Why is Japan’s population declining?
Anti-Abortion news site LifeNews.com has pinpointed the exact cause of Japan’s population decline. Here’s an excerpt from an article by Japan expert and Right to Life of Wyoming president Steven Ertelt:
Japanese Companies Switch to Full-Time Workers as Abortion Causes Shortage
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com EditorThere was a time in Japan that major corporations and small businesses could get away with hiring part-time or temporary employees. But with a worker shortage prompted by decades of legalized abortions, Japanese companies are now forced to hire as many full-time workers as possible.
Aging employees are now retiring, — including those born prior to 1949 when the Asian nation legalized abortion.
The net effect is an economy that shrank 2.4 percent in the second quarter as companies have a difficult time attracting enough employees to get the work done.
Now suffering from a lack of people thanks to the decades of destroying its next generation, Japan has a shortage of workers to replace the baby boomers who are entering their retirement years.
In case the headline and not-so-subtle references to abortion weren’t enough, Ertelt makes his point clear later in the article with this line:
Abortion has resulted in a demographic nightmare for the island nation.
How did I find this garbage news article? Apparently Google’s staff has reviewed LifeNews.com and determined that its articles are professional enough to appear as headlines on Google News.
| Related Posts: |
|
Japanese birthrate is on the rise Free Land in Ibaraki Prefecture Japan News for December 09, 2006 The Health minister said couples should want at least two kids? How dare he! |
Full RSS Feed
What is google thinking letting this sorry excuse for a news site be on their news headlines? The people from this site are some of the most ignorant and biased “reporters” that I’ve ever read.
it has a nothing to do with Japan’s population declining.
Absolute nonsense.
Further, this part is completely fabricated…
“But with a worker shortage prompted by decades of legalized abortions, Japanese companies are now forced to hire as many full-time workers as possible.”
If anything, the Koizumi reforms created more part and temporary jobs in Japan, and has decrreased the living conditions for more people.
Does it really surprise you that people whose entire basis for life and “reason” are based on a magic book and a magic corpse would fabricate “facts”? And I don’t say this tongue-in-cheek, voodoo oogie boogie believing morons can have their secret little “everyone’s plotting against us poor christians, when we’re really plotting against everyone else” meetings and believe in whatever they want so long as they keep it to themselves. But when these borderline mentally-ill, delusional, obsessive compulsive people start just out and out lying in public to accomplish their ridiculous goals, it really gets under my skin. Granted they’re morons, and most people know they’re morons and will disregard any (mis)information that these fools give them, but it pisses me off nonetheless. On my college campus a few years back, a woman had two children in suits (presumably her kids) handing out why evolution is wrong and everyone that ever advocated evolution as a science has lied about it or falsified it in some way. When I asked her a specific, eloquently worded, question about the contents of the pamphlet, she began shouting at me, put her hands over the kids’ ears and shuffled away very quickly. If I was in a relationship and tried to lie and threaten to control my partner, people would call that abuse, all most religion is, is doing that on a larger scale. Ironically, they mention “Truth” with a capital T so often, but they’ve never spoken an iota of it. I actually once had an acquaintance of mine tell me, “What can you prove with science, at your “colleges” and “schools”? Nothing, you can’t prove anything with science or facts, because facts don’t exist.” Needless to say I wasn’t an acquaintance of his much longer after that. This article makes me think of that conversation, utterly.
Well said. Thank you.
“I actually once had an acquaintance of mine tell me, “What can you prove with science, at your “colleges” and “schools”? Nothing, you can’t prove anything with science or facts, because facts don’t exist.””
Was he a sociologist, or perhaps a philosophy major?
As someone so eloquently put it, “correlation != causation”.
Is there even a correlation?
Didn’t you know? Part-time workers were considered too lazy, so if they were caught screwing around on the job, they were aborted. I think that’s what they’re talking about here.
perhaps the major reason is that the government does not make efforts to attract other foregners to come to Japan and make their home. If Japan treat well good foregners in Japan and get rid of bad foregners Japan would be much better. If the foregners are good, they give their best example to the community and the society. If this example is given to the Japanese people, they have a good image about foregners, and consequently they start to respect those foregners.
