Religion and Fertility Rates

I see they are taking birth rates as a basis. That assumes that all the children they have will follow their parents' religion. I don't think that can be taken for granted.When I look at my own country it seems that people are less and less following their parents' religious choices. Most Catholics in Holland of my generation are only so in name. That say they are to please the parents, but they don't do anything church related.The same happens to more strict religions

Here is an uncomfortable truth: religious people produce more children, regardless of their income, social welfare status and living conditions. They are thought from birth that marriage, family and children are gifts from "God".In fact, Christians make it a _requirement_ to be "open to life" (i.e have children) before they agree to marry you in Church (in addition to banning contraceptives, abortions and porn).They also believe that pursuit of wealth, status and greed

Conservatives and the more religious tend to have more kids. Non-religious, liberals have the least kids.If there is any genetic contributions, then this will be under intense selection pressure.Maybe this is why religion has survived so long? It tends to our reproduce the non-religious?

Religious people seem to be having more children.

Poor people are also more religious, and in the age of birth control,religions that don't explicitly require their adherents to procreate will have far fewer followers than those that do after just a few generations.

Religion is a much stronger predictor of number of children than any genetic factor. Religion is typically passed on to children, but not genetically!

Religious people have more children. Family formation has historically been much more affordable in the US than in Europe and Japan, and most of the rest of the world. So desire and culture has been the primary constraint on an individual's choice to have one or another child, whereas in other places the constraints have been more financial.Religious people in the US out-breed non-religious people at a higher rate than is possible elsewhere. If you look at the demographics, blue state urba

Combination of religious groups that favor big families plus immigration from low income countries where large families are still commmon?

There was a religious leader making a similar argument some time back, but I don't think it holds together all that well. After all, back in the middle ages the amount of churchgoing people was near 100% and religions were promoting big families then just as much as now. So if religious parents "out-produce" their non-religious counterparts how did we ever get to the current situation where a majority is not religious?The answer is of course that children choose their own way a

What was the previous generation's child mortality rate? From what I read, that seems to be the dominant factor for the number of children you're expected to get, not so much what religion one has.Probably contraception availability also plays a role there, but I'd be surprised if the two don't go hand in hand: if you have money to spend on healthcare then you'll also have the money for cheap contraceptives.Edit: another comment (<a href="https://news.yco