“Domestic supply of infants”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m getting to the point where I don’t see infant adoption as something that should be allowed. The baby stealing is horrific.

It's always been evil and surrogacy is equally as evil.

How is surrogacy evil?!? My friend has had 6 miscarriages, and finally one of her friends (mom of 3) offered to be a surrogate. She and her husband are over the moon, and the baby is theirs biologically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys are nuts. This is an issue facing many, many nations. It isn't about religion or Evangelicals. It's about resources any nation needs, no different from gas or food.

China's population freakout: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/international/4299666-chinas-dystopian-population-goals-forced-procreation-and-industrialized-births/amp/

Korea: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp%3fnewsIdx=362679

Europe: https://www.ft.com/content/c11ef0af-717b-4266-817d-533426363aa7

Even NPR can discuss this issue from a practical standpoint and without being convinced it's a scheme by religious fantatics: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/03/141943008/when-governments-pay-people-to-have-babies


Fertility rates are a thing that are closely tracked for economic and security reasons. On DCUM, if you bring this up, you get a mixture of denial that the US has declining fertility, accusations of racism that have no basis since the color of the baby is immaterial to the overall rate, and accusations that this is all a scheme by Evangelicals. You all need to study up on this topic if you insist on talking about it. I wrote my masters thesis on it like 15 years ago; it's an actual issue that many, many countries have enacted policies to address. And yes, as much as people don't want to admit it, making abortion illegal IS one possible approach to increasing birth. Just like when China mandated abortions under the one child policy.

You can also become more lax on immigration. That's another way to combat it.

[Anonymous]

How about we do this ethically? Don't steal kids from Afghanistan or anywhere else. Let women control their own health and bodies. Do not have a government that oppresses people based on some kind of "need" for more humans. Put in policies that support the kids that we do have (like affordable housing, daycare, decent education, college for a reasonable cost). Many people want to have kids, but don't want to have kids that they cannot support.

[Anonymous]

How about we do this ethically? Don't steal kids from Afghanistan or anywhere else. Let women control their own health and bodies. Do not have a government that oppresses people based on some kind of "need" for more humans. Put in policies that support the kids that we do have (like affordable housing, daycare, decent education, college for a reasonable cost). Many people want to have kids, but don't want to have kids that they cannot support.

Also do something about guns since they are the leading cause of death for children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are nuts. This is an issue facing many, many nations. It isn't about religion or Evangelicals. It's about resources any nation needs, no different from gas or food.

China's population freakout: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/international/4299666-chinas-dystopian-population-goals-forced-procreation-and-industrialized-births/amp/

Korea: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp%3fnewsIdx=362679

Europe: https://www.ft.com/content/c11ef0af-717b-4266-817d-533426363aa7

Even NPR can discuss this issue from a practical standpoint and without being convinced it's a scheme by religious fantatics: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/03/141943008/when-governments-pay-people-to-have-babies


Fertility rates are a thing that are closely tracked for economic and security reasons. On DCUM, if you bring this up, you get a mixture of denial that the US has declining fertility, accusations of racism that have no basis since the color of the baby is immaterial to the overall rate, and accusations that this is all a scheme by Evangelicals. You all need to study up on this topic if you insist on talking about it. I wrote my masters thesis on it like 15 years ago; it's an actual issue that many, many countries have enacted policies to address. And yes, as much as people don't want to admit it, making abortion illegal IS one possible approach to increasing birth. Just like when China mandated abortions under the one child policy.

You can also become more lax on immigration. That's another way to combat it.

Yes, you can bring in immigrants from ethnicities that are more fertile, you can pay people to have kids, or many other things. The fact remains that it IS a real issue and treating it like a religious theory is nonsensical and doesn't win anyone to your side. It makes more sense to argue that restricting abortion isn't the right policy response vs pretending it's a fake issue ginned up by Evangelicals.

[Anonymous]

This is such a complicated issue.
Is it ok to create a baby who will not have a mother past the first minutes after birth?
Is it ok to leave the baby with the parents who are clearly not able to give her a good life?
Is it ok to deny parenting to someone who isn’t a biological parent but can give the baby so much more than the bio parents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is such a complicated issue.
Is it ok to create a baby who will not have a mother past the first minutes after birth?
Is it ok to leave the baby with the parents who are clearly not able to give her a good life?
Is it ok to deny parenting to someone who isn’t a biological parent but can give the baby so much more than the bio parents?

That’s not complicated at all. Yes it’s ABSOLUTELY ok to “deny parenting” to someone even if they’re wealthier than the child’s biological parents. Or do you think if Elon Musk wants to adopt your child he should be entitled to do so because he can “give them so much more” than you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys are nuts. This is an issue facing many, many nations. It isn't about religion or Evangelicals. It's about resources any nation needs, no different from gas or food.

