Our Pronatalist Moment: A Christian Evaluation 

Editor’s Note: The following article appears in the Spring 2025 issue of Eikon.

Four days after being sworn in as the nation’s fiftieth vice president, J.D. Vance stood on stage at the nation’s premier pro-life event and declared, “I want more babies in the United States of America.”^[1] Vance’s remarks were not unexpected, as he had a strong pro-life voting record during his two years in the U.S. Senate. However, his comments were received by many through the lens of a growing cultural debate: the pronatalism movement. Supporters of this movement celebrated the statement as a sign that their views were entering the political mainstream. Conversely, critics expressed concern, seeing it as a troubling endorsement of a worldview they believe threatens environmental sustainability and undermines women’s autonomy.

The early months of President Donald Trump’s second term have ushered in a series of significant pro-life policy initiatives. Shortly after taking office, Trump pardoned twenty-three pro-life activists who had been convicted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act during the Biden administration, rescinded multiple pro-abortion executive orders, and reinstated the Mexico City Policy, which prohibits U.S. tax dollars from funding organizations that perform or promote abortion abroad. Additionally, the United States rejoined the Geneva Consensus Declaration, which affirms that “there is no international right to abortion.”^[2]

The Trump administration has also embraced policies championed by pronatalist advocates. On February 18, the president signed an executive order titled “Expanding Access to In Vitro Fertilization.” Although the order did not change existing policy, it acknowledged “family formation” as a national priority and emphasized that “our public policy must make it easier for loving and longing mothers and fathers to have children.”^[3] Furthermore, in late January, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy issued a memo directing the department to “give preference to communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average.”^[4] Both the in vitro fertilization (IVF) order and the Department of Transportation memo drew international attention, with commentators suggesting they reflected the growing influence of pronatalist ideologues within the administration.^[5]

There is no doubt that pronatalism, the belief that having more children is both a personal virtue and a social good, is gaining traction in the United States and Europe. But what is driving this renewed interest in family and fertility from political parties in Europe and tech elites in Silicon Valley? More importantly, how should Christians respond to pronatalist arguments? Is the biblical command to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen 1:28) compatible with the goals of a movement often led by individuals who do not share a biblical worldview?

Low Birth Rates Fuel Pronatalist Rhetoric and Policy

The current pronatalist movement is largely fueled by one undeniable reality: a growing fertility crisis. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the birth rate in the United States hit a record low in 2023, averaging just 1.62 births per woman — well below the replacement rate of 2.1.^[6] Fewer babies today mean fewer working-age adults in the future. A shrinking workforce can lead to labor shortages, reduced productivity, and the risk of long-term economic stagnation. It also places greater strain on social welfare programs like Social Security. An aging population also affects military readiness and eldercare.

If this trend is not reversed, America’s demographic decline poses an existential threat. This “birth dearth,” as Emma Waters has called it, is the driving concern behind much of today’s pronatalist advocacy.^[7]

And the United States is far from alone. Every developed nation except Israel is facing the prospect of demographic decline. In some countries, fertility rates have reached alarmingly low levels. For example, Japan’s birthrate fell to 1.2 in 2023.^[8] South Korea, which now has the lowest fertility rate in the world, hit a record low of 0.72 in 2023, although it rose slightly to 0.75 in 2024.^[9]

In response to the alarmingly low birth rate in the United States, a range of proposals have been put forward. For instance, the Institute for Family Studies recently launched a Pronatalism Initiative that recommends, among other measures, expanding the Child Tax Credit — a policy both major presidential candidates endorsed during the recent election.^[10] Other proposed solutions include broadening access to IVF, investing in artificial womb technology, and exploring emerging reproductive innovations such as in vitro gametogenesis (IVG).

Meanwhile, European governments have implemented various incentives to combat declining birth rates. For example, Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán Viktor announced last week that mothers with one child will be exempt from paying income tax until turning thirty; mothers with two or more children will be exempt from paying income tax for life.^[11] In Poland, families receive a monthly payment of approximately 125 USD per child, with additional tax credits for larger families.^[12] Similarly, in Russia, families are given a lump-sum payment of about 7,500 USD upon the birth of a second child.^[13]

Critiques and Excesses of Pronatalism

In 2023, Miriam Cates, a Member of the British Parliament, drew national attention when she asserted that the “one overarching threat to British conservatism, and indeed the whole of Western society” is liberal individualism’s failure to deliver babies.^[14] Cates’s comments ignited a flurry of criticism from commentators across the British media.

One headline in The Guardian proclaimed, “Conservative calls for women to have more babies hide pernicious motives,” arguing that Cates’s pronatalist stance masked efforts to reinforce traditional gender roles.^[15] Similarly, the leftist American publication Jacobin claimed that pronatalism has grown in postcommunist states with the effect of “reversing the relative autonomy of women under socialism and reestablishing ‘traditional’ patriarchal family structures.”^[16] Feminist critics strongly objected to pronatalist rhetoric and policies, believing they relegate women to second-class status. Abortion advocates opposed any initiatives that could weaken or undermine abortion access.

While many critiques of the contemporary pronatalist movement typically fail to acknowledge or respect the dignity of the unborn, there are indeed aspects of the movement that warrant closer scrutiny — and, in some cases, rightfully deserve condemnation by Christians. One notable example is the rise of pronatalist rhetoric within Silicon Valley.

Although many who embrace pronatalism do so out of concern for declining birth rates, the version promoted by Silicon Valley elites has taken a more troubling and technocratic turn. Recently, there has been a focus on technologies aimed at creating genetically “superior” children. For example, new companies, like Orchid — a fertility company launched in 2021 — utilize embryonic polygenic screening that allows prospective parents to screen for conditions that involve multiple genes, including some non-life threatening conditions such as diabetes and various neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders.

At the same time, researchers have dedicated attention to emerging reproductive technologies such as in vitro gametogenesis and artificial wombs. IVG involves the creation of sperm or egg cells (gametes) from other cell types, most commonly pluripotent stem cells. Although not yet approved for human use, researchers in Japan have successfully transformed skin cells from mice into viable egg cells using induced pluripotent stem cell techniques.^[17] This breakthrough opens the door to reproduction without the need for natural human gametes. Additionally, ectogenesis, the gestation of an embryo in an artificial environment, could potentially bypass the need for a biological mother entirely. Although still experimental, these technologies are attracting significant financial support from Silicon Valley investors.

The Difference Between Being Pro-Family and Merely Pronatalist

A biblical ethic affirms and celebrates both families and children. The psalmist declares in Psalm 127:3–5, “Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one’s youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.”

From a Christian perspective, the impulse to welcome more children into the world is noble and commendable. Every child — born and unborn — is made in the image of God and, therefore, possesses inherent dignity and worth.

However, unlike the technocratic pronatalism promoted by some in Silicon Valley, children must never be regarded merely as a means to an end, even if those ends are commendable goals like national security or preserving entitlement programs like Social Security. Reproductive technologies that sever procreation from its God-ordained context within the covenant of marriage are incompatible with a Christian understanding of the family.

Pronatalists are right to be concerned about declining birthrates, but the answer is not simply “more babies for the sake of more babies.” In a 2024 article, Emma Waters makes an important distinction between a truly pro-family approach and a merely pronatalist one.^[18] The pro-family approach recognizes marriage as the best foundation for childrearing, while the pronatalist approach often focuses on increasing fertility without considering the essential family and moral context that helps children thrive. For Christians, the pro-family model is the biblical standard and must take precedence over any utilitarian approach that reduces children to economic assets or demographic tools.

The Effects of the Marriage Recession Cannot Be Ignored

Waters also notes that the ongoing “marriage recession” marked by rising divorce rates, cohabitation, single parenthood, and hookup culture predates and contributes to the fertility crisis in the United States.^[19] Delayed or foregone marriage is a key factor in declining birthrates among millennials and Gen Z. A 2023 study found that although eighty-three percent of millennials and Gen Z express a desire to marry, seventy-three percent say it is too expensive, and eighty-five percent believe marriage is not necessary for a fulfilling or committed relationship.^[20] As of 2023, the average age for first marriages is 30.2 years for men and 28.4 years for women. By contrast, in 1950, the average ages were 22.8 and 20.3, respectively.^[21] At that time, the birth rate was around three children per woman, compared to just 1.62 today — well below replacement level.^[22] The correlation between delayed marriage and declining fertility is clear, suggesting that rebuilding a culture that values and supports marriage is essential to reversing America’s falling birthrate.

Research consistently shows that children thrive when raised by their biological parents in a stable, two-parent home. In particular, fatherlessness is strongly associated with increased risks of poverty, academic failure, violence, substance abuse, and incarceration. By contrast, children raised in intact, married families tend to experience better educational outcomes, fewer behavior problems, greater emotional well-being, and lower rates of poverty.^[23] One report found that eighty-five percent of youths in prison come from fatherless rooms.^[24] A separate study on school shootings revealed that only eighteen percent of shooters were raised by both biological parents; eighty-two percent came from unstable or broken homes.^[25] In short, social science research consistently affirms that children are best equipped for a healthy adulthood when raised in a home with both a mother and father.

Conclusion

Increasing the birth rate could help address some long-term economic and social challenges, like sustaining Social Security or mitigating eldercare shortages. However, this must not become the primary motivation for encouraging childbirth. Christians should instead champion children and families as intrinsic goods rooted in God’s design. Although recent pronatalist rhetoric and policy proposals reflect a growing awareness of the demographic crisis, Christians must not settle for being merely pronatalist. A biblical worldview affirms the importance of family formation, childbearing, and parenting within the covenant of marriage between a husband and wife who are committed to raising their children in the nurture and instruction of the Lord.

^[1] “Full Speech: Catholic Vice President JD Vance Speaks at the March for Life 2025,” National Catholic Register, January 24, 2025, https://www.ncregister.com/news/jd-vance-addresses-the-march-for-life-2025-full-text.

^[2] “Geneva Consensus Declaration on Promoting Women’s Health and Strengthening the Family,” The Institute for Women’s Health, 2020, https://www.theiwh.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Geneva-Consensus-Declaration-GCD-English-2024.pdf.

^[3] The White House, “Expanding Access to In Vitro Fertilization,” executive order, February 18, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/expanding-access-to-in-vitro-fertilization/.

^[4] U.S. Department of Transportation, “Ensuring Reliance upon Sound Economic Analysis in Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and Activities,” order, January 29, 2025, 3, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2025-02/DOT_2100.7-Ensuring_Reliance_Upon_Sound_Economic_Analysis_in_DOT_Policies.pdf.

^[5] Carter Sherman, “The rise of pronatalism: why Musk, Vance and the right want women to have more babies,” The Guardian, March 11, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/11/what-is-pronatalism-right-wing-republican.

^[6] Brady E. Hamilton, Joyce A. Martin, and Michelle J.K. Osterman, “Births: Provisional Data for 2023,” Vital Statistics Rapid Release, no. 35, April 2024, 3, https://dx.doi.org/10.15620/cdc:151797.

^[7] Emma Waters, “The birth dearth gives rise to pro-natalism,” WORLD, July 8, 2024, https://wng.org/opinions/the-birth-dearth-gives-rise-to-pro-natalism-1720432594.

^[8] Jennifer Jett, “Japan’s Births Fell to a Record Low in 2024,” NBC News, March 1, 2024, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/japans-births-fell-record-low-2024-rcna193950.

^[9] Julian Ryall, “South Korea records birth rate rise,” Deutsche Welle, March 4, 2025, https://www.dw.com/en/south-korea-records-birth-rate-rise/a-71812274.