Japanese should be more faithfull to their country and government and not abandoning their country. If Japanese comeback to their country and use their skills to improve the Japanese economy, the economy will get better and they can have more babies. But the way it is now is not good.
The government shuld encourage the increase of his population by improving the economy and giving opportunities for both Japanese and good foregners to live in Japan and help the economy of Japan.
Every right thinking person knows the REAL reason for the declining population is the fact that we let women out of the kitchens and into the working world instead of pumping out babies.
Damn right. All this voting nonsense. And women wearing trousers! What’s next? Men in skirts? Only Scotsmen can get away with that….
You forgot that breast cancer is god punishing women for leaving the kitchen!
yep you dont pick a fight with us scotsmen!
That’s right, and abortion has also been linked to other calamities such as global warming, world hunger, and the election of G.W. Bush. Chronological sequence, causation… same thing really.
*sigh* “pro-life” nutjobs…
Actually it was pro-life thought that led to “W” being born, not the other way around….
W is an abortion of intelligence.
Here’s an excerpt from an article for G4’s Wired For Sex regarding The future of sex in the modern by looking at Japan.
“It’s hard to believe a country with so many people living in close proximity has a population crisis on its hands. Yet younger generations are choosing to forego having children until much later in life. No place is this more evident than in the Japanese countryside, where the population has dropped precipitously over the past several decades.
There is a price to pay for life in the city. Both sexes experience tremendous pressure to maintain their careers. Children are often seen as a hindrance. “A 30-year-old woman does not want to quit her job, lose her spending money, not have money to spend on clothing, etc.,” sexologist Kim Myung Gan says. Instead, young single women “want to be single and have a good time.”
Some maintain that the problem with such a paradigm is that eventually there won’t be enough people in the working segment of the population to support the senior generation during their retiring years.
Japan differs greatly from much of the Western world in terms of its cultural attitude toward sex. Take, for example, the practice known in Japan as “enjo kosai,” or compensated dating.
“Enjo kosai is often abbreviated in Japan as enko. Basically it’s the ’sugar daddy’ system,” says Erik Gain of dating site Asoboo.com. “It’s not prostitution, at least not in the sense of traditional prostitution. What usually happens is that older men go out with younger girls. It wouldn’t be acceptable to the Japanese to accept cash for that type of relationship, so basically the men give the girls gifts.”
A study found 10 percent of men in Japan paid for sex at least once a month.
Pregnancy eventually catches up with many enjo kosai girls. Japan has one of the highest abortion rates in the world. For girls under 19, the number of abortions rose to 46,500 in 2001, almost double the number in 1995.”
http://www.g4tv.com/wiredforsex/features/44899/Japan_Wireless_for_Sex.html
“It’s not prostitution, at least not in the sense of traditional prostitution.”
Isn’t that a wonderful way to say something and mean the exact opposite?
I am rarely compelled to e-mail personal protests to large corporations as I question their actual effects but such blatant misinformation presented as fact to a gigantic community – most of whom have absolutely no prior knowledge of the matter through which to filter this rubbish – is completely unacceptable.
Strongly worded e-mail powers ACTIVATE!
I would guess it pointless in this case. Such faux-news organizations as this one usually have American-taliban style bible freaks involved somewhere, though they may obscure that fact on their masthead. This is a tiny make-belive news story that they concocted to try to further their biblical philosophy from their HQ over in Jesusland, USA. The editor may not even be able to point to Japan on a map if asked. If you write them you may as well also ask them about why the fossil record disputes bible scripture on the age of the earth. They would just reply that god put the fossil record in the ground to test the true believers.
Did you write to Google or to the pro life wackos’ site? If the latter, then u should know your efforts were just wasted.
Google News doesn’t use human editors to find / filter “news”, that why people w/ an agenda like these fundamentalists can take advantage of this loop hole & get people to read their bull shit through Google News.
