Is there ANY Benefit of Social Conservatism to Society?

[The True Adonis]

Can anyone list one benefit and why they feel it is a benefit?

[Soul Crusher]

Can anyone list one benefit and why they feel it is a benefit?

When people have self discipline, they are more apt to get a job, stay gainfully employed, and contribute to society.

 

 

[a_joker10]

I guess it all sits on where you fall on abortion and morality.

Arguing you with about this is pointless because you don't agree with it.

[The True Adonis]

I guess it all sits on where you fall on abortion and morality.

Arguing you with about this is pointless because you don't agree with it.

You don`t support abortion in cases of incest, rape or if the health of the mother is in danger?  Also, how do you feel about women`s periods and ejaculatory sperm being wasted?  Just curious.

[Dos Equis]

What is your definition of social conservatism? 

[Kazan]

You don`t support abortion in cases of incest, rape or if the health of the mother is in danger?  Also, how do you feel about women`s periods and ejaculatory sperm being wasted?  Just curious.

Why does the federal government have to decide this? Why can't the states make laws that are what the majority of their citizens want? What about a women's period, it is part of the menstral cycle, where are you going with this?

[The True Adonis]

What is your definition of social conservatism? 

What is yours?

[Dos Equis]

What is yours?

You asked about the benefits of social conservatism.  What do you mean by "social conservatism"? 

[The True Adonis]

You asked about the benefits of social conservatism.  What do you mean by "social conservatism"? 

How do you define it?  I would rather not taint your definition with mine.  So how do you define it?

[a_joker10]

You don`t support abortion in cases of incest, rape or if the health of the mother is in danger?  Also, how do you feel about women`s periods and ejaculatory sperm being wasted?  Just curious.

I have no idea what you are trying to get at.

I am not a social conservative. I am by most measures a liberal.
No where did I tell you my stance on abortion.
I am pro-choice by the way.
I just think that underage girls parents should be notified and I also feel that the state should encourage adoption instead of abortion.

You are just looking for an argument to make yourself fell good. Yet again you don't know or care to understand the other side of the argument.

One of things I find funny about the whole abortion debate is that countries where it is easy and free to get them all have the lowest growth rates. UK, Germany, France.
These are the same countries spending billions trying to increase there birth rate.

One would argue for the sake of their societies growth it would be in their best interest to limit birth control and abortion.

Most Socialists ignore this stuff though.

[Dos Equis]

How do you define it?  I would rather not taint your definition with mine.  So how do you define it?

I see.  Another one of those things you can't define, but have an opinion about anyway.  Got it. 

[The True Adonis]

I have no idea what you are trying to get at.

I am not a social conservative. I am by most measures a liberal.
No where did I tell you my stance on abortion.
I am pro-choice by the way.
I just think that underage girls parents should be notified and I also feel that the state should encourage adoption instead of abortion.

You are just looking for an argument to make yourself fell good. Yet again you don't know or care to understand the other side of the argument.

One of things I find funny about the whole abortion debate is that countries where it is easy and free to get them all have the lowest growth rates. UK, Germany, France.
These are the same countries spending billions trying to increase there birth rate.

One would argue for the sake of their societies growth it would be in their best interest to limit birth control and abortion.

Most Socialists ignore this stuff though.

Socialists know the value of NOT having children as the most Socialistic countries also have the lowest birth rates.  Socialists do not ignore this and are well aware of it.  You are wrong in that respect totally.

There is a high correlation between high intelligence among a society and a lowered birth rate and vice versa.  See the third world countries for more detail on this issue.

[The True Adonis]

I see.  Another one of those things you can't define, but have an opinion about anyway.  Got it. 

Of course I can answer it, but that does not address my question at all, now does it.  I would rather here from someone who identifies with or considers themselves in favor of Social Conservatism. 

[a_joker10]

Socialists know the value of NOT having children as the most Socialistic countries also have the lowest birth rates.  Socialists do not ignore this and are well aware of it.  You are wrong in that respect totally.

There is a high correlation between high intelligence among a society and a lowered birth rate and vice versa.  See the third world countries for more detail on this issue.

Negative growth is bad for any country.

If you don't understand this fine.

[GigantorX]

Of course I can answer it, but that does not address my question at all, now does it.  I would rather here from someone who identifies with or considers themselves in favor of Social Conservatism. 

It helps elaborate on it. You are asking if Social Conservatism is good for a nation. You are asking the question and want us to respond, but we do not know the context in which to answer. You need to lay down what is Soc. Consv. within the confines of this thread.

Just do it. You said you could...

[bears]

You don`t support abortion in cases of incest, rape or if the health of the mother is in danger?  Also, how do you feel about women`s periods and ejaculatory sperm being wasted?  Just curious.

....which accounts for less than .05% of all abortions performed in this country.  if you are going to discuss abortion on a board at least give people the courtesy of calling a spade a spade.  people use abortion as a convenient way of taking care of a problem.  nothing more nothing less.  i dont harshly judge people who have abortions.   its none of my business what you do with your babies.  but for you to sit here and pretend that women have abortions because of incest, rape, or the health of the mother well than you're just kidding yourself.  yes it happens.  but its very rare.  and OK.  how bout we ban all abortions except for that reason?  that would be the biggest victory in pro life history.  deal?

[Soul Crusher]

Socialists know the value of NOT having children as the most Socialistic countries also have the lowest birth rates.  Socialists do not ignore this and are well aware of it.  You are wrong in that respect totally.

There is a high correlation between high intelligence among a society and a lowered birth rate and vice versa.  See the third world countries for more detail on this issue.

