Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Demographic time bomb?


Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Internet and the youth aren't interested in large families or children at all.

Yet, it seems many here think that the Church will continue to grow, just really slowly. In other words, a membership loss is unthinkable. The numbers and trends don't seem to bear this out, barring a huge shift. 

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, rongo said:

Yet, it seems many here think that the Church will continue to grow, just really slowly. In other words, a membership loss is unthinkable. The numbers and trends don't seem to bear this out, barring a huge shift. 

I saw this article just now, so maybe I'm wrong. 

https://www.ksl.com/article/50153170/what-does-gen-z-want-when-they-grow-up-similarity-to-their-parents-may-surprise-you

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, rongo said:

Yet, it seems many here think that the Church will continue to grow, just really slowly. In other words, a membership loss is unthinkable. The numbers and trends don't seem to bear this out, barring a huge shift. 

Considering the Church operates on both sides of the veil, it will continue to grow.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, rongo said:

I agree that the Church can fulfill its purpose and destiny with "Gideon's Army" numbers (a la 1 Nephi). 

What I'm not seeing is how the Church won't shrink in absolute numbers if it's birth/marriage rate continue to plummet, along with continuing decline in convert baptisms. Can you expand on the sociological reasons you think would bring this about?

Generally speaking, marriage and fertility rates tend to plummet when youth are saddled with huge student debt, can't find good paying jobs, and see no likelihood of improvement.  These are obviously not religious reasons.  One way to turn these problems around is to provide substantial tax credits or direct payments for having children, and to eliminate any marriage penalty taxes.  Same applies to the current housing crisis in which homes cannot be bought at reasonable prices, and rentals are skyrocketing.  Religion cannot ameliorate such problems.

Some countries provide free college education for those who are willing to study hard, and the results more than pay for that investment.  A religious group with lots of cash on hand could in fact subsidize such education for its youth, and thus keep the marriage and fertility rate at replacement levels.  Prayer and faith are less practical ways to prevent problems.  In other words, the Lord helps those who help themselves (God gave man a brain and expects him to use it).  For LDS, the way the Church works best is through orthopraxis, not orthodoxis.

A broad range of sociological reasons was provided here on this board at http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/68483-blogger-on-the-alarming-truth-behind-anti-mormonism/?page=19 .

However, I will mention here how this works for LDS also in other sociological ways:  Unlike the familiar pattern in which people with more education tend to be more likely to leave religion entirely, better educated LDS people tend to be more likely to stay in the Church.  Katherine Orgill, “Mormons more faithful with more education,” BYU Daily Universe, May 5, 2015, online at http://universe.byu.edu/2015/05/05/final-story-21/ ;  Joseph Walker, “LDS religious commitment high, Pew survey finds,” Deseret News, Jan 13, 2012, online at  http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700215244/LDS-religious-commitment-high-Pew-survey-finds.html?pg=all ; https://www.reddit.com/r/latterdaysaints/comments/4bnont/as_mormons_become_more_educated_they_become_more/.

And there are other socioloigcal factors to consider:

Quote

The strength of strict churches is neither a historical coincidence nor a statistical artifact. Strictness makes organizations stronger and more attractive because it reduces free riding. It screens out members who lack commitment and and stimulates participation among those who remain. Rational choice theory thus explains the success of sects, cults, and conservative denominations without recourse to assumptions of irrationality, abnormality, or misinformation. The theory also predicts differences between strict and lenient groups, distinguishes between effective and counterproductive demands, and demonstrates the need to adapt strict demands in response to social change.  Laurence R. Iannaccone, “Why Strict Churches Are Strong,” American Journal of Sociology, 99/5 (March 1994):1180-1211, online at  http://majorsmatter.net/religion/Readings/RationalChoice.pdf ,

 

Quote

Religion plays a major role in easing the convert’s transformation by providing an institutionalized set of guidelines for beliefs, behaviors, and expectations that are socially supported and reinforced (Berger; Gooren). One’s ideological destination is identified, embraced, and immediately available. A positive emotional response arises from a sense of control and reliance on a higher power, a sense of assurance, feelings of ecstasy, and liberation through self-surrender (James; Mahoney and Pargament).  Lori L. Fazzino, “Leaving the Church Behind: Applying a Deconversion Perspective to Evangelical Exit Narratives,” Journal of Contemporary Religion, 29/2 (2014):249-266.  http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13537903.2014.903664?src=recsys .

