I’m a little distracted right now, as my wife and I are moving across town. I could rattle off a lot of reasons for the move – closer to work, bigger apartment, better kitchen – but one of the biggest reasons is actually the fact that we don’t have children. We don’t, but everyone around us does, which leads to problems.
At certain points, all the kids are turned outside to play. They play games that involve a lot of screaming, throwing rocks and slamming doors. One parent bought their kid a vuvuzela. There will be a reckoning.
Not being parents ourselves, we seem to lack the ability to block this out. We haven’t gotten numb to things like the scratches on the sides of our cars from careless kids on bicycles. We spent years trying to keep quiet so that we wouldn’t wake the baby upstairs. Now that baby is a healthy child who like to run, jump and drop things. And move furniture, as near as we can tell.
Anyway, it’s time to move. But it got me thinking about a question that our friend Ty asked on the forum: do we owe it to the world to have children? My wife and I are fairly stable and reasonably prosperous (though a lot of that is because we don’t have kids) We could probably raise a healthy child. Do we owe it to the world to try?
No, you owe it to your potential offspring to only have them if you are 100% absolutely sure that you want them and can afford them. As having children requires you to sacrifice the remaining parts of your life that aren’t already taken by working, you have to be willing to sacrifice everything. I know I’m not willing to do that and I can think of hundreds of other reasons not to. My Fiancee and I make a game of it, when we are visiting friends with kids or see them on the street, they are inevitably doing something loud and dangerous, we add those things to our list of reasons not to have them.
+1 This!
My boyfriend is dead set on having children for some reason, and he wants multiples! I’m still on the fence, mainly because who in their right mind would want to bring a child into this world? Also, I experienced a miserable childhood (great homelife, but terrible school life) so I know that even if I’m loving and supportive, the kid can still have a rotten life. I don’t want to put someone through that.
Also, and this is selfish – but this is a topic on which you must be selfish or wholly selfless, there is no middle ground – I don’t want to give up my life to care for a screaming, shitting ball of flesh.
“Also, and this is selfish – but this is a topic on which you must be selfish or wholly selfless, there is no middle ground – I don’t want to give up my life to care for a screaming, shitting ball of flesh.”
I’ve heard this more than once and I don’t agree. You’ve already said that “My boyfriend is dead set on having children …” so for him it wouldn’t be selfless having children.
@ Elanor, that’s not selfishness! It’s the polar opposite! It’s intellectual honesty & self-examination. Had I possessed an ounce of such a quality when in my child-bearin’ prime, I probably wouldn’t have had kids. And I’m a mom who beams w/ pride & tears at my 2 daughters who’ve become the most awesomest, self-aware young women I could ever hope for! The world is *truly* a better place with them in it. But, I fell for the idealism of the ‘happy family’ & thank gawd reality checked in before baby #2 was even born. F*ck more of that sh*t! I freakin’ loved those babies but I’m no idiot, I know when to STOP. Raising kids can be a f*cking drag on the best days & a nightmare that renders you pitifully helpless on the worst days. And even good dads are of little help when baby wants you: mommy! (ex-hub would get jealous & frustrated w/ the girls b/c they preferred me over him; well duh, you impatient asshole).
But, it is, without a doubt, an all-consuming, responsibility (for lack of a better word) that doesn’t go away when they spend the wknd w/ grandma, or go to camp or turn 18 or graduate college, or when they become self-sufficient grown-ups. Of course, you relax as they grow & it’s not a neurosis but ‘it’ will be there until my final breath.
In my experience, most men don’t possess this all-consuming ‘whatever’ it is…daughters’ father seems to put ‘the outta sight, outta mind’ quite easily & my own father does the same. I know there are exceptions, I’ve certainly met fathers amazingly connected to their kids.
Simply put, my mind & thoughts have never been & will never be free of concern for my offspring. Their welfare is always, if not forefront in my mind, then it’s tugging at the corners of my consciousness & consuming my energy in some way, 24/7/365. Maybe it’s just me, I doubt it tho…I’m no helicopter mom or control freak. I don’t live in fear of things out of my control & tend to ‘hold on loosely’ as I want them to learn to make decisions & make their mistakes NOW while I can help them & when most of them aren’t permanent. So I don’t obsess by any means.
Still, my concern & need for the well-being of their existence will always be present w/in me. I carry it everywhere I go. I guess I’ve over stated that point by now. Is it a burden? Perhaps, a huge one! But it’s more of a DNA thing, as familiar & heavy as my own flesh & bones. No misunderstanding, I don’t view it as a ‘spiritual thing’ whatsoever! Spirituality is meaningless & doesn’t help you cope w/ a toddler’s night terrors or teenage heartbreak & misery. It’s deeply biological, instinctual. Evolutionary is the word for it.
So, if you don’t want shitting, screaming, clinging balls of flesh that consume your every waking thought & cause you endless real & imaginary guilt & become teenagers that consider you brain-dead stupid & then want to drive a f*cking 2000lb potential assault missile while expecting you to be calm about it & then want to date dumb boys w/ purely evil intentions & then go away to university that costs an ungawdly amt of money & leave you w/ a dusty, empty nest & nothing but the cat-hair bunnies under their bed…then jeebus frakkin christ, feel free NOT to have them & relieve yourself of any guilt you may feel for NOT procreating!
I’m long-winded this morning. But it’s coming full-circle for me as this point in my life when I’m sending my oldest off to college with daughter #2 right behind her, so I’m reviewing life & the what-ifs & such. If you’re still with me, thanks for reading!
To the mods: feel free to delete my wall of words! It’s already been said anyway!
“I don’t want to give up my life to care for a screaming, shitting ball of flesh.”
I agree!
No, you owe the world nothing, as it owes you nothing. The only obligation you have regarding children is the ones you place on yourselves. Society and the world have no say.
No more than you owe it to every other child in the world who is already born to provide them with the space and ability to thrive and enjoy life. Adding more humans to the world will deprive those already around of something, especially if that child is born into a society in which each member consumes 10x more than members of poorer countries.
There are over 6 billion reasons not to have children. Seriously though, as others have said, having kids is a huge responsibility that many don’t take seriously enough. If it isn’t something you really want, don’t do it.
Don’t worry, if you should have children, your wife will tell you…
Have you considered adopting? Take me for example, I have my eye on a lovely 23 year old Filipino girl, that I personally think will enrich the relationship between the wife and I…
No, you are in no way obligated to have children. If you want to that’s your right, but adding to the surplus population just because you feel like you should is dumb. My wife and I are considering the same things. Perhaps when we’re in a more stable financial situation we’ll look at adoption.
Definitely not. I have three kids and can tell you that you DO NOT want to have them if you aren’t ready to sacrifice time, resources, and a little sanity. And I absolutely love having my kids!
The trade-off, for me, is totally worth it. Hard to describe how rewarding it is to see a person go from completely helpless baby to an independent teen (that’s as far as we have gotten at the moment). Watching them discover life and their unique personality is pretty amazing. But, again, the fun comes at a price and I don’t think everyone would find the trade-off rewarding.
