Is having children a cruel and purely selfish act?

cowboyBuilder · 27-09-2015 09:18PM

Reiver wrote: »

The world is nowhere near overcrowded.

What's wrong with continuing the species? It's impetus to colonise the stars.

Sure is overcrowded, we don't need to be having 4 kids to be "continuing"
the species", people should have 1-2 kids , keep the population stable.

People worry about global warming (the least of our worries) yet keep their heads firmly stuck in the sand when it comes to over population.

Stacksofwacks · 27-09-2015 09:21PM

Brian from Bray wrote: »

No.

But if you are not in a position financially to look after children then I don't think you should have kids.

true. to that also i would add emotionally. then you are just passing your problems onto your kids

Mother Brain · 27-09-2015 10:25PM

Personally I won't be having children as I don't like the idea of forcing another being into existence. Could care less about the economic impact but I'm just a bit of a misanthrope and reckon I would have preferred not to have been born given the choice.

I don't like the world and I wouldn't wish the life sentence (and subsequent death sentence) on another conscious being.

I don't think it's selfish in the normal sense that you are having kids because it will benefit you in some material way, but it is certainly a decision people take because they want to be parents.

Except for the "accidents" of course!

wakka12 · 27-09-2015 10:48PM

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

Twaddle,
it's a global problem, people who have more then 2 kids (in Ireland seems to be normal to have 4,5,6 + kids) are irresponsible idiots.

Irony is they are leaving a worse quality of life for their own kids.

The average woman in Ireland, and almost every woman in the western world has an average of less than 2 children. Thats not enough for a population to sustain itself..
In Ireland its not normal to have 6 children, thats a large exaggeration. Maybe you thinking of 1950's Ireland
Its a developing world problem only.

wakka12 · 27-09-2015 10:50PM

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

Sure is overcrowded, we don't need to be having 4 kids to be "continuing"
the species", people should have 1-2 kids , keep the population stable.

People worry about global warming (the least of our worries) yet keep their heads firmly stuck in the sand when it comes to over population.

Again how many times does this need to be repeated. Europe's population is declining and this population decline will lead to problems worse than overcrowding ever could. Over population is literally the least of Europes future problems, we should be encouraging people to have more children here.

cowboyBuilder · 27-09-2015 10:54PM

wakka12 wrote: »

Again how many times does this need to be repeated. Europe's population is declining and this population decline will lead to problems worse than overcrowding ever could. Over population is literally the least of Europes future problems, we should be encouraging people to have more children here.

I find that extremely difficult to believe that the population of Europe is declining - perhaps the birth rate is ? but with migration surely it's not - again problem in developing worlds is our problem too - a global one!!!

Reiver · 27-09-2015 10:55PM

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

I find that extremely difficult to believe that the population of Europe is declining - perhaps the birth rate is ? but with migration surely it's not - again problem in developing worlds is our problem too - a global one!!!

Europe has a greying population. It's well known. I'm not sure all the migrants are specifically moving here to become residential care workers.

Why is the problem in the developing world our problem? They don't pay my ESB bill.

Mother Brain · 27-09-2015 10:57PM

Reiver wrote: »

Why is the problem in the developing world our problem? They don't pay my ESB bill.

Finite resources I would say. If 3 billion more people in the developing world are demanding oil based products and energy services in the next 20-30 years then you and / or your children will definitely be feeling the impact of that demand on your ESB bill.

wakka12 · 27-09-2015 10:58PM

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

I find that extremely difficult to believe that the population of Europe is declining - perhaps the birth rate is ? but with migration surely it's not - again problem in developing worlds is our problem too - a global one!!!

At this very minute the population isn't declining but it is ageing. Importing immigrants will only solve the problem for a while, they will age too. And then the population will decline quite rapidly

Pherekydes · 27-09-2015 10:58PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Having 1-3 children is fine as it keeps the human race growing.

Having one child won't even maintain the status quo.

Reiver · 27-09-2015 10:59PM

Mother Brain wrote: »

Finite resources I would say. If 3 billion more people in the developing world are demanding oil based products and energy services in the next 20-30 years then you and / or your children will definitely be feeling the impact of that demand on your ESB bill.

Right by that logic I should have loadsa kids so the NWO has plenty of conscripts to use in its resource wars against the developing world.

_Brian · 27-09-2015 10:59PM

Surely having children is a selfless act.
Your ensuring the continuation of the human race.
You're willing to give up the single lifestyle to do no matter what it takes to raise your children and give them the best start possible.

