How High School Graduates see their future

Congratulations! to all students who will be wearing a cap and gown over the next few weeks.  We honor each graduate and look forward to all of the amazing things that the graduating classes of 2010 will accomplish during the coming years.

We thought we’d point out a study that gives some clues as to what the future may hold for some of these grads.  The Barna research group asked 602 soon-to-be-high-school graduates where they thought they would be by the time they were 25 years old:

1. Graduate from College (93%)
2. Having a close connection with God (72%)
3. International travel (71%)
4. Church involvement (63% felt they’d be involved at some points in their lives, but only 29% said they be involved by age 25)
5. Marriage (58% felt they would be involved at some point in their lives, but only 12% said they be married by 25 years of age)

We are hearten by the numbers that desire a close connection with God, but note that that connection is not something that these students perceive will be gained through traditional church involvement.   This trend mirrors other studies that show that involvement in organized religion among millennials (ages 18-30) has dropped off dramatically.

We are alarmed that only 58% of young people feel that marriage is something that they want to participate in.   This is further evidence that we are on the verge of losing a “marriage culture.”   We hope this rather dismal omen of the future is grounded in teenage distraction and exuberance because marriage will be an essential component in the success of these grads lives, their future children’s lives and is crucial to an on-going successful society.

Read details of the Barna survey:   http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/366-teenagers-want-successful-careers-and-global-travel-expect-to-delay-marriage-a-parenting-

Shocking British Abortion Statistics

Just one day after the abortion industry in Britain started running TV ads to solicit more customers, the British Department of Health released their most recent statistics on abortion.  Telegraph.co.uk  begins their news article with:  “More than 1,000 children under 15 had an abortion last year raising fears they could be using terminations as a form of contraception.”  Here’s a few more statistics on abortion in Britain:

• 1,047 girls 14 and under had abortions
• One in three women having an abortion, including 1,341 under-18s, had already had at least one abortion.
• 2,637 women had had three previous abortions, while 779 had had four, 214 had had five and 48 women had had seven or more abortions.
• Among 25 to 29 year olds, 3,268 had already had two abortions, and 70 had had five previous abortions.
• The abortion rate was highest for women aged 19 to 21, at 33 per 1,000 for women
• 2,085 abortions, or one per cent of the total, were for children who would have been born disabled, including 775 for chromosomal abnormalities including Down’s syndrome.
• Total abortions for the year were 189,100 (2009 figure)

A British Department of Health spokesperson was quick to tell everyone that the overall abortion rate had fallen since 2008, but he also admitted that “abortion figures tend to fluctuate slightly year-on-year so we can’t call this a trend yet, especially with the background of the last few decades’ gradual rise in the numbers of abortions.”

Abortion certainly does appear to be the birth control of choice for many females in Britain.  So much for the vapid pro-choice mantra:  “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.”

A new low for TV: Abortion Ads

In a new low for television advertising, the Marie Stopes International UK is now running ads on British television for abortion services.  It is an advertising campaign with a deceptively simple question:  “Are you late?”  The word “abortion” is never mentioned.

“If you’re pregnant and not sure what to do, Marie Stopes International can help.” The ad closes with the words “Are you late?” and a phone number displayed.    Nothing is said, of course, about the real purpose for the commercial (more abortion revenue for Marie Stopes International).

Marie Stopes describes itself as a “not for profit sexual and reproductive health” organization, yet last year it provided 920,000 abortions internationally.  This number is a 56 percent increase over 2008. Their board of directors must be proud.

On its website, Marie Stopes defends its ad by saying, “The time has come to talk more openly and honestly about abortion and we hope that the TV commercial will help to break down the taboos that persist around this issue.”   We’re left wondering where the “honesty about abortion” fits into this ad since the word “abortion” is never even mentioned!

If you visit the Marie Stopes website and click on the link “What are my pregnancy options? It becomes very clear that Marie Stopes has no interest in running their ads except to attract abortion dollars.  They provide no other services.   Real help for women is in short supply.   If a pregnant woman wants something other than abortion, Marie Stopes casually tells them to contact their General Practice physician (GP) or the British Adoption and Fostering Association.