Having said all that, I will repeat what I said on the thread that inspired this post: before you bash kids for being immature, loud, messy, etc. remember that a lot of adults put up with you when you were the exact same way. Think of your neighbors growing up, your teachers, your coaches, etc. You probably had some that didn’t like kids. But you probably had more that put up with all kinds of crap from you and took time and effort to help you grow up.
Well, it wasn’t exactly my (or anyone’s) choice, was it? I didn’t exactly ask to be born. It was my mother’s choice, as was the teachers and such.
Whether you chose to be here or not (and not one person born ever did), is immaterial to my point. There were many adults around you who put up with your loudness, your immaturity, your messiness and your lack of social skills in order to help you become an independent adult. Doesn’t mean they enjoyed it. But sometimes we put up with annoying things in order to make our society a better place.
There is a difference between “he’s just a kid” and “he’s just a kid” if you get what I’m getting at. I have a general prejudice against people who are loud and sticky and I judge parents who are not attentive to the unlouding and unstickying their children or themselves, as the situation may warrant. Children have growth stages, they are not helped along by excusing their behavior, but rather nurturing a path toward appropriate behavior. Recent example: waiting on line at a bank inside a grocery store, a child of about 9 (+/- 2) was clearly interested in vandalizing the ATM and stealing all the deposit envelopes, climbing up on the desk, and creating other petty annoyances. He wasn’t loud but he was bored and his mother wasn’t talking to him or watching what he was doing. Then she let his younger brother out of the cart and they both climbed up on the desk. Unluckily for society, it’s socially forbidden to tap this woman on the shoulder and ask her to watch her own kids. Unluckily for society, someone from the bank came over and made conversation with the kids instead of asking them to stop climbing on shlt or approaching the mother with a little more authority than I have, thus condoning and complimenting and entitling the bad behavior, 3rd party style, which is always ok. Luckily for society, I could still stare at the older one, without his mother catching on, as he was bent on messing up things for the grown-ups who use the ATM; he was clearly smart enough to look around to see if anyone was watching, and I did, the whole time. Perhaps if I minded my own business letting kids be kids, he could face the consequences, but he probably wouldn’t. Anyone who ignores how bored her kids are on an adult errand probably expects society to put up with the little asshoIes as a matter of course, which makes them big asshoIes in my opinion, loud and sticky in different ways. Consequences for behavior make the difference in turning out a pretty good adult or a selfish jerk. Parents who turn that loose aren’t doing anyone a favor, they think society owes them ultimate tolerance for the miracle of squeezing out a live one or several.
Yes, that is true, but why should I care for their option? It was their option, after all, not mine. I, personally, didn’t ask for it. I’d rather people didn’t do what they don’t enjoy, because chances are they’ll suck at it – they won’t have the patience nor the care someone who actually likes what they do. I know that’s not often the case. Hell, I myself do things I don’t enjoy and like most of us have a boring, uninspiring job, all for the betterment of society (in my case: I work at gov’t, helping in my own small way people have access to the judicial system).
I know several people who love teaching small children, lots of people who enjoy being moms and dads – that’s great, kudos to them, but why should I feel personally obligated to do something I know I won’t enjoy (ie: raising children I don’t want) because someone else put up with me as a child? That’s nonsensical. I have every right to not like children at all (as long, of course, as I don’t abuse them). Whether I was one or not is immaterial. I didn’t ask to be born. I’m grateful to my mother because she raised me with love and care, but that doesn’t obligate me in any way – and nor should people have children out of duty, IMHO.
Ah, wait, nevermind, I went back and reread your post (sorry, just woke up):
Yeah, about the sticky and immature thing. Children are sticky and immature – that’s how they are. Some people can deal with it. Some people enjoy it (my mother’s head over heels over my niece, for instance). Kudos to them; they’re, as you said, making a better society.
But only because I was one, I don’t feel compelled to care. Some people can deal with it, some just would rather not and I’m one of those who would rather not. I’d rather help society some other way (such as by not procreating). Hell, my current project monograph is about prevention of child sexual abuse – I *care* for children, just not in a hands-on way, because they’re loud and sticky and immature and annoy me immensely most of the time.
I was once loud and sticky and immature myself, but seriously; while I’m grateful for those who didn’t slap me upside the head, I don’t feel compelled to follow their footsteps. At all. Not that I’d slap children upside the head, but I’d rather just avoid them altogether, as far as possible.
Let me add one thing: one of the problems you seem to be having is that you live by adults who aren’t being considerate parents. Perhaps they shouldn’t have had kids if they can’t do a reasonably good job of keeping their kids from hurting your property. There are many conscientious parents out here who actually try to teach their kids consideration and respect for others. You and your wife would probably be the same.
Nope. There are too many as it is. If we were an animal species some other race would be culling us to protect our species from wiping itself out thru overpopulation.
We are an animal species. Thus, the population problem will sort itself out: either we will find more efficient ways of getting and distributing the resources we need to sustain ourselves, or we will suffer widespread famine, war and disease and thus decrease our numbers. Either way: problem solved.
Yes we are animals, but we are also intelligent. We have ways of controlling our population that do not involve widespread death. Any one who truly believes that we need to let famine, war, and disease limit our numbers is advocating for death and suffering on a massive level. It is utterly immoral to say that my desire to have lots of children is more important than the lives of the thousands of people I will be condemning to death from overpopulation.
This is not to say that we should stop having children, but that we need to be responsible about it.
That is an important point. My fiance and I are on the fence about kids, currently (especially him) leaning more toward NO, but his vehemence compared to my reluctance is, in my opinion, due to the fact that the kids that have surrounded him over the last several years have, for the most part and in one way or another, been obnoxious, disrespectful, unpleasant little people whose parents either can’t or don’t know how to handle them. While generally speaking we share the same concerns (the financial commitment, the lifelong commitment in general, potential changes in our relationship and our family dynamic, physical changes — that one’s just my concern, limited freedom, etc.), I think he gets way more freaked out about the behavioral challenges of parenting, which, while no small feat, are skewed for him because many of his friends and family have no idea what they’re doing, and the ones that do aren’t around as much.
If behavior is his big issue, then either don’t have them, or insist on parenting classes or counseling before subjecting children to his unrealistic expectations. Authoritarian parents who expect unquestioning obedience are ignorant of basic child development & growth & are damaging to little humans. They may produce obedient children, but not happy & eventually well-adjusted ones. Treat them as individual from you, deserving of your respect & love from day one & it will come back to you when it counts most. Yes, I said ‘respect’ them, their differences, their little voices have a right to be respected & heard, doesn’t mean things will go their way but that they have a right to state their case & appeal! Being a kid doesn’t mean they lack valuable, independent thought & it’s this that we (especially us as seekers of rationality & reason!) ultimately want for our kids! Children need consistent, loving guidance & patient instruction, not rigid, unnecessary rules designed to make daddy look like a ‘good parent’. Fear is not a good motivator. Mutual respect is better. When they receive it & learn it first hand from you, then they learn to give it freely to you & others.
Life’s a bitch & no one said it would be easy & maybe you got unlucky in the gene dept but there are little ones who don’t learn things the easy way, or the stubborn, willful, feisty ones that embarrass, defy & anger you, but reactionary parenting is lazy & good parenting isn’t necessarily how our parents did it. Re-direct that fire in their belly don’t kill it! They’ll need it to defend themselves against religion or the courage to start an atheist group at their college or even bigger, more awesome things. I’m not suggesting ‘free-range parenting’ or letting the buggers run batsh*t crazy. That’s not respecting them, either.
Off topic:
I always click on people’s names to see which website they link to (I feel obligated as a mod to at least look and make sure it’s not underage porn or something), but Malvond, I wound up reading your blog for an hour. You’re a very funny writer.
Also, your amazonian friend is really hot.
Thanks!
She just finished filming another season of the Challenge, and it starts on MTV on October 5th or 6th, so you can watch her hotness in every episode.
Watching MTV reality shows is pretty much the opposite of what I do for fun. But I would be watching if my friend were on, so I understand why you do.
In fact, the only episode of ‘Real World’ or whatever it’s called I’ve ever watched is the one where my friend’s song was played on the soundtrack.
But, yes, based on the picture you linked, definitely ‘the hotness’.
Yeah I generally avoid most reality shows and haven’t watched MTV with any sort of regularity for nearly a decade — if it weren’t for her I wouldn’t be watching (and actually, sometimes I just fast-forward through the episode to catch her parts because the other parts annoy me so much).
Somewhere I saw a picture of a vuvuzela duct-taped to a can of compressed air …
Depends. Do you want the world of tomorrow to be ruled by the Duggars? If so, don’t reproduce. About the only way we can reliably produce reasonable people is to create them ourselves. Conversion will never produce reason in large enough numbers to outweigh faith.
This is one of my dad’s biggest arguments when I tell him I might not want kids. He feels that because there are so many incompetent morons in the world, the more intelligent, reasonable people have an almost moral obligation to reproduce. Occasionally I do feel that way, really, like when I’m watching the world’s worst parents interact with their child and start to feel a swelling sense of obligation to do better.
That argument is a load of baloney. Smart, competent, educated people raise idiots all the time. Complete losers raise brilliant kids all the time. There is far too much chaos in this equation to assume that the outputs will equal the inputs.
That’s true, and it certainly feels like it happens all the time, but without numbers I’m not convinced that responsible, intelligent, etc. people aren’t more likely to raise responsible, intelligent, etc. kids.
Who is trying to convince you that responsible, intelligent, etc. people aren’t more likely to raise responsible, intelligent, etc. kids?
No one, unless you count the previous commenter. I said I’m not convinced that people aren’t. :)
I suspect that the statistics will be against you on this one. Irrespective of weather nature or Nurture has the greater roll. What you describe does happen but is the exception rather then the rule. Its just that the exceptions are more noticeable.
In general however I never know what to say when I hear this question. Simply because for me it never was a question. I just assumed that I would have children, call it a parenting instinct if you will.
I have to agree with James that skeptics are more likely to raise their children to have a healthy skepticism, But then again as others have said, if you have to ask then the answer might be no.
My parents are both brilliant, and evangelical Christians. 33% of their children are morons, and 66% are agnostic or atheist.
My wife’s father had 8 children. by two different women. My wife is a brilliant architecture student looking to do graduate work at Harvard or MIT. Her seven siblings are all idiots and addicts of one type or another.
Just because you are smart, or competent, or educated, does not mean you will be a successful parent. Those skills are entirely different. And you are just one part of the environment in which your kids will grow. Skeptics raise kids who go on to be fundamentalists, and vice versa. This is a chaotic system, and one in which you aren’t even aware of many of the variables, much less able to control them.
Assuming your kids will be carbon copies of your own ideals and beliefs is foolishly naive.
It would definitely be foolish to just assume that they’d be carbon copies, but I’m not sure it’s less illogical to assume that it’s not at least more LIKELY that you will pass on some of your character to your kids.
I guess it also depends on what we put under the umbrella of “intelligent” and “competent”. I guess I’m not just talking about IQ, I’m talking about things that are partly inherent but also cultural — passed down deliberately. Things like accountability and social responsibility, integrity, the value of critical thinking, etc. I also probably should have included the limitation that those things don’t automatically make a good parent. But if you (a) have those qualities and (b) are otherwise a responsible parent and make an effort to raise your child with those qualities, I would think you probably have a better chance at being pleased with the results.
I’m not arguing against that.
What I’m arguing against is the idea that if you are an atheist, and you want to increase the number of atheists, you should have kids. That is hopelessly simplistic.
It’s also the reason I don’t worry about fundamentalists winning because they have more kids.
I said statistics, not anacdotes.
We where talking in vauge general terms however no one made a claim that it was 100% guaranteed to work. Just that it had a resonable chance of working. Are my children more likely to become skeptics the true belivers?
Well I cetaintly ask questions when someone has told them a theoloigical ‘fact”. And I make sure that they have early exosure to alternate points of view. I’d say that puts them in a better situation then someone who has been sheilded from all contrary opinions.
Either way my children will know not how to spot an unsubstantiated asertion, and demand evidence. I can’t control how they will use this knowledge but I can make sure that they possess it.
“I said statistics, not anacdotes.”
… and then …
“I’d say that puts them in a better situation then someone who has been sheilded from all contrary opinions.”
… any statistics to back that up?
;-)
Two things absolutely guaranteed to cause problems (often terminal) in a relationship – different ideas about money; different ideas about having kids.
What is more important than genetics is education. We should be improving education rather than trying to out breed stupid people. The proof of this is societal change throughout history. If everyone grew up to have the same ideas, thoughts, and morals of their parents then we never would have left the caves. All of the atheists here had religious ancestors. If the idea that religious/stupid people only breed religious/stupid people was true then everyone in the world would be religious and stupid because all of humanity was at one point.
Further, taking this position is a eugenics program. To state that there is a category of people (sheeple for instance) that should not breed is to set them up as a dangerous and inferior race. That is what eugenics programs are about, they separate the desirables from the undesirables and then promote the desirables while suppressing the undesirables.
Um. No. Now go be happy and get on with your life.
@James: Your statement would be funny if it wasn’t so possible… A future with the Palins and Duggars outnumbering those with reasoning skills. Sends a shiver down my spine.
I have to agree with the No camp, you don’t ‘owe’ it to anyone at all! You should only have kids if it’s what you want to do and you’re mentally and financially prepared for it. I can understand people saying ‘you’d be conscientious and good parents’ but that’s no reason to have kids. This planet is massively over populated and struggling to sustain the amount of us there are already.