James!!, I suggest you remove that link in your article so you don’t give their site more credit in Google’s eyes.
Cloneofsnake:
I made the link nofollow, so it won’t count in the eyes of the Googlebots.
I’d say abortion is only a factor, however, Cyberstrike makes a good point.
What a doink. *rolls eyes* I wonder if he blames abortion for declining populations in other countries too…
Hey, at least the Japanese are doing something with aborted babies: eating them…
PROCEEED WITH CAUTION!!!!
http://believe-or-not.blogspot.com/2007/08/japanese-eating-dead-babies.html
You should check Snopes first before posting such things…
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/cannibal/fetus.asp
Damn, you mean my Babyburger was a fake? No wonder it didn’t taste quite right….
Wasn’t that featured once in WaiWai?
I don’t recall that particular urban legend being in WaiWai. I’ve only heard it about the Chinese.
Leitmotiv:
Funny!
Waaaaaaaaaaaaai! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai!
I think that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. If that was the case, then there would be population declines over the world. That guy is probably pissed off because a Japanese girl turned when he asked her to marry him. If so, smart girl. Idiot!
See, United States? That’s what happens when you give women a choice!
The real thrust of this article (other than the obvious right-to-life base theme) is… -from authors perspective- “I am a western orthodox christian, and my I am superimposing my values and beliefs on Japan”.
While Japan continues to be neither a ‘western’ thinking country nor christian, this type of writing will always emerge from christian extremists.
The real point of the blog post is that this type of rubbish can be treated as news, which it can, but its independance and balance/bias must be either clearly stated or the news agency (google) lack credibility.
CyberStrikes comments are the usual nonsense about Japan… enjo kosai is not he reason for a declining birth rate.
Women looking for independance is also not the whole answer.
The main reqson is the demands from society to be succesful and happy through mass consumption, much of which is wasted consumption. So therefore women need to work more to buy those expensive goods (shoes, bags et) that get used a few times the disposed. Same for enjo kosai… the kids do it for the brand goods and the appearance of being succesful.
Having kids and a family just `gets in the way` of appearing successful as money and time is diverted from consumption of personal goods to the baby.
So the root cause is American-style consumption, and the pursuit of happiness… as in the constitution.
Well said!
IF IT’S IN THE NEWS, IT MUST BE TRUE.
I agree that this may not be the most professional article on the effects of abortion on population,or even as an argument in opposition to abortion-for the purpose of argument is to transfer from ignorance to knowledge,and this article hardly provides such convincing evidence for the case of Japan. However, it is fair to say that such a relation exists-Russia being the better example.
Notwithstanding poor articles like this, I agree that abortion is wrong, and that the institution of abortion internationally is a tragedy-for it is always wrong to deliberately kill an innocent person.
I am Catholic, and it is unfortunate that such Christians leave a negative impression on some individuals, like Karusu-kun. It may be true then, that the “only unanswerable question against Christianity is Christians”-meaning, bad and sad ones. Nevertheless, every Christian-and the case against abortion-should not be dismissed as being moronic or delusional.
I agree that this may not be the most professional article on the effects of abortion on population,or even as an argument in opposition to abortion-for the purpose of argument is to transfer from ignorance to knowledge,and this article hardly provides such convincing evidence for the case of Japan. However, it is fair to say that such a relation exists-Russia being the better example.
Notwithstanding poor articles like this, I agree that abortion is wrong, and that the institution of abortion internationally is a tragedy-for it is always wrong to deliberately kill an innocent person.
I am Catholic, and it is unfortunate that such Christians leave a negative impression on some individuals, like Karusu-kun. It may be true then, that the “only unanswerable question against Christianity is Christians”-meaning, bad and sad ones. Nevertheless, every Christian-and the case against abortion-should not be dismissed as being moronic or delusional.
Christians Vs people of Reason is like the PC vs Mac these days, no matter what u say, u just can’t project an image of “cool”. LOL.
The argument against abortion is definitely not moronic nor delusional, but it’s also an argument based on morality rooted in religion.
