As Angela Merkel enters the home stretch of her nearly 15-year tenure, more people express confidence in the German chancellor than in any other world leader asked about in a recent Pew Research Center survey of 14 countries. And in six of those countries, the share of adults who have confidence in Merkel is the highest on record.

This year marks the last full calendar year that Merkel will serve as the head of Germany’s federal government. Merkel announced in October 2018 that she would not seek reelection in elections planned for next year. She is closing out her tenure amid the coronavirus pandemic and widespread economic pessimism in Europe and elsewhere.

Overall, a median of 75% across the surveyed countries say they have confidence in Merkel to do the right thing regarding world affairs. That is higher than the share who say the same about French President Emmanuel Macron (63%), British Prime Minister Boris Johnson (50%), Russian President Vladimir Putin (23%), Chinese President Xi Jinping (19%) and U.S. President Donald Trump (17%). Majorities of adults express confidence in Merkel in every country surveyed except Italy, where people are divided (50% confident, 49% not confident).

The six countries where confidence in Merkel is now at its highest level on record are the United Kingdom (where 76% have confidence in her), Canada (74%), Spain and Australia (both 72%), Japan (67%) and the United States (61%). In France and Italy, confidence in Merkel was higher prior to the eurozone crisis than it is now. And in Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea and Sweden, more people had confidence in Merkel in the years following the height of the refugee crisis than currently.

Since Merkel took office in 2005, confidence in the German chancellor has been relatively stable in much of Europe – Germany in particular – as she has helped coordinate national and international responses to the eurozone debt crisis, the refugee crisis and now the COVID-19 pandemic. A majority of Germans have expressed confidence in Merkel throughout her tenure, with around eight-in-ten (81%) doing so now. The share of Germans who express no confidence in Merkel has declined 12 percentage points in two years, from a high of 31% in 2018 to the current figure of 19%.

Notably, confidence in Merkel remains high internationally even though views of Germany have declined in several countries since 2007. In Italy, for example, the share of adults with a favorable view of Germany declined from 75% in 2007 to 53% in 2019. Still, Germany continues to be viewed much more favorably than not overall. Across 15 European countries surveyed by Pew Research Center in 2019, including Russia and Ukraine, a median of 74% had a positive view of Germany.

Views of Merkel differ by education level and, in some countries, by gender

In 12 of the 14 countries surveyed this year, those with a postsecondary education or higher are more likely to have confidence in Merkel than those with less education. In Italy, for example, 64% of those with more education have confidence in Merkel, compared with 47% of those with less education, a difference of 17 percentage points.

Views of Merkel also differ substantially by education in the UK, Australia, the U.S., South Korea, Denmark and Japan. And in Merkel’s own country, people with at least a postsecondary education are more confident in their chancellor than those with less education (88% vs. 78%, respectively) – though confidence is high among both groups.

In most countries, views of Merkel don’t differ by gender. But in Canada, Spain and South Korea, men are more likely than women to have confidence in her. The reverse is true in Germany, where 86% of women express confidence, compared with 75% of men.

In the U.S., confidence in Merkel differs widely by party

The share of Americans who express confidence in Merkel has increased from 38% in 2006 to 61% in this year’s survey. (In 2006, 38% did not offer an opinion, a share that fell to 9% this year.)

In recent years, impressions of Germany’s leader have differed by Americans’ partisan identification. Democrats and independents who lean to the Democratic Party are now much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to say they have confidence in Merkel (76% vs. 50%). Earlier in Merkel’s tenure, Democrats and Republicans barely differed in their views.

Democrats have become much more likely to express confidence in Merkel over time. In 2006, 35% of Democrats expressed confidence in Germany’s leader, a share that has risen to about three-quarters (76%) today. By comparison, Republicans’ confidence in Merkel has changed little.

In Germany, views of country’s handling of COVID-19 are linked to confidence in Merkel

Among Germans, views of their country’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak are tied to confidence in Merkel. Those who say their country has done a good job dealing with the virus are much more likely than those who say it has done a bad job to have confidence in Merkel (87% vs. 41%, respectively).

Germany has fared relatively well during the coronavirus outbreak. The country has fewer COVID-19 deaths per capita than many other European countries surveyed. And a majority of Germans (61%) say their everyday lives have not changed too much or at all as a result of the outbreak.

