eBay

the_bob_delusion · ‎16-08-2015

Not just irresponsible but immoral.

GO.

iapetus_rocks · ‎19-08-2015

@springyzone wrote:

Our main problem is the areas of real population growth are not in our countries. To suggest anything else is a smokescreen.

We have to look at a couple of facts here.
a) People do want children, to pass on their line. It seems to be a fundamental genetic drive. It's not going to go away so we have to allow for it.
b) If there is a high infant mortality rate, people will have more children.Sometimes children are seen as an asset to work on farms, look after parents in older age etc

We have our own pockets in this country with some cultures that value large families or who milk welfare.

But the real problem is overseas.
So what's the answer?

Probably, the answer is to assist other countries to improve their standard of living and improve their economies (but historically, we have done the exact opposite).

The fundamental problem is the way we have arranged our dominant economies so that in order to function at all, they need to continue to grow. The profit motive (at all costs, just so those costs can be layed off on someone else) drives the destruction of forests and destruction of the landscape and the destruction of the wildlife and, if need be, the destruction of whole populations who stand in the way of "progress".

We are progressing towards a world which is not going to be a very nice place to live in. (actually, I think we have already arrived in that place and I can only envision it getting worse)

We need fewer people, a different economic model and a very different collective mindset to the one we have now.

But oh, profits would plummet!. and no one who matters is ever going to support that sort of change.

icyfroth · ‎19-08-2015

History is full of cases where people of no means had children and found resources to raise their children against all odds.

iapetus_rocks · ‎19-08-2015

And history is full of an even greater number of people of no means who had children and found insufficient means to obtain enough resources to stave off starvation, illness and death.

So, what's your point?

icyfroth · ‎19-08-2015

My point is that many ppl find themselves in situations they have no control over, like unwanted pregancies, but do the best they can with the resources they're given in the circumstances they're in.

Not everyone has access to birth control or is able to deny unwanted sex.

That doesn't mean it's immoral to bring children into the world.

There are no guarantees in life that every child born will live to adulthood.

the_bob_delusion · ‎19-08-2015

@icyfroth wrote:
My point is that many ppl find themselves in situations they have no control over, like unwanted pregancies, but do the best they can with the resources they're given in the circumstances they're in.

Not everyone has access to birth control or is able to deny unwanted sex.

That doesn't mean it's immoral to bring children into the world.

There are no guarantees in life that every child born will live to adulthood.

Pay attention to OP. It's not about the rare accidents. It's about purposely having kids without any resources to provide for them.

If you cannot afford $2 for a condom, you cannot afford to have a kid.

Strawman arguments Frothy. You can do better than that.

icyfroth · ‎19-08-2015

@the_bob_delusion wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
My point is that many ppl find themselves in situations they have no control over, like unwanted pregancies, but do the best they can with the resources they're given in the circumstances they're in.

Not everyone has access to birth control or is able to deny unwanted sex.

That doesn't mean it's immoral to bring children into the world.

There are no guarantees in life that every child born will live to adulthood.
Pay attention to OP. It's not about the rare accidents. It's about purposely having kids without any resources to provide for them.
If you cannot afford $2 for a condom, you cannot afford to have a kid.

Strawman arguments Frothy. You can do better than that.

Ok well I've lost interest, and I don't like your tone.

goodnight.

springyzone · ‎20-08-2015

It's not about the rare accidents. It's about purposely having kids without any resources to provide for them.

If you cannot afford $2 for a condom, you cannot afford to have a kid.

Strawman arguments Frothy. You can do better than that.

----------------------

Immorality is such a subjective concept in many ways.

I would be one of the first to say that zero population growth or even a decline in world population would be good for the planet.

It would be sensible.

But at the same time, we are never going to change people's drives for existence, I think they have been hard wired into our brains & have helped our species.

Some of those drives are sex, passing on your genes and violence/fighting.

One coping mechanism we have is to get used to the circumstances we find ourselves in & constantly battle for better. I guess it's the reason people in concentration camps in WW2 were able to go on, they hoped for change.

I think some people do the same when they have kids-they have hope things will work out.

In truth, you don't need a lot to survive as such. Shelter, food, society.

So, I would guess that most people in our society can provide those minimums, but I also think our welfare system needs tweaking to make it not such an easy option.

I've known several poorer families who have made good for their kids.

Whether some people DO provide properly for their children once those kids are born is quite another question.

I've seen plenty of photos of homes where it looks as if the people had basic possessions and food but the parents lived in squalor, never cleaned, neglected their kids etc

Now THAT'S immoral.(to my mind)

raptor_rebooted · ‎20-08-2015

@the_bob_delusion wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:
My point is that many ppl find themselves in situations they have no control over, like unwanted pregancies, but do the best they can with the resources they're given in the circumstances they're in.

Not everyone has access to birth control or is able to deny unwanted sex.

That doesn't mean it's immoral to bring children into the world.

There are no guarantees in life that every child born will live to adulthood.
Pay attention to OP. It's not about the rare accidents. It's about purposely having kids without any resources to provide for them.
If you cannot afford $2 for a condom, you cannot afford to have a kid.

Strawman arguments Frothy. You can do better than that.

this is your OP:

Not just irresponsible but immoral.

GO.

this-one-time-at-bandcamp · ‎20-08-2015

No.........This is the OP

"It's immoral for poor people to have a lot of kids"

Not just irresponsible but immoral.

GO.

Wow, it's just like tag-team fundamentalism..........they even kudo each others' posts..........

icyfroth · ‎20-08-2015

@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:
No.........This is the OP
"It's immoral for poor people to have a lot of kids"

Not just irresponsible but immoral.

GO.

Wow, it's just like tag-team fundamentalism..........they even kudo each others' posts..........

"It's immoral for poor people to have a lot of kids"

No that's the thread title