
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
"REP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > "Mark Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is an obvious ethical question to be raised in regard to involuntary > > sterilization, but what about the ethical question of bearing children when > > there are no means to support them? > I can't think of a culture where women relish seeing their children die. > Putting contraceptives into the hands of women, along with education, > are two of the surest way to regulate fertility without coercion. Interestingly, in societies where the infant mortality rate is high there is a much higher birthrate to go with it. Women reproduce at a rate which will ensure that some of their children will survive. Agricultural societies prize large families. More people to do the work. When the South African society gets the education issue right, together with the very real issues that Mark Richardson continually raises relating to the lack of medical infrastructure and means of adequately feeding families *then* and only then will South Africa be in a position to start expecting our birthrate to drop in order to accommodate a higher standard of living. Moira, the Faerie Godmother
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |