Martinus: Livets Bog, vol. 4, sect. 1470

1470. It is understandable that beings have, to some extent, chosen foeticide and contraception in order to safeguard themselves against the financial pressure that parenthood in many cases inflicts upon them. But making these phenomena downright legal or authorised aids in the struggle against poverty is glaringly against the laws of Nature, destructive to the survival of the species and of advantage only to the state in its efforts to deny its financial responsibility for all newly born children, a policy that states that the fewer children "poor people" have, the better, because this would reduce the state's expenses. And the fewer expenses the state has, the less the taxpayers would have to pay in tax. But since the taxpayers that pay most in tax are the financial upper class, that is, the section of society where there are almost no surplus births, legalising foeticide or any other way of sabotaging the survival of the species or the race will thus favour this class. And one can hardly practise a more perfect way of sabotaging the survival of terrestrial mankind. One undermines the section of society that has the ability to supply the birth surplus that is so vital to the survival of society in favour of the section of society that almost totally lacks this ability. As one can see, terrestrial mankind would actually wipe itself out if there were not a higher power for whom these calamities are merely a temporary link in the great divine world plan that has as its goal the raising of this mankind to the sphere of absolute perfection. But this does not of course exempt the state or the individual from the consequences of their temporary sabotage of reincarnation or life. The state, as well as the individual, must therefore take the consequences of the situations they have created in order to aid or favour their infringement of the laws and their flight from their true responsibility and duty.