^[10] Lyman Stone, “Pronatal Policy Ideas for 2025,” Institute for Family Studies, October 22, 2024, https://ifstudies.org/blog/pronatal-policy-ideas-for-2025; Aimee Picchi, “Harris wants to give a $6,000 tax credit to parents of newborns. Here’s what to know.” CBS News, last updated August 19, 2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-child-tax-credit-6000-dnc-what-to-know/.

^[11] Viktor Orbán (@PM_ViktorOrban), X post, March 20, 2024, 11:00 a.m., https://x.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1901287411038269614.

^[12] Yasmeen Serhan, “Poland’s Case for ‘Family Values,’” The Atlantic, October 10, 2019, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/10/poland-family-values-cash-handouts/599968/.

^[13] “Poland Court Ruling Halts ‘LGBT-Free Zone’ Town Funding,” BBC News, January 15, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51120165.

^[14] John Duggan, “National Conservatism Comes to the U.K.,” First Things, May 18, 2023, https://firstthings.com/national-conservatism-comes-to-the-uk/.

^[15] Kenan Malik, “Conservative calls for women to have more babies hide pernicious motives,” The Guardian, August 6, 2023, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/06/conservative-calls-women-more-babies-hide-pernicious-motives.

^[16] Emily Baughan, “The European Right’s ‘Pro-Family’ Turn Is Just Austerity in Disguise,” Jacobin, August 7, 2023, https://jacobin.com/2023/08/conservative-party-uk-pronatalism-childcare-patriarchy-xenophobia.

^[17] Michaeleen Doucleff, “Japanese Scientists Race to Create Human Eggs and Sperm in the Lab,” NPR, September 28, 2023, https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/09/28/1200105467/japanese-scientists-race-to-create-human-eggs-and-sperm-in-the-lab. For more information on in vitro gametogenesis (IVG), see Emma Waters, “Designer Embryos and Kids Born from the DNA of Throuple Parents? Understanding the Depraved New World of EPs and IVG,” Christ Over All, February 14, 2024, https://christoverall.com/article/concise/designer-embryos-and-kids-born-from-the-dna-of-throuple-parents-understanding-the-depraved-new-world-of-eps-and-ivg/.

^[18] Emma Waters, “Pro-Natalism Is Not Enough,” The Heritage Foundation, August 28, 2024, https://www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/commentary/pro-natalism-not-enough.

^[19] Waters, “Pro-Natalism Is Not Enough.”

^[20] Thriving Center of Psychology, “I Do Not: Gen Z, Millennials Shifting Expectations About Marriage in 2023,” blog, June 23, 2023, https://thrivingcenterofpsych.com/blog/millennials-gen-z-marriage-expectations-statistics/.

^[21] U.S. Census Bureau, “Living Arrangements of Adults 18 and Older: 1967 to Present,” Figure MS-2, accessed March 20, 2025, https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/time-series/demo/families-and-households/ms-2.pdf.

^[22] U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Table 1-1. Live Births, Birth Rates, and Fertility Rates, by Race: United States, 1909-2002,” archived January 17, 2025, accessed March 20, 2025, https://archive.cdc.gov/#/details?url=https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/statab/natfinal2002.annvol1_01.pdf.

^[23] For a more lengthy study on the topic, see  Patrick F. Fagan, Marriage: The Safest Place for Women and Children, The Heritage Foundation, April 9, 2009, https://www.heritage.org/welfare/report/marriage-the-safest-place-women-and-children.

^[24] This statistic is cited by No Longer Fatherless, “Statistics,” accessed March 21, 2025, https://www.nolongerfatherless.org/statistics.

^[25] Peter Langman, “School Shooters: The Myth of the Stable Home,” May 24, 2016, https://schoolshooters.info/sites/default/files/shooters_myth_stable_home_1.15.pdf.