Alert: Trouble in Texas

United Families International recently sent out an alert discussing the revisions to the  of the State of Texas curriculum for history and social studies.  We wanted to pass on some new information; particularly for our readers who are residents of Texas.  Please write and express your support for the new revisions.  Here’s the text of the appeal:

“If You Really Care About Our Texas School Children…”

by Donna Garner

5.27.10

I am making a personal appeal to every Texas parent who has children in the public schools and to everyone who cares about the future of our state and nation.  If you have not gotten involved before to try to protect our children, then here is your chance.

“The mind is a terrible thing to waste.”  “This year’s students will become tomorrow’s voters and leaders.”

A huge battle unfolded as the elected Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) members went through the 1 ½ year process of adopting brand new Social Studies standards (TEKS) for K-12.

These new standards were passed last Friday, 5.21.10; but the liberal news media (including the Dallas Morning News, the Austin American-Statesman, the San Antonio Express-News, etc.) working together with leftists such as Texas Freedom Network, Mexican American Legislative Caucus, ACLU, MEChA, NAACP, TSTA, NEA, PFLAG, Equality Texas, AFT, LULAC, and the Democrat Texas Legislators are still trying to keep the firestorm brewing.

These liberals want the SBOE to rewrite the newly passed Social Studies standards next January when new left-leaning Board members take their seats.

(To read the Dallas Morning News’ nefarious plan, please go to: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-sboe_0527edi.State.Edition1.6e8fa12.html )

I think most parents and people in the public will agree with me that the new Social Studies TEKS are exactly what they want our Texas children to learn and that the lengthy process to adopt these standards was fair and transparent, involving more than 42,000 e-mails and countless hours of public hearings.

Before this firestorm is allowed to gain speed, Texas parents and the public must write to their Texas legislators and put a stop to this nefarious plan right now.

ACTION:  Please tell your legislators that you want the new Social Studies TEKS to stand as adopted; you support the authority of the elected SBOE; you appreciate the thoroughness of the adoption process; and you want our state’s children to have new Social Studies textbooks based upon the Social Studies standards that were adopted on 5.21.10.

EXAMPLES FROM NEW SOCIAL STUDIES TEKS

Here are some of the Social Studies standards that our Texas children will study.  The final version adopted on 5.21.10 will be posted on the Texas Education Agency website in a few weeks:

Analyze Abraham Lincoln’s ideas about liberty, equality, union and government (Gettysburg Address) and contrast them with the ideas contained in Jefferson Davis’s inaugural address (8^th grade U. S. History).

Examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America and guaranteed free exercise by saying that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  Compare and contrast this concept to the phrase “separation of church and state. “(U. S. Government)

Explain instances of institutional racism in American society (Sociology).

Discuss the solvency of long-term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare (U. S. History since 1877).

Participate in Celebrate Freedom Week annually with an emphasis on Thomas Jefferson’s part in writing The Declaration of Independence.

Study such people as Cesar Chavez, Dolores Huerta, Thurgood Marshall, Martin Luther King, Jr, Sonia Sotomayor, Barack H. Obama, Sandra Day O’Connor, Wallace Jefferson, Susan B. Anthony, Lorenzo de Zavala, Booker T. Washington, Henry B. Gonzalez, Hector P. Garcia, Raul A. Gonzalez, Jr., Jose Antonio Navarro, Hillary Clinton, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, W.E. B. Dubois, Irma Rangel, Oprah Winfrey, Ellen Ochoa, Harriet Tubman, Roy Benavides, John”Danny” Olivas, Carmen Loma Garza, Vernon J. Baker, George Washington Carver, William Wilberforce, many others.

Learn about Tejano leaders:  Juan N. Seguin, Lorenzo de Zavala, and Jose Antonio Navarro including the significant contributions of Tejanos such as Juan N. Seguín, Plácido Benavides, and Jose Francisco Ruiz during the time period of the Texas Revolution, The Republic of Texas, and the annexation of Texas to the United States; Tejanos who died at the Alamo, Juan Antonio Badillo and Carlos Espalier.

Study holidays such as Veterans’ Day, July the 4^th, Christmas, and Rosh Hashanah.

Describe the causes, key organizations, and individuals of the conservative resurgence of the 1980’s and 1990’s, including the Moral Majority, the National Rifle Association, and the Contract with America.

Study Enlightenment philosophers such as Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Rousseau, and other political thinkers.

