- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 53,409
- Reaction score
- 31,478
- Location
- Northern California
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I sort of do, though I would say that the position applies to couples in general rather than just women in particular.
How is civilization supposed to survive if a majority of people ever arbitrarily decide that their petty day-to-day concerns trump the survival of the species?
Any "principle" which proves to be destructive to society as a whole isn't worth upholding in the first place.
What "petty day-to-day concerns" might that be? A job, food, clothing, housing, that kind of thing? Rather judgmental of people about whom you know absolutely nothing. Women are not brood mares. They are not chattel, existing only as birthing stations. They are actual living, breathing people, who have the right to follow their dreams, just like anyone else in this country, including *gasp!* men, for whom those "day-to-day concerns" are apparently not so "petty" in your eyes, since only females who do not procreate to your liking are considered to be "selfish, decadent and stupid... flying in the face of their biological destiny..."
I honestly can't think of anything more insulting and sexist.
We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.
I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.
It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.
The question I'd have to ask is why would ANYONE want to have a kid in this day and age?
Both my kids swear they're never having children. Never. Which is great considering they are 21 and 17 years old.
I don't want either having a child for at least another 10 years or so.
But they're adamant. I can't blame them either.
The world is a pretty messed up place and it appears to be getting much worse.
So why would anyone with common sense and intelligence want to bring more life into this world at this time?
We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.
I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.
It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.
Well, I'd rather smart women have babies than crack hos.
If I understand you, it's the absolute responsibility for every individual in this country to procreate, which means every couple must produce at least two children. What should become of individuals who, for whatever reason, are medically unable to procreate? Should they be allowed to exist? If so, should a census of such people be taken, and their procreation responsibilities assigned to other, more fertile individuals, who would then be expected to take up the slack?
Does free will enter into this at all?
BTW, your "hedonistic materialism" may be someone else's "rampant poverty". Sometimes foregoing procreation when unable to properly care for a child is better for society, not worse.
We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.
I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.
It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.
How many families have the Duggans got covered.
...I was simply pointing out that voluntarily choosing not to reproduce can be seen to be a monumentally stupid decision for a wide variety of practical and societal reasons. Not only is anyone who decides to take such a route essentially committing genetic suicide by excluding themselves from the gene pool, but they are hurting society as a whole by robbing us all of any number of potential future laborers, thinkers, and leaders.....
Should we care that smart women aren't having kids? | Sadhbh Walshe | Comment is free | theguardian.com
Part of the reason I put this here is that the argument of the article appears to be totally ass-backwards.
Frankly, I don't understand why anybody cares who does or doesn't choose to have children. As long as you can provide for however many children you have, that's your business.
But the whole IQ vs momhood thing is lame.
The world as a whole in reproducing is huge numbers. Any population reduction in one specific geographic area is not significant because people will migrate fairly quickly to the places where necessary resources are most available, which will be the most potentially productive areas with low population density.
I'm not seeing that as a bad thing. People shouldn't be having babies they can't afford.
Most of the people having children in the United States these days cannot afford them.
The problem is that legitimately productive people who actually can afford to have children are choosing not to because they view it as being inconvenient.
I can't wrap my brain around having kids for any reason other than wanting to. If you don't want to, why would you?
If you don't want children, you shouldn't have them. I'm not telling anyone otherwise.
I simply think it's very telling that our society's values have become so perversely warped and narcissistic in recent decades that it is now the case that most "well off" people either don't want children, or only have one or two, often begrudgingly, even if their financial circumstances easily allow for the raising of a decent sized family.
I'd almost describe the situation as being akin to something like anorexia. People have become so obsessed with the superficial aspects of the accumulation of material wealth and creature comforts that they have almost completely forgotten why our forbearers worked to make these things so readily available in the first place. The health of our society as a whole is suffering for this fact.
People aren't meant to live only for themselves and then die afterwards, leaving naught for a legacy behind but a vacant job posting. They're meant to drive society forward; to replace themselves, and give the next generation something to aspire towards.
The way people seem to think these days, it's getting harder and harder to even have a meaningful "next generation" in the first place.
Take a moment just to let our current predicament sink in. Western culture is slowly but surely being supplanted (and possibly even dying out) because people are too fundamentally lazy and self-centered to breed, and there is a significant portion of our population who actually thinks that this is a good thing.