I agree with Frozen Summers as well, we’d be being culled so hard if we weren’t the dominant species. As a (sort of) aside I think having more than 2 children is incredibly selfish and should I have kids I’d never have more than 2 biological children, though my ideal would be to adopt after one (however adoption is a massively convoluted process, so it may not be possible for us to adopt if we don’t meet the stringent criteria).
I’ll side on the no as well.
In days when land and other property was automatically expected to go to the children, it was a different story. Now that people don’t feel obligated to spend their whole lives (and by extension the lives of their children) in one place, doing one job until they die doing it, the necessity of having offspring for that particular reason has faded. I also think that in the past people weren’t having kids because they “wanted” them; they had them because they needed them. It’s different now. It’s a far different dynamic, want vs need.
And in a world like ours where resources are noticeably limited in some cases, or expensive or whatever, then child-having needs to be weighed a lot more against the ability to provide for them and give them what they’ll need. That isn’t always possible. Thoughts about this should stop more people from going ahead with the kid having, but the wanting can override a lot of the rationality required to question the need to do it, yeah?
@Teralka: OK, call me selfish. Or call me someone who got pregnant a third time and chose to have the baby. (A choice I wouldn’t make a fourth time, but only because I’m not mentally ready to put the time and effort into raising another child from infancy and wouldn’t do the job correctly).
From those of you who are so adamant that having kids is this horrible thing as far as overpopulation goes, I’ve never heard a well-constructed argument for that position. This argument always strikes me as similar to the argument parents used to make about making sure you eat all your food since there are people starving in Africa. As if me eating my food is going to give starving kids in Africa more food?
It’s pretty basic. There is only so much space and resources on the planet. The more people there are sharing these resources the smaller amount there will be for each person.
One of the most famous articles on this is The Tragedy of the Commons “http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/162/3859/1243″
Much of the reason (though not all of the reason) that there are starving kids in Africa is because of the way America and the rest of Western civilization live. We export our poverty to the third world countries in various ways. So having more people in America, or England or anywhere else, will create more problems for the rest of the world.
No, you don’t owe the world children! Its you and your wife’s choice if you want to reproduce. However, the world needs for kids from reasonable and educated parents to help offsets all the idiots reproducing. =)
Good point, most religions encourage having a lot of children.
From an evolutionary standpoint you sort of owe it to your ancestors to continue the genetic line.
The information age ended the period when culture wars could be won through reproduction.
I won’t get into the debat about if the earth is over populated or not. I won’t remind you of what the churches think. I will ask you one question, are you happy?
If you answered yes, than that is all that matters. The only thing you owe this old world is to live your life on your own terms. If that means you and yours are happy without children, so be it. If you decide that you want children some day, so be it. It’s your life. Live it as you see fit.
On a side note, my one child is 25 next week. We are retired from child rearing. Now, Sweetie and I are the nosy couple that tell all other parents, “you’re doing it wrong.” We’ve earned that right, and we take full advantage of it.
Good for you :D
I want to be that person. As much as I’d love to have a relationship like I have with my mom with someone else ( as a parent ) I don’t want to have to deal, nor do I think I have the mental capacity to deal with a screaming infant. It drives me up the wall as it is now. I don’t think I”m mentally sound enough to take it if I can’t walk away from the person with the wailing baby.
Inez Wong’s nagging is ringing in the back of my head…that’s what I get for watching Futurama back to back :P
Anyway, I’m with Team “No” on this one. MrCheese, drax, WonderGoon, and Frozen Summers pretty much covers the reasons I agree with for this.
Short answer: No, no one should be obligated to have children.
My answer:
I want to have children and have a hard time understanding people who do not. Since there is no heaven/hell, it is our only real chance at eternal life and the only opportunity we have at making a permanent influence on the world (by spreading our seed). I have been with my wife for 9 years and very early on “not having children” was a deal breaker. I will have children, and if I was with a girl who said she did not want children, I would have had to call it off. I didn’t mean this to be offensive to her, its just that her life goals were not in line with my own.
Most (all I can think of at least) people who do not want to have children are that way because they are selfish and very self absorbed. They don’t want to spare their own free time (that is spent on themselves) on squaking little brats. These people are often very interesting and generally enjoy life and I enjoy hanging out with them. They may be onto something but I cannot get past my own burning desire to procreate.
Chance for eternal life? There is no such thing. It sounds to me like an idealistic notion you have & trying to live vicariously (and hopefully for you, eternally) through them. That, to me, is the ultimate in self-absorption. What if your child turns out to be someone that doesn’t make you proud or greatly disappoints you, himself, or society, in spite of your excellent parenting skills? Love & empathy is the goal, not eternal life.
Reality is a hard pill to swallow, but intellectual honesty demands it. Your desire for eternal life & your fluffy idealism of parenthood & children doesn’t change it.
The reality of continuing or not continuing genetic material is: in very few generations, no one will know who you are. They might look up your name, but it is trivial to them, they won’t know you or what you’re like, they won’t have any of your heirlooms, they are strangers because you won’t know them, and you will be dead and not live forever. If you write a diary, they may romanticize you, but they probably have no interest in it. If they were never alive, they would not know it. It’s vanity to suspect there’s a chance to live forever via this method. You have to be in the history books to live at least a few hundred years.
Think about it this way, you may be an artist or an author, and leave some of your work behind, but chances are you will not be renowned, if eternal life is your goal, rather than the need to create art. A book on a shelf with an author who could go by any name does not last long. The art has a good chance of ending up in a thrift store for $2 and being bought by a college student for being ironic and left on the curb on move-out day once they’ve outgrown it. If you are lucky, you have a little more than 100 years before nobody knows your name or cares to find articles to learn more about you, even people related to you, or even if you have some fame in life. You have to be in the history books (a nebulous concept at that), and that might buy you a couple hundred extra years before you fade into the bottom of the list of interesting people who ever lived or contributed to the world.
Now, as for being in the world, maybe the world is a better place with you in it, but as one in a sea of people who individually do not matter. If you are not yourself detracting, that’s positive. If you teach your children not to detract, that’s ok too, but individuals don’t matter unless you know them personally. People who don’t exist, contrary to It’s a Wonderful Life, can’t and won’t be missed, so don’t make any for the sheer sake of vanity. That’s stupid.
Or maybe they know they have neither patience nor inclination to deal with the fruit of their loins and thus, rather than be a sh*tty parent, opt to not put more people to be neglected on this world?
From an evolutionary standpoint, I would really like you to create more like-minded individuals to populate the world with. However all that is meaningless if you don’t WANT children. Having a kid when you aren’t sure is taking a big risk, I know some parents who weren’t sure and some have let it affect their relationship with their kids.
No no no no. I do NOT want kids and would probably be a bad parent.
I enjoy my freedom and the amount of $$$ I spend and time to raise a child would not equal the joy I would get from having a child.
That and Japan has a very low birth rate as well so it’s normal here not to have kids as I know many couples who are childless and will stay that way. There is no real stigma here for not having kids in my opinion.
