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.
What I can't believe is that so many people actually care what others do in their personal lives. I don't think whether other people have kids or not is any of my business.
I can't believe it either. But, I've had people actually get offended and shocked when they find out I don't have kids and I won't. It's as if some people - strangers usually - are honestly pissed off at the notion.
Some people can't fathom a world where everyone doesn't have kids. When one woman found out I had fertility problems and I had decided to accept it and not go the expensive, crazy IVF type routes, she told me I should go to CPS and just "pick up a baby" on my way home from work, and that I could also get $300 a month per kid. (just what she claims, I dunno, as if that somehow would make me change my mind) She made it sound like a casual trip to Wal-Mart to pick up some items. It was really weird. She just couldn't fathom that I wouldn't have kids.
You guys are missing the real point. Thing is, we live in society. Which means, someone has to do the replacement. It doesn't matter who (it actually does, but not for the sake of this discussion), it only matters that it gets done. If you don't want to deal with the idiosyncrasies of physically raising your replacement, that's quite alright. You're still gonna pay your share of the cost though. No free lunch.
You want the poor, uneducated and/or those less likely to analyze the full impact of child-rearing on their personal and economic lives, to have the kids for you? You're cutting the check. Simple as that.
So in reality, all is well. What I don't like hearing is these DINKS bemoaning the wealth re-distribution. It's the cost of society, fellas. Otherwise, influence the replacements on your own accord, if you really feel passionately about getting your tax money's worth.
Of course the article doesn't touch on that inevitable opportunity cost. I think most DINKs can afford it. The problem is that money doesn't buy everything. You really can't influence these underclass spawn by remote control. You need physical and lasting role models in order to create repeatable results. That's the only true selfishness of the childless couple. The poor don't think that far ahead. They just like having babies at other people's expense. Plus misery loves company. Not exactly a recipe for a progressive globally competitive society....
If people want to think of intentionally childless people, couples in particular (seriously, who would judge a SINGLE adult for not having children??) as selfish good for them. My husband and I are choosing not to have kids. We have our reasons, and yes I have so say those reasons to some may seem selfish or lazy. But as countless people in this thread have pointed out, that's a more responsible decision than having kids we don't have the energy/want/money/patience/etc for. We have priorities in our lives and our marriage that would by default have to be put off or given up if we had children and were good responsible parents. Honestly, I think we would be good parents, in some ways, but we just don't want to be.
Personally what I find odd is how people seem to have trouble wrapping their heads around others not wanting children. Not being judgemental, just not understanding the decision or not taking it seriously. Especially when you work with kids, THAT one is hard for people to understand. How can you like working with kids but not want your own? I just find it odd how people always assume everyone is going to have kids. Even I do it sometimes. Strange, really.
I think being child-less in this era is a smart and compassionate choice. I have four grown children. I don't want each of them to bring another 16 children into the world as it is today because I feel like we are living on borrowed time. There are too many consumers on the earth now and nature will likely scale that back drastically in my lifetime. That is why I feel the way I do about people considering having children at this time in history.
My brother and his wife, married 40 years did not have children and the world has to be a better place.
I have a brother like that. He and his wife have been married about the same amount of time and it is a good thing they did not have children because they, frankly, could not have been as self-sacrificing as is needed to rear a child properly.
If people want to think of intentionally childless people, couples in particular (seriously, who would judge a SINGLE adult for not having children??) as selfish good for them. My husband and I are choosing not to have kids. We have our reasons, and yes I have so say those reasons to some may seem selfish or lazy. But as countless people in this thread have pointed out, that's a more responsible decision than having kids we don't have the energy/want/money/patience/etc for. We have priorities in our lives and our marriage that would by default have to be put off or given up if we had children and were good responsible parents. Honestly, I think we would be good parents, in some ways, but we just don't want to be.
Personally what I find odd is how people seem to have trouble wrapping their heads around others not wanting children. Not being judgemental, just not understanding the decision or not taking it seriously. Especially when you work with kids, THAT one is hard for people to understand. How can you like working with kids but not want your own? I just find it odd how people always assume everyone is going to have kids. Even I do it sometimes. Strange, really.