You have a choice to not have an abortion, but when you forcibly remove that choice from others you’re forcing your religious beliefs on them. The separation of politics and religion requires that choice be maintained.
Neatly put!
The debate is whether is the collection of a few cells that makes up a blastocyst is a “person.” Or even an early embryo. These are not people. If it is wrong to kill them, it’s not the same wrong as killing a fully formed and sentient human. And the Catholic Church would need to worry a lot less about abortion if they allowed contraception.
The article has a point though. While abortion may not be the sole cause of Japan`s rapidly shrinking population it certainly must be considered as a factor, irregardless of ones views on it, when over 36 million babies have been aborted since 1949.
http://www.ipss.go.jp/syoushika/tohkei/Popular/P_Detail2008.asp?fname=T04-21.html&title1=%87W%81D%8Fo%90%B6%81E%89%C6%91%B0%8Cv%89%E6&title2=%95%5C%82S%81%7C21%81%40%90l%8DH%94D%90P%92%86%90%E2%90%94%82%A8%82%E6%82%D1%95s%94D%8E%E8%8Fp%90%94%81F1949%81%602006%94N
The most laughable contention in that article, and the reason anything else it says can be rejected out of hand, is that Japanese companies are desperately seeking full-time employees – that would be news to plenty of contract workers, part-timers, temps, freeters, and job-hunters, not to mention pretty much every economist studying Japan, the MHLW, and, most of all, a great number of employers in Japan. It might not be the mid-to-late ’90s now, but it’s certainly not a seller’s market.
The question of the extent to which abortion reduces population is one that’s tough enough to figure out without one side having decided that it’s the bane of existence and responsible for all population decline.
It is true that much contention exists in whether an embryo is a person because if an embryo is a person, then abortion is wrong, because it would be deliberately killing that innocent human being.
Then, what is an embryo? What is a fetus? What is a teenager, or an adult?
These words-embryo,fetus,teenager,adult-are nouns that come from adjectives. Embryonic human:embryo. Fetal human: fetus. Infantile human:infant. Childish human:child. Teenaged human:human. These are stages of development of the same entity,which is a person.
When does the individual life of any mammalian species begin? When the genetic code is complete. When instead of the haploid ovum and the haploid sperm, you get the diploid embryo. Cells replicate immeasurably, a pattern emerges, and gradually organs develop. Granted,there is nothing like a human brain in the embryo.However, a human embryo only has the potential to be human; a human embryo grows a human brain, and an ape embryo grows an ape brain. So, it is a human embryo even though it does not yet have a brain.
If we gradually become a person, and if it is okay to kill somebody without all their systems in place, and to be consistent with this reasoning, then there should be no objection to killing an eight-year old child whose reproductive systems are still immature.
Then, the embryo must be human-and the process of growth and development does not begin at birth, it begins at conception. Part of this takes places in the ninth month in the womb, and rest occurs in the years outside of the womb. There is no break during this process.
Birth is a huge break. It marks the step between being a dependent and intergral part of another being to being a fully independent organism.
Actually I have been able to think of a few 8-year-olds who might be better off dead. Good idea of yours. Of course there is a little bit of difference between immature and non-existent, but we’ll let that slide.
BTW, why is killing wrong? There is nothing wrong with killing per se. It is only wrong in the sense that it causes harm to others: the person himself, and his loved ones. When the person himself doesn’t even have a brain, he can feel no loss. An embryo, even more than mature (post-natal) humans, is just a biochemical reaction, akin to a crystal growing. Only when sentience arrives does it become morally ambiguous (yes, I’m all for pulling the plug on the braindead as well). No CNS, no awareness, no moral ambiguity. So since the embryo not only does not object, but cannot conceive of objecting, then what is the harm done?
I was hesitant to submit the argument, that,”If we gradually become a person, and if it is okay to kill somebody without all their systems in place, and to be consistent with this reasoning, then there should be no objection to killing an eight-year old child whose reproductive systems are still immature,” because some individuals do think it is a good idea. That, of course, was not my intention.
it is true that “there is a little bit of difference between immature and non-existent.” I would add that there is a big difference that should not be dismissed-since, if it was proven that a human is “non-existent” in the womb, I would agree that no harm is done. But I disagree, and considering the evidence for proof, I am convinced the embryo is a human.