Then there's the fact that you would change nappies, kill, mame and generally do anything to ensure their safety and well being.

How is this a selfish decision ??

The only thing I see as selfish are those who have children and them continue to live as if they had none !!

meeeeh · 27-09-2015 11:01PM

wakka12 wrote: »

At this very minute the population isn't declining but it is ageing. Importing immigrants will only solve the problem for a while, they will age too. And then the population will decline quite rapidly

Actually half of Europe already has declining population. If you draw a line from including Germany and Italy and go east you are in the minus countries.

Mother Brain · 27-09-2015 11:05PM

Reiver wrote: »

Right by that logic I should have loadsa kids so the NWO has plenty of conscripts to use in its resource wars against the developing world.

Sorry, I don't really understand what you mean. You asked why it's your problem and I gave a reason is all. As I said, I don't really care about the economic implications of having loads of kids but there will be a definite impact on scarce fossil fuel resources that we currently rely on as global population rises.

meeeeh · 27-09-2015 11:07PM

Mother Brain wrote: »

Sorry, I don't really understand what you mean. You asked why it's your problem and I gave a reason is all. As I said, I don't really care about the economic implications of having loads of kids but there will be a definite impact on scarce fossil fuel resources that we currently rely on as global population rises.

yeah it will be terrible, we will have to figure out how to use less of them. Oh the hassle of having to do this whole progress thing.

Reiver · 27-09-2015 11:09PM

Mother Brain wrote: »

Sorry, I don't really understand what you mean. You asked why it's your problem and I gave a reason is all. As I said, I don't really care about the economic implications of having loads of kids but there will be a definite impact on scarce fossil fuel resources that we currently rely on as global population rises.

Right. Because we're going to be dependent on fossil fuels forever.

Mother Brain · 27-09-2015 11:16PM

meeeeh wrote: »

yeah it will be terrible, we will have to figure out how to use less of them. Oh the hassle of having to do this whole progress thing.

Reiver wrote: »

Right. Because we're going to be dependent on fossil fuels forever.

If you read the post I said "currently rely on" I didn't imply we always would. There's also plenty of other things that are in finite supply that will be endangered due to massive population growth in the future.

Fossil fuels for a start don't solely deal with energy mind you. An absolute s**t ton of products from pharmaceuticals, plastics, chemicals etc are also based on hydrocrabons. Also there's things like rare earth metals used for computing products and so on.

I've no doubt in our ability as a species to largely deal with these problems but they shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

Username here · 27-09-2015 11:30PM

DareGod wrote: »

What are your thoughts?

What good does having children do for anyone but satisfy ones own longing for children?

Is it purely damaging to the current world population, which is already unable to cope with its size, to have children?

Is it also cruel to create a new sentient being and forcing it to live in a crumbling society/world?

Is having children purely cruel and selfish?

I believe the children are our future
Teach them well and let them lead the way
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

CliCliW · 28-09-2015 07:35AM

Whether it's cruel and selfish depends.

If you want children just because you want to be a parent, and you don't have the resources to be able to nurture and support them to the level they need, then yes. It's ridiculously cruel and selfish.

It's quite difficult if you don't want children though, you're also called cruel and selfish then too. I don't want children and other than the fact that I'm only in my early 20's, I have reasons and anxieties about it that I don't think it's fair to impose on anyone else, much less a vulnerable child. I don't go into detail, I just say I don't want kids and everyone automatically assumes I'm selfish. I don't think I am, but whatever.

I love how philosophical and worldly everyone is about this, it's hilarious when you step back and think "hold on, do people actually think this when they talk about kids? Ageing populations? Resources? Declining population?" :-D

I'm guessing you all totally disagree with the law in China, where they limit the families to one child only? (Not sure if they do any more, but I did hear about it in the past)

Turtwig · 28-09-2015 07:41AM

Having children can only actually be selfish. The child gets no say in existence. The parent decides mostly all by themselves that for whatever reason they want kids. That's selfish.

Whether it's wrong or right is another matter. To answer the op's question if the child cannot give consent to its existence then the parent is having the child for its own reasons.

cowboyBuilder · 28-09-2015 08:11AM

meeeeh wrote: »

yeah it will be terrible, we will have to figure out how to use less of them. Oh the hassle of having to do this whole progress thing.

Careful now not to swallow any of that sand while you're down there...

wakka12 · 28-09-2015 09:36AM

CliCliW wrote: »

Whether it's cruel and selfish depends.

