In what way is this post "analysis" rather than ham-handed moral posturing?

This kind of moral panic has galvanized conservatives ever since urbanization, industrialization, and first-wave feminism in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Its impressive how everyone sounding this alarm seems to suffer from (s)elective amnesia, championing the good ol' days without admitting that doing so is more a political posture than a historical one.

I think religion (christianity) is recipes that worked for the human race for thousands of years. Now, don’t get me wrong, a lot of stuff is no longer useful, is not used or need updates. But on the other hand we change things at a speed that we can’t keep up as a society. My mother had 8 siblings, I had one and and most now will have zero on won’t exist. A society that does that disappear in a few generations. Much of the west subsist on immigration at the moment. What that mean is that our civilisation will change drastically or disappear.

Personally, I was an atheist scientific that rejected religion for most of my life. Recently to my great surprise I find out that the wisdom I was seeking was there all along.

At the same time, I don’t want to believe in fairy tales and the bearded magician in the sky, but there is a deeper symbolic meaning hiding behind the stories for those ready to dig deeper.

> I think this movement will collapse and people will return to traditions/religion. Others part of society that don’t will self extinguish as is already apparent in the birth rate and divorce rate.

That will probably take a long time, as the "part of society that ... will self extinguish" will parasitically attach itself to the parts that don't (e.g. through compulsory education and mass media), dragging everything down in the process.

Luckily, this may be a convenient way to dispose of all the excess labor that capital will no longer will need once it's been made obsolete by AI and automation.

There's already too many humans on the planet. A reduction would be really welcome. Humanity can't keep growing forever. The planet can only sustain so many. I think a reduction will actually stave off disaster though in terms of climate change we're already too late.

I don't think the reduction in birth rate has anything to do with religion and a conservative religious society sounds like a nightmare to me personally.

For me the reason for not having kids is simply that life is already expensive enough even with a double income, and life is much more fulfilling without the responsibility of having to raise kids. I've seen so much of the world that I wouldn't have if I'd be rushing between work, school and judo clubs.

I think it's a really good thing that people no longer have to have kids for economic / pension reasons (or lack of decent contraception) but just have them if they really want to. Personally I don't and I don't think I'd be a good father so it's better not to have them.

> I've seen so much of the world that I wouldn't have if I'd be rushing between work, school and judo clubs.

Ah yes, the old, life is so fulfilling when I'm a constant tourist, and also, climate change is bad but seeing a lot of the world is good.

It’s the new atheist religion: - human are bad, there are too many, we are a cancer on the pristine planet, it would better if we disappear (original sin)

I think: - We live in the most abundant and easy time ever in the history of mankind. - The news, media and education have completely demoralised people, we are either victim or oppressor, no longer the hero of our lives - Our religious traditions was the backbone of our society and sanity, as we cast it away everything break down.