The German economy has also generally held up, though data suggests a slow recovery. About half (51%) of Germans say the current economic situation is good, and they are among the most optimistic in Europe, with 47% saying that the economic situation will improve in the next year.

Germans are also very positive when rating their own country’s job dealing with the coronavirus outbreak: Nearly nine-in-ten (88%) say the country has done well. About two-thirds say both the European Union and World Health Organization have done a good job with the outbreak. However, views are not so positive toward the other two countries asked about in the survey: A majority say China has done a bad job, and 88% say the same of how the U.S. has handled the outbreak.

While Germans broadly have confidence in Merkel, there are political differences in views of the chancellor. Those with favorable views of two of the ruling coalition parties – Merkel’s own Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD) – are more likely to say they have confidence in Merkel to do the right thing regarding world affairs than those who do not have favorable views of these parties.

However, supporters of Germany’s right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party are much less likely to be positive on Merkel than those who who do not support AfD. About half (51%) of AfD supporters have confidence in Merkel, compared with 86% of those who do not support the party.

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/02/confidence-in-merkel-is-at-all-time-high-in-several-countries-during-her-last-full-year-in-office/

The post Confidence in Merkel is at all-time high in several countries during her last full year in office first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The United States plans to admit a maximum of 18,000 refugees in fiscal year 2020, down from a cap of 30,000 in the one that ended Sept. 30, 2019, under a new refugee admissions ceiling set by the Trump administration. This would be the lowest number of refugees resettled by the U.S. in a single year since 1980, when Congress created the nation’s refugee resettlement program.

Even before the administration’s announcement, refugee resettlement in the U.S. had dropped to historic lows during Donald Trump’s presidency, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of State Department data. As a result, the U.S. is no longer the world’s top country for refugee admissions. It had previously led the world on this measure for decades, admitting more refugees each year than all other countries combined.

The decline in U.S. refugee admissions comes at a time when the number of refugees worldwide has reached the highest levels since World War II.

Here are key facts from our research about refugees entering the United States:

1Refugee admissions into the U.S. have declined substantially during Donald Trump’s presidency. Every fall, the U.S. president sets a refugee ceiling – the maximum number of refugees who may enter the country in a fiscal year. In fiscal 2017 (Oct. 1, 2016, to Sept. 30, 2017), about 53,700 refugees resettled in the U.S. – a figure that reflects a temporary freeze on refugee admissions that Trump ordered shortly after taking office. The following year, Trump’s first full fiscal year in office, he set the nation’s refugee ceiling at 45,000, a new low at the time, and the U.S. ultimately admitted about 22,500. Trump then set the refugee ceiling at 30,000 for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2019, and refugee admissions reached this cap. For fiscal 2020, which started Oct. 1, 2019, Trump has set a ceiling of 18,000 refugees.

Overall, the U.S. has admitted about 76,200 refugees so far under the Trump administration (Jan. 20, 2017, to Sept. 30, 2019). By comparison, the U.S. admitted nearly 85,000 refugees in fiscal 2016 alone, the last full fiscal year of the Obama administration.

2Historically, the total number of refugees coming to the U.S. has fluctuated with global events and U.S. priorities. From fiscal years 1990 to 1995, an average of about 116,000 refugees arrived in the U.S. each year, with many coming from the former Soviet Union. However, refugee admissions dropped off to roughly 27,100 in fiscal 2002, a new low at the time, after the U.S. largely suspended admissions following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Refugee admissions rebounded from this low point. From fiscal 2008 to 2017, an average of about 67,100 refugees arrived each year. Half or more of refugees during this time came from Asia, with many from Iraq and Burma (Myanmar). (Iraq is counted as a part of Asia in this data source.) Since fiscal 1980, 55% of refugees have come from Asia, a far higher share than from Europe (28%), Africa (13%) or Latin America (4%).

3Refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo far outnumbered those from other countries in fiscal 2019. D.R. Congo accounted for nearly 13,000 refugees, followed by Burma (Myanmar) with about 4,900, then Ukraine (4,500), Eritrea (1,800) and Afghanistan (1,200). The picture looks different over the longer term. Since fiscal 2002 (Oct. 1, 2001, to Sept. 30, 2019), the most refugees have come from Burma (about 177,700), Iraq (144,400) and Somalia (104,100).