[GigantorX]

People have low birth rates in Socialist countries because it isn't economical for them to do so. It's to expensive to keep up the population growth or even stability. Hence France and much of Europe importing a huge number of Muslims and others from abroad. They need people because their native populations have been in decline for a while now.

[Dos Equis]

Of course I can answer it, but that does not address my question at all, now does it.  I would rather here from someone who identifies with or considers themselves in favor of Social Conservatism. 

Of course it addresses your question.  Your question was asked with no context whatsoever.  You don't even know what you're asking for. 

[The True Adonis]

It helps elaborate on it. You are asking if Social Conservatism is good for a nation. You are asking the question and want us to respond, but we do not know the context in which to answer. You need to lay down what is Soc. Consv. within the confines of this thread.

Just do it. You said you could...

USING YOUR OWN DEFINITION of Social Conservatism, not mine, feel free to answer the question.

This is what I want and what I intended.

[The True Adonis]

People have low birth rates in Socialist countries because it isn't economical for them to do so. It's to expensive to keep up the population growth or even stability. Hence France and much of Europe importing a huge number of Muslims and others from abroad. They need people because their native populations have been in decline for a while now.

It is more of an intelligence factor as the standard of living in Socialist type countries exceeds the United States as well as any third world nations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_and_intelligence
Demographic studies have indicated that in humans, fertility and intelligence tend to be negatively correlated, that is to say, the more intelligent, as measured by IQ, exhibit a lower total fertility rate than the less intelligent. On the other hand, according to the research conducted by Tim Spector from the Twin Research Department at King's College London, more emotionally intelligent women experience more orgasms during sexual intercources than women with an average index of EI.[1] Other correlates of fertility include income, diet, and educational attainment.

[a_joker10]

It is more of an intelligence factor as the standard of living in Socialist type countries exceeds the United States as well as any third world nations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_and_intelligence
Demographic studies have indicated that in humans, fertility and intelligence tend to be negatively correlated, that is to say, the more intelligent, as measured by IQ, exhibit a lower total fertility rate than the less intelligent. On the other hand, according to the research conducted by Tim Spector from the Twin Research Department at King's College London, more emotionally intelligent women experience more orgasms during sexual intercources than women with an average index of EI.[1] Other correlates of fertility include income, diet, and educational attainment.

It is due to economics and not intelligence.

Rich countries generally have low birth rates then poor.

The introduction of the pill only made the gap larger because rich countries can afford the pill for most of its citizens poor countries can't.

You can even see this by state level.

[GigantorX]

It is more of an intelligence factor as the standard of living in Socialist type countries exceeds the United States as well as any third world nations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_and_intelligence
Demographic studies have indicated that in humans, fertility and intelligence tend to be negatively correlated, that is to say, the more intelligent, as measured by IQ, exhibit a lower total fertility rate than the less intelligent. On the other hand, according to the research conducted by Tim Spector from the Twin Research Department at King's College London, more emotionally intelligent women experience more orgasms during sexual intercources than women with an average index of EI.[1] Other correlates of fertility include income, diet, and educational attainment.

Where was this quote from? I'm not impressed at all as it really doesn't prove your point. Intelligence levels in the populations of 1st world nations are higher because they are far better developed and have better educational systems and access to information on all levels compared to 3rd World nations who need high birth rates to sustain populations because of low lifespans, have agricultural subsistence workers, and lack of sexual education and access or acceptance of birth control.

Developed societies don't need to have 5 kids per family, even in its most base form, having kids isn't deemed necessary and neither is marraige.

To say it is solely based on intelligence is just narrow sighted. The arguement is like someone who goes on Google and searches for hours to find a sentence that "validates" his "thoughts". Then said person copy/pastes it into the thread....

[The True Adonis]

Where was this quote from? I'm not impressed at all as it really doesn't prove your point. Intelligence levels in the populations of 1st world nations are higher because they are far better developed and have better educational systems and access to information on all levels compared to 3rd World nations who need high birth rates to sustain populations because of low lifespans, have agricultural subsistence workers, and lack of sexual education and access or acceptance of birth control.

Developed societies don't need to have 5 kids per family, even in its most base form, having kids isn't deemed necessary and neither is marraige.

To say it is solely based on intelligence is just narrow sighted. The arguement is like someone who goes on Google and searches for hours to find a sentence that "validates" his "thoughts". Then said person copy/pastes it into the thread....

Not exactly as there has been years of study and research regarding Intelligence and Fertility rate.  I would post some links, but I do not think any of you are interested in the years of research compiled and will just find some way to attack me instead.

[GigantorX]

Not exactly as there has been years of study and research regarding Intelligence and Fertility rate.  I would post some links, but I do not think any of you are interested in the years of research compiled and will just find some way to attack me instead.

Please, post them.

How did 1st World nations become 1st World nations and thus, how did their populations become more intelligent than those of the 3rd World?

The intelliegence that you talk about doesn't just appear and then no one has kids anymore. Developed societies are developed for a reasons. They have access to information, a higher standard of living, certain freedoms, well developed Univ. and K-12 educational systems the list goes on.

These societies have the apparatus that leads to the dev. of the intelligence and because they are a developed nation they don't need the 5 children p/family to support an argicultureal base or subsistence farming or spit out 10 kids because 6 of them will die before age 5. The well developed societies have technology, manufacturing and other processes that can easily replace the need to have huge amounts of children.

It seems I actually agree with your intelligence theory, I just believe that the reasons a dev. nation has a high level of intelligence also lends itself to low birth rates.