 

Quote

 At least the studies that I’ve seen of sociologists in the United States and Europe show that most people remain in the religion into which they were born. The exceptions are people who were born to parents who had a mixed religion. Often, they will change. So, we can begin with the premise that most people stay in the family religion. Those that do change were in situations with a bit of conflict, and were perplexed about the issue.  * * *

...almost without exception, changing to a new religious orientation takes place through what the sociologists call kinship and friendship networks of one sort or another. Sometimes they’re very intense. Sometimes they’re minimal.

Lewis Rambo, “The Psychology of Religious Conversion,” delivered at the International Coalition for Religious Freedom Conference on "Religious Freedom and the New Millennium" Berlin, Germany, May 29-31, 1998, online at  http://www.religiousfreedom.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=356&Itemid=18.

Daniel Cox, “Most churches are losing members fast — but not the Mormons. Here’s Why,” Vox.com and MSN, March 6-7, 2019, online at  https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/3/6/18252231/mormons-mormonism-church-of-latter-day-saints .

Rodney Stark, "Why Religious Movements Succeed or Fail: A Revised General Model," Journal of Contemporary Religion 12 (1996): 133-157.

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Generally speaking, marriage and fertility rates tend to plummet when youth are saddled with huge student debt, can't find good paying jobs, and see no likelihood of improvement.  These are obviously not religious reasons.  One way to turn these problems around is to provide substantial tax credits or direct payments for having children, and to eliminate any marriage penalty taxes.  Same applies to the current housing crisis in which homes cannot be bought at reasonable prices, and rentals are skyrocketing.  Religion cannot ameliorate such problems.

I agree that a significant part of it is economic. Economic pressures discourage large families, mother staying home with the children (and/or taking large amounts of time off for delivery, nurturing, and bonding --- which discourages many children). 

I still don't think economics is the whole answer. If the Green New Deal/Agenda 2030 were implemented in its fulness, and a guaranteed minimum income and guaranteed low housing were provided across the board --- I still don't think that would really affect number of children. I think it has more to do with selfishness (where people are able to, but choose not to). Young parents want "me" and "us" time, and large numbers of children cut into that for 20+ years. 

25 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Some countries provide free college education for those who are willing to study hard, and the results more than pay for that investment. 

And those countries (Germany is one of them) have even lower marriage and childbirth rates than the U.S. Which tends to undermine the above theory that providing things like this would encourage the birthrate and marriage rate to increase.

ETA: I do agree with you that the Church could fruitfully provide scholarships to young adults, above and beyond its Church school scholarships. I don't think that would hurt, and I think that it would do a lot of good. 

Edited by rongo
Link to comment
23 hours ago, rongo said:

Am I wrong in thinking that the Millennial/GenZ propensity for later marriage, smaller number of children, and lower commitment to and acceptance of religion (which we see in the Church as well in society at large) are factors that throw gasoline on the demographic fire?

I was watching a comedian not long ago.  He clearly stated that he cannot do comedy for the average person because the average person is Chinese.  Not many years from now India will overtake China in number of souls if projections hold.  We think in families in the Church, but the Church really is people.  If there was a day of Pentecost or some huge Spiritual event once the Gospel is in full swing in China and India even our imaginations could not match the growth.