4The U.S. has admitted far more Christian refugees than Muslim refugees in recent years. Christians accounted for 79% of refugees who came to the U.S. in fiscal 2019. The U.S. admitted about 23,800 Christians, compared with about 4,900 Muslims and smaller numbers of other religious groups.

This pattern marks a sharp reversal from several years ago. In fiscal 2016, the number of Muslim refugees admitted reached 38,900, a historic high that narrowly outpaced Christian refugee admissions (about 37,500). That year, Muslims accounted for 46% of the year’s refugees, the highest share since fiscal 2006.

Since fiscal 2002 (Oct. 1, 2001, to Sept. 30, 2019), the U.S. has admitted about 464,700 Christian refugees and about 310,700 Muslim refugees.

5 Texas, Washington, New York and California resettled roughly a quarter of all refugees in fiscal 2019. Together, these states took in nearly 8,100 refugees. Other states that received at least 1,000 refugees include Kentucky, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, Georgia and Michigan. By contrast, the District of Columbia, Delaware and West Virginia each resettled fewer than 10 refugees. Hawaii and Wyoming took in no refugees in fiscal 2019.

Since fiscal 2002, California has resettled the most refugees (about 108,600), followed by Texas (88,300), New York (58,500) and Florida (48,700).

6 Americans have been divided in recent years over whether the U.S. should accept refugees, with large differences by political party affiliation. In a May 2018 survey, for example, about half of Americans (51%) said the U.S. has a responsibility to accept refugees into the country, while 43% said it does not. Around three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (74%) said the U.S. has this responsibility, compared with 26% of Republicans and Republican leaners. For much of the 20th century, U.S. public opinion polls showed fairly consistent disapproval of admitting large numbers of foreigners fleeing war and oppression, regardless of official government policy.

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/07/key-facts-about-refugees-to-the-u-s/

The post Key facts about refugees to the U.S. first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

“We are defending religion itself, it’s under siege,” Trump said. “A society without religion cannot prosper.”

More than 80% of white evangelicals voted for Trump in the 2016 election. But a crack in evangelical support opened up last month when the magazine Christianity Today wrote a blistering editorial on Trump’s “grossly immoral character.”

Attendees, some of them wearing Trump’s signature red campaign hats, nearly filled the room, which the church says holds 7,000. Some raised their hands in a sign of praise and swayed while music played loudly over the speakers before the president entered the room.

Pastors gathered around Trump on the stage for an opening prayer, while much of the audience remained standing with their hands aloft.

In his speech, Trump mocked Democratic challenger Pete Buttigieg, the Indiana mayor, for having what he said was an unpronounceable last name, and told attendees Democrats were waging war against religion.

“These angry radicals want to impose absolute conformity by censuring speech, tearing down crosses and symbols of faith and banning religious believers from public life.”

He got a big reaction from the crowd when he promised to bring religion into U.S. schools. A clause in the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from promoting one religion over the other, which means public schools don’t promote prayer or religious symbols.

“Very soon I’ll be taking action to safeguard students and teachers’ First Amendment rights to pray in our schools,” Trump said. “They want to take that right along with many other ones.”

The post Trump tells evangelical rally he will put prayer in schools first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Today in America, our U.S. Congress imported 45 million people born in other countries.  Additionally, our Congress allowed 23 to 25 million illegal aliens to cross our borders and now inhabit all 50 states. Additionally, our Congress allows 300,000 pregnant illegal alien women to birth their babies once they violate our borders to become “anchor babies” with all the privileges of citizenship. (Source: Yale Report on Illegal Immigration, Oct 2018)

In 1965, European-Americans who designed the U.S. Constitution and created the most successful civilization on this planet—enjoyed 90 percent population dominance.  Black Americans held 7 percent and Hispanics enjoyed 3 percent.  Additionally, at current immigration and birthrates, Muslims will become a dominant force in cities where they enclave.

In a recent report, an anonymous writer used a pen name, Audacious Epigone, said, “Western Civilization was invented by Whites, just as Chinese cavillation was invented by Chinese and Japanese civilization was invented by Japanese.

