I agree that talk of Eurabia is highly sensationalized. It is true and alarming that sub-replacement fertility is no longer a Western phenomenon. The apostles of contraception have been far better at evangelization in the muslim and eastern world than we christians ever have, I’m afraid.
Although the article (thanks for the readable link K) does a good job of noting the downward trend in muslim fertility rates, it is still an assumption that they will eventually equalize with native europeans. Given the profound differences between Islamic culture and European culture I think that is a highly questionable assumption. While rates are clearly coming down, I would question whether they will equalize. This seems to presume that muslim immigrants will become as much cafeteria muslims as Europeans are cafeteria christians. I doubt it. When a minority in a foreign land, immigrants tend to be more religious. This was, at least the case for catholics in America in the 19th century. It wasn’t until we got above 20% of the overall population that you really started to see integration and homogenization of American culture.
The same will likely hold in Europe. Muslims won’t really be homogenized into the society until their numbers reach a critical mass. IMO, it is an open question still as to what that number is and how much conflict we could see before it is reached.
If the poster who claimed we’ve seen sub-replacement fertility rates in cultures before which then rebounded could steer me in the direction of some references, I’d appreciate it. My impression is that Western civilization has really never before seen sub-replacement birthrates before, other than during economic, natural or disease disaster periods. When else has there been a fabulously wealthy and prosperous culture that refused to reproduce?