U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-19-2014, 08:37 AM
 
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,071 posts, read 2,893,455 times
Reputation: 1935

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Some would say that humans are evil and destructive, and have no business being the "stewards" of anything, let along the universe.
I think we've made mistakes in the past, but we learned from them, and humanity is in a continuous process of societal evolution to improve itself. If we ever discover an emerging intelligent species out there, they will need our guidance at some point.

Quote:
Besides, why does the universe even need a steward? It got along for 14 billion years just fine, without humans.
To give it greater meaning and to preserve its beauty and grandeur.

Quote:
Sentient life is an abomination, for it raises too many tensions and contradictions. It is our great misfortune that the evolutionary processes on earth led eventually to life, and then to complex life, and then to self-aware life
You have just destroyed your own argument, sir. We became intelligent through the natural process of evolution. As a Deist, I believe God wrote the laws of nature for the Purpose of the creation of intelligent beings to share existence, but even just looking at history, we are the natural result, clearly not an abomination. I think preserving humanity is a noble purpose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-19-2014, 09:31 AM
 
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,071 posts, read 2,893,455 times
Reputation: 1935
Stephen Jay Gould Quotes (Author of Wonderful Life)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Jay Gould
We have become, by the power of a glorious evolutionary accident called intelligence, the stewards of life's continuity on earth. We did not ask for this role, but we cannot abjure it. We may not be suited to it, but here we are.
I don't often quote him since, as a Deist, I believe in God, and Gould is an atheist, but I agree with him here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 08:50 PM
 
195 posts, read 228,787 times
Reputation: 154
I have no obligation to continue anything, and neither does anyone else. What you AINT got is the right to point gov't guns at me and force me to surrender ANY part of what I legally earned. Which is what taxes are, including property taxes used to "educate" the kids that you shouldn't be having if you can't pay for their education by yourself. It's those having kids that they can't raise properly who are the hogs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2014, 07:06 AM
 
Location: The City That Never Sleeps
2,043 posts, read 4,844,252 times
Reputation: 3336
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoss View Post
I have no obligation to continue anything, and neither does anyone else. What you AINT got is the right to point gov't guns at me and force me to surrender ANY part of what I legally earned. Which is what taxes are, including property taxes used to "educate" the kids that you shouldn't be having if you can't pay for their education by yourself. It's those having kids that they can't raise properly who are the hogs.
thank you. seriously. I always say in reference to the bible thumpers and other fundamentalists on reproductive issues: people should practice what they preach; you picked your religion, you follow it. leave others alone. they have to follow their own beliefs. it's like they have no obligation to follow what they "believe" but they impose it on everyone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2014, 08:25 AM
 
1,279 posts, read 1,405,910 times
Reputation: 2455
I read most of the arguments and counter arguments and TBH the answer is very simple. It can be summed up in a few sentences.

First of all I'm highly religious. However, last time I checked NOWHERE does it say in any of the books from the three major monotheistic religions that NOT having kids is a sin that will lead you to burn in hell. So please leave religion out of this discussion.

The simple answer is that its the individuals choice. There is no right answer or wrong answer. Which ever option you choose, just make sure you are happy with the decision.

The ONLY scenario I can think of where having a kid would be wrong is if you do not have the ability to take care of the child financially, emotionally and/or socially.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2014, 09:52 AM
 
Location: The City That Never Sleeps
2,043 posts, read 4,844,252 times
Reputation: 3336
Of course. Most reasonable people agree that it's an individual choice. But here is the problem: it's socially unacceptable to say in public, in a social situation, "I don't have children because I JUST DON'T WANT TO. I am childfree by choice. I enjoy my free time, my money and I just want to keep my looks." This stigma especially hits women who say this. Men who say this seem to be treated with "ok" whatever.. (next subject....). When a woman says "not having children" many assume "gay/lesbian" or "weird". I find it just easier to say "I can't have because of infertility." Most people leave it alone at that. Further, many men don't want to hear that a woman just isn't interested in reproducing. So finding a long standing relationship with childfree men is nearly impossible as there seem to be very few of them. So we have to lie by saying "infertility" or reveal this info much later in the relationship.And then we have to be judged by the religious conservatives, breeding coworkers and other "institutions". It's not easy to live in a pro-reproductive world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2014, 05:17 PM
 