Honest to God, this premise could easily be the subject of a Twilight Zone episode. I'm frankly still kind of baffled as to how we could possibly be living in a world where most people fail to realize this.
Are we really that far gone?
If we are, so be it. The world will be better off without us anyway.
I'm sorry; I just don't get it. First because you are ascribing a whole lot of thoughts and behaviors to people which may or may not fit, and second, even if you are right, it still comes down to - I don't see why it matters.
First off, according to the statistics, and the viewpoints expressed by several people on the other side of the fence in this very thread, the thoughts and behaviors I elaborated upon above more or less perfectly describe the common Western mindset towards parenthood in our current era.
i.e.
"Kids and responsibility are icky! It's more fun to be foot loose and fancy free!"
Secondly, if you still don't "get it" after all I've posted so far, it's not going to magically come together now all of the sudden if I start repeating myself.
Needless to say, I've basically just told you that Western Civilization is going down the tubes due to self-centered hedonistic attitudes, and most people can't even be bothered to care. Your basic reaction to this argument seems to be: "LOL, so? It doesn't bother me!"
Ummm... Thanks for proving my point, I guess? View attachment 67151947
Honestly, what else am I supposed to say to that? :shug:
You could try explaining why less children equals, in your mind, the decline and fall of western civilization.
China's population growth rate is right around zero. Remember the one child policy.The fact that we aren't producing enough children to replace our current population levels?
How do you expect Social Security to support you in your old age if there are more seniors drawing government benefits than there are young people working and paying taxes? After all, people are living longer these days than ever before, which is driving medical costs through the roof.
In case you haven't noticed, our government is already more or less broke. I really fail to see how you can believe that a shrinking worforce, and theretofore, shrinking tax base, could do anything but exacerbate this problem.
How about the fact roughly 60% of all children born in the United States are now being born to unwed welfare queens?
Not only are there not enough children being born to replace the current workforce and tax base, but more than half of those that are being born at present are being brought up in an environment that is unlikely to lead them towards becoming productive working or tax paying members of our society anyway.
I'm sure that'll help. :roll:
What about the fact that native whites are expected to become minorities in many of their own nations before the turn of the century?
Projections Put Whites in Minority in U.S. by 2050
White Britons 'will be minority' before 2070, says professor
What possible incentive will non-Western immigrants have to conform to Western cultural values when they outnumber the native populations of the nations they inhabit?
It is much more likely that they will begin to assimilate us under such circumstances, rather than the other way around.
As a matter of fact, such circumstances have pretty much always proven to be a major cause for civil unrest in the past.
Lebanese Civil War
And on top of all of that, how about the fact that China, which has staggeringly high population growth rates in comparison to the any nation in the Western World, is set to leave the United States and Western World in general in the dust in terms of economic output in just a few years?
OECD Report Says China's Economy Will Overtake US Economy By 2016
What about the fact that India is expected to overtake the Chinese soon afterwards?
Why India Will Displace China as Global Growth Engine
How do you expect the West to remain relevant or competitive on the international stage when it so is so thoroughly outclassed by the rest of the developing world?
I'm sorry, but I really can't help but think that you haven't really thought things through here. :screwy
.. and this was the whole basis of the movie Idiocracy, which is looking more and more realistic...
Should we care that smart women aren't having kids? | Sadhbh Walshe | Comment is free | theguardian.com
Part of the reason I put this here is that the argument of the article appears to be totally ass-backwards.
Frankly, I don't understand why anybody cares who does or doesn't choose to have children. As long as you can provide for however many children you have, that's your business.
But the whole IQ vs momhood thing is lame.
What "petty day-to-day concerns" might that be? A job, food, clothing, housing, that kind of thing? Rather judgmental of people about whom you know absolutely nothing. Women are not brood mares. They are not chattel, existing only as birthing stations. They are actual living, breathing people, who have the right to follow their dreams, just like anyone else in this country, including *gasp!* men, for whom those "day-to-day concerns" are apparently not so "petty" in your eyes, since only females who do not procreate to your liking are considered to be "selfish, decadent and stupid... flying in the face of their biological destiny..."
I honestly can't think of anything more insulting and sexist.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?