Learn about Thomas Jefferson as a Founding Father, patriot hero, political philosopher, significant figure in American Revolution, and author of Declaration of Independence.

Study slavery by explaining the reasons for the development of the plantation system, the Transatlantic Slave Trade, and the spread of slavery.

Learn about the benefits of the free enterprise system (Grades 2 – 12) and understand that this system may also be referred to by the term “capitalism.”

Study the establishment of our Constitutional Republic.

To read more, go to Rampart 360 – 5.27.10 — “Coverage of the Texas State Board of Education Battle” — http://ramparts360.com/uncategorized/heather-sboe/

Donna Garner
wgarner1@hot.rr.com

Gulf Coast Oil Crisis is No Time for Agenda Politics

At a time when we have one of the largest environmental disasters in the history of the U.S. and a massive part of the Gulf region economy at risk, we also have agenda politics at play in Washington D. C.

When the Obama administration was assembling an elite team of engineers and scientists to help stop the massive oil leak, Professor Jonathan Katz was tapped.  But when it was discovered that Prof. Katz’s opinion on homosexual behavior didn’t align with an ultra-left agenda, Katz was told his services were no longer needed.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu explained:  “Some of Professor Katz’s controversial writings have become a distraction from the critical work of addressing the oil spill. Professor Katz will no longer be involved in the Department’s efforts.”

So what did Katz write?  A paper entitled “In Defense of homophobia.”   Katz’s essay explains the health risks associated with homosexual behavior.  He wrote the facts; that’s it.  Katz expressed opinions that the majority of citizens would agree with.

This situation is discrimination based on an individual’s expressed opinion unrelated to his employment.  Yet you have an administration that is pushing for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which is intended to protect homosexuals from discrimination.  Evidently it is OK to discriminate against heterosexuals, however.

Bottom Line:  If you desire to have a career in government or public service, it appears you cannot have an opinion that disagrees with homosexual or liberal orthodoxy.  You either have to change your opinion or bury any evidence of your opinion deep enough that no one will ever find it.

As a final note, A.J. Bockelman, director of PROMO, a St. Louis-bases advocacy group for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people gives us this gem of a quote:

“It’s disappointing at a time like this that when all Americans need to come together and focus on relief efforts and recovery efforts in the Gulf, someone divisive was placed in a position of power,”

Let me get this straight:  because you, Mr. Bockelman, disagree with Prof. Katz that makes him “divisive?”

On this I think we can agree; at a time like this Americans should be coming together to solve a massive problem.  So, Mr. Bockelman and your friends in Washington, leave your homosexual agenda at the door and let’s all concentrate on the crisis at hand.  As Pres. Obama has not so eloquently stated:   “Just plug the damn hole.”

In public schools, is it appropriate for the bible and other significant religious text to be available and used as an educational resource?

Let your voice be heard!  Vote on the current UFI poll question -  In public schools, is it appropriate for the bible and other significant religious text to be available and used as an educational resource?

Click HERE and scroll to bottom of the page to cast your vote!

Texas Textbooks: Why the International Community Should Care

An article on Texas textbooks may not appear to be of interest to our international community. However, the world movement toward secularism and one world government may have just met its match. The great state of Texas, in a bold move, is taking on the international anti-religion and anti-family movement.

Last Friday, the Texas State Board of Education adopted its new guidelines for social studies and history curriculum.  Not only will 4.8 million Texas students be taught from these guidelines for the next 10 years, but the standards that emanate from Texas are also used by the major publishers in the development of their textbooks for the rest of the U.S. These Texas textbooks guidelines and standards have, for decades, had substantial influence over education not only in the U.S., but around the world.

The changes to the guidelines that are controversial may surprise you.  They include the following:

Recognizing Religious History

The Texas Board voted to reject the change of the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D., thereby retaining the century old religious connotations of the historical classifications for time .

Teaching  National Sovereignty

In a move that United Families International really cheers, the Board also approved a requirement for all students to evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations system to undermine national sovereignty .  The Chairman of the Texas Board, Don McLeroy, stated that these global organizations, including the U.N., “threaten individual liberty and freedom.”

Clarifying the Issue of Church and State

Texas schoolchildren will also be required to learn that the words “separation of church and state” aren’t in the U.S. Constitution and they’ll be required to compare and contrast the judicial language with the First Amendment’s wording.

