David f,
There is a universal law.

If a species of plant or animal does not produce enough offspring, then the species of plant or animal eventually becomes extinct.

As a country, Australia produces about 1.75 offspring per mother and father (not including the abomination of IVF). This is not enough to continue the species, so there is immigration.

As a feminist country, we don’t produce hardly anything, and there is now a deficit regards most things.

Married women produce almost twice the number of babies as unmarried women, and the feminist ideal of de facto relationships not only produces too few children, it also produces the highest rates of child poverty, child neglect, child abuse, general drug taking, depression, fatherless children, run away children, low marks in schools etc.

So that is why most societies decided to have marriage (pre-feminism).

I hope you understand now.

That's right. The government spends billions on child protection bureaucracies while actively discriminating against marriage and subsidising single parenthood and step-parenthood, which are two of the biggest correlates with risk of harm and disadvantage to children.[Peter Hume]

PeterHume:
So is paedophilia [a priority issue targetted vigilantly by government "Bureaucracies" to assist with the protection of our innocent 'under aged' children].

Dear vanna,

A country is not a species. Species appear and disappear, but when a country disappears the people who made up that country can live on. However, I think that it is a healthy sign that Australia produces about 1.75 offspring per mother and father. Populations cannot increase indefinitely. It is normal for populations to increase and decrease as circumstances change. The present human population in the world is unsustainable. It would be good if we had fewer people on the planet. It can be done by starvation, war or other nasty means. The best way is for women to choose to have fewer children. That is happening in Australia and in other countries.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=as&v=25 is a website listing the birth rates of 221 countries or political entities from Niger with the highest birth rate to Hong Kong with the lowest birth rate. Australia is 163 on the list. There are 38 with a lower birth rate than Australia. Luxembourg, Bermuda, Cuba, Russia, Norway, United Kingdom, Denmark, Romania, Netherlands, Finland, Estonia, Portugal, Canada, Belgium, Sweden, Poland, Latvia, Spain, Belarus, Croatia, Ukraine, Switzerland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Lithuania, Taiwan, Slovenia, South Korea, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Czech Republic, Singapore, Austria, Germany, Italy and Japan all have lower birth rates than Australia. It appears to be a world wide trend. Over population is a great problem. Extinction is not.

Australia does not need to produce more babies. We have 3% of the fresh water resources that the US has. Our top soil is lacking in trace elements. We have the highest rate of species extinction in the world. We are overpopulated, but some people don't understand that. Unfortunately, one of those people is now prime minister.

David F
Races of people are not that different to species of animals.

If a race of people does not produce 2.2 children per woman, it becomes extinct. Guess which race will eventually predominate in Australia, (and many other countries).

De Facto relationships are a very expensive exercise, and you are paying for it.

As well as social dislocation, de facto relationships also create a demand for housing.

With an average life expectancy of about 3 years, de facto relationships often end in single person households. With about 1 in 4 households now a single person household, it is creating considerable demand for housing, pushing up prices.

Not only do feminist and Marxist societies become extinct, they do so expensively.

Vanna,

In addition to making misstatements, you don't listen.

W.A.U.
No-one is defending paedophilia. But paedophilia doesn't mean under-age sex. It means a psychiatric condition in which the person is unable to experience sexual stimulation unless with an immature child - you know, a *real* child, a sexually immature person - not a person who is four or five years past puberty, is fully sexually mature with fully-functional reproductive organs, is able to bear children or has in fact already borne children, but who is defined by 150-year old law to be a child regardless of the facts?