Edited by Metis_LDS
clarity
Link to comment
19 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The most important truth about history is that it is oscillatory and unpredictable rather than linear in nature.  Then too, even if the planet avoids major war (it never has in the past), global warming will wreack havoc on any sort of projections we wish to make based on current fertility rates or rates of LDS conversion.  This may have a marked effect on the fastest growing religion in the world, Islam.  Global warming is a debacle coming at us with a vengeance, and there is nothing we can do to avoid the consequences.  The younger generation will pay the price for our failure to grapple with that immense problem

Well here is something we can agree on but I like to think there are still steps we can take to mitigate this disaster.  

Link to comment
23 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think what is being missed here is the possibility of younger generations, as they grow older and become more conservative (it happens in each and every generation), retrenching themselves and returning to the faith of their youth. 
 

What is it the scripture says? “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.” 

One of the problems is that the church of my youth has little in common with the church of today.  The things I enjoyed about the church growing up have been removed or replaced.

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

One of the problems is that the church of my youth has little in common with the church of today.  The things I enjoyed about the church growing up have been removed or replaced.

 

I doubt you are older than I. I look back on the Church of my youth, and I’m hard-pressed to find anything of lasting or vital value that has gone away. 
 

I miss the stake “road shows” of yesteryear. They were for me the funnest of the Church youth activities I engaged in. But to be honest, I look around today and doubt that such things would hold much interest or relevance to our youth of today. Other things have come along to accommodate them. 
 

And no, I don’t agree at all that the Church of today has “little in common” with what I’m guessing is the Church of your youth. 
 

Recently, on FamilySearch, I ran across the minutes of a fast-and-testimony meeting in the southern Utah ward where my mom spent her youth. The date was before her birth in 1908, but it gave me a fascinating glimpse into the milieu in which she was reared. Yes, there were some marked differences between how things were done then and now, but I was amazed at the similarities. I found myself thinking that if I were to go back in time and attend that meeting, I would feel right at home. 

Link to comment

The church I grew up in culturally developed a sense of local Mormon community for its youth. We had road shows, cotillion, Gold and Green Balls, dance festivals, scouts, and church wide sporting competitions. We attended a minimum of two meetings on Sundays, three for priesthood males. Monday nights were family night, Tuesdays were Mutual/scouts, Thursdays were primary, every weekday morning during school was seminary, Saturdays were for stake sporting events and dances, and summers were for fantastic scouting outings that ranged from desert shooting trips, floating down the river or in Lake Mead  in canoes we built ourselves.  All these events were centered around the ward. We identified ourselves not only as Mormons but as being from a particular ward, usually a building that was unique to its local. The loss of many of those events, programs and individualist structures, I think, contributed to our loss of youth of today. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Well here is something we can agree on but I like to think there are still steps we can take to mitigate this disaster.  

You and Greta Thunberg.  Thirty to forty years ago we might have begun to do something.  Now it is too late.  Whatever we do now will only have its effect a couple of centuries from now (which is a good thing and will be much needed then).  Meantime, only a massive volcanic eruption could stop this galloping disaster from hitting us like a ton of bricks this century.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

The church I grew up in culturally developed a sense of local Mormon community for its youth. We had road shows, cotillion, Gold and Green Balls, dance festivals, scouts, and church wide sporting competitions. We attended a minimum of two meetings on Sundays, three for priesthood males. Monday nights were family night, Tuesdays were Mutual/scouts, Thursdays were primary, every weekday morning during school was seminary, Saturdays were for stake sporting events and dances, and summers were for fantastic scouting outings that ranged from desert shooting trips, floating down the river or in Lake Mead  in canoes we built ourselves.  All these events were centered around the ward. We identified ourselves not only as Mormons but as being from a particular ward, usually a building that was unique to its local. The loss of many of those events, programs and individualist structures, I think, contributed to our loss of youth of today. 

Yes.  Youth are central.  Have you any sense of what has replaced scouting now?  Are the youth fully engaged, or are they drifting?

