tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20158084.post116079797502564126..comments2023-04-25T06:19:07.970+05:30Comments on Paivakil: Child LabourMahesh T. Pai / മഹേഷ് ടി. പൈhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18184558702678093195noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20158084.post-1162480015006395282006-11-02T20:36:00.000+05:302006-11-02T20:36:00.000+05:30Mahesh,Just noticed your posting. I appreciate you...Mahesh,<BR/><BR/>Just noticed your posting. I appreciate your opinion. I think it's good that we can discuss this openly and share differences or similarity in conclusions.<BR/><BR/>I had said two things about religion. Specifically:<BR/>Organized religions pushing against family planning, sexual education, and oppressing womens rights.<BR/>- religious organizations must be forced to accept, encourage and provide contraception to their audience. Iran was able to do this, a secular country like India should be able to achieve this too.<BR/><BR/>You had said: " Religion and population may or may not influence existence (or absence) of child labour."<BR/><BR/>I am trying to understand what you mean by this. Is it correct for me to interpret that you feel that religion does not influence birthrate? If this is the case, then we disagree on that point. I will need to find evidence that shows birthrate and religion to be highly correlated.<BR/><BR/>I believe that birthrate is tied strongly to the existence of child labour. If the birthrate was low, and each family had only one child, then it is highly unlikely that the child would be sent for work. Instead, the family would be more likely to dedicate resources to accomodate the child's education and such. This is what I observe as a result of China's one child policy. [ But I'm not advocating we copy China in India ] What is your opinion of this? <BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/>jayakumarjayakumarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01394315069061047760noreply@blogger.com