“One of the great taboos promulgated by leftists – including the left-wing national media is that every race is encouraged to promote their own interests… except for Whites. You see, some Whites are descended from slave owners, so that makes all Whites racist. Blacks, by the way, owned slaves. Slaves were captured in Africa by Africans and were sold to pre-American slave traders via Muslim slave traders. Over a million Europeans had been captured and enslaved by Muslims.”

Whether you like it or not, if you enjoyed being a white-majority and/or a Black presence in America—within 22 years, blacks and whites will become new minorities in their own country.

Epigone said, “The Great Replacement is a term that describes one mechanism by which this transition is being accomplished. That is the importation of people from third-world countries who favor big government and who ultimately vote for the Democrat party which promises them an unending stream of taxpayer-paid benefits.

“White, native-born Americans are being displaced without their permission within their own country. Open borders policies are effectively electing a new people – who don’t necessarily endorse the principles under which America was founded.”

The one understanding that most people don’t realize: all those 110 million more immigrants flooding into America by 2050—come to our country from failed countries, failed civilizations and utterly violent and destructive cultures.

As goes the White demographic, so goes America, and so goes Western Civilization. We’re not that far behind the immigration-driven demise of Europe. Read The Strange Death of Europe by Douglas Murray.

What’s driving this mass displacement of Americans out of their own country?  The democrats WANT endless open borders to gain a stranglehold on Congress and the presidency.  Once in total command, they can and will open up America to 100 million, 200 million and onward to 300 million immigrants. U.S. Senator Teddy Kennedy along with his democratic buddies wrote the “1965 Immigration Reform Act” that dumped 100 million immigrants into the USA since 1965 to reach 300 million people in October 2006.

In his expose’ of America’s doom, James Kirkpatrick said, “By mid-century, Whites will be just another identity group in an America of squabbling nationalities.  No taboo will withstand this converging reality. It remains to be seen whether our Republic, let alone Western Civilization will be able to withstand this demographic onslaught.“

In his best-selling book, Patrick J. Buchanan wrote Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?—Buchanan spelled out our country’s impending demise rather graphically.  After riding my bike through forty states in America this summer and 20 of her largest cities, I can attest to the fact that we stand in the crosshairs of a collapsing civilization brought about by our own leaders.  One critic said, “Not a pleasant or fun read. Most of us have an idea that our country, the USA, is sick. The question is what is the sickness, is it terminal or can it be cured? Mr. Buchanan attempts to answer these questions. In short, he finds us and presents evidence for the conclusions that we are morally weak, with little love for liberty or life. The disease is terminal, and not far off, unless we reform ourselves, and quickly. As I said, Mr. Buchanan supplies evidence. And he does suggest what to do about it. We cannot remain an empire without a moral or industrial base. We will have to give up the role of global policeman and rebuild first at home. His conclusions are not going to be popular, though they were taken for granted a hundred years ago. They will involve discomfort, and change, not of the Obama sort. Suicide of a Superpower is not just good reading, it is essential for the well-being of our children. It needs to be read by every American, and action taken. We don’t have long.”

To help you appreciate what we face, I again ask you, an American citizen, how will your children live in this country with another 110 million legal immigrants pounded into every city and state in this country? How will your children deal with 110 million people from 196 different countries with their incompatible cultures, religions, languages and world views?  Do you think our country will survive as European-Americans become the new minority at 49 percent while all those citizens of failed countries become the new majority?  Do you think multiculturalism and diversity will thrive to makes us one big happy American family?

Answer: “Immigrants devoted to their own cultures and religions are not influenced by the secular politically correct façade that dominates academia, news-media, entertainment, education, religious and political thinking today,” said James Walsh, former Associate General Counsel of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. “They claim the right not to assimilate, and the day is coming when the question will be how can the United States regulate the defiantly unassimilated cultures, religions, and mores of foreign lands?  Such immigrants say their traditions trump the U.S. legal system.  Balkanization of the United States has begun.”