My wife and I didn’t want children until we had children. My wife kept it between us that when she was pregnant she didn’t feel that “connection” that she had heard other women talk about. (Keep in mind we were involved in a church and we kept hearing “it was a gift from god.”) It wasn’t until about 6 months after our daughter was born that either one of us felt a connection. We were not planning on having children at that time. She was on birth control and was militant on taking it. We never looked at it as a mistake only as a surprise. Our second child was totally different. A surprise also, we both felt the excitement and the connection right away. (This time, no church, no god, coincidence?)
I’ve heard christians say, “if a married couple does not have children, they are being selfish.” WHAT A LOAD! Too many couples are having children thinking it is going to “fix” their relationship not realizing that it will only make it worse.
We love our children and would do anything for them. We would still be just as whole if we didn’t have them!
I think that marriage as a condition for intercourse tends to generate children. It’s a religious and/or institutionalized social construct to get people to make more people and create a household format ideal for the raising and feeding of children. Imagine playing into it, you’ve reached the age of majority, you have sexually awakened, and you seek a partner to live with. Religion or tradition moralizes sex as to be procreative, and thus make a contract for the man to stick around and for the woman to obey, and taunt people who don’t want to conform, old maids like me and “confirmed bachelors”, gay people, the childless. Imagine getting to the other side of that fence, desiring it, institutionalizing a desire for it as a standard, and becoming that portrait of normal, healthy, fertile, and beloved… behind the door, it’s a different story for a lot of people, but they still take part in the ritual of taunting and insulting people who don’t conform, who haven’t found someone and who don’t appreciate the wonders of childhood from the perspective of their own parents, to finally come full circle. Think of all the women who get worried that no one will choose them ever, that they’ll do anything to make a child alone if they must, sperm donors, international adoption, drunken incident, etc., or couples who are infertile who go through invasive treatments costing thousands and thousands of dollars just to be considered normal, to have what everyone else has, and pity people who don’t have it.
We’re talking pity. What a horrible thing, to not want these things, and be considered pathetic for one reason or another, because the normal condition is that everyone wants this, and if they don’t have it, they must want it, and if they don’t want it, they’re selfish. Bullying, it’s bullying. As far as what I want, I would like to have a kid with or without a husband. People should want what they want and not be judged overly, although that gets into the business of fundies (or obsessive octomoms, etc.) who want 27 children if it kills them, because I still think the vagina/clown car metaphor is one of the funniest I’ve heard if it wasn’t so selfish. I mean how can we say they are selfish but a childfree single or married person isn’t? I don’t know how to feel about it then. I read about someone who kept having children because she kept trying until she had twins, which I think qualifies for some medical intervention. I mean, fertility drug + wait until she’s over 40 + sperm donor with twin gene = not 8-12 or so disappointing singletons (I think one of them was named Peppermint) and a great chance you get twins.
Actually, marriage seems to have been a way for men with power to ensure themselves more reproductive opportunities. It allows men to control who their women breed with, making it more likely that their wealth goes to their own offspring. I’m not sure what you mean by “create a household format ideal for the raising of children”. If you mean current abomination, the nuclear family, I would have to disagree. Humans are tribal and the way we do it now not only permits far more abuse of children by overworked and stressed mothers and fathers, but denies women the support of sisters, mothers, aunts and neighbors.
I agree, parents seem to be becoming more and more proprietary about their children, lots of advice columns have probably been written about that more than a lot of other subjects. I am thinking mainly about mothers and mothers-in-law conflicting with their children about their children, and how to get them to back off if you can’t move away. A stranger like me with no children can’t offer advice or have ideas on child-rearing at all. People get resentful and put on their doing perfectly fine without my input.
I was writing more to the idealization of the nuclear family, with the idea in mind that most of the people I know who got married had gotten pregnant within 6 months if not less, that they were only getting married because they had already planned to have children and it was time. Many of these were Catholic weddings (for the one partner in each union who was still nominally Catholic) in which the betrothed had been cohabiting for over a year or even longer. I don’t know that many people, but of whom I do know, none have gotten married without directly trying to have children asap.
And then, at least society does, to go forth and marginalize people who never achieved this ideal, the (still) single, single parents, gay people, and childfree married people. It is not enough if you finally find someone to marry you, you can’t just let it lie there, you have to put the married household to use. If not, just cohabit – the consequence that if you do, people generally consider you still single, make the move already. But not if you’re gay. If you’re gay, you shouldn’t be gay, you can’t want the same married with children life we want, because we want that. Never mind that you can adopt to fill in “the hole.” Society is obsessed with this hole. If you got married and divorced or widowed, people will not be too subtle about you getting “back out there.” If you are married with no children, “the hole” is a child. If you have one child, “the hole” is a second child, because of the tragedy of depriving a child of a sibling.
The weird thing is, a “confirmed bachelor” compared to an “old maid” is strange. She is damaged, not chosen for the dance, while he is living the life. Maybe the gay life. I’m not trying to out people, but I do believe some older unmarried men are closeted homosexuals, and they get the biggest break from the same society which condemns homosexuality. If they are not condemning homosexuality, it’s because gay people seem to want to simulate the hetero nuclear family to the best of their abilities. When you are trying to counteract a stereotype, you have to strive for the norm, and not stay freaky: single, promiscuous, and/or childless. Single hetero men can steer clear of this a while longer, as there’s no rush to settle down and he has longer than a woman does to produce an offspring, but there is a sad mocking stereotype of the older swinging bachelor, like .. Mr. Furley, but Mr. Roper didn’t have a better deal. Not sure if the Ropers had grown children off-camera, but Elemenope probably can find out.
I think the whole plot of “the normal life” is to make babies, and that if you’re not committing to marriage with anyone or can’t or society thinks you shouldn’t, you’re going to miss your window of opportunity, people will find you less attractive and less fertile, so you’re considered somewhat irresponsible for not getting things in order sooner and doing what you’re supposed to; heaven forbid if you have the baby before you get married, no one wants to raise some other guy’s babies. Like you’re a waste of a human being for choosing something else, not to mention how oblivious these judgmental types are to the ease and ubiquity of preventing the conception of children and how easy it is to get a divorce (which is a good thing if you need it).
Of course you don’t, but you are missing out on that opportunity to be inoculated (numbed) against the annoyances like crying babies and scratched cars that you mention. Nothing like seeing everything in your house systematically destroyed or lost to loosen the emotional grip they hold on your heart. :^)
You owe it to yourselves to only have a child if you really, really want to. Having kids is so much work. You never get to sleep again. You never really have time to yourself again. It’s never quiet again. Nothing is ever where you left it. The house will never be truly clean again. And the list goes on… Yes, there are benefits, but there are many sacrifices. There is absolutely no reason in the world to do it, unless you want to. It’s a huge commitment.
You might consider adoption. Think of it as saving a child from a religious household.
we need well-adjusted, intelligent types to become the leaders, but the idea of owing it to someone or something sounds a little too much like quiverfull.
