Skip to main content

The Coming Victory Over Abortion

Below is a email I recieved from Steve Mosher. Please read it because it is important. I don't want to get into names, but there are some pro-life organizations which I wouldn't donate a penny. Steve's PRI is just the opposite, if you could only donate to one pro-life group that is the one.

Fred


Abortion may be legal in America, but more and more Americans are choosing life. This shift in attitude will have a positive demographic effect in the years ahead. As more and more Americans choose life, America is shifting towards the Culture of Life.

Steven W. Mosher
President

The Coming Demographic Victory

Pro-lifers may be on the defensive in the courtroom, but they are winning the battle of the cradle.
The first person to point this out to me was Father Paul Marx. A family sociologist by training, Father had noticed in his travels around the United States that pro-lifers had larger families than the American average. I had observed the same thing. Pro-life events attracted families with four, six, or even eight children. It only made sense, we agreed, that those who respect the sanctity of unborn life would average more children than those who do not. For one thing, their children are at far less risk of being aborted than are the children of pro-aborts.

It was left to crack HLI researcher Brian Clowes to clothe these impressions with statistics. Dr. Clowes concluded from the sketchy survey data then available that there were significant, even striking differences in fertility between the two groups. While those who professed pro-life sentiments far exceeded the American average of two children, those who supported legal abortion fell far short of this figure. Specifically, he found that pro-lifers averaged three children, while pro-aborts averaged one. This is to say, pro-lifers were out reproducing pro-aborts by a margin of three to one.

At the time, in the mid-nineties, the polls showed that Americans were more or less evenly divided on the abortion question. But if we were right, the poll numbers would inexorably shift in a pro-life direction as time passed. Demography is destiny, after all. If the pro-lifers were having three times as many children as the pro-aborts, then the ranks of the pro-lifers would swell while the ranks of the pro-aborts thinned. The pro-abortion movement would have signed its own death warrant.

Pro-lifers, on the other hand, would be busy signing birth certificates.
After a generation, the country would be overwhelmingly pro-life.

The mind is drawn toward pleasant prospects, but is there any hard evidence of such a demographic shift? I am happy to report that there is. A new Gallup poll of teenagers, reported on November 24, 2003 by WorldNetDaily.com, found that 72 percent of those queried believe abortion is morally wrong.

The survey of youth, aged 13 to 17, indicated just 19 percent believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances, compared to 26 percent for adults. About 47 percent of teens said it should be legal under some circumstances, while 55 percent of adults agreed. Most strikingly, about 32 percent of teens thought abortion should never be permitted, while only 17 percent of adults said the same. Religious conviction played a part in these views. Only 12 percent of churchgoing youth thought that abortion is morally acceptable, compared with about 38 percent of non-churchgoing youth. About 40 percent of churchgoing teens believe abortion should be illegal under any circumstance, compared to 26 percent for non-churchgoers.

The Gallup Youth Survey was done through a scientific methodology via the Internet to ensure a representative sample of the U.S. population. The questionnaire was completed by 517 youths. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told Baptist Press that "We're winning the struggle for hearts and minds. The young people are more conservative than their parents."
But I believe it would be accurate to say that we are winning the battle
of the cradle. The young people surveyed are, by and large, the sons and
daughters of parents of pro-life sentiments. Like begets like, only in greater number.

The battle is not over yet, however.

The pro-aborts are not going quietly into demographic oblivion. (Do they ever do anything quietly?) While they have largely stopped reproducing themselves biologically, they are continuing to replicate themselves culturally. What do I mean? I mean that the Culture of Death controls MTV and passes its anti-people and anti-baby attitudes along to unsuspecting young viewers. It controls elite institutions of higher education. Tenured abortion radicals are zealous in making new recruits to their anti-life views.

This means that it is not enough to simply welcome more children into the world. People of pro-life sentiments must ensure that their own children_and as many other young people as they can reach_are properly taught the Culture of Life values that they are the product of. They will find their pro-life views under assault as they go on to college, and must be taught to defend them.

If this is done, then this country will move sharply in a pro-life direction over the next decade. And the stage will be set to outlaw not merely Partial Birth Abortions, but all abortions.

Join with Population Research Institute as we work to make the world safe for families and babies. Make your tax-deductible donation at our secure Website at https://pop.org/donate.cfm
Steve Mosher is the president of Population Research Institute, a non-profit organization dedicated to debunking the myth that the world is overpopulated.

(c) 2003 Population Research Institute.
Permission to reprint granted. Redistribute widely. Credit requested.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...