Your opinions on having kids?

[Skwidward]

Do your religious/non-religious beliefs affect your opinions?

Bertrand Russell claimed that in order to be truly happy and feel part of the human race one must have kids.

I have a step son, and the responsibility does stop many things I wanna do. My wife and I have the freedom in summer when he's at his Dad's, and it is nice; but I do miss him. I've always been one to up and move at the drop of hat with ambitions of living all over the world. The beauty of the situation with my step son is that he'll be off to college when I'm 37-plenty of time for crazy live change **** later too. I have also scoffed at soccer mums and family **** quite a bit too, and I'm extremely selfish. However, I have also always wanted a daughter-since before I even met my wife. Not having a another child would allow me to do things I feel I want to do, but I fear it may also be something I'd regret on my death bed or in my "Grandpa" years.

A few years back my wife had a surprise ectopic pregnancy. It was an extremely strange experience learning of my wife's pregnancy and within the hour its abortion. So that kinda has me scared too.

Another thing I'd like to add is that if I ever lost my wife, I'd be lost. It would awesome to have at least a piece of her left. I don't know if anyone's ever used that as a pro for having a kid, but to me, it's quite a significant one.

[NotStandingBy]

Adopt. I am planning to adopt many children. Save their life. Please.

[powerman2000]

Do your religious/non-religious beliefs affect your opinions?

Nope.

[JAGERBOY]

Do my non-religious beliefs affect it? No, not at all. With that said, I'm 27 and still have absolutely no urge to have kids, I don't see the appeal, looks like more negative than positive.

[Skwidward]

In my experience non-religious people tend to either hold off on having kids or do not have kids at all, whereas religious people have kids.

Obviously the non-religious persons believes (or knows) that their very purpose is to perpetuate the human race, yet so many of them choose not to. I find that strange.

Of course that's a generalization.

[_AdaM_]

Do my non-religious beliefs affect it? No, not at all. With that said, I'm 27 and still have absolutely no urge to have kids, I don't see the appeal, looks like more negative than positive.

You do realize that if you get your kid at lets say post 30 years of age. When they're 15, you're an oldie.

Me, I want to have at least 2 kids before 30

[AKR]

Do your religious/non-religious beliefs affect your opinions?

Bertrand Russell claimed that in order to be truly happy and feel part of the human race one must have kids.

I have a step son, and the responsibility does stop many things I wanna do. My wife and I have the freedom in summer when he's at his Dad's, and it is nice; but I do miss him. I've always been one to up and move at the drop of hat with ambitions of living all over the world. The beauty of the situation with my step son is that he'll be off to college when I'm 37-plenty of time for crazy live change **** later too. I have also scoffed at soccer mums and family **** quite a bit too, and I'm extremely selfish. However, I have also always wanted a daughter-since before I even met my wife. Not having a another child would allow me to do things I feel I want to do, but I fear it may also be something I'd regret on my death bed or in my "Grandpa" years.

A few years back my wife had a surprise ectopic pregnancy. It was an extremely strange experience learning of my wife's pregnancy and within the hour its abortion. So that kinda has me scared too.

Another thing I'd like to add is that if I ever lost my wife, I'd be lost. It would awesome to have at least a piece of her left. I don't know if anyone's ever used that as a pro for having a kid, but to me, it's quite a significant one.

Dude, that seems pretty f*cked up to create someone just so you can have "a piece" of your wife. I mean, how would that kid feel, knowing that you created him/her so you could be reminded of your wife?

You bring up selfishness. Personally, I don't think it's more selfish to not have kids. Creating children in itself is a selfish act. If anyone says they're doing it to share their love and share the world, they're full of it. If you want to share, share with a child that already exists, otherwise, you're just showing you're doing it out of selfishness.

I really don't know how anyone can feel they're justified in creating children. Everyone seems to think that they have magical genes, and that their child will be totally special and exempt from the risks involved in life. They're child won't possibly want to commit suicide and/or wish they were never born. And let's also ignore the fact that another human means a greater strain on resources and great output of pollution. Oh no, that's negative thinking, and we can't have that. Let's just ignore reality so we can all feel good about popping out babies.


And Bertrand Russell can suck my balls. That's pretty stupid to claim that people who do not want to or cannot make babies don't feel a part of the human race or can't be happy. ****, there's a whole culture of "child free" adults who do not want children and couldn't be happier about it. I'm part of it. Not having kids was the best thing I've ever done for myself and for the rest of the world. Not just because I'm happier, but because Bipolar runs in my genes (fortunately, I don't have it), and I don't want to add to the most destructive species on the planet.