Adoption might be a reasonable way of doing things, especially if you can get a reasonably well socialised one at about four or five, after someone else has done all the hard work :P
My wife and I had our one child late in life. It’s been great, having the financial security, maturity and stable home to raise her.
If the fence sitters and naysayers are young couples, I can tell you that I was in the same place when I was in my 20′s. There is a certain biological drive that can kick in. You just have this drive to see your progeny thrive and grow. Im not saying that everyone will feel this way, but I’ve seen it happen quite often in my circle of friends.
One huge advantage of being a skeptical parent who chooses to have a child later in life is the school system. You might get a few young ideological faith heads who join the PTA, or go to school board meetings, but as an older wiser person you can just look condescendingly at them when they complain about teaching evolution or prayer in school. Being one of the older couples in our school gives us a quite a bit of gravitas concerning how the school is run.
My one piece of advice I would give to skeptical couples is to wait until at least their 30′s to have kids.
That is something I try to consider. I’ll be 26 soon and feel like if I do at some point decide that, YES, I want kids, I wouldn’t be ready until I was at least 30 or 31. My fiance’s 32, but as far as his education and career track, is at the same place as I am, so I think his actual age is less of a factor. My parents weren’t as financially stable as they would have liked when they had me, but they were in their 30s, mature, established career-wise, and deliberately waited several years after getting married to have kids. Young, less-established couples can certainly produce great, stable families –particularly if it’s what each half wants, but I think waiting is the way to go. All but one of my fiance’s closest friends had unplanned pregnancies in the relationship –and subsequent, essentially shotgun weddings– between 20 and 22, when they were still party animals and in no way prepared to be parents. Now, the moment they have a babysitter, they go crazy. One time one of the mom actually described herself, referring to having kids and getting babysitters, like a “caged animal”. If I decide to have kids, I will be consciously doing everything I can do avoid this.
No, you owe it to the world to adopt children and raise them to be the same kind of respectful, thoughtful people you are. NO ONE owes it to the world to add more children to it when there are hundreds of thousands of kids out there without homes.
“My one piece of advice I would give to skeptical couples is to wait until at least their 30’s to have kids.”
That’s great advice. I didn’t even get married until I was 30 so all my kids were born a little “later in life.” I also went though a period in my twenties where I thought I’d never have kids.
Of course you’re not obligated, and the world population argument is a strong one.
THAT SAID, have you ever seen Idiocracy? Or noted the rate at which non-liberal, non-intelligent people are recreating and spreading ignorance. It’s terrifying. Maybe those of us who can think in straight lines should be making more of an attempt to fight the tide.
You can’t theorize from a fictional movie. Idiocracy was great entertainment, but really fell down on population genetics. It failed on basic Darwinian evolution too. As was mentioned earlier, ignorant hicks have brilliant children, and very educated parents have moronic offspring. The best indicator for the relative intelligence of a child will be the quality of the education it receives.
Actually, even better than that (according to recent info) is the quality of nutrition it receives during the first five years of life.
No, you don’t. But you do owe it to the world to not have children unless you really want them. Having said that, I personally really want children. However, being both gay and adopted, I’ve never felt the need to be genetically related to my offspring. My plan is to adopt a slightly older child when I’m in my thirties. Luckily, the religious right believes that adoption is a much better solution than abortion, so one can only assume that they’ll support a gay man wanting to adopt…
I don’t think children (or potential children) are a “debt” to be paid. I mean, there are plenty of decent, well-off, intelligent people who are having children (and in some cases, tons of children). By you having children, it’s not like you’re somehow countering or nullifying bad parents — you’re having a kid, and adding to an already heavy load of humanity on this planet. And, unfortunately, many of the decent, well-off, intelligent people are also religious, and have more children than is necessary in this day and age in order to fulfill god’s commandments.
My sister, for instance, is a lovely person, with a curious, vibrant (and oddly blind, when it comes to faith) mind. She’s one of the best moms I know, all involved and supportive. But 4 kids in less than 6 years? What’s that about?
I do have a kid. My husband and I were religious when we married, and we got pregnant almost immediately. One of the most shocking things about becoming a mom (for me) is that I’m totally not cut out for it.
I should have maybe guessed — all those years where I sat stiff and awkward when small children from church climbed all over me, or when I flinched away from toddler-bestowed, cheerio-dusted hugs and grimy fingers. But somehow I’d just always figured that I would love having children and children would be my calling — something I’d been told growing up.
So having our son, it was odd when I realized that although I loved this small, squirmy, stinky bundle of unintelligible cries, I didn’t want any more. Ever.
So I got my tubes tied, and ran into the most interesting thing I’ve run into yet. Real, vibrant anger from women who want children (or more children) and find out that I’m voluntarily infertile. As though they’re personally offended, as though by deciding to be infertile myself, I’ve somehow transmitted that infertility to all the women who want children and can’t have them.
It’s incredibly baffling. How in the world would me having more children that I don’t particularly want in any way help their situation?
I have experienced the opposite of this. I sometimes find it difficult to deal with those of my acquaintance who are in the voluntarily childless category who tell me, more or less directly, that I’m stupid for wanting children. It is common for people to assume that my disappointment that the possibility is becoming smaller all the time is either some holdover from my religious days or an indicator that I’m somehow irrational.
My bafflement is as great as yours though. I completely fail to see my involuntary lack of children as a reason to resent those who choose not have them. If people don’t want to have children, fine by me!
If you have to ask if you want children, then you shouldn’t have children.
That’s ridiculous. There are way too many people in the world that just have babies because that’s what people do. As a responsible adult in a society lucky enough to no longer depend on children for income and manual labor, no longer required to have kids by religion, you do a disservice to the world by not at least contemplating whether or not you actually WANT to procreate.
Why not adopt an animal? Or better yet, donate the money you would have spent on a child, to organizations which are active in saving endangered species. Unless you feel that humanity is an endangered species….then go ahead and have a dozen kids. Look on the bright side, when the fossil fuels run out, they’ll be there to chop wood for their old man.
Absolutely not! The world has plenty of people having kids. A child consumes HUGE amounts of resources, which from both a personal and global pov can be bad. If you do not feel inclined to have children and devoted two decades to their feeding and care, don’t.
1) Why in the world would you want to?
2) No.
This would be true even if overpopulation weren’t driving all the problems talked about and in the news. Why cut your carbon footprint in half and then squeeze out another little carbon footprint to feed?
Turn the conformist spouting on its head: People who have children are selfish. They mistake their cocooned breeding and protection of their own spawn as caring for others. Hell, even our favorite mythology has God asking Job, “So you tell me you are a worthy human being because you love your children? The she-wolf and she-bear do that much.” So it not only doesn’t set you apart as a worthy human being, it doesn’t even set you apart as a human being. Check out the singles and the childfree helping animals, other people (who aren’t their tight little nuclear family!), and trying to help the cause of environmental problems rather than, in the words of a sociology professor, “one Band-aid after another”.