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You and Greta Thunberg.  Thirty to forty years ago we might have begun to do something.  Now it is too late.  Whatever we do now will only have its effect a couple of centuries from now (which is a good thing and will be much needed then).  Meantime, only a massive volcanic eruption could stop this galloping disaster from hitting us like a ton of bricks this century.

Have you read Bill Gates recent book on climate change?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, rongo said:

I agree that a significant part of it is economic. Economic pressures discourage large families, mother staying home with the children (and/or taking large amounts of time off for delivery, nurturing, and bonding --- which discourages many children). 

I still don't think economics is the whole answer. If the Green New Deal/Agenda 2030 were implemented in its fulness, and a guaranteed minimum income and guaranteed low housing were provided across the board --- I still don't think that would really affect number of children. I think it has more to do with selfishness (where people are able to, but choose not to). Young parents want "me" and "us" time, and large numbers of children cut into that for 20+ years. 

And those countries (Germany is one of them) have even lower marriage and childbirth rates than the U.S. Which tends to undermine the above theory that providing things like this would encourage the birthrate and marriage rate to increase.

ETA: I do agree with you that the Church could fruitfully provide scholarships to young adults, above and beyond its Church school scholarships. I don't think that would hurt, and I think that it would do a lot of good. 

We would probably want to see LDS figures set over against the national statistics.  In America, for example, LDS families have higher marriage and fertility rates than the general population (LDS replace themselves, whereas the general population does not).  This is  most clear in the so-called Mormon Corridor, but may be true everywhere.

Germany is a special case, with the younger generation still plagued by war-guilt from the Nazi era.  The resulting malaise is a huge problem.  However, what are the LDS statistics throughout Europe?

Link to comment
Just now, Teancum said:

Have you read Bill Gates recent book on climate change?

No.  Bill Gates is not a useful or knowledgeable source on Global Warming science.  Like a lot of people, he means well, but it is too late to stop what is already in process.  I did my part:  Bought a Prius hybrid, and installed solar panels on my house, but most others among us are slow to do anything at all.  I am very sorry for the coming debacle -- Bangladesh and Holland will cease to exist.  Denmark will be a series of Islands.  Miami and most of Florida will be under water (plenty of swamp for the gators), and London and New York subways will be flooded (both cities will have to be moved inland).  There are electronic maps which show what will happen worldwide.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I doubt you are older than I. I look back on the Church of my youth, and I’m hard-pressed to find anything of lasting or vital value that has gone away. 
 

I miss the stake “road shows” of yesteryear. They were for me the funnest of the Church youth activities I engaged in. But to be honest, I look around today and doubt that such things would hold much interest or relevance to our youth of today. Other things have come along to accommodate them. 
 

And no, I don’t agree at all that the Church of today has “little in common” with what I’m guessing is the Church of your youth. 
 

Recently, on FamilySearch, I ran across the minutes of a fast-and-testimony meeting in the southern Utah ward where my mom spent her youth. The date was before her birth in 1908, but it gave me a fascinating glimpse into the milieu in which she was reared. Yes, there were some marked differences between how things were done then and now, but I was amazed at the similarities. I found myself thinking that if I were to go back in time and attend that meeting, I would feel right at home. 

Some of the things gone that I participated in as a youth:

1) Road shows

2) Boy Scouts

4) Manti Pageant

Things I’m glad are gone:

1) Church twice on Sundays with Primary after school in a weekday.

2) Three hour church

3) Temple changes in 1990 and recent changes primarily affecting women.

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, AtlanticMike said:

What do you think about this guy Robert?

........................

