Amazon.com Widgets
  • It really depends

    If you can afford a child, then yes you should really have as many as you can. This is because not only do families increase stability (it gives people something to do not revolving around hedonism or materialism for once) of a society, but they represent continuity. If we rely on migrants to fill in our demographic gaps, not only will the native population be resentful, but the nation will loose its legacy and character. And identity will be squandered and replaced with nothing but subgroups and division.

    I plan to have three children, because I know with the strain on the safety net and the crowd of people who ARE having children, I cannot any longer rely on the public purse to come to the rescue thanks to all these childless couples who will grow old and not have any children to pay for their retirement,

    The system only works to its fullest extent when EVERYONE makes a sacrifice. No sacrifice, no stability and no thriving, long - term society. Its that simple.

    The people on the no side who don't want kids are wasting their potential (assuming they can afford them). The dedication they say having children requires (and they would have to put in) means that they may be great parents if they decide to procreate, and for once, children raised by educated, middle class professionals may one day become a majority of births (imagine what rational and level headed society that would create).

    Plus, the state should do more as well and society should STOP promoting a consumerist lifestyle. Daycare should be free and covered, Families should get allowances of $450 each month per child (like in France). We need to spend in excess of 4% of our GDP (and reform the education system dramatically so that having children is strongly encouraged and children are "eased" into being a parent).

    Thats the only way we save the nation from financial demise.

  • Depending on the fitness of the couple

    This is not addressing those who are infertile, incapable mentally, or even financially unfit, but to those whom this is a true choice. Selfishness is defined as "lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure."

    1) