The ideological fights between Left and Right have much to do with family structure. After all, the family is the cornerstone of society. Strong marriages that produce children undergird communities. Having and raising children to be productive, law-abiding, and dutiful is a must in every generation, no matter one’s political leanings. 

It’s been true for a while that the fertility rate in the United States is abysmally low. It is below replacement levels, which does not bode well for the future. The current rate is 1.62 births per woman. This statistic should bother everyone, not just those who consider themselves to be traditional in terms of family values or politics.

In recent years, leftists have expressed disinterest in even having children due to excuses such as climate change. And the status of DINKs, couples with double income and no kids, is apparently something to aspire to, not question. This “progress” is anything but positive advancement. 

While the political Left cheers for abortions, condemns the Dobbs decision, and promotes self-fulfillment over family, the political Right mostly does the opposite. The pro-natal side is often exclusively dominated by the Right. Since that’s the case, those who oppose Republicans and conservatives naturally gravitate toward opposing anything the Right embraces.

This is exactly the angle taken in a recent piece at Politico titled “The Far Right’s Campaign to Explode the Population.” Dress anything up with fear and explain it’s coming from the “far right,” automatically seen as a negative term, and it’s powerful. But the piece and overall argument conveniently forget that babies are good and population growth helps everyone regardless of whether they’re on the left or right. 

At the core of the opposition to natalism is that it goes against self-actualization. Children don’t allow us to reach our full potential. We can’t do what we want, when we want, and how we want if we must take care of offspring who drain our resources and our energy. This is the message we hear from anti-natalists.

Anyone who has inhabited the role of parent understands the phrase “parenthood is a journey out of selfishness.” You are forced to lay aside your immediate concerns to focus on a child. Children are the priority. While parenthood is not easy, it’s worth it.

The attitude of far too many millennials and Zoomers is that our individual lives should be all about us. This could not be further from the truth. We, as human beings, are meant for community. The fullness of life comes from the love of and investment in family and friends.

Adding to the population is neither scary nor is it reserved for conservatives. Establishing families helps individuals, towns, communities, and cities flourish. It also is a deposit for the future, after we’re gone. Given the low fertility rate, overpopulation isn’t a threat. And climate change alarmism is no reason to promote population reduction. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

There is no way to make people have children, especially those who view them as more of a problem than anything else. That should never be the goal, anyway. Children deserve attentive, dedicated parents who meet their physical and emotional needs. Indifference is not an option. But the idea that parenthood and even large families fall in line with extreme political ideology is nonsense. It’s an argument meant to demean right-leaning people as mindless breeders.

But fertility is a bipartisan issue. We must view and discuss it as affecting us all. The entire future depends on it. 

Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog and a columnist at Arc Digital.