Ask a roomful of people one by one, “Why did you have children?” I heard this done, as the teacher asked the room after I asked her something about why do people have children. THe answers ranged from “It seemed like the thing to do at the time” to “I needed someone to love me” to “Too much wine for Thanksgiving dinner.”
That ain’t unselfish. I’d say it is selfish.
This site does a better job than I ever could of explaining the plethora of reasons to *not* bring another eating, pooping carbon footprint into our already bloated planet:
http://www.vhemt.org/
My opinion is that no, you do not owe the world a child. However, bringing a well-raised, intelligent child into the world is one way you can leave the world better than you found it in a way that will outlast your own existence by far. So I think it is worthwhile — but only if you are prepared to invest the time and energy it takes to do the job right. If you are not prepared to put the needs of an ungrateful ball of wants and bodily functions ahead of your own for at least a few years, then parenthood is not for you.
Yes, you have every right too…. but think about the fact that the world doesn’t need another child, there are plenty of people that need adopted first. True you don’t get to pass on your genes, but with humans… theres exceptions.
Unfortunately, the production of useful, intelligent children who believe the same way as you do is something of a genetic crapshoot. If intelligence and atheism were single gene loci where you could calculate the probability of having “the right” kid, it would make things easy. As it is, we have atheists who come from fundamentalist families, and fundamentalists who come from atheist families.
No, you don’t owe it to the world, but the more atheists have children and raise them to think rationally, the more sane the world will be in the future. That being said, having children is a huge decision and commitment that you need to look at carefully. There is much that is wonderful about it. I have one son who is a marvel to me. I have helped him learn to think rationally rather than accept beliefs on faith alone. His mother and I parted when he was very small but I am still very much in his life, providing balance to his mother, a UU minister.
If you need to ask the only viable answer is NO.
Considering limited space and resources mean that overpopulation is a very likely problem to arise in the future, not contributing isn’t a bad thing.
Pingback: Fit Darwinists Discuss Not Reproducing « Christ the Truth
I have kids, but I’m not a big fan of babies. But kids! With good parents and intelligence, they are the greatest people you will ever know. However, if you don’t like kids and are afraid of babies, then don’t have any. You might actually want to get to know someone with kids, maybe a friend has some, and get to know them a bit. I find that most people who don’t want kids are afraid of them. But you have no obligation to anyone to have any. As a younger person I really didn’t want kids until I got to know the ones a friend had, changed my mind. I love my kids! Nothing like them.
I am terrified of babies, and having spent a lot of time around them has only solidified that, not reduced it.
Once they become capable of speech, then they’re generally fine. Not that I want any, but I lose my fear of them at least.
The only possible true obligation there could be for reproducing is to continue the survival of the species. That involves two things though. Is the survival of the species an inherently good thing, and will the species really die off if you don’t reproduce?
I do think the survival of the species is a good thing; I like the idea that there is an intelligence that can explore and understand the world.
However, the species will not die off if you don’t reproduce. The only reason we feel obligated is because society still pushes child rearing.
I say if you don’t want children then definitely don’t have them. One can still make the world a better place and secure a legacy without children. If it is important to help the future then try to advance education or help create a social system that is better (however you define that). Don’t have kids if you don’t want them. If you are not ready for them then they can be an amazing stressor on your life.
The main thing that scares me out of having kids (aside from having to give up my life) is that “What if I end up raising little hellions that turn out to be terrible, selfish adults and I don’t realize what I’ve done until they are 20 years old.
You know when you’re walking in the store and you see a parent yelling at the kid or totally ignoring him/her as they misbehave and the one thing you think is: That person isn’t parenting properly. But how do you, as a new parent, know whether you are doing it properly? I figured that being a parent is a bit like being brainwashed. If you’re brainwashed then you generally aren’t aware of it. And if you’re a parent you generally think that the way you handle your kids is perfectly fine. I used to work at a store where one family would come in with 5 kids and just let them rip around the place and do whatever they wanted. We also had another mom that would force her kids to follow her through the ladies clothes isle (AND through the gramma panties section) and snap at them when they asked to see the toy isle. Do those parents think there is anything wrong with their methods? It didn’t seem like it.
This is a huge generalization, I know. And I have no parenting experience to back it up. But it is just something I have always wondered about.
You have absolutely no obligation to have kids. they are expensive and require an immense amount of attention and responsibility. They will likely become the focus of your life for 15-20 years. Besides, the world is overpopulated as it is.
Here’s another thing to consider before you have children. You can’t put them back. It’s not like when you get married, you imagine that you’ll never get divorced, and lots of people do, maybe you too. Once you decide to have children, divorce is not just about breaking up, it’s about sharing the custody. If you had no children, you could move anywhere you want and not feel like a dick for taking your kids away from the other parent or being the parent who leaves the local area and your kids for most of the year.
If you weren’t saddled with kids, being single again could be fabulous. You could go anywhere you want, start over far away from there. Why’d you end up there anyway, where did you really want to go before you got married and traded in your plans for a compromise that seemed worth it at the time? Shared custody is a pain in the rear even if you’re living near one another. Despite “turning out ok,” I’m sure it’s not ideal for children, nor is two parents in the same house who do not get along; I’d choose divorce. But you can’t cut your kids in half, and you’re not completely free to re-assemble the life you half-started before they came into the picture.
Not completely knowing the circumstances of either dissolved marriage I describe: (1) I had a teacher in high school who claimed they shared custody of the house, which eh. Maybe better for the kids not to pack up for a weekend at dad’s dingy apartment, the mom and dad traded residence while the kids stayed put. That’s a lot of inconvenience for anyone to put up with, and they felt it wasn’t the kids’ responsibility, but Jesus. Is this what you want? (2) A relative kept custody of his son in one state while his ex took their daughter to live 1000 miles away in another state. I think his son might have been old enough to let choose… I could not figure it out why they actually did cut their children in half like that, but I don’t think it’s a wonderful idea for siblings to live apart or for parents to distribute their children among themselves as a custody solution.
In sum, if you consider having children, choose very carefully and prepare for the worst in life. It’s pretty bad manners to prepare for a divorce and custody battle before you even have someone to marry, when you are young and can’t imagine any reason to worry, but half of you will divorce and it only comes up after someone moves out. When you put your life back on track and you want to move somewhere else, or your job takes you, and you no longer have to consult with your spouse whether to take that job, you still have to consider your kids’ relationship with their other parent. No, I haven’t been through this, but I used to watch a lot of tv.
This comment assumes that your own convenience is or should be your top priority. While you are certainly entitled to that perspective – and if it is your perspective you should absolutely avoid having kids – it’s far from everyone’s.