~Katy
I envy those who have the maturity and forethought to actually PLAN their lives in this way. So many people just let life happen and don't even think about what they are getting into.
I'll never judge a child free person, ever. I can close my eyes and imagine that life, it sounds different...But good! If I had not been able to have children, or meet my spouse, or my life worked out different and I was child free, there are plenty of things to do and ways of being I might have enjoyed.
Infact, if children are not something you desire, it would be a selfless act (not selfish) to let them go I'd think.
My wife of 22 years and myself decided before marriage that we would not have children.
Life is good for the both of us.
From a societal standpoint the reason why you are seeing articles like this one from TIME magazine is the population is seeing the effects of a crumbling infrastructure, morel decay and debauchery, high unemployment, extreme debt, homelessness, hopelessness, high suicide rates, increased violent crime and the selfishness of the few at the expense of the many.
When I see a woman who's pregnant or a young family at the grocery store I have to wonder what level of blind hope in a dying society led that person(s) to the decision to bring another living being into a cesspool.
I'm not a pessimist but I do see what's going on around me just like others do, thus one of the main reasons never to be controlled by animal instinct at the cost of common sense.
Last edited by julian17033; 08-06-2013 at 07:07 AM..
I have been impressed by the intelligent reasoning of the majority of the posts here. That is something I did not expect to find. I did of course end up seeing a few bigots, and that was disappointing, even though I had expected more. Perhaps my hopes were just lifted by how many rational people came to post.
To respond to hindsight, an ironic name given the post, the DINKS are already paying taxes for services they won't consume to subsidize those with more children. Stating that the society must create new people at an arbitrary rate and that dinks have no choice in the matter is imposing tyranny. They might disagree about the need to create more people and may feel that the earth's resources are already being utilized at a very reasonable rate. To tell them, "If you won't have the child, we are going to have it for you and then come to your home and take the resources you are working for" deserves to be met with the barrel of a rifle.
I'm not opposed to a reasonable system of taxation, but claims that your decision to have a child does not create a divine right to the property of others. If you considered this on a smaller scale and respected resources as time, you might see the absurdity of it. If your made it your neighborhoods responsibility (against their will), and declared to your neighbor, "My wife is now pregnant, you will be required to work an extra two hours each week to support our child" you would probably be concerned about the negative reaction to your demand.
I will gladly bear the taxation burden to subsidize birth control options so more couples can choose to remain child-free. There are six billion people on the planet. That's quite enough. Lets focus on saving the lives of those that are in dire need, rather than on creating new lives. That is where I voluntarily give my money. Once they can all eat, then we can discuss "needing" to create and pay for new life. Until then, I can respect people choosing to create their own child and provide for it, but not people choosing to create a child and declare that I must pay for theirs.
You guys are missing the real point. Thing is, we live in society. Which means, someone has to do the replacement. It doesn't matter who (it actually does, but not for the sake of this discussion), it only matters that it gets done. If you don't want to deal with the idiosyncrasies of physically raising your replacement, that's quite alright. You're still gonna pay your share of the cost though. No free lunch.
You want the poor, uneducated and/or those less likely to analyze the full impact of child-rearing on their personal and economic lives, to have the kids for you? You're cutting the check. Simple as that.
So in reality, all is well. What I don't like hearing is these DINKS bemoaning the wealth re-distribution. It's the cost of society, fellas. Otherwise, influence the replacements on your own accord, if you really feel passionately about getting your tax money's worth.
Of course the article doesn't touch on that inevitable opportunity cost. I think most DINKs can afford it. The problem is that money doesn't buy everything. You really can't influence these underclass spawn by remote control. You need physical and lasting role models in order to create repeatable results. That's the only true selfishness of the childless couple. The poor don't think that far ahead. They just like having babies at other people's expense. Plus misery loves company. Not exactly a recipe for a progressive globally competitive society....
It doesn't bother me one bit to pay the taxes, etc and I have not once ever said otherwise. OK?
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.
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.
