[ExI] What is the Right Reproductive Age?

[Lee Corbin]

Kevin wrote (Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [ExI] flds raid, was general repudiation)

> I just wanted to point out that the quality and quantity
> of eggs only benefits the baby from an evolutionary
> perspective. Once that baby is born it doesn't matter
> if the mother lives 15 or 50 years. There can still be
> health concerns when a very [*very*] young girl has
> a baby at such a young age. For example, often the
> hips have not widened to a point where the baby can
> be passed easily which increases complications.
> Various sources put the ideal age from a biological
> standpoint ranges between 13 and 17. 

Yes. That's when girls should be having children. The
correct solution would also entail their giving up those
children to their own parents to raise, while they then
continue their studies and pursue whatever life goals
they have when---at age 40 or so---they can in turn
parent (raise) their own biological children's offspring.

So who should be the biological fathers? Today, we
have the means to have this decision made correctly.
Clearly the girl and her parents should select from
a wide variety of publicly sold sperm, and the
insemination done artificially.

Lee

P.S. More spectacularly, the Mormons (i.e. Brigham
Young) were very close to the ideal solution in the
1850s. After reaching an appropriate age where their
own personal resources permitted it, e.g., age 25 or 30,
a man could settle down with as many young teenage
wives as he could afford. This also had the benefit
of creating a huge demographic pyramid. Despite
what everyone says, you know, the world really
is starkly underpopulated.

The reason that Mormons are above average in
intelligence stems directly from enormous numbers
of offspring that many highly intelligent Mormons
had back when they were all practicing polygamy.

P.P.S. If there is to be more about Mormons in
particular, please, oh please, would you change
the subject line?