[MarkA15]

The bible doesn't require me to have children or have a wife. Does my faith effect me? Yes it does. Though I humbly admit, it is hard to persevere with God.

[JAGERBOY]

You do realize that if you get your kid at lets say post 30 years of age. When they're 15, you're an oldie.

Me, I want to have at least 2 kids before 30

Meh, why though? Whats the attraction to wanting a child? I just don't get it. I always thought by the time I was in my mid to late twenties Id want kids, but it still isn't appealing. Maybe it will change if/when I actually have a serious relationship.

[BroncManiac]

28 and still have no urge to have children. I still feel like a big kid sometimes. How the hell would I be able to handle a kid? I do have nieces and a nephew. Being around them makes me realize even more that I'm no where close to being able to care for a kid, that is, if I ever want any.

[Skwidward]

Great post!

Dude, that seems pretty f*cked up to create someone just so you can have "a piece" of your wife. I mean, how would that kid feel, knowing that you created him/her so you could be reminded of your wife?

I guess what I'm talking about here is creating a family, a "traditional" family, an entirely naturalistic family and perpetuating the "connection" I have made with this other human being in some way.

You bring up selfishness. Personally, I don't think it's more selfish to not have kids. Creating children in itself is a selfish act. If anyone says they're doing it to share their love and share the world, they're full of it. If you want to share, share with a child that already exists, otherwise, you're just showing you're doing it out of selfishness.

I disagree with you here entirely. If a couple want to create a family, and they have the means etc. to support such a family, they are more than entitled.

I really don't know how anyone can feel they're justified in creating children. Everyone seems to think that they have magical genes, and that their child will be totally special and exempt from the risks involved in life. They're child won't possibly want to commit suicide and/or wish they were never born. And let's also ignore the fact that another human means a greater strain on resources and great output of pollution. Oh no, that's negative thinking, and we can't have that. Let's just ignore reality so we can all feel good about popping out babies.

I heard something on the radio a while ago about someone who was not ever going to have kids in order to save the environment. This person was claiming what you claim-that having kids is selfish. Someone else asked, sure it's good etc. to save the environment, but if we aren't saving it for our children and our children's children, what are we saving it for?

That question is actually what sparked my thread, and AKR you hit it dead center. Thanks.

[AKR]

Great post!

I guess what I'm talking about here is creating a family, a "traditional" family, an entirely naturalistic family and perpetuating the "connection" I have made with this other human being in some way.

I disagree with you here entirely. If a couple want to create a family, and they have the means etc. to support such a family, they are more than entitled.


I heard something on the radio a while ago about someone who was not ever going to have kids in order to save the environment. This person was claiming what you claim-that having kids is selfish. Someone else asked, sure it's good etc. to save the environment, but if we aren't saving it for our children and our children's children, what are we saving it for?

That question is actually what sparked my thread, and AKR you hit it dead center. Thanks.

Ok, really quick cuz I gotta head to bed:

First off, as long as there are humans, there will be people making babies. If you want to preserve the world just for humans, there is no shortage of children to preserve the world for. Personally, I don't think it makes any sense to justify creating children in order to make it worth while to save the planet...while adding to the pollution/taking away resources by making more children. Not only does it not make sense, but like I said, if people really have selfless love for children, adopt one. There's plenty to go around.

Second, I care about the other species on the planet. I don't believe the human species is any better than any other species, and I think all of the other species deserve a great planet to live on as well. Clearly, humans have shown that they cannot be responsible inhabitants, so I think we should do all we can to minimize the damage of such a selfish, destructive species, which would be best done by not creating them in the first place.

I'll address the other stuff later. night.

[Skwidward]

Adopt. I am planning to adopt many children. Save their life. Please.

Creating children in itself is a selfish act. If anyone says they're doing it to share their love and share the world, they're full of it. If you want to share, share with a child that already exists, otherwise, you're just showing you're doing it out of selfishness.

To me this stance is amazing. It seems you claim that it is the duty of the responsible (those planning to have children) to manage the mistakes of the irresponsible.

This seems more like a Christian way of thinking than anything else I've ever heard.

[_AdaM_]

You bring up selfishness. Personally, I don't think it's more selfish to not have kids. Creating children in itself is a selfish act. If anyone says they're doing it to share their love and share the world, they're full of it. If you want to share, share with a child that already exists, otherwise, you're just showing you're doing it out of selfishness.

