02-06-2005, 01:58 AM
EPW 1-29-2005
Role of Religion in Fertility Decline - Part 2
P N MARI BHAT, A J FRANCIS ZAVIER
***This has the implication that a
locality which has a Muslim population of 35 per cent or more
in 2001 would become a Muslim majority area by the time
population size gets stabilised. Thus the fear that Muslims would
outnumber Hindus in India as a whole is totally unwarranted.
But some new Muslim majority localities will certainly emerge,
which could have a bearing on local politics.
***Conclusion
As a result of the lag in fertility decline among Indian Muslims,
the Hindu-Muslim fertility difference had increased from about
10 per cent at the time of independence to 25-30 per cent in the
1990s. We estimate that, as a consequence, before population
stabilisation is attained the percentage of Muslims in India would
nearly double from what it was in 1951 (10 per cent). Our analysis
also shows that socio-economic factors can explain no more than
one-fourth of the current difference in Hindu-Muslim fertility
in rural areas and half of the differences in urban areas.
****What would explain the remaining part of the fertility differential?
In our view, the role of religion in the development of
an attitude towards fertility control as an act interfering with
Godâs designs in matters of procreation should not be underestimated.
As Durkheim had pointed out, central to all religious
beliefs is their classification of things or conducts as sacred or
profane. It has been argued that from the theological perspective,
both Hinduism and Christianity (especially Catholicism) are as
pronatalist as Islam [Iyer 2002]. But religious doctrines are often
reinterpreted to make them relevant to the socio-political realities
of the day. Several modern scholars have argued that Islam is
not opposed to family planning [Mahmood 1977; Khan 1979;
Obermeyer 1992; Omran 1992]. The need for such clarification
probably arose because the orthodox interpretation of Islamic
texts was to the contrary. For our purpose what is crucial is not
which interpretation is theologically correct, but which holds
greater sway among the faithful. The best method to test this
is to ask the people themselves. Morgan et al (2002:117) claim
that Muslims do not consistently state that the use of contraception
is against their religion. But they overlook the possibility
that such inconsistent reporting could be because the clergy do
not speak with one voice in different countries, or over time.
The dramatic fall in fertility in Iran after Muslim clerics took
a favourable stand on family planning is a case in point [Hoodfar
and Assadpour 2002]. On the other hand, the NFHS data suggest
that it is the orthodox view that commands respect in India.
****Thus the effect of religion on fertility cannot be dismissed
as inconsequential, or a myth. What perhaps separates the Hindus
and Christians from Muslims is that their religious leaders give
low priority for conformity with fertility/contraceptive norms,
as demographic and technological circumstances have changed
since the times the scriptures were written.
The Islamic clerics
appear to be more dogmatic on this issue, particularly in countries
were their followers are in minority.23 However, as the experience
of Iran and a few other Islamic countries show, a more pragmatic
view is sometimes taken when their population is in majority
---
The last paragraph needs to be kept in mind
In muslim minority countries, mullahs oppose family planning since breeding is the main means to sieze power
Once power is siezed and muslims are in majority, mullahs support family planning
Since breeding no longer has any political impact
Hindus need to learn from this
No pain no gain
A society unwilling to do the easy task of breeding cannot do the hard task of fighting
Role of Religion in Fertility Decline - Part 2
P N MARI BHAT, A J FRANCIS ZAVIER
***This has the implication that a
locality which has a Muslim population of 35 per cent or more
in 2001 would become a Muslim majority area by the time
population size gets stabilised. Thus the fear that Muslims would
outnumber Hindus in India as a whole is totally unwarranted.
But some new Muslim majority localities will certainly emerge,
which could have a bearing on local politics.
***Conclusion
As a result of the lag in fertility decline among Indian Muslims,
the Hindu-Muslim fertility difference had increased from about
10 per cent at the time of independence to 25-30 per cent in the
1990s. We estimate that, as a consequence, before population
stabilisation is attained the percentage of Muslims in India would
nearly double from what it was in 1951 (10 per cent). Our analysis
also shows that socio-economic factors can explain no more than
one-fourth of the current difference in Hindu-Muslim fertility
in rural areas and half of the differences in urban areas.
****What would explain the remaining part of the fertility differential?
In our view, the role of religion in the development of
an attitude towards fertility control as an act interfering with
Godâs designs in matters of procreation should not be underestimated.
As Durkheim had pointed out, central to all religious
beliefs is their classification of things or conducts as sacred or
profane. It has been argued that from the theological perspective,
both Hinduism and Christianity (especially Catholicism) are as
pronatalist as Islam [Iyer 2002]. But religious doctrines are often
reinterpreted to make them relevant to the socio-political realities
of the day. Several modern scholars have argued that Islam is
not opposed to family planning [Mahmood 1977; Khan 1979;
Obermeyer 1992; Omran 1992]. The need for such clarification
probably arose because the orthodox interpretation of Islamic
texts was to the contrary. For our purpose what is crucial is not
which interpretation is theologically correct, but which holds
greater sway among the faithful. The best method to test this
is to ask the people themselves. Morgan et al (2002:117) claim
that Muslims do not consistently state that the use of contraception
is against their religion. But they overlook the possibility
that such inconsistent reporting could be because the clergy do
not speak with one voice in different countries, or over time.
The dramatic fall in fertility in Iran after Muslim clerics took
a favourable stand on family planning is a case in point [Hoodfar
and Assadpour 2002]. On the other hand, the NFHS data suggest
that it is the orthodox view that commands respect in India.
****Thus the effect of religion on fertility cannot be dismissed
as inconsequential, or a myth. What perhaps separates the Hindus
and Christians from Muslims is that their religious leaders give
low priority for conformity with fertility/contraceptive norms,
as demographic and technological circumstances have changed
since the times the scriptures were written.
The Islamic clerics
appear to be more dogmatic on this issue, particularly in countries
were their followers are in minority.23 However, as the experience
of Iran and a few other Islamic countries show, a more pragmatic
view is sometimes taken when their population is in majority
---
The last paragraph needs to be kept in mind
In muslim minority countries, mullahs oppose family planning since breeding is the main means to sieze power
Once power is siezed and muslims are in majority, mullahs support family planning
Since breeding no longer has any political impact
Hindus need to learn from this
No pain no gain
A society unwilling to do the easy task of breeding cannot do the hard task of fighting