Clarifying the United States’ Form of Government & Monetary System

Students will be reminded that the U.S. government should be referred to as a “constitutional republic” rather than “democratic.” In an effort to help students understand economics and monetary systems, they will be required to study the decline in the U.S. dollar’s value, including the abandonment of the gold standard .  References to “American exceptionalism” and free enterprise are featured in the new guidelines as well as the suggestion that free enterprise functions best in the absence of government intervention.

Perhaps your first thought is:  “You mean those things aren’t in the textbooks right now?  Suffice it to say that the history that you learned while in school may be significantly different than what your children and grandchildren are currently being taught.

We also want to mention that efforts by some members of the Texas State Board of Education to diminish textbook references to Christmas, Independence Day, and religious heritage were defeated .  In a move that must surely outrage the secularists of society, there is a strengthened requirement for teaching the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation’s Founding Fathers. Not everyone is as pleased with the new requirements and guidelines for textbooks as we may be.

Some educators have criticized the proposed curriculum as “politicizing education.” The more liberal members of the Texas Board lament the fact that they no longer have the majority so as to control the requirements.   In California a state legislator is working to block the Texas standards from influencing textbooks in his state. We are confident, however, that the vast majority of parents will be pleased with the changes to the guidelines and we thank those in Texas who had the courage and conviction to return lost information and standards to the country’s textbooks.

Call to Action

An interesting exercise would be to get hold of your student’s current social studies and history book. Read and study them over the summer.   Do some comparing to what you were taught while in school . Please add this proposal to last week’s suggestion of taking the time to evaluate your student’s sex education program over the summer.  Get copies of textbooks and curriculum from social studies and history as well.  This should make for some wonderful around-the-dinner-table teaching moments this summer.

Conclusion

In a world where children are being used as pawns in the chase for a god-less society, parents must be informed and aware of the contents of their child’s school curriculum. This ever increasing movement away from family empowerment can only be stifled and eventually turned around by vigilant parents and strong family public policy. Thanks to the Texas Board of Education for paving the way!

Support UFI!

Stand up for the family, and traditional values by supporting UFI! Click here to support UFI by credit card
Click here to support UFI using PayPal
Click here to support UFI by check

98% Say No To Same-Sex Adoption!

In responses to UFI’s poll question, “Should same-sex couples be allowed to adopt?” over 98% of our blog readers said “No.”   As they say on a famous game show:  “Good Answer!”

Many individuals know intuitively how important it is that children have both a mother and a father.  But, they don’t have the information to feel comfortable in articulating “why” when their position on gay adoption and parenting is being challenged.  Listed below are a few studies that can give you empirical support when engaging in dialogues on this topic.

Homosexual Parenting/Gay Adoption

Golombok’s and Tasker’s study revealed in its results section a clear connection between being raised in a lesbian family and homosexuality: “With respect to actual involvement in same-gender sexual relationships, there was a significant difference between groups . . .  None of the children from heterosexual families had experienced a lesbian or gay relationship.” By contrast, five (29 percent) of the 17 daughters and one (13 percent) of the eight boys in homosexual families reported having at least one same-sex relationship. Susan Golombok and Fiona L. Tasker, “Do Parents Influence the Sexual Orientation of Their Children? Findings from a Longitudinal Study of Lesbian Families,” Developmental Psychology 32 (1996): 7.

Twelve percent of the children of lesbians became active lesbians themselves, a rate which is at least four times the base rate of lesbianism in the adult female population. Tasker and S. Golombok, “Adults Raised as Children in Lesbian Families,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 65, 2 (1995): 213.

Sixty-four percent of young adults raised by lesbian mothers reported considering having same-sex relationships. Only 17 percent of young adults in heterosexual families reported the same thing. Judith Stacey and Timothy Biblarz, “(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?” American Sociological Review 66 (2001): 159-183.

Recent studies indicate that a higher proportion of children of lesbian parents are themselves apt to engage in homosexual activity. Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste.  The researchers conclude that “children with lesbigay parents appear less traditionally gender-typed and more likely to be open to homoerotic relationships.” Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz, “(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?” American Sociological Review 66 (2001): 174, 179.