Incompatible people should split up, no doubt, but when you have kids, there are no ideal solutions. Even living in the same town, someone is put upon to pack up and move back and forth, usually the kids. If one parent abandons, the kid has a stable single-parent home but resents the other parent. If either parent wants to move somewhere else, visitations become more complicated. I guess now that there’s skype, there’s no reason the distant parent has to be so hard to know, actually, I forgot about that. It always used to seem to me, if mom has custody, for example, then she also has the burden of discipline and structure and the ordinary drudge of child-rearing, while dad comes home to an empty, quiet apartment, and has the whopping responsibility of making “quality time” at the zoo or the movies on alternate weekends (so he can date freely in the interim?), and buying presents to make sure his kids still love him.
If you’re at all compatible, staying together, making decisions together and moving as a unit is more efficient and convenient for everyone. But nobody thinks when they get married that they’re going to get divorced, and people have babies because they want them, and don’t look at the forecast of their marriage.
No, you have no obligation to produce offspring. You didn’t sign a contract when you were born agreeing to bring a child into the world after you.
But there are other ways to look at it: Are you grateful you were born? Do you believe a child of yours would enjoy life instead of hating it? Do you think you would raise a child who contributes to the world instead of making it worse? Do you look forward to learning things that you can only learn from being a parent? Do you think it would improve your relationships with spouse, friends and community? Is now a responsible time to have a child given factors like the future economy and global warming? How do you feel about the current population of the earth … too few or too many?
When I was in my twenties and early thirties, I was convinced I’d be a terrible dad and I just didn’t want kids. In my late thirties I began to think I’d be a better than average parent and certainly better than my own dad. At forty I got married; had a baby a few years later and I can happily say “so far, so good”. She’s a delightful young lady, smart, athletic, giving, funny; I am very fortunate. My wife and I do a good job of sharing the responsibilities; it’s been a scary and wonderful experience. But would I do it again now? I rather doubt it … the world is headed in a bad direction from my point of view … it’s getting increasingly difficult to make a comfortable living … global warming will continue for decades … regional conflicts seem never ending … resources are becoming scarce … overall the coming decades don’t look very pleasant. There’s a good chance that ten or twenty years from now my daughter will find life to be more a burden than a gift.
When it comes to having or not having a child, only you can decide what’s the right course for you to take (though I’ll bet you’d do a fine job if you did).
Wow, that trackback leads to a giant pile of stupid, doesn’t it?
And it’s like a parody of Fundie arugments. You can find quote mining, the use of the term ‘darwinist’, and a quick devolution into talking about abortion.
Hey, since you’re reading this thread, moron, here’s a thought for you to take away: Have as many kids as you like. It won’t matter. Most of us here grew up in very religious households. Statistics show that more and more of those kids you are cranking out to win your culture war are in actuality going to wind up on our side.
‘None’ is still the fastest growing religious affiliation in America. So just keep doing what you’re doing. It really helps us out.
“‘None’ is still the fastest growing religious affiliation in America.”
Unfortunately Glen is based in my old home town of Eastbourne in England … oh hang on this is a country where Christanity is taking a real node dive!
Still what is “Darwinism’s universe”?
Nobody has an “obligation” to have kids. In fact, if you have any doubt about wanting to be a parent you should avoid it. For your own sake, for the sake of potential children and probably for the sake of those around you.
Personally I consider parenting the most rewarding thing I have ever done. (As evidenced b the fact that I have four kids.) But it is a deeply personal choice and I recognize is not for everyone.
For those who are childless, I do ask for some of your patience with the small humans around you though. Sometimes even good kids react badly to things, and it’s just because they are kids.
No, you don’t owe the world anything. You didn’t ask to be born, after all.
Personally: I don’t want kids. I’m 25 and I know lots of people think “oh, she’s young, she’ll change her mind” (my mother’s particularly fond of this: “what if you meet someone and he wants kids?” my answer is always “well, then he’s perfectly free to make them with someone else”).
Why I don’t want kids? For several reasons (and it sucks that we-the-childless always have to justify ourselves, unlike the child-ed), but mostly because I just don’t want to. I don’t care about babies or children and never felt the urge (thus far) to get one of my own. I’d rather adopt, probably an older child (I just can’t deal with babies), y’know, like those who never get adopted.
Looking over some of the weak arguments for excreting a kid:
Adding to the population with intelligent ones does less than reducing the (over) population. Besides, every schmuck thinks they are smart and will produce smart spawn. Read any news and drive any road to see how well that worked out.
“Society Without God” (which I found through this site, read, and liked), shows some correlation between nonreligious democracies and low crime rates and high quality of life. This is relevant, in that the religious cultures are the ones that discourage abortion – and the birth control that would prevent the need for abortion – and encourage breeding regardless of what other life plans individuals may have.
“Freakonomics” had a chapter I really liked on the positive correlation between restrictions on abortion and higher crime rates. Makes sense to me. Hmmm, unhappy people forced to breed, people unsuited to raising children, and unwanted children and more people, crowds and congestion and poverty correlating with more crime? Surprise, surprise.
Best. Phrase. EVAR.
On a related note, does anybody else get pissed-off at women who have kids and behave like they’re somehow special or posessed of some new and spiritual knowledge that can only be obtained by squeezing an object the size of a bowling ball out of a hole the size of a dollar coin?
It wrecks me. The mothers on my facebook list do it near as dammit constantly – “Post this to your status if you know the special love that only a mother can know blah blah blah PUKE”.
Hey ladies, here’s the facts: If it was special, not every yoyo would be able to squeeze out a sprog that they’re spectacularly inequipped to raise once every nine months. If it was special, there wouldn’t be six and a half BILLION of us. It’s not miraculous, it’s not special, it does not have a deeper spiritual meaning – it’s just reproduction. It’s not more special than the spinach and ricotta lasagne I made last night landing with a splash in my toilet bowl this morning.
/ramt.
*pets*
Yes, it annoys me immensely. Especially – being a girl – when they act all smug like I’ll somehow inevitably bow to their advice and join the specialness and when I say I don’t want to, that I’ll totally change my mind. Totally.
*rawr*
Maybe you guys have seen this before, but there’s a song about that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJRzBpFjJS8
“On a related note, does anybody else get pissed-off at women who have kids and behave like they’re somehow special or posessed of some new and spiritual knowledge that can only be obtained by squeezing an object the size of a bowling ball out of a hole the size of a dollar coin?”
Absolutely not I’m in awe of women who can do something that the vast majority of other women can’t and in addition I’m amazed at how many of the children they produce are so gifted.
For a terrible moment I didn’t spot the sarcasm…
It could just be me but it seems as though children have turned from being something you just do to an extension of yourself.
p.s. BT have sorted you out now then?
No, I’m in the university submitting an essay. BT are coming this afternoon. The bastards.
I’m pregnant right now and I can’t STAND when other mothers tell me that crap. Not only is it bullshit but I find it incredibly sexist. They go on to make comments about how only a “mother” will know blah blah blah. Uh sorry babe but my husband is pretty fucking attached to his kid already and we haven’t even seen her yet. It makes me sick really.
Sorry I ranted there a bit.