That is the weirdest paragraph I have read in R/P!!!!

I don't know about you man, But I would defiantly want to have a 'little me'

[LetsJustTalk]

Golly Gee Willakers!!! Well of course you should have kids! Wow some of my best childhood memories are growing up and playing ball with the old man, drinking lemonaid and having swell times together! i have a super neat younger brother and my cute little sister! i cant think of growing up without them! me well i need to find a good woman to settle down with first but gosh i plan on having a great big family! more to love! i dont know when that will be! my friends all say i am a wild and crazy guy so it could be awhile!! this is a great thread! thanks for perking up my morning...thinking about being like my old man sure makes me feel great!

[Skwidward]

Personally, I don't think it makes any sense to justify creating children in order to make it worth while to save the planet..

I don't think that was the point the guy I was quoting was making.

Clearly, humans have shown that they cannot be responsible inhabitants.

Really?

How?

[Melkor]

I have three kids and they are among the best things that have ever happened to me. It's hard sometimes, but more than worth it.

[mrawdtsi]

I think the decision to have children is an instinctual one more than religious preferance.

[Dreamscapes]

Neither my girlfriend or I want to have kids.

The decision isn't influenced by religion as we don't buy into it.

If Bertrand Russell said that, then I disagree with his statement.

[Poppa Pump]

I am against having children personally. And I think that religion plays a big part of it. People who are religious tend to not only have children but to have MANY children (or at least that is what I have gathered from my experience). Perhaps it has to do with their belief that god put is here for a reason and gave us that ability for a reason. Or maybe they are creating more people to serve god. Who knows. I don't think it is selfish to have children. I think that people are doing what they think they are supposed to do. Whether it's culture, religion or (likely) a combination of the two that makes them feel that they need to be parents. I think saying that it's selfish is going a little too far though. I'd say it's ignorant. Ignorant to the fact that this planet can only take so many people. Ignorant to how to raise their children. Ignorant as to what having a baby really means. Fundamentally there is nothing wrong with starting a family. But from that viewpoint of an agnostic, there is no real purpose to the world or us being here. We feel a biological need to reproduce, but cognitively we can reason that it is nothing we really need. But most of us end up doing it anyway. To be honest I dont know why people have kids, especially so many of them. Most of them are treated poorly, not raised with love, and/or controlled by their parents. I'm a happy person, I really am. I love life and I have a great one. But I sometimes wonder what the point was of my parents having me. Creating new life is a big deal and I'm not so sure that there is even a point in it. I also feel that humans do a lot of damage to this planet....what's the big deal about just not making anymore? Then we wont have to worry about global warming or meteors or murders....everything would be pretty simple for us humans if we just stopped reproducing.

EDIT: To clarify I can fully understand the desire to reproduce. It's very powerful. In my opinion having no kids would be a good thing (especially with how many orphans there are looking for loving homes). But I especially don't understand having so many kids. If I ended up with a wife who really wanted children I would compromise if need be by having no more than two. One to replace her and one to replace me so we do not unnecessarily crowding this planet.

[David77]

Many people have selfish reasons to have kids. That should be obvious. The desire to have another person to love you, to have your family name live on, etc. Those are selfish, and my religious beliefs don't really effect my desire to have kids. I didn't have a strong desire before I became religious and I still don't.

[cj_hackett]

Dude, that seems pretty f*cked up to create someone just so you can have "a piece" of your wife. I mean, how would that kid feel, knowing that you created him/her so you could be reminded of your wife?

You bring up selfishness. Personally, I don't think it's more selfish to not have kids. Creating children in itself is a selfish act. If anyone says they're doing it to share their love and share the world, they're full of it. If you want to share, share with a child that already exists, otherwise, you're just showing you're doing it out of selfishness.

I really don't know how anyone can feel they're justified in creating children. Everyone seems to think that they have magical genes, and that their child will be totally special and exempt from the risks involved in life. They're child won't possibly want to commit suicide and/or wish they were never born. And let's also ignore the fact that another human means a greater strain on resources and great output of pollution. Oh no, that's negative thinking, and we can't have that. Let's just ignore reality so we can all feel good about popping out babies.


