Over the past couple years, growing awareness of the neofascist undercurrent in conspiracy culture has led me to alter some of the statements in the original article, most recently regarding the presence of eugenics in the present day, which is an idea that has been co-opted by organizations I would never want to be associated with such as the Quiverfull movement. My main concern has never been declining birth rates but instead the possibility that developing technologies will permanently alter the genetic code, in the process destroying natural immunities and leading towards further acceptance of increasingly invasive, as well as traumatic, medical treatments. Reference the frightening medical industry expose, How Doctors Die, and contrast that with the numerous histories of gentle, effective holistic therapies that have been suppressed by regulatory agencies.
As for reproductive technologies, within Chinese medicine there is the idea that the emotional state of the parents at the moment of conception determines the overall vitality of the child. How would artificial insemination affect this process, and can it ever fully approximate the natural variety? My opinion is that the normalization of reproductive technologies is problematic, especially because researchers have discovered that in vitro fertilization has many disturbing health risks, such as an increased rate of birth defects, premature births, multiple births and low birth weight. And yet, ironically, despite the righteous indignation of fundamentalists who say abortion is driving the new eugenics, it may actually be a cult of reproduction-as-social-necessity that is behind its modern incarnation. For example, many people don't know that, during Hurricane Katrina, a special rescue team was sent in to retrieve frozen embryos while fully grown human beings were dying in the streets without the most basic necessities. Also, religious organizations that have worked to make adoption all but impossible for gay couples have contributed to the exploding number of lesbians who choose artificial insemination, which is legally a far easier process. Many of these problems are created by the atomization of social structures, since isolated family units are not in a position to easily interact with orphaned children as they would have in many indigenous cultures, meaning that they will be more likely to turn to risky methods of conception in order to realize the dream of having a family.
By the way, did you know that the single family home is a modern invention of real estate companies? Prior to the 19th century, extended families living under the same roof were the norm and not the exception. Try looking for the supposedly traditional nuclear family prior to the past couple of centuries and it will be a rare find. It's interesting that this development is promoted as a civilizing influence despite the terrible consequences for elderly people who typically pass their final days in institutionalized settings. The argument has also been made that domestic violence thrives in isolated settings, and its occurrence is noticeably lower in the context of extended family environments. With these ideas in mind, I've made a few minor alterations to the article, although it will be awhile before the implications are fully articulated.
