the long term advantage of being anti-abortion

Cool story, bro.

Just FYI, "anti-abortionists" have abortions, and "pro-abortionists" have children. That alone throws off the extrapolation your conclusions stand on.

And yet, Pro-life is trending down.

Hmmm, Lindsey Graham didn't have any children.

Long term, no. Conservatives reproduce far more than radical left.

My parents were Pro-choice and conservative. Out of four children, only one subscribes to their views.

High fertility is not a guarantee of ideological dominance.

My parents were Pro-choice and conservative

Did you mean to say pro-life and conservative? Or are they just conservative on other issues?

Savant wrote:

My parents were Pro-choice and conservative

Did you mean to say pro-life and conservative? Or are they just conservative on other issues?

Yes, my parents were pro-life and conservative. Thanks for catching that.

Children of Muslims are much more likely to be Muslims themselves. And your logic goes both ways, so it's not any smart.

It is interesting that youre comparing Conservatism to a religion. I can definitely see the similarities. And yet, adherents are diminishing with each generarion:

Pro-life is trending down.

Depends on how long the time frame is we're looking at. I suspect that with artificial wombs, fewer people will see abortion as necessary, which might be enough to make an anti-abortion coalition dominant. Some people would still support abortion on principle, but I think they'll be a minority. That said, I think that both pro-life and pro-choice views have trended up, since in ancient times you had views like "husbands should be allowed to force their wives to get abortions" or support for infanticide. Today people either prioritize autonomy or the life of the child, but for a long time people didn't really care about either.

High fertility is not a guarantee of ideological dominance.

There's definitely a correlation though between what parents believe and what their kids believe. I agree that it's not the only factor though.

Savant wrote:

Pro-life is trending down.

Depends on how long the time frame is we're looking at. I suspect that with artificial wombs, fewer people will see abortion as necessary, which might be enough to make an anti-abortion coalition dominant. Some people would still support abortion on principle, but I think they'll be a minority. That said, I think that both pro-life and pro-choice views have trended up, since in ancient times you had views like "husbands should be allowed to force their wives to get abortions" or support for infanticide. Today people either prioritize autonomy or the life of the child, but for a long time people didn't really care about either.

Your argument is 'it *might* be different in the future'. Maybe, maybe not. This is speculation. The current reality is that pro-life ideology is trending down.

High fertility is not a guarantee of ideological dominance.

There's definitely a correlation though between what parents believe and what their kids believe. I agree that it's not the only factor though.

There are obviously stronger forces than fertility shaping what is considered moral and our perception of reality. If this weren't the case, then humans would still accept slavery as moral or that the sun circles the Earth.

The current reality is that pro-life ideology is trending down.

On a long term view, I don't think it is. Infanticide used to be common, now it's not. Forced abortions are no longer popular. So even if more people are pro-choice, more people are also pro-life. ("Pro-death" used to take up a large slice of the pie, but it's been significantly declining.) Looking at the past few years or few decades I think will get caught up in short-term fluctuations and isn't really measuring a long term tend.

If this weren't the case, then humans would still accept slavery as moral or that the sun circles the Earth.

I mean, an argument could be made that slavery isn't economically sustainable anymore, so people who reject it will be more successful/have more kids, etc. but I do agree with the broader point that there are other factors at play.

And then there is bombing Iranian schools...Such is another playful factor.

Family > familia > humans inter-relating with other humans.

Just because the children were playing when their school got bombed by Americans does not make it a playful act.

Satire Debs, satire.

But you knew that.

Didn't you?

Even Americans are paying for the cost of the Iran war.

The good thing is though, that most current Americans and people in general will all be non-existent a hundred years form now.

Self importance and self righteousness are transient.

The Iran war wipes out the two qualities and puts America in a bad light.

But unfortunately, certain Americans seem to not mind the bad light...Thriving on their own self importance and self righteousness

Similarly, Israelis are now positively thriving in near darkness...Thriving on their own self importance and self righteousness.

Maybe they are connected in some way.

Maybe Israel believe by siding with America they are agreeing to Christian values thereby correcting the mistakes of the past where they rejected Jesus. The Americans on the other hand believe by standing with the Jews they are fulfilling Jesus’s mission which was to save the lost sheep of Israel.Matthew 15:24. To the world and Palestinians the word is genocide.

I think Israel sees a powerful ally. American fundamentalists...er, I mean, the Republican party sees Israel as the key to fulfilling eschatological prerequisites for the return of Jesus.

To the world and Palestinians the word is genocide

...many Americans too.

The Muslim world is waiting to develop nuclear weapons and be in the majority.