And Bertrand Russell can suck my balls. That's pretty stupid to claim that people who do not want to or cannot make babies don't feel a part of the human race or can't be happy. ****, there's a whole culture of "child free" adults who do not want children and couldn't be happier about it. I'm part of it. Not having kids was the best thing I've ever done for myself and for the rest of the world. Not just because I'm happier, but because Bipolar runs in my genes (fortunately, I don't have it), and I don't want to add to the most destructive species on the planet.

Hai, AKR. I agree with you on most things, but on this I differ. I'm pretty sure you're an evolution guy, so you have to realize that having children is ingrained in our genes and it IS what we are made to do. If you know anything about evolution, the individuals that have the genes that make them capable of surviving to reproduction age are the ones that pass on our genes. Therefore, we are the result of millions of years of reproduction efforts.

On the other hand, I don't want to take care of someone else's child. Some people do, but I don't. If that makes me selfish, then I guess I'm selfish. It's called natural selection. If other people have kids and can't take care of them, then those people won't pass on their genes.

The main reason the world is so messed up now (IMO), is that people who used to die off from natural selection are allowed to live and pass on their genes because the stronger members of our species are propping them up.

Neg away if you want, but remember, everyone gets an opinion and just because it differs from your own, does not make it wrong.

One other thing too. Trying to save the world in itself is selfish. When you try to save the world and the environment, you're not doing it for the Earth's sake. The Earth and many millions of species will survive even the worst things that we can do to it. You would be saving it so it stays habitable to us humans, which is selfish. There is no way around this fact.

[MarkA15]

There's nothing selfish than having sex for pleasure.

[paolo59]

Don't have them unless you're going to love them and take care of them! Children are the greatest responsibility that anyone can ever face. They demand selflessness on the part of the parent. That quality is sorely lacking in todays society.

[ceno]

not religious but my cultural upbringing has an impact on my decisions. I dont believe in "Single parent" BS. Thats not how I grew up, and I'd never let my kid(s) suffer that way either.

Majority of divorces happen today because of "financial problems" or/and "individuals' lack of maturity"...

As one of the posters pointed, at the age of 28, I am nowhere near that maturity level as I still feel like a kid, time to time.

when the time's right, then of course I'd like to have a family, but that day is not here yet...

Today people think I they know everything or/and mature enough to handle the hardships of life at very early ages.

When I look back I laugh at the stuff I did in my early 20s...Meaning; I am still growing. I was engaged at the age of 24...and today, I am so glad that didnt work out....I'd be one miserable person today...

[DTRG]

I can't say whether I'll have kids or not, but I want to look at adoption right now. I find it pretty funny that the people who are educated on how our selfish genes work and how humanity is are the ones who do not reproduce. The genes of the educated get passed less so than genes of the ignorant. Talk about a slap in the face for humanity and a preferable evolution in the long term. But thats not to say that adoption is wrong because 'its natural selection as to who puts their kids up for adoption' in the first place. Its not natural selection to put a kid up for adoption because ability to provide depends on the environment. It is natural selection based on the ability to survive. The welfare state and adoption keep these genes alive regardless of the parental ability or willingness to provide and obviously this skews the system of selection. So by adopting you're doing nothing but giving a set of genes a better environment to realize the potential of the genes and a better chance at reproducing, perhaps with a 'better' set of genes than they would have otherwise. You're not skewing the system of selection because the system is long gone by now with humans. However the people who actually put their kids up for adoption do not often contain alpha genes, but neither do you. I think adopting is a more rational idea for people who know how the system works, despite it being at face value 'weird'.

If you want to go back to a system of natural selection, get rid of the welfare state and be a republican. But the only people who actually support natural selection for our species are people who wish to see the natural means of population control: starvation. And these people are cowards and worship chance, if they were the ones starving, they would be begging for help. Instead, if all students of the earth realized the reality of exponential growth we'd realize a cap on offspring would be in the earth's best interest and therefore our long term interests as well. But no- listen to god, he'll let you know when its naturally right to have a child: abandon contraception they say. Again, those who push natural selection are ones who support natural starvation. Enjoy.

[LunicaAshes]

If I ended up with a wife who really wanted children I would compromise if need be by having no more than two. One to replace her and one to replace me so we do not unnecessarily crowding this planet.

That's actually old reasoning that doesn't work. Due to momentum, only having two to replace yourselves isn't good enough if you care about the environment. Just think, if someone had two kids at age 25, then those two each had two at age 25, then you have four kids and THEY all have two at age 25, you are then a 75yo who has helped increase the total world population by more than just yourself... and since you are still around, it didn't just "replace" you. While birth rates are going down to around 2 per couple or even less worldwide, population is still rising quickly because of this.