I agree that “nothing is wrong with killing per se.” Especially if it is done in the process of self-defense or in the interest of protecting the general public. But recall that I submitted abortion to be wrong because “it deliberately kills an innocent human being.”
The purpose of law is to protect people. If law does not achieve this even minimally, it is failing to protect the innocent from the guilty. Then, if abortion is killing a person,and the person is innocent and weak, should not he be protected?
It is true that in human growth, like crystal growth, chemical reactions occur. However, analogies have their limits and obviously, a human is not a crystal,and since a human is not a crystal, he has rights.
Also, self-awareness is an unreasonable condition to be placed on the value of human life. There are developmental disorders that result in a deficit of self-recognition, yet such members of a society are worthy of protection.
By the way, I respect your honesty.
But you’re missing the point: the law is to protect innocent people, fine. But why? Because these innocent people don’t want to be killed (of course the law also makes it illegal to kill someone who *wants* to be killed, but that’s another area). But a four-month embryo has no brain (which is what I was referring to when I said “non-existent” in line with your previous reference to sexual organs: the best an embryo has is cells that are scheduled to develop into a braun, like a piece of stone is to be carved into a statue), ergo cannot “want” anything. Nor feel. In short, for early abortions there is no victim beyond a mass of barely distinguished cells.
“…if abortion is killing a person,and the person is innocent and weak, should not he be protected?”
Only if he wants to be….
“self-awareness is an unreasonable condition to be placed on the value of human life.”
Why? Your next statement does not explain this. You simply state they are “worthy of protection” but not why.
Now I think I’m going to march in protest of Crystal Rights….
“self-awareness is an unreasonable condition to be placed on the value of human life. There are developmental disorders that result in a deficit of self-recognition, yet such members of a society are worthy of protection.”
Such members of society(people with developmental disorders that prevent self-awareness) are still human, and in the United States they are protected by law. To submit that an embryo deserves no protection by law because it does not possess self-awareness would also disenfranchise individuals with developmental disorders-this would be a gross social injustice.
On the subject of protection by law:
I stated that, “the purpose of law is to protect people.” I should clarify by adding that law must protect the innocent and weak against the guilty and strong. This is because nobody seriously maintains that there should not be laws against theft, rape, or slavery, because those are clearly cases of oppression. Furthermore, to maintain that a person should be protected “only if he wants to be,” is simply not how moral issues are approached.
I submit again: if abortion is killing a person, and the person is innocent and weak, he should be protected.
In my first comment, I stated that “the purpose of argument is to transfer from ignorance to knowledge.” I also let you know that I respect your honesty, because it does not seem to me that you are being disingenuous.
With that said, by your last comment, it seems as if you have been either been misinformed about,or, are ignoring scientific realities.
You said: “But a four-month embryo has no brain… ”
On the contrary, in day 18-20, it has the foundations of the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system. And in the second month, electric brain wave patterns can be records as evidence of activity (O’Rahilly, R. and Muller, F., Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd Edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2001.) Also, at 3 months, the name changes from embryo to fetus. However, I would like to add that in the 4th month, nostrils and toenails become visible, and the baby begins to feel pain (Anand, K and Hickey P, “Pain and Its Effects in the Human Neonate and Fetus.” The New England Journal of Medicine, (1987).
For those who follow the abortion debate in the U.S.(like myself), you will notice that it is no longer popular among the majority of abortion supporters to claim there is no human in the womb, or even that human life does not begin at the moment of conception, because the notion that the embryo is merely a “mass of barely distinguished cells” has been dismissed by scientific evidence. Hence, the argument is now is not whether or not woman are killing their unborn child, rather, it is that women have a “right to choose” to kill their unborn child.