Solutions to change course for America:

1. Rescind the 1965 Immigration Reform Act; shut down all immigration for 20 years.
2. Or, “Egress Equates to Ingress”, which means if 50,000 people vacate America, 50,000 skilled and contributing immigrants may be allowed into our country.
3. Stop all 300,000 anchor babies annually by amending the 14^th Amendment so it’s not abused by pregnant illegal alien mothers.  No birthright citizenship!
4. Stop all 50,000 annual Diversity Visas.
5. Stop all chain-migration.
6. Help all those “would-be” immigrants in their own countries to create viable and sustainable societies with water, food production, and birth control.

— Frosty Wooldridge

Source: http://sonorannews.com/2019/11/30/ongoing-displacement-of-americans-out-of-our-own-country/

The post Ongoing displacement of Americans out of our own country first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Nearly 8 of 10 Americans told the Pew Research Center that supporters for both sides could “act” on the politically charged rhetoric with violence. It was higher for Democrats, 91% than Republicans, 61%.

And they want politicians to cool it.

“Americans broadly agree that elected officials should avoid using heated language because it could encourage violence. Nearly three-quarters of Americans (73%) say this, while just a quarter believe that elected officials ‘Should be able to use heated language to express themselves without worrying about whether some people may act on what they say,’” warned the center.

“While majorities in both parties say officials should avoid heated language, this view is more widely held among Democrats (83%) than Republicans (61%),” it added.

Trump is cited by a majority for stirring up the situation, but, like anything “Washington” today, there is partisan division.

Said Pew, “Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents overwhelmingly (84%) say Trump has changed political discourse for the worse. About half of Republicans and Republican leaners (49%) say he has changed it for the better, while 23% say he has changed it for the worse and 27% say he hasn’t changed it much either way.”

Source: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/pew-91-democrats-see-violence-next-in-war-of-words

The post Pew: 91% Democrats see violence next in war of words first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Most of the United States’ 10.7 million unauthorized immigrants live in just 20 major metropolitan areas, with the largest populations in New York, Los Angeles, Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth, according to new Pew Research Center estimates based on government data.

The nation’s unauthorized immigrant population is highly concentrated, more so than the U.S. population overall. In 2016, the 20 metro areas with the most unauthorized immigrants were home to 6.5 million of them, or 61% of the estimated nationwide total. By contrast, only 37% of the total U.S. population lived in those metro areas.

The number of unauthorized immigrants in these 20 metros has declined sharply since 2007, when 7.7 million of them lived in these areas. These metro areas account for much of a national decline of the U.S. unauthorized immigrant population over the past decade.

Explore which U.S. metro areas unauthorized immigrants live in with an interactive table or download the data.

By far the biggest unauthorized immigrant populations in 2016 were in the New York (1.1 million) and Los Angeles metro areas (925,000). Both metros had unauthorized immigrant populations that exceeded the statewide total in every state except California and Texas. No other metro area approached a million. Meanwhile, the smallest unauthorized immigrant populations among the top 20 areas were in Austin and Charlotte (100,000 each).

Five of the 20 metros with the largest unauthorized immigrant populations are in California: Los Angeles, Riverside-San Bernardino, San Francisco, San Diego and San Jose. Three – Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Austin – are in Texas.

The top 20 metropolitan areas for unauthorized immigrants have been remarkably consistent over the past decade, according to the Center’s analysis. The top 18 areas have ranked among the top 18 in each year since 2005.

The Center’s analysis relies on augmented data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, using the same residual method as its previous reports on unauthorized immigrants. Unauthorized immigrants include people who either crossed the border illegally or overstayed their visas.

These estimates have margins of error, so many apparent differences in unauthorized immigrant populations between metros are not statistically significant. In 2016, only seven of the 182 U.S. metro areas analyzed had significantly larger unauthorized immigrant populations than the areas ranked immediately below them. All are among the top 20 metro areas (see table).

More metro areas lost unauthorized immigrants than gained them between 2007 and 2016. And while many metros had small apparent declines within the margin of error, 28 of the areas analyzed had statistically significant smaller unauthorized immigrant populations in 2016 than in 2007. Seven of the top 20 metro areas saw significant declines, including New York City and Los Angeles. Only 10 of all the metro areas analyzed had larger unauthorized immigrant populations in 2016 than in 2007, including three of the top 20 — Washington, Boston and Charlotte.

