AVERAGE USER RATING
Recently On Home
Featured Sponsors
Christian Living Resources, Bible Study Tools, Jesus Christ
Are Big Families Causing an Ecological Crisis?
Albert Mohler
President, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
September 18, 2008
These days, the issue of family size can be controversial -- just ask any couple with several children. Large families are often seen as oddities and treated as an imposition. Why would anyone willingly have so many kids? Don't they know about birth control?
Few comments reveal as much about our times as these. Those with even the slightest historical awareness would know that large families were the norm throughout human history, and for good reason. In the Bible, large families are seen as a sign of God's blessing and children are celebrated as God's gifts. Only with the development of modern birth control and the transformations of values and worldviews that followed, does any other view of large families make sense.
The pill changed everything. In addition, concerns about human overpopulation and an ecological crisis led some to see large families as expensive and inefficient hobbies, or worse. Social planners held out the example of the two-child family, and some ideologues wanted to define "normal" as one child per couple. By the early twenty-first century, reproduction rates were falling around the world. Some European nations were facing a demographic crisis of low birthrates and not a single major European nation was reproducing at even the replacement rate.
The same would be true of America, were it not for the higher reproduction rates found among recent immigrants.
Now, within the span of just a few months, two major figures have called for putting a stop to large families -- and at least one has suggested making large families illegal.
One of those calling for an end to large families is the Duke of Edinburgh, Britain's Prince Philip. In an interview broadcast on British television this past spring, the husband of Queen Elizabeth II spoke his mind on a number of issues, including family size.
As The Times [London] reports,
Prince Philip emerges in a television interview this week as the model royal “eco-warrior” who believes overpopulation has contributed to the pressures on the world and that anyone who believes in God should go green.
The duke hints that curbing family sizes may be the best means of keeping the soaring cost of staple food products, such as bread and rice, in check.
He continued by arguing that rising food prices should be blamed on large families. “Everyone thinks it’s to do with not enough food, but it’s really that demand is too great – too many people," the duke asserted. "Basically, it’s a little embarrassing for everybody. No one quite knows how to handle it. Nobody wants their family life to be interfered with by the government.”Just taking that argument at face value, the duke states that the problem is not that there is not enough food, but that there are "too many people." Speaking as delicately as those words allow, that argument is stunningly stupid. If food was in abundance, would the duke argue that people are too few? How does he arrive at the "right" number of people?
Most Recent User Comments
coveredmomma
9/25/2008 9:39 PM
These people, the men quoted in the article, are far out of touch with reality. The larger the family the more "green" they become. Material things become secondary needs and the financial reasources of large families are carefully spent. In my personal experiEnce the less people in a family the more stuff they accumulate and the more disposable items they use. Most large families, my own included, have one income and take that income and spread it over many people. Most small/childless families have two incomes and have more to spend and waste per person. You can be eco friendly with a large budget per person but unless you have made a strenous effort to put people before things the stuff usually takes over your spending accounts. Let me list some common but minor way large families I know are "greener" than others. We reuse reasources more frequently, we usually eat at home and simpler foods, and our kid's character matter more than what brands they wear. So larger is GREEN
Report this post
P50116
9/22/2008 9:57 PM
First, very briefly, every planet in the solar system is experiencing "global warming." Since mankind occupies only one planet, it is totally illogical to attribute this effect to any action or inaction of mankind.
Secondly, there have been a few articles here about Christians who leave "birth control" in the hands of God. They accept as many, or as few, children as God entrusts to them.
However, we now have childless couples spending large sums on fertility solutions, and many of these solutions result in multiple births (twins, triplets, and up).
I have had occasion to see the quality of parenting done by such couples, who, after failing to conceive naturally, or with the help of fertility specialists, finally adopted.
It seems apparent to me why God left these couples childless!
As for the royals; the dangers of inbreeding have long been known and nobility have been the prime example.
Secondly, there have been a few articles here about Christians who leave "birth control" in the hands of God. They accept as many, or as few, children as God entrusts to them.
However, we now have childless couples spending large sums on fertility solutions, and many of these solutions result in multiple births (twins, triplets, and up).
I have had occasion to see the quality of parenting done by such couples, who, after failing to conceive naturally, or with the help of fertility specialists, finally adopted.
It seems apparent to me why God left these couples childless!
As for the royals; the dangers of inbreeding have long been known and nobility have been the prime example.
Donwind
9/19/2008 2:54 PM
The many ecological crises confronting mankind are the product of the number of humans times the average level of ecologogical impact per person. These two factors have both increased rapidly in the last 2 or 3 centuries, which is why we are now beginning to see the consequences of our actions. No amount of carbon recycling, conservation, alternative energy production, recycling, and re-use will permanently solve these crises, unless we address the underlying population growth as well.
To deny this is, I believe, most antithecal to the spirit of Christianity, and destructive to the long term welfare of mankind. The simplistic interpretation of God telling Adam to "multiply and fill the Earth, and subdue in" is that we, in todays world, should conceive without regard for the consequences to our future generations. We instead should ask, if indeed the passage applies to us and not simply to people of early times, is the Earth not now way past "full"?
To deny this is, I believe, most antithecal to the spirit of Christianity, and destructive to the long term welfare of mankind. The simplistic interpretation of God telling Adam to "multiply and fill the Earth, and subdue in" is that we, in todays world, should conceive without regard for the consequences to our future generations. We instead should ask, if indeed the passage applies to us and not simply to people of early times, is the Earth not now way past "full"?
- Read more feedback
- Give us your feedback on this article - (login required to comment)