If you want children just because you want to be a parent, and you don't have the resources to be able to nurture and support them to the level they need, then yes. It's ridiculously cruel and selfish.

It's quite difficult if you don't want children though, you're also called cruel and selfish then too. I don't want children and other than the fact that I'm only in my early 20's, I have reasons and anxieties about it that I don't think it's fair to impose on anyone else, much less a vulnerable child. I don't go into detail, I just say I don't want kids and everyone automatically assumes I'm selfish. I don't think I am, but whatever.

I love how philosophical and worldly everyone is about this, it's hilarious when you step back and think "hold on, do people actually think this when they talk about kids? Ageing populations? Resources? Declining population?" :-D

I'm guessing you all totally disagree with the law in China, where they limit the families to one child only? (Not sure if they do any more, but I did hear about it in the past)

I genuinely think about it.It really worries me. And I wholeheartedly disagree with the law in China as their population is now ageing and will face many problems in the future because of it. But I would have supported it when it was introduced as the countries population was growing too large for its infrastructure to keep up and cope.

Dave! · 28-09-2015 09:40AM

No. I can never understand people repeating this point about overpopulation. Bill Maher does it all the time. Parts of the world are overpopulated, yes, and parts of the world are pure misery. In those places there may be a valid argument.

Ireland is one of the most prosperous countries in the world and does not suffer from overpopulation.

VisibleGorilla · 28-09-2015 09:42AM

If you can provide a safe, financially stable and loving environment for a child then no it is not cruel at all.

Is it selfish? 100% in my view.

28-09-2015 09:43AM

Turtwig wrote: »

Having children can only actually be selfish. The child gets no say in existence. The parent decides mostly all by themselves that for whatever reason they want kids. That's selfish.

I guess the issue with this debate - and I have seen the same debate often on many forums - usually multiple times - is that people are not really debating over whether it is selfish to have children or not - but over their own definition of what constitutes "selfish".

Not to single you out specifically - but you are just one example of many - and a recent one so I do not have to scroll back

So nothing personal! You have given your own definition of "selfish" here - as meaning they make the decision by themselves.

But the first dictionary definition I found says"(of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for other people; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure."

Now I would not assume that this definition fits yours at all. Sure the parents are making the decision themselves - but that they did so "lacking consideration for others" would be mere assumption. Many - myself included - made are decisions to parent very much considering others. What impact it would have on those already alive - what kind of life could be offered to the child(ren) of the union(s) - and much more.

So for me to be "selfish" you would have to be making your decisions without any consideration for others - including but not limited to the child(ren) you create. And I would say many - if not by far most - people who _choose_ to have children - are the exact opposite.

Starokan · 28-09-2015 10:02AM

I see the point your trying to make op but in fairness no one really thinks of the planet when they decide to have kids, does that make them cruel and selfish - no definitely not in my opinion.

Overpopulation is a divisive issue, many people maintain the world is overpopulated, many maintain it is not. Until its identified as a undisputed problem to the mainstream population I think you cannot really judge people's life choices.

The real problem is separation - on this thread you can see how people consider themselves completely separate to people living in less developed areas. We will never really solve the world's problems until we can forget about our own petty differences and work to solve the world's problems as one unit.

I can't see that happening in my lifetime though , I would say to make this world come together we would need a V type scenario where pesky aliens make us unite against a common enemy.

osarusan · 28-09-2015 10:06AM

Cruel? Don't be ridiculous.

764dak · 28-09-2015 10:18AM

This reminds of the time Facebook listed the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement as a suggested group for me to join. But I'm probably more of an involuntary celibate guy anyway.

NotCominBack · 28-09-2015 10:28AM

Dave! wrote: »

No. I can never understand people repeating this point about overpopulation. Bill Maher does it all the time. Parts of the world are overpopulated, yes, and parts of the world are pure misery. In those places there may be a valid argument.

Ireland is one of the most prosperous countries in the world and does not suffer from overpopulation.

You obviously weren't on my bus to work this morning

threeball · 28-09-2015 10:31AM

Ideally there should be a world wide limit of having 3 children, two replacements and a spare if you will. The 3rd child would offset some losses from premature deaths, people not having more than one or two or none at all. The world population needs to decrease back to about 5 billion or we're all well and truly screwed and 3 kids should be more than enough for anyone.

Off course common sense will not prevail and we'll have people bleeting on about their rights do as they please and this is not China etc. so instead we'll end up with massive food and water shortages in 50yrs which our grandkids can all die fighting wars over.

Is having children a cruel and purely selfish act?

Comments