China's population freakout: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/international/4299666-chinas-dystopian-population-goals-forced-procreation-and-industrialized-births/amp/

Korea: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp%3fnewsIdx=362679

Europe: https://www.ft.com/content/c11ef0af-717b-4266-817d-533426363aa7

Even NPR can discuss this issue from a practical standpoint and without being convinced it's a scheme by religious fantatics: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/03/141943008/when-governments-pay-people-to-have-babies


Fertility rates are a thing that are closely tracked for economic and security reasons. On DCUM, if you bring this up, you get a mixture of denial that the US has declining fertility, accusations of racism that have no basis since the color of the baby is immaterial to the overall rate, and accusations that this is all a scheme by Evangelicals. You all need to study up on this topic if you insist on talking about it. I wrote my masters thesis on it like 15 years ago; it's an actual issue that many, many countries have enacted policies to address. And yes, as much as people don't want to admit it, making abortion illegal IS one possible approach to increasing birth. Just like when China mandated abortions under the one child policy.

Yes! What hell does DCUM think demographers do? Agree this is a global problem. There are only a few countries on earth that have birth rates above replacement. Additionally, the teen birth rate and the immigrant birth in the US has plummeted. Life is too expensive and daycare in the US is a failed market. It’s too expensive and too low paying. We also have a do nothing Congress or a public will to implement policies to support families to have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys are nuts. This is an issue facing many, many nations. It isn't about religion or Evangelicals. It's about resources any nation needs, no different from gas or food.

China's population freakout: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/international/4299666-chinas-dystopian-population-goals-forced-procreation-and-industrialized-births/amp/

Korea: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp%3fnewsIdx=362679

Europe: https://www.ft.com/content/c11ef0af-717b-4266-817d-533426363aa7

Even NPR can discuss this issue from a practical standpoint and without being convinced it's a scheme by religious fantatics: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/03/141943008/when-governments-pay-people-to-have-babies


Fertility rates are a thing that are closely tracked for economic and security reasons. On DCUM, if you bring this up, you get a mixture of denial that the US has declining fertility, accusations of racism that have no basis since the color of the baby is immaterial to the overall rate, and accusations that this is all a scheme by Evangelicals. You all need to study up on this topic if you insist on talking about it. I wrote my masters thesis on it like 15 years ago; it's an actual issue that many, many countries have enacted policies to address. And yes, as much as people don't want to admit it, making abortion illegal IS one possible approach to increasing birth. Just like when China mandated abortions under the one child policy.

Abortion bans can decrease the birthrate. Look at Poland. Women are much more wary of trying to carry a pregnancy in a place with substandard maternal care and abortion bans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are nuts. This is an issue facing many, many nations. It isn't about religion or Evangelicals. It's about resources any nation needs, no different from gas or food.

China's population freakout: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/international/4299666-chinas-dystopian-population-goals-forced-procreation-and-industrialized-births/amp/

Korea: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp%3fnewsIdx=362679

Europe: https://www.ft.com/content/c11ef0af-717b-4266-817d-533426363aa7

Even NPR can discuss this issue from a practical standpoint and without being convinced it's a scheme by religious fantatics: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/03/141943008/when-governments-pay-people-to-have-babies


Fertility rates are a thing that are closely tracked for economic and security reasons. On DCUM, if you bring this up, you get a mixture of denial that the US has declining fertility, accusations of racism that have no basis since the color of the baby is immaterial to the overall rate, and accusations that this is all a scheme by Evangelicals. You all need to study up on this topic if you insist on talking about it. I wrote my masters thesis on it like 15 years ago; it's an actual issue that many, many countries have enacted policies to address. And yes, as much as people don't want to admit it, making abortion illegal IS one possible approach to increasing birth. Just like when China mandated abortions under the one child policy.

Abortion bans can decrease the birthrate. Look at Poland. Women are much more wary of trying to carry a pregnancy in a place with substandard maternal care and abortion bans

And if we want to encourage people to bring more children into the world, do something about issues like climate change, guns, college costs, etc.

[Anonymous]

Women are not supplying enough kids. They are the future.

Step it up ladies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women are not supplying enough kids. They are the future.

Step it up ladies.

make the future better for kids if you want more kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women are not supplying enough kids. They are the future.

Step it up ladies.

make the future better for kids if you want more kids.

Future is bright! Thankfully your great grandmother didn’t have the Debbie downer attitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women are not supplying enough kids. They are the future.

Step it up ladies.

make the future better for kids if you want more kids.

Future is bright! Thankfully your great grandmother didn’t have the Debbie downer attitude.

Have as many kids as you want sport. Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, do you all remember Amy Coney Barrett’s note about the “domestic supply of infants” in her rationale of why Roe should be overturned?? Well, looks like there is more effort underfoot to increase this “domestic supply” as international adoptions are more restricted and fewer single moms in America put their kids up for adoption.

This is an ongoing ploy for foster parents to steal kids from biological parents who follow the full plan to get their kids back. Potential parents are going into the foster system deliberately to try to work the system to keep their foster infants. This is horrific.

https://www.propublica.org/article/foster-care-intervention-adoption-colorado

International adoptions declined years ago as did the ability to adopt and infant. That stopped well over a decade ago.

Nothing in this article is new.
This has always been happening.
You think it has not because you didn’t read a media story on it.
Some cases might local news coverage on occasion at best.