U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-18-2009, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Right Here
296 posts, read 584,578 times
Reputation: 190

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by brightdoglover View Post
(Disclaimer: I am childfree by choice, currently 56, might have lost one great guy over the issue, and have never had a moment of wavering- known as an "Early Adopter" I suppose).
Regarding the idea that "we are here to reproduce" (whether one is a believer or not, and I am an atheist, too), I think the basic urge, the "natural" thing, is to have sex. Reproduction is built into the sex system. Note that people who cannot reproduce for whatever reason still desire sex. I think it's a wickedly clever way to have the species continue, to built mindless reproduction into a very different act and desire.
I do think that we haven't caught up to the technologic and societal realities (at least in developed places) that childbearing/reproduction is a choice, not a given, not a requirement, and not something that "just happens" and is a natural and unavoidable thing.
Thank heavens for birth control, and, in my case, tubal ligation, although I had trouble getting it until age 30 in an East Coast city. I didn't know enough to know that I could demand it or find some doctor who would do it.
Do remember that it's not just "couples" who don't want children, it's individuals, too. Some of those individuals find each other and become childfree couples. Not everyone needs to be in a couple to know they don't want to be parents.
Brilliant post! And from someone who is not just conjecturing about what life might be like without children.

And amazing point that people who cannot have children still desire sex. Very true. If the only point is to procreate then why would they still have a sex drive?

 
Old 06-18-2009, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,316,080 times
Reputation: 10915
Actually, I'm just projecting an image of the perfect world according to me. What I would find to be ideal.
 
Old 06-18-2009, 02:42 PM
 
179 posts, read 478,872 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelgirl View Post
If the only point is to procreate then why would they still have a sex drive?
That's not a very strong point....it's like asking "if the only point is to procreate, then why would they still have a desire to enjoy watching the sunset?"

having sex is something that humans to for pleasure. mind you, that not ALL humans actually enjoy having it! there are people who do not!

when i made the point that the goal/purpose of life is to reproduce, i was talking in the very general, and high level sense of the idea. Comparing us to an ant colony for example. Their main purpose, in my view, is to reproduce, make the colony bigger, take over larger surrounding areas, etc. etc.
 
Old 06-18-2009, 02:44 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,316,080 times
Reputation: 10915
Quote:
Originally Posted by msconnie73 View Post
What if you are contagious but otherwise don't feel too sick to work? Is it fair on your coworkers to expose them to your germs? I'd rather pick up the slack for a sick coworker versus catching their illness. Please stay home!
The strong survive. Besides, I don't come into close contact with the other workers. We can't afford the time to work together on things. In other words, you want to work with us, you had better be capable of picking up that 100 pounds all by yourself.
 
Old 06-18-2009, 05:09 PM
 
12,510 posts, read 13,124,841 times
Reputation: 8932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimatetruth View Post
when i made the point that the goal/purpose of life is to reproduce, i was talking in the very general, and high level sense of the idea. Comparing us to an ant colony for example. Their main purpose, in my view, is to reproduce, make the colony bigger, take over larger surrounding areas, etc. etc.
that is not a "high level" sense of idea at all, it is actually the reverse, the lowest level possible. It's pretty clear cut the phrase you used, you called it the ultimate purpose for humans. And your answer is pretty clear to, to reproduce.

But to view humans as nothing more than an ant colony, that is proof and evidence that it is the lowest level of idea. It is what it is. Just don't pass it off as a "high level" idea because it isn't. If that is the grandest and biggest thinking you have, then so be it. But that is highest level for you that you are capable of embracing as a vision. It is NOT the highest level idea of humans or for humans. There is a difference.

Best wishes to you, and please continue to live in the question, that is the fertile place where adventure and growth and expansion occur, and yes high level ideas.
 
Old 06-18-2009, 08:56 PM
 
179 posts, read 478,872 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
that is not a "high level" sense of idea at all, it is actually the reverse, the lowest level possible. It's pretty clear cut the phrase you used, you called it the ultimate purpose for humans. And your answer is pretty clear to, to reproduce.

But to view humans as nothing more than an ant colony, that is proof and evidence that it is the lowest level of idea. It is what it is. Just don't pass it off as a "high level" idea because it isn't. If that is the grandest and biggest thinking you have, then so be it. But that is highest level for you that you are capable of embracing as a vision. It is NOT the highest level idea of humans or for humans. There is a difference.

Best wishes to you, and please continue to live in the question, that is the fertile place where adventure and growth and expansion occur, and yes high level ideas.

lol wow!
i've never encountered someone who doesn't know what HIGH LEVEL means! it has nothing to do with quality of the idea....

what it means is that it's the broadest view.....as in zoom out far far back and look at the big picture. you obviously misunderstood everything i said. lol

don't think too hard....your head might hurt. lol
 
Old 06-18-2009, 09:08 PM
 
16 posts, read 116,336 times
Reputation: 66
Some people aren't meant to be parents. If they're wise enough to know that they're not cut out for such a responsibility, then more power to them. There are alot of people out there who get pregnant and should never have children, whether it be for reasons of immaturity, financially unstable, single mothers who can't afford to support themselves (let alone another life), etc. etc. etc. We shouldn't criticize those who are being true to themselves and feel they do not want children. That's their business and theirs alone. The problem with this world is that everybody sticks their nose into everybody else's business.
 