Unfortunately, I cannot continue this discussion or entertain your questions any further. Your response will probably go unanswered by me because I have obligations that demand my time and attention,as your protest of Crystal Rights probably demands of you. Still, I would like to read your response.
Pulling the plug…
See, the difference between The Braindead and an early-developing embryo is that the embryo has the potential, nay is almost gauranteed, to become sentient.
But ISN’T. That is the key point. That’s why abortion is legal and murder is not.
Murder? Murder had nothing to do with my comment, but now that you mention it, when a young person is killed people think (maybe not in so many words) “oh, isn’t it too bad that that person died before their time, there was so much they had yet to do and accompish in their life”, for abortion one might think a similar thing except now it’s “oh, isn’t it too bad that that person never got a chance to live.”
Anyway, I think it’s the potential, or at least the perceived potential, for concious life of a fetus that makes abortion so problematic, not the current state of sentience. But, yeah, the fact that there is no measurable consciousness in a fetus does probably give way for abortion to be legal.
Don’t stop now, Kabocha! Let’s consider all eggs that are never fertilized as potential lives lost. An angel cries every time a woman gets her period. Let’s all have indiscriminate sex to save potential lives!
Okay, everyone after me:
“Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is good. When a sperm gets wasted, the Lord gets quite irate!”
Alex, if you want to go that far, go right ahead.
Shit, I’m just trying to point out one thing that I think makes abortion objectionable, the potential for a lifetime that is attributed by others. There is hardly any potential when we consider your mocking example using single gametes. And in reality, the odds for successful fertilization are quite low, so there’s not much point in anticipating the birth of another human being before that event.
Here, I’ll actually let you know my own views since you seem to think I’m some moralistic extremist: If it has to be done, or if the parent chooses to do it, I think it would be sad, but I do believe that it is not my place or a government’s to remove the option to go ahead with that choice. I understand that in some cases it may actually have to be done… That’s probably a pretty typical way of looking at it.
There.
So what do you think? Do you think it’s sad, or do you think it’s simply removing a lump of inert tissue that happens to be shaped roughly like a human being? You don’t have to answer, just convey a bit more repect next time, please. You too, Overthinker.
I generally like reading what you two write for comments here. I just hope you guys are not, in your pride, resorting to mockery just because some other discussant has a point that you might find difficult to counter.
I think it’s a deliberated decision weighing both the pros of life and the cons of finance and viability, and like you, I think it’s unfortunate, but sometimes that’s the lesser of two evils.
I also think both the man and woman should be “fined” (taxed?) for their irresponsibility, but that the process should be allowed, and all of the accumulated “fines” should be put towards producing free condoms and information on the responsibility of safe sex.
In the case of rape, the fine should obviously be waived. Misrepresenting a rape-case would be a criminal offense.
At any rate if the stats I found are accurate then between 1949-2006 over 36 million pregnancies were ended through the process called abortion. Irregardless of ones views on that everyone knows where babies come from, and that when a baby comes out of its mom he or she is kicking and screaming and very much alive. So 36 million times pregnant women in Japan ended the pregnancy before full gestation but how many babies did she deliver and raise in lieu of the pregnancy or cies she ended?
Say a woman has three pregnancies and carries two to full gestation but the third for whatever reason she ends. Now of those two children she will raise say each then goes on to have and raise one child each, then that child goes on to have only one child. Do this over a couple of generations and it is easy to see how the ending of a pregnancy through abortion could contribute to the upside down pyramid of Japans current society.
Irregardless?
Oh man, I LOVE supposition games!
What if the woman was forced to give birth to all three children, but can’t financially support them all, and none of them end up going on to get a higher education for lack of financing, and they all end up stringing together konbini jobs and irasshaimase’ing at McDonald’s, and in their poverty all three of them decide never to have children of their own? Now her non-abortion is to blame for a declining population.
uh.. wait a minute. In your scenario population growth will slow whether abortion occurred or not. Unless you’re assuming that the aborted child would have compensated for that slowed rate… I guess we’ll never know….
In every country, there are pros and cons for immigration as a method to solve such problem, what made you think Japan differed in this regard?