Michael wrote:Ian, the disconnect is whether or not you consider reproductive rights part of health care, or if you consider abortion part of health care. Gates does.
In societies where women have access to education, reproductive health care, and reproductive rights, there is a stabilization of population growth, an increase in wealth, and an increase in well being for persons in that society.
You're taking a very subjective ribbon and bow, so to speak, of "well being for persons in that society" and using it to tie up the package preceding it in your sentence as if all of those things are empirically desirable and good, when they are in some serious gray areas.
Here is something empirical: how does reducing your birth rate to below replacement increase well being for persons in society, or for the society overall?
Why is not proliferating your society numerically a higher priority than whatever you meant by "well being" and "reproductive rights"? For example, one of the few groups in the USA who have a high birth rate are Amish. They probably don't qualify on the three points you mention—access to education, reproductive health care, and reproductive rights—but how is their "well being"? I think it's much, much higher than among those who do qualify with your three points.
Hey, Michael, I know you're an intelligent guy. But I can't really understand where you're coming from here. Have you actually read the linked Snopes article? A very clear point made there is that generally speaking (I'll come back to that in a moment) people have lots of children because they expect most of them to die. And also of course because they might not have access to birth control, but these two factors should not be conflated into one. You can see this by looking at European and also North American (settler) history over the centuries. As living standards rose and infant mortality fell, people gradually have had few and fewer children. Mostly WANTED fewer children. Sure, some specific minority population groups go against this trend, usually for religion-related reasons. And a few families still choose to have lots of children just because they want to. But the clear trend is very clearly downward.
You can disagree with Bill Gates' stance on abortion, you can even hate him for this if you want, but that doesn't automatically invalidate any of his other ideas or initiatives.
And reducing the world population - by peaceful and positive means, not by killing people !! - is pretty much a no-brainer when it comes to the welfare of humanity and the planet as a whole. Less consumption of resources, less (or even zero) further destruction of the natural environment, less greenhouse emissions, less other pollution types (e.g. plastic), less competition among people and nations for essential resources (land, water, food etc.).
This doesn't mean going back to medieval population levels or whatever. There will still be plenty plenty of us around. Just not so many that we're sleeping three to a bed.
) quite often I was offered tip, or “come in, you want something to drink?”. I guess because I was quite service minded and gave that little “extra” 
