best method to prevent the racial and cultural extinction of the white ethnic groups

Thanks, Pro. Before we go any further in this debate - and because I still have 3 rounds to go, so this is not bad conduct - you'll notice that Pro never explains why population reduction in an over-populated world is a bad thing. If we can agree that maybe it isn't, then the need for Pro's 2 suggestions goes away all-together. Anyway... Pro begins by noting that sources indicate white women having less than 2.1 kids on average means that no ethnic group can survive. However, Pro conveniently ignores that it's not just the white population that are having less than 2.1 births/woman. For example, the European Union's TFR (total fertility rates) is 1.5 and no EU member state has a TFR at replacement or above. Even high population developing countries have seen steep declines in fertility. Since 1970, China's TFR fell from 5.8 to 1.6; Japan's from 2.0 to 1.3, etc. [1]. So, we can assume that this is not just a white cultural phenomena but rather one that affects many groups - and not just because of Christianity and paganism. The book 'Demographic Winter' asserts that "every aspect of modernity works against family life and in favor of singleness and small families or voluntary childlessness." Harvard psychologist and happiness researcher Daniel Gilbert notes that the more children a person has, the less happy they are. Researchers have found that people derive more satisfaction from eating, exercising, shopping, napping, or watching television than being with their kids [1]. Additionally, many families have chosen to not have kids due to declining economic circumstances [2]. Other factors include sociodemographic ones, such as limited access to health care [3]. Even still there are other factors mentioned, such as the growing usage of contraception by whites causing them to have less children. As you can see, religion and feminism are mentioned nowhere in those causes/reasons for the decline of white births. The real factors include modern culture at large; happiness; limited resources; the use of contraception, etc. Now clearly Pro should not be advocating that women start using LESS contraception. Not only should women who don't want to have kids not have them, but contraception is also extremely useful in helping to prevent the spread of STDs. Similarly, people should not be having kids if they cannot afford to take care of them. Moving on, Pro begins talking about the Bible and verses from the OT vs. verses from the NT. To be clear, whatever the Bible says about divorce and the death penalty are entirely irrelevant to this debate. However, for purposes of clarification, I think it is important for Pro to understand that what the Bible READS is not necessarily what it SAYS. Due to a lot of factors including multiple translations several times over, cultural differences, etc. you cannot always accept the Bible how it reads at face value. You have to look deeper. The whole point of Pro's rant here was to prove that Christianity is "liberal." You'll note that he conveniently excluded abortion from the example, because the Christian stance on that is conservative. He also ignores anti-gay (non-liberal) sentiments from the NT, and the fact that Christianity still calls for you to keep holy the sabbath day, except it's on Sunday instead of Saturday. Also, Pro says that Christianity claims a universal value; however, a UNIVERSALIST is all-inclusive in that it accepts ALL FAITHS and does not promote one truth over another like Christianity does. No more characters for now, but there's nothing left to say in this round - GL! [1] http://reason.com... [2] http://voices.washingtonpost.com... [3] Taffel SM. Prenatal care -- United States, 1969-75. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, NCHS, 1978. (Vital and health statistics; series 21, no. 33).