Reading this article and watching this random video put me in high key stress mode. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0Zxvr2NjDA&feature=youtu.be...
Add : bringing in a fully autonomous individual motivated by the hope+belief+expectation that they will be there when you grow old?
Small chance, considering that the human trait which they need to be subscribed to is empathy, self-lessness and family.
A lot of which will be learnt from their own parents. Namely you.
wanting to have a child as to not be lonely in life is terrible? most kids are had for no reason at all, and its not terrible either. plus, I am pretty sure for 3 billion people in asia, this is part of the culture.
Of course it's for the parents. You can't make a child "for the child", since it doesn't exist (and doesn't care) until you gave life to it.
I don't have kids, and I've been told on several occasions that I was selfish for not doing so. Isn't it more selfish to have kids (who didn't ask for being born) for one's own joy?
However I don't think we can call having children a selfish act, it's pretty hard wired in us to do it. It's at least no more selfish than your average human.
There's a lot of positive things you can do for the environment: less or no (air, car) travel, avoid plastic and downcycling your waste, avoiding meat. As our population size increases the one best thing you can do for the environment is not having kids and if you do have kids stay as close to the amount of 1.
But having less people, especially in rich parts of the world, means they won't be able to develop technology to control the climate and, travel to other planets, and do all the other awesome things people do.
Besides whats the point of saving the environment if there are no people to enjoy it.
Sure, and one crazy narcissistic politician can also destroy Earth. That's not the point; the point is that on average, a child is going to have an average meaningful impact, and we cannot sustain the projected growth if we keep going on like we are right now. For example, those rich people you're so enthusiastic about are eating a lot of cow meat which has a terrible Co2 footprint.
> (maybe a little bit slower).
That's a good thing. If we're slower we'll be able to have more advanced technology.
Its extremely arrogant to believe that your rich kid is going to make the difference in the world. Statistically, it won't.
> Besides whats the point of saving the environment if there are no people to enjoy it.
If you decide to not procreate there will still be people to live on Earth.
If we destroy Earth for human inhabitation that doesn't equal all life is extinct.
> having a child is for the parents, not the child.
It's beyond me how you can even write such a statement. Children are not things. They are not property. They are not "for" anything.
Children are human. They are independent individuals. You can't own them, you can't abuse them, you can't ruin their lives just because you once decided to have unprotected sex.
> its sad that people have forgotten that.
That's like saying that it's sad that people forgot how natural and beneficial slavery is. With a mindset like that, I'd say that even a dog would be too big a responsibility. Get a Roomba instead. At least it won't suffer because of you.
> and its not terrible either.
Oh yes, it is. More often than not.
> this is part of the culture
That says literally nothing about how good - in just about any sense of the word - it is. I believe you're a strong supporter of death by stoning too - it's a cultural thing, after all.
Is being young and dumb a good reason? Social pressure?
Personally, I think publicly auditing other people's life decisions like this is just tacky and rude, and informs me more about the critic than the subject.
Happens to me, too - I chose not to spawn, and for some reason a lot of people feel entitled to tell me all sorts of things this fact tells them about me. I'm tired of it, and have begun replying with my views of their moral myopathy, manners and occasionally, breeding.
So don't have to go into this whole hog; don't need anybody else involved to make it work; and no unsurmountable reason to delay?
The future literally belongs to those who agree with the grandparent poster.
It might be your purpose, or even most people's purpose, but there are plenty that frankly just aren't that interested.
You're reiterating what I said above.
>...outliers like that tend to be self weeding anyway; no reason to shame the individual over it.
I'm not sure what you mean or are implying with the "self-weeding" terminology.
He was unfortunately estranged from his ex-wife and kids ... so as he approached his last days, my dad helped him with more and more things, including medical visits, etc. When he passed, he left him his car in his will. I still think about the guy from time to time.
If you half-ass it for the wrong reasons, of course not.
But the same thing is true, but with higher costs (both economical and psychological), if you have your own child with the same attitude.