If you really don't WANT kids, don't compromise something like that for a spouse. Find someone that has your views and marry her. If you end up wanting kids, do everyone a favor and adopt.

Hai, AKR. I agree with you on most things, but on this I differ. I'm pretty sure you're an evolution guy, so you have to realize that having children is ingrained in our genes and it IS what we are made to do. If you know anything about evolution, the individuals that have the genes that make them capable of surviving to reproduction age are the ones that pass on our genes. Therefore, we are the result of millions of years of reproduction efforts.

F*ck instinct. Who cares? It's instinct to overeat/get fat too, but I don't see you advocating for that. That's just a lame excuse people use to make themselves feel okay about doing something they probably really know is unethical. We are smart enough to overcome our basest urges.

One other thing too. Trying to save the world in itself is selfish. When you try to save the world and the environment, you're not doing it for the Earth's sake. The Earth and many millions of species will survive even the worst things that we can do to it. You would be saving it so it stays habitable to us humans, which is selfish. There is no way around this fact.

LOL, wut? Who said save it so people can live here? Why not save it for every other organism? I wouldn't care if every human disappeared form the face of the planet, but I think we need to STOP raping it for other species.

Of course things would survive in one way or another, but I think it's completely selfish to think that way and disregard that we are forcing others into peril and extinction. Just because the Earth won't collapse from our use of it doesn't mean we can do whatever we want and be justified in doing so.

[LunicaAshes]

To me this stance is amazing. It seems you claim that it is the duty of the responsible (those planning to have children) to manage the mistakes of the irresponsible.

This seems more like a Christian way of thinking than anything else I've ever heard.

Think of it this way. You may not be responsible for what others have done to this planet, but you ARE responsible for what you child experiences in life. If the planet is strained, and having another life on it strains it more, you are responsible for that, and the fact that your child must deal with it.

It is also your responsibility to the planet and those ALREADY here to not make matter worse. Having a baby does exactly that. SO if you make kids, then it's not the mistakes of others that need managed, but your OWN actions, because they are harming the environment as well. No matter whatyou do, more life means more harm.

Adopt.

[cj_hackett]

That's actually old reasoning that doesn't work. Due to momentum, only having two to replace yourselves isn't good enough if you care about the environment. Just think, if someone had two kids at age 25, then those two each had two at age 25, then you have four kids and THEY all have two at age 25, you are then a 75yo who has helped increase the total world population by more than just yourself... and since you are still around, it didn't just "replace" you. While birth rates are going down to around 2 per couple or even less worldwide, population is still rising quickly because of this.

If you really don't WANT kids, don't compromise something like that for a spouse. Find someone that has your views and marry her. If you end up wanting kids, do everyone a favor and adopt.



F*ck instinct. Who cares? It's instinct to overeat/get fat too, but I don't see you advocating for that. That's just a lame excuse people use to make themselves feel okay about doing something they probably really know is unethical. We are smart enough to overcome our basest urges.



LOL, wut? Who said save it so people can live here? Why not save it for every other organism? I wouldn't care if every human disappeared form the face of the planet, but I think we need to STOP raping it for other species.

Of course things would survive in one way or another, but I think it's completely selfish to think that way and disregard that we are forcing others into peril and extinction. Just because the Earth won't collapse from our use of it doesn't mean we can do whatever we want and be justified in doing so.

Eh, it's natural selection, whatever we or any other species causes will harm a few other species, but something new will evolve to take it's place. It's pretty egotistical to think that we can harm the Earth. The Earth and the majority of it's billion species will be fine regardless of what we do to it.

Try reading The World Without Us. It won't take long, maybe a thousand years at most, for the world to totally recover once we're gone.

[cj_hackett]

Think of it this way. You may not be responsible for what others have done to this planet, but you ARE responsible for what you child experiences in life. If the planet is strained, and having another life on it strains it more, you are responsible for that, and the fact that your child must deal with it.

It is also your responsibility to the planet and those ALREADY here to not make matter worse. Having a baby does exactly that. SO if you make kids, then it's not the mistakes of others that need managed, but your OWN actions, because they are harming the environment as well. No matter whatyou do, more life means more harm.

Adopt.

I do admire and respect your opinion and also that you support it in the face of a lot of opposition, but you are definitely fighting an uphill battle. Definitely not a reason to give up, but good luck.