Freeman Dyson was a great scientist, but the remarks you cite from his 2009 interview are badly out of date.  For example, he claims that global warming effects are primarily Arctic in locale.  The melting of Antarctica and Greenland have since then become major and obvious.  In fact, this quote covers developments since Dyson's interview:

Quote

The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.12 degrees Fahrenheit (1.18 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere and other human activities. Most of the warming occurred in the past 40 years, with the seven most recent years being the warmest. The years 2016 and 2020 are tied for the warmest year on recordhttps://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Most climate scientists around the world disagree with Dyson's and other minority views.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You and Greta Thunberg.  Thirty to forty years ago we might have begun to do something.  Now it is too late.  Whatever we do now will only have its effect a couple of centuries from now (which is a good thing and will be much needed then).  Meantime, only a massive volcanic eruption could stop this galloping disaster from hitting us like a ton of bricks this century.

Can you pinpoint it more precisely? This decade? Next? At what point will it become clear to everybody that the alarmists were right? 

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

Some of the things gone that I participated in as a youth:

1) Road shows

2) Boy Scouts

4) Manti Pageant

I miss road shoes and really miss scouts. Never been to the manti pagent.

 

56 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

Things I’m glad are gone:

1) Church twice on Sundays with Primary after school in a weekday.

2) Three hour church

I vaguely remember twice on Sunday church, that must of ended in the early to mid 80s.

Link to comment

I have to chuckle at the proposed 'solutions' to declining birth rates in the Church or US.  If only some rich entity (Church or US Gov't) would give free housing, free education, free childcare -- then birthrates would increase.

Too bad people haven't looked at the results of such efforts to increase birthrates already attempted around the globe: Empirical evidence is these efforts do not make much of difference in fertility rates.  Sweden and Norway both are heavily socialized, offering generous paid familial leave, subsidized or free childcare, direct subsidies to parents who have children. Net result:  declines in birthrates despite these efforts well below replacement levels of 2.1 births per woman.

Singapore offers direct cash payments to parents of children to try to boost fertility rates, but has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world (1.1 births per woman). South Korea is offering something similar to new parents and they are below 1 birth per woman and their total population is shrinking.

Japan has offered such subsidies and their population is dropping by over 400,000 people per year.

Utah used to have the highest fertility rate in the US and is now in 4th place -- but Utah's rate is now below the replacement rate at only 1.99 births per woman.

HIgher education, careers and later marriage ages for women are the primary cause of lower birthrates, not the lack of some gov't or Church subsidy.  Prime years for child bearing are taken up with those activities (which I am in favor of for my daughters), so basic math shows a lower potential number of children can be borne during a shorter available time period for bearing children.

'Children of record' total numbers have been declining in the Church for the last 5 years or so, thus reflecting the lower birth rates in the Church.

Social programs can't stop this decline as long as women are empowered to get educated, work outside the home and choose when and if they get married.  Nothing can stop this trend, especially superficial and ineffective subsidies favored by the 'government will save us' faction.

I can't see any way to turn the demographic tide either within or without the Church.

jb

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Can you pinpoint it more precisely? This decade? Next? At what point will it become clear to everybody that the alarmists were right? 

Warming of the ocean is already roiling the weather worldwide, and making it more severe.  In the American southwest, for example (including parts of Utah), we may be facing a megadrought as severe as a drought which hit the area 1200 years ago.  https://www.ecowatch.com/southwest-drought-climate-crisis-2645742986.html .  Unusually harsh hurricanes, typhoons, and cyclones are already a problem, and will continue with increasing frequency, bringing ocean surge to coastal zones and islands.  By 2050, many south sea islands will no longer be habitable, and many ports will have to be reconstructed inland.  The area of the world in which most humans live (India, China, and SE Asia) is watered by vast rivers from the Himalayas, where we see less snow and ice each year.  Water conservation can only go so far in ameliorating such reduction in supply.  All of this will come a cropper this century.  Millions will die.

Carbon dioxide levels are now the highest they have been in 3.6 million years, and quickly growing.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGUI4-idOa4.

Currently, we appear to be on the fast road to the highest world temperatures since the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) 55-56 million years ago, as shown in the graph here:

https://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/graph-from-scott-wing-620px.png.  Humans simply cannot live in such a hot environment.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...