Nationally, unauthorized immigrants made up 3.3% of the U.S. population in 2016. Among the top 20 metro areas, only Philadelphia (2.6%) had a lower share of unauthorized immigrants than the national population, while Las Vegas (8.2%) had the highest share.

Unauthorized immigrants account for slightly less than one-in-four foreign-born U.S. residents. Among the top 20 metro areas, they make up somewhat higher shares of immigrants in Charlotte, Las Vegas, Dallas-Fort Worth, Atlanta, Denver, Austin, Houston, Phoenix and Washington. They make up a somewhat lower share of all immigrants in the Seattle, San Diego, Los Angeles, New York, San Jose, Miami and San Francisco metro areas.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published Feb. 9, 2017.

For an interactive graphic showing unauthorized immigrant population estimates and trends for the U.S., states and countries of birth, click here.

Related posts:

5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.

Explore unauthorized immigration by state using our new interactive

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/03/11/us-metro-areas-unauthorized-immigrants/

The post 20 metro areas are home to six-in-ten unauthorized immigrants in U.S. first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Study: Europe’s Muslim population to grow, migration or not first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Germans say Russia is more reliable than the United States first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The Muslim share of Germany’s population could grow from 6.1% to 19.7% between 2016-2050 if high migration continues. Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty Images

The Muslim population in some European countries could triple by 2050 while it will barely change in others, according to new projections released by the Washington-based Pew Research Centre.

The report, Europe’s Growing Muslim Population, shows a stark west-east divide. The Muslim share of Germany’s population could grow from 6.1% in 2016 to 19.7% in 2050 if high migration continues, whereas over the border Poland’s share would change from 0.1% to 0.2% in the same scenario.

Even if all current 28 EU members, plus Norway and Switzerland, closed their borders to migrants, the Muslim population share in the west would continue to grow owing to a younger age profile and higher fertility rates, but remain very low in the east.

According to Pew’s data, Muslims made up 4.9% of Europe’s population in 2016, with an estimated 25.8 million people across 30 countries, up from 19.5 million people in 2010. The number of Muslim migrants arriving in Europe surged after 2014 to almost half a million annually, largely due to people fleeing conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Researchers considered three scenarios: zero migration between 2016 and 2050; medium migration, in which the flow of refugees stops but people continue to migrate for other reasons; and high migration, in which the record flow of migrants between 2014 and 2016 continues indefinitely with the same religious composition.

In the zero migration scenario, the Muslim population in Europe is expected to rise from 4.9% to 7.4%. Apart from Cyprus, which has a high Muslim share (25.4%) due to the historical presence of Turkish Cypriots in the north of the island, France would have Europe’s biggest share of population with 12.7%, up from 8.8%.

In the medium migration scenario – perhaps the most likely – Sweden would have the biggest share of population at 20.5%. The UK’s share would rise from 6.3% in 2016 to 16.7%. Finland’s Muslim share would grow from 2.7% to 11.4% and most western European countries would face a big jump.

If high migration continues until 2050, Sweden’s Muslim share will grow to 30.6%, Finland’s to 15% and Norway’s to 17%. In eastern Europe, most countries will continue to have a relatively low Muslim share of population, with only Hungary and Greece seeing significant increases from 2016.

Apart from migration, the number of Muslims in Europe is set to grow considerably through natural increases. Europe’s Muslims have more children than members of other religious groups, or people of no religion, the study shows. The European average fertility rate is 2.6 for Muslims compared to 1.6 for non-Muslims.

The Muslim population is also much younger than non-Muslims. The proportion of Muslims under the age of 15 is 27%, nearly double the proportion of under-15 non-Muslims at 15%.

“While Europe’s Muslim population is expected to grow in all three scenarios – and more than double in the medium and high migration scenarios – Europe’s non-Muslims, on the other hand, are projected to decline in total number in each scenario,” says the Pew report.

Historically, a relatively small share of migrants to Europe were refugees from violence or persecution, with most coming for other reasons. Nearly half of all recent migrants to Europe were non-Muslims, with Christians making up the next largest group.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/29/muslim-population-in-europe-could-more-than-double

The post Europe’s Muslim population to grow, migration or not first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.