Dutch Scholars found that compared to peers living in an intact family, adolescents living in a one-parent family are more than twice as likely to perceive a need for psychological help and more than three times as likely to actually be referred for mental health services.  Alternative family structures, even in the open-minded, tolerant Netherlands negatively impacts children. Marieke Zwwaanswijk et al., “Factors Associated With Adolescent Mental Health Service Need and Utilization,”Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 42 (2003):  692-700.

Children of homosexuals reported that their childhoods were more difficult than the childhoods of children of heterosexuals. In nine percent of homosexual-parented families, children mentioned having one or more problems or concerns.  Of the 213 “score problems,” 94 percent were attributed to the homosexual parent(s). Among appellate cases, the courts attributed 97 percent of the “harms” to children to the homosexual parent. (Narratives from 52 homosexually-parented families and files from 40 appeals court cases involving custody disputes between homosexual and heterosexual parents.)  Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron, “Children of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties,” Psychological Reports 90, 1 (2002): 71-82.  **Although there is criticism of Paul Cameron’s work we find no substantive evidence or reason to exclude Cameron’s studies.

Compared with children from traditional families, children from nontraditional families showed more psychological problems as rated by their parents and more internalizing behavior as rated by their teachers. Boys from nontraditional families were especially at a disadvantage; they showed lower self-concept, more externalizing, poorer classroom behavior, and lower grade-point averages. Girls from such families were less popular with peers. (Study of 136 fifth-grade children and their parents in Vermont.)  Phyllis Bronstein et al., “Parenting Behavior and Children’s Social, Psychological and Academic Adjustment in Diverse Family Structure,” Family Relations 42 (1993): 268-276.

“Twenty-nine percent of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents. Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.” P. Cameron and K. Cameron, “Homosexual Parents,” Adolescence 31 (1996): 772.  **Although there is criticism of Paul Cameron’s work we find no substantive evidence or reason to exclude Cameron’s studies.

The research comparing outcomes from homosexual parenting and heterosexual parenting are notoriously inconclusive. Studies on the positive aspects of homosexual parenting “rely on small samples of white, middle-class, previously married lesbians and their children.” David Demo and Martha Cox,  Families with Young Children: A Review of Research in the 1990s,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62 (2000): 889.  Glenn T. Stanton, “Examining the Research of Homosexual Parenting,” Journal of the Southern Baptist Convention, (June/July 2002), (http://sbclife.net/Articles/2002/06/Sla7.asp).

There are no homosexual parenting studies that a) take a nationally representative sample of babies born to or adopted by gay parents and married mothers and fathers and b) follow them longitudinally while c) controlling for standard demographic variables (race, education, etc.) and d) include a broad range of outcome variables. The studies that currently exist simply compare lesbian single moms to heterosexual single moms. Social science research has already shown the negative outcomes visited upon children who do not live with two married parents. Maggie Gallagher, Marriagedebate.com, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, (www.marriagedebate.com/mdblog/2003_07_27_mdblog_archive.htm).

The American College of Pediatricians believes it is in appropriate, potentially hazardous to children, and dangerously irresponsible to change the age-old prohibition on homosexual parenting, whether by adoption, foster care, or by reproductive manipulation.  This position is rooted in the best available science. “Homosexual Parenting Is It Time For A Change?”  American College of Pediatricians, January 24, 2004.  Coalition for marriage, www.preservemarriage.com

Children raised by homosexuals were more dissatisfied with their own gender, had homosexual experiences more frequently, and suffered a greater rate of molestation by members of their families (Adolescence, 1996; Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1986; American Sociological Review, 2001).

Abortion: The UnChoice

Last week we posted a story about a teen mother in the state of Pennsylvania who was coerced into having an abortion.  We expressed shock that U.S. courts would force abortion upon a mother.  We were not thinking, however, of the thousands of women every year, right here in the U.S., that are forced to abort their babies either by circumstances or by an individual(s) in their lives.

The Elliot Institute is a pro-life organization that is dedicated to “performing original research and education on the impact of abortion on women, men, siblings, and society.”  Because most academic institutions (where research is most often performed) do not choose to research the impact of abortion on women, (I’ll let you guess why not) this group has stepped in to provide the much needed data.