Old 06-18-2009, 11:12 PM
Status: "Done with the 90s (hopefully)?" (set 3 days ago)
 
Location: East Central Phoenix
5,421 posts, read 8,313,581 times
Reputation: 5783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimatetruth View Post
Well,
as an Athiest, i must say that in my opinion, the ONLY real purpose/goal of humanity is to 'reproduce'. (that's not to say that being kind to others and creating a pleasant world as opposed to a negative atmosphere has no value; but if you really think about it, the only thing humans (and other animals like ants, etc.) are here for, are to reproduce and compete in the food chain....but let's not get too much into the religious aspect of things i guess...)

So, to the original poster, i DO think that it is "abnormal" to 'not' have kids....because you're essentially going against the 'ultimate purpose' of humanity....that said, i do think that it is your choice and one that if thought through and made with patience and a though process, can work great for you. You could spend more time with your hubby and do things that you typically wouldn't be able to do...(like travel the world much more easily).

That said, i also think that you might be creating a lonely world for yourselves later on in life....no kids typically means far fewer relatives to care for you and be with you in later stages of your lives.
I won't argue that procreation and competing in the food chain is part of nature for both humans and animals. My problem is when you stated that not having children is "abnormal". The way I see it, there are many valid reasons why couples may not reproduce. People with medical issues may not be physically able to bear children, or may decide that it would be more humane to not pass a serious medical condition onto offspring. There is also the cost burden to consider. The way I see it, having children is like having anything else in life: if you can afford it, fine ... but if you can't afford all the costs on your own, you have no right to have it. People that have children without being financially able to are essentially a burden on taxpayers because they rely more on government aid than those who are childless.

Regarding the "loneliness" concern, that shouldn't even be an issue. Who cares if a couple has the desire to be by themselves with fewer relatives? In many aspects, fewer family members in the picture would be appealing because there is reduced stress in terms of less tension, fewer fights, and more time for themselves to enjoy each other ... not be burdened with relatives butting in.

The decision to procreate or not is strictly a personal matter which is absolutely nobody else's business. The topic of children can contribute to why marriages break up. For instance, when I was married, neither my wife or I wanted children at first. We were very comfortable and happy with our lives. However, a lot of our nosey family & friends badgered us about why we didn't have kids. My wife eventually caved in, told me she changed her mind and wanted children. That's when the marriage took a turn for the worst, and ended in divorce. Some of us simply believe that kids are a burden in many ways. Not everybody is meant to procreate for different reasons. Not everyone has to be a breeder just because we have the "parts" for doing so.
 
Old 06-19-2009, 06:02 AM
 
7,683 posts, read 11,301,809 times
Reputation: 15276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native View Post
The decision to procreate or not is strictly a personal matter which is absolutely nobody else's business.
When my wife and I were younger, we would routinely be asked why we didn't have children. (And not just by friends; even mere acquaintances at parties would pose the question.) I got tired of explaining why I never wanted to have children. I finally came up with a standard response that usually put an end to the bothersome questions. I would turn to the person (or couple) and say:

"Well, there are only two possible reasons. Either we didn't want any children or, due to medical reasons, we couldn't have any children."

I never had to say anything further. Usually, after a brief, uncomfortable silence (uncomfortable for them, not me), they would change the subject.

Only once did I have someone nosy enough to ask a follow-up question.
 
Old 06-19-2009, 07:20 AM
 
179 posts, read 478,872 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native View Post
I won't argue that procreation and competing in the food chain is part of nature for both humans and animals. My problem is when you stated that not having children is "abnormal". The way I see it, there are many valid reasons why couples may not reproduce. People with medical issues may not be physically able to bear children, or may decide that it would be more humane to not pass a serious medical condition onto offspring. There is also the cost burden to consider. The way I see it, having children is like having anything else in life: if you can afford it, fine ... but if you can't afford all the costs on your own, you have no right to have it. People that have children without being financially able to are essentially a burden on taxpayers because they rely more on government aid than those who are childless.

Regarding the "loneliness" concern, that shouldn't even be an issue. Who cares if a couple has the desire to be by themselves with fewer relatives? In many aspects, fewer family members in the picture would be appealing because there is reduced stress in terms of less tension, fewer fights, and more time for themselves to enjoy each other ... not be burdened with relatives butting in.

The decision to procreate or not is strictly a personal matter which is absolutely nobody else's business. The topic of children can contribute to why marriages break up. For instance, when I was married, neither my wife or I wanted children at first. We were very comfortable and happy with our lives. However, a lot of our nosey family & friends badgered us about why we didn't have kids. My wife eventually caved in, told me she changed her mind and wanted children. That's when the marriage took a turn for the worst, and ended in divorce. Some of us simply believe that kids are a burden in many ways. Not everybody is meant to procreate for different reasons. Not everyone has to be a breeder just because we have the "parts" for doing so.
well, "abnormal" means that it is against the norm which even with your description is true. not being "able" to conceive is "abnormal"...meaning that it's not "typical". i don't mean "abnormal" as something bad....i mean simply that it's against the 'norm'. :-)

that said, i do agree with you 100%. everything you said is valid. i do believe that it's a personal choice and one that is nobody else's business really! :-)

i did ask my mom this question yesterday to see what she thinks....she agreed with me but said that you don't know the joy and the feeling you get from having a baby until you do. and you don't know what you're missing until you do have a baby.
i'm 28 and unmarried but with a steady gf. Future will tell if she's right :-)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top