an economic boom, with each of the ten children adding to gross family product as well as gross domestic product. In every large family I have known, the children have all grown up to be economically productive adults, thereby adding to national wealth. Human resources are the most valuable of all.

As for overpopulation, it is a myth. The next huge problem for much of the nations of the globe will be falling fertility rates and underpopulation, leading to economic depression.

 

[epan]

The notion of “overpopulation” presumes shortage of resources. As technology replaces people as workers in our monetary based economies, it will become increasingly necessary to seek another model. A resource based economy is one such alternative, which could supply sufficient means for people to live comfortably.

Sexual morality is not really an issue. The problem is resource allocation. Keep in mind that a monetary based economy actually creates shortages of goods and services. Otherwise, nobody would pay for anything, and there would be no profits.

 

[GEddie]

The notion of “overpopulation” presumes shortage of resources. As technology replaces people as workers in our monetary based economies, it will become increasingly necessary to seek another model. A resource based economy is one such alternative, which could supply sufficient means for people to live comfortably.

Sexual morality is not really an issue. The problem is resource allocation. Keep in mind that a monetary based economy actually creates shortages of goods and services. Otherwise, nobody would pay for anything, and there would be no profits.

The monetary based economy is simply the extension of a resource economy. As long as human life is limited to the Earth, resources will be in shortage.

Money is used to transfer resources, since the owner of a factory, for example, cannot pay his workers in chickens. But the scarcity is still that of physical, earthly resources.

ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

The parent of 10 children will not a fortiori be grandparent to 100. When that type of family was the norm, many of the numerous children died young.

The increasing human population should be a cause for joy, in that it is easier than ever for the human being to keep alive. Human beings no longer die of skin infections, or diptheria, or dysentery, or falls off horses, etc, in youth the way they used to.

But instead of thanking God for our improved hold on life, we are rationalizing how we can “unwrong” certain reproductive sins to get the numbers back down! We should all be careful what we wish for; we might get it!

ICXC NIKA

 

[po18guy]

Simple. Overpopulation is when the amount of resources cannot support a given population of a species.

For example, if one person was one the moon with no spacesuit, the moon would be overpopulated because no resources exist for this person to survive. Nature would takes its course and the person would quickly die.

Is that actually “over population” of humans, or rather “underproduction” of resources?

Why is the solution never an increase in production, but a decrease in humanity? Who would inspire such a thought?

 

[Rence]

Near the beginning, men were few, thus the order to procreate. Now, men are not so few, in fact we approach overpoulation. If we reach a state of overpopulation, where uncontrolled birthing of children is truly poor stewardship of natural resources, is it expected that the Church will change her position on certain issues of sexual morality?

The Church will never change it’s position on sexual morality because all the rules come from the same two properties that they require: the unitive property and the procreative property. But that doesn’t mean everyone is called to have a dozen kids we know that! Some families are called to have one, some are called to have more, some are called to have none. Those who are being called to have however many kids they’re meant to have are having them

 

[E_7]

Near the beginning, men were few, thus the order to procreate. Now, men are not so few, in fact we approach overpoulation. If we reach a state of overpopulation, where uncontrolled birthing of children is truly poor stewardship of natural resources, is it expected that the Church will change her position on certain issues of sexual morality?

Before saying such thing, you should look deep into it and realize that we aren’t nor are approaching overpopulation. The problem is distribution.

I heard of this website while listening to EWTN on SeriusXM or Catholic Channel on SeriusXM, it is called www.pop.org.

The Church won’t change its teachings. What is moral is moral. What is immoral it is still immoral. You can’t change the four principles of the natural law.

 

[mek42]

I appreciate all of your responses. I have learned quite a bit.