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.
Funny that people who are pro-natalist often argument that having children is right because only an infinitesimal minority of people regret existence... But looking at this thread I saw quite a few people who prefer never had been born and are against procreation. As everyone can see, people who are dissatisfied with life are not as rare as pro-natalist argument...
The day I believe the misanthropes on C-D represent the population as a whole is the day I give up period.
It has nothing to do with misanthropy. I have suffered in my life and I think it would be better never have been.
I don't want to bring children to a world of futility, meaninglessness and suffering. I recognize procreation as an immoral and irrational act.
It has nothing to do with misanthropy. I have suffered in my life and I think it would be better never have been.
I don't want to bring children to a world of futility, meaninglessness and suffering. I recognize procreation as an immoral and irrational act.
Your world, not mine. Not everybody's.
Your so-called recognition about procreation is merely an opinion. Sorry.
That said...I still don't think having kids or not is anyone else's business other than the individual's. It's a good choice for you not to have kids, given your feelings.
If a person is so illiterate they don't know the differences between common-usage words, I don't think they can form a cogent argument in favor of their point of view.
Is that the excuse you are using now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider
You are demonstrating neither literacy nor intelligence by failing to recognize that the meanings and usages of words evolve over time. Even going back to my 1976 edition of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language shows an overlap in the meanings of "jealous" and "envious" and lists them as partial synonyms.
Only an insufferable pedant and snob resists all change. Do you continue to spell the word "canyon" as canon (with a tilde over the first "n") just because that was the usage about 100 years ago, as we see in the writings of Jack London in The Call of the Wild and of Zane Grey in Riders of the Purple Sage?
Excellent riposte.
Hey Tele-Cat,
I recommend you pay close attention and take notes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn
I'm surprised he is giving anyone a hard time given that he continually uses the word breeder incorrectly.
To be perfectly honest, I find it much more satisfying to watch him wallow in his own ignorance.
Your so-called recognition about procreation is merely an opinion. Sorry.
That said...I still don't think having kids or not is anyone else's business other than the individual's. It's a good choice for you not to have kids, given your feelings.
Are you denying that is there futility and suffering in the world?
***Note: My use of the term "you" is generalized and applies to human beings in general. My comments are not directed to anyone personally***
I think having children, even under the "right" circumstances (ie. being married, having a job, car, house, insurance, healthcare, etc.) isselfish. No child asks to be born. He or she is brought into this world against his/her own will.
Also, how arrogant of anyone to assume that if a child could choose to be born, that he/she would choose to have the DNA of you (the collective you)? Like any child would want to have/be raised by a drug addicted parent, or pedophile parent, an alcoholic parent, a racist parent, a sociopathic parent, etc. and all the DNA markers that go with that. Moreover, what child would choose to have DNA riddled with diabetes, heart disease, cancer, stroke, Tay-Sachs, Sickle cell, etc?
I think it is selfish to bring a child into this world. This world has rapists, kidnappers, murderers, bullies, poverty, sexism, racism, misogyny, gov't corruption, police brutality, etc. I think the ultimate way anyone could demonstrate their true love for their child is to never conceive one in the first place.
By never conceiving a child to begin with, you will have ultimately protected your child from a life of pain and misery (whether that pain and misery comes from the world or that pain and misery comes from having you [the collective you] and your other co-parent as parents).
I think it is selfish to bring a child into this world. This world has rapists, kidnappers, murderers, bullies, poverty, sexism, racism, misogyny, gov't corruption, police brutality, etc. I think the ultimate way anyone could demonstrate their true love for their child is to never conceive one in the first place.
By never conceiving a child to begin with, you will have ultimately protected your child from a life of pain and misery (whether that pain and misery comes from the world or that pain and misery comes from having you [the collective you] and your other co-parent as parents).
This thought process--and that of many people posting in this thread--seems very divergent from the societal norm. If the majority of the world thought this way, there would be no more human race, as procreation levels would be too low to sustain the population.
I do not, and there is plenty of proof that society does not, accept this way of thinking as reasonable, and the conclusions as valid. I believe this is an aberrant mindset resulting from depression. The last statement about the "ultimate protection" sounds eerily similar to statements made by those suffering from postpartum depression.
The way social security and medicare (or the social support system du jour, or even the basic economy) are structured is for those of working age to support the very young and the very old consumers who cannot work. When you pay in to social security, you aren't banking up money for 40 years down the road when you hit retirement age, you were supporting the elderly of that time. If the population ages and fewer young workers pay into the system, these social programs will be cut back or fail.
The same is true of the overall economy; if the flow of new workers is suddenly cut off by a dramatic drop in birth rates, the economy will collapse and all your investments and savings will become meaningless, witness [the less extreme case of] Japan's economic stagnation which is primarily due to their low birth rate.
Therefore, you should recognize that the people who choose to have children are performing the basic task required for society to function. Having kids is akin to maintaining roads or other essential infrastructure. It's just as silly to complain about school taxes that help maintain the workforce as it is to complain about gas taxes that help maintain your street.
This is a good point. Unless there are more and more workers paying taxes and Social Security, our social safety nets will fail. However I would like to point out that if our economy is in danger of collapsing, the villains are not childfree couples but mega corporations. Big corporations save money by relocating their factories to foreign countries, whose workers do not pay U.S. taxes. More to the point, these workers don't pay Social Security taxes. The merchandise may be cheaper, but it's cheaper because of non-U.S. labor. So if you want to be truly unselfish and support our social programs, buy American-made goods whenever possible, and don't shop at Wal-Mart.
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.