195 posts, read 228,787 times
Reputation: 154
If you aint clearing at the very least, 80k per year (between 2 parents) you can't properly raise a kid. You need to be putting 30k a year into retirement-investments, and the kid costs $20 per year to raise properly. You will be foisting your failures as a parent off on the rest of society. The money has to come first. Having kids can wait until you're 40-odd years old. If you haven't been able to build up at least 1/2 million $ of net worth, in 40 years of work (between the 2 of you, ) how can you possibly afford to raise a kid properly?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2014, 05:19 PM
 
195 posts, read 228,787 times
Reputation: 154
YOu have to provide at least 100k worth of beyond high school education for the kid, you need at least 15k per year worth of baby sitting the first 8 or so years of each kid's life. For all but a few, the choices are, don't have a kid, or do a bad job of raising them, (and let society cover the 30k per year cost of locking them up or keeping them on welfare, with the cops called on them every year or 2.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,698 posts, read 23,572,738 times
Reputation: 35448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystique13 View Post
Of course. Most reasonable people agree that it's an individual choice. But here is the problem: it's socially unacceptable to say in public, in a social situation, "I don't have children because I JUST DON'T WANT TO. I am childfree by choice. I enjoy my free time, my money and I just want to keep my looks." This stigma especially hits women who say this. Men who say this seem to be treated with "ok" whatever.. (next subject....). When a woman says "not having children" many assume "gay/lesbian" or "weird". I find it just easier to say "I can't have because of infertility." Most people leave it alone at that. Further, many men don't want to hear that a woman just isn't interested in reproducing. So finding a long standing relationship with childfree men is nearly impossible as there seem to be very few of them. So we have to lie by saying "infertility" or reveal this info much later in the relationship.And then we have to be judged by the religious conservatives, breeding coworkers and other "institutions". It's not easy to live in a pro-reproductive world.
I agree. But I am stubborn. In the past, when asked "Why don't you have kids?" I have always stated simply, "I don't have children because I don't want them." Cue the crickets chirping. Now that I am passed childbearing age when I am asked why didn't you have kids, it's "I didn't have them because I didn't want them." The tense of the inquiry changes slightly but the reaction never changes. Silence and crickets and my refusal to offer justification for my decision.

I am normally not a rude person but when people think they have the right to ask a personal question they get terse reply because I believe the reason for my decision to not have children is a personal question.

I have always felt what I chose to do with my uterus was my business and no one else's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 07:02 AM
 
Location: Guangzhou, China
9,762 posts, read 13,307,777 times
Reputation: 11300
This is all weird for me to hear... I've lived for most of my adult life in LA, SF, Seattle, and Boston... fairly liberal cities, all of them. In LA and SF, if you say that you don't want kids, it probably increases your chances of finding a date or at least finding common ground with the people you're talking to. In Seattle or Boston, even if the person you're talking to has and loves children, they just figure it's none of their business - and probably wouldn't ask if you wanted them unless you were on the topic of childrearing in the first place.

Saying that I did want children in LA and SF actually alienated me somewhat from a lot of my peers, at least when it came to plans for the future, because they planned to stay child-free for the rest of their lives and I figured that in the next 5 or so years, I'd start looking to start a family. I always found it ironic, because the complaint I hear from childfree people all the time is that the friends they had who decided to start a family and "used to be cool" turned their backs on them...

In any case, as far as the OP's question goes: no, it's neither inherently selfish or unselfish to decide you don't want to have kids, and it's ultimately no one's business one way or the other why you decided not to have them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:56 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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