The Elliot Institute has produced some excellent educational materials and public service campaigns over the years.  Their latest campaign bears the slogan:  “Abortion:  The UnChoice.”

Their most recent work is a special report entitled “Forced Abortion in America.”  Here are some of the statistics they have compiled about women who have had abortions:

• 64% of women reported feeling pressured to abort
• 79% weren’t told of available resources
• Abortion clinics fail to screen for coercion
• 84% were inadequately counseled before hand
• Pressure to abort can escalate to violence
• Homicide is the leading killer of pregnant women

“Forced Abortion in America” is filled with the examples and compelling stories of women.  This special report is an attempt to shine a light on aspect of abortion that pro-choice advocates would rather you knew nothing of.

Read it and then educate those around you.

http://www.theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/ForcedAbortions.pdf

“Food: There’s lots of it”

We had a lot of interest in Population Research Institute’s  youtube cartoon presentations on the myths surrounding overpopulation.  PRI recently released another video; this time on world hunger.  We think you’ll enjoy this one too.  “Thank you”to Population Research Institute!

We also wanted to share some interesting statistics on population and world food production.  Check them out below.

Population and Food Production

• The world produces 23 percent more food per capita than it did in 1961 and the growth in agricultural crops per person in developing countries has grown by as much as 52 percent.  The fall in the proportion of people starving in the world came at the same time as the population of developing countries doubled.  Bjorn Lomborg, The Skeptical Environmentalist, University Press, Cambridge United Kingdom, 2001, pg. 61
• In 1970, 35 percent of all people in developing countries were starving.  In 1996 the figure was 18 percent and it is expected to drop to 12 percent by the year 2010. (United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization,1999c:29)
• The average caloric intake by people in the developing worlds has increased by eight percent over the last 10 years with gains as high as 26 percent in some developing countries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, Food and Production Yearbook, 2000 Database  http://www.apps.fao.org/
• The price of food fell by more than two-thirds from 1957 to early 2001. World Bank Food Index; International Monetary Fund 2001; Consumer Price Index 1913-2001, Washington, DC:  Bureau of Labor 2001
• The mass famines “guaranteed” for the 1970’s by doomsayers, such as William and Paul Paddock in Famine 1975!, have not occurred.  Even in 2010, governments in Canada, USA and Europe are still trying to come up with new ways to suppress agricultural production.
• World food supplies exceed requirements in all world areas, amounting to a surplus approaching 50% in 1990 in the developed countries and 17% in the developing regions. (World Food Summit 96/Tech I Executive Summary, FAO, 1996, pp. 8-9)
• “Global food supplies have more than doubled in the last 40 years…between 1962 and 1991, average daily-per-capita food supplies increased more than 15%…at a global level, there is probably no obstacle to food production rising to meet demand.” (“Food Requirements and Population Growth,” World Food Summit Technical Background Documents 1-05, Vol. 1, FAO, 1996, pp 8-9)
• The amount of food produced per person increased about 62% from 1948 to 1996—a period of substantial population growth. (The State of Food and Agriculture, published annually by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, 1953, 1997)
• In developing countries, the average calories per person per day were 2060 in 1966.  By 1995, the average calories per person per day were 2570, an improvement of about 25%. (The State of Food and Agriculture, published annually by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, 1997)
• Crop yield has been increasing faster than population has grown for more than sixty years.  It would be possible to feed today’s larger populations using less cropland than was used in 1948. (The State of Food and Agriculture, published annually by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, various editions)
• The International Monetary Fund says African economic problems result from excessive government spending, high taxes on farmers, inflation, restrictions on trade, too much government ownership, and over-regulation of private economic activity.  There is no mention of overpopulation. (Christine Jones and Miguel A. Kiguel, “Africa’s Quest for prosperity:  Has Adjustment helped?” Finance and Development June 1994, pp. 2-5)
• Africa has the worst average diet in the world, but also has much unused potential rain-fed land. Diet has been improving fastest in Asia, which has little unused land.  Latin America uses the same amount of land as South Asia, which feeds a much greater population.  Many in Latin America are malnourished even though 80% of the potential rain-fed agricultural land in Latin America is unused. (World Agriculture:  Towards 2010, Nikos Alexandratos, et al. (1995) A Food and Agriculture Organization Study, John Wiley & Sons, New York.)