A Liberal Shot in the Foot?

Here's an interesting article from Georgetown University's News Magazine:

The Kids Aren't All Right

Essentially, the writer, Julie Patterson, exclaims that she finds children repulsing, even the thought of "family time" and child-rearing inculcates in her a sense of disgust and revolt. She writes, and a I quote:

I’ll come right out and say it: Children repulse me. They frighten me. They make me anxious. Babies all look the same, and they are all ugly. Toddlers are praised for doing ordinary things like speaking and waving. Children have a comment and a question about everything.

and,

...I could muse on how the source of my discomfort lies in how the promise of youth that shines in their carefree eyes makes me lament my own loss of innocence, but it’s probably more accurate to say that these kids just suck. They’re loud, they’re obnoxious, they have too much energy, and they’re still learning how to conjugate irregular verbs. I have no time for that in my life...I assume that they, like many predators, can sense fear, and will therefore leave me in peace. But there are no guarantees in life—not even the success of birth control. Here’s to hoping no little accident ever “blesses” my life.

Even for people who prefer not to have children, this seems to be going too far. This may be a shot in the dark, and correct me if I'm wrong (I have tried to look and see her personal beliefs on religious and spiritual matters, but to no avail), but I don't think she's a Christian...perhaps a nominal one in label only, but certainly not following any orthodox teaching from any mainline denominations.

I have found via Lex Communis, who provided this other related link that, "Incidentally, Julie’s Facebook page lists her only two Interests and Activities as “Being a Bitch” and “Being a Hypocrite.”"

Whether that truly belies a specific misanthropic disposition or if she's doing that for the sake of being edgy and to "shock" conservatives (and hey, even some moderates and liberals as well), I really can't say. More intriguing though, is the fact that she calls these little young ones "accidents". What could she mean by that? That ALL of the children she sees were unintended or unplanned? Does she implicitly assume that children are objectively a burden with no greater reward, and so does not believe that any [sane] couple would choose to have children (ergo, they "must have been" accidents)?

...Or perhaps she's just launching personal attack against them. Wait...if that is the case, then at one point in time she was an accident? At what point does she "cease" to be an accident (because I don't think that she sees herself as one, yet she was a child before)? Did she just unwittingly reveal an engrossed sense of selfishness; a calling card to bad upbringing; or both?

And a thought just occurred to me: this is a fairly prevalent position of the far-leaning Left (in general terms: progressive-secularist Liberals). If a large amount of liberals refuse to have or bear any children, they really can't pass on their values. Conservatives, on the other hand, do affirm the value of the family and the value/sacrifice of child-bearing and child-rearing in a way that allows them to pass on their beliefs and values to their own children.

In fact, liberal demographer Phillip Longman laments this trend as he writes,

This dynamic helps explain, for example, the gradual drift of American culture away from secular individualism and toward religious fundamentalism. Among states that voted for President George W. Bush in 2004, fertility rates are 12 percent higher than in states that voted for Sen. John Kerry. It may also help to explain the increasing popular resistance among rank-and-file Europeans to such crown jewels of secular liberalism as the European Union. It turns out that Europeans who are most likely to identify themselves as “world citizens” are also those least likely to have children.

The great difference in fertility rates between secular individualists and religious or cultural conservatives augurs a vast, demographically driven change in modern societies. Consider the demographics of France, for example. Among French women born in the early 1960s, less than a third have three or more children. But this distinct minority of French women (most of them presumably practicing Catholics and Muslims) produced more than 50 percent of all children born to their generation, in large measure because so many of their contemporaries had one child or none at all.

Tomorrow’s children, therefore, unlike members of the postwar baby boom generation, will be for the most part descendants of a comparatively narrow and culturally conservative segment of society. To be sure, some members of the rising generation may reject their parents’ values, as always happens. But when they look around for fellow secularists and counterculturalists with whom to make common cause, they will find that most of their wouldbe fellow travelers were quite literally never born.

(emphasis mine)

Link to the Article

Seems like on the macro scale of things, Liberalism as we know it is tearing itself down. With the strong desire to negate away parental responsibility by way of not having any children, they are going to be hard-pressed to be able to pass their beliefs down. Perhaps this is why they want a bigger government with time-enduring laws in favor of their ideology.

Any thoughts on the matter?

UPDATE:

(H/T: Lex Communis...again)

So San Francisco's youth population is dropping, and is apparently, "disappointing news" for city officials. Consider that,

Families that remain in The City are bucking the trend that has plagued San Francisco for years as the number of children — defined as people up to 17 years old — has dropped from 181,532 in 1960 to 107,524 today, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau figures. The 2000 census counted 112,802 youths.

Given California's advocation of abortion and same-sex marriage, this really isn't surprising. On top of that, the exodus of many a traditional and nuclear family--families that do have children--occur because their values are being pushed away in favor of the distorted "equality" and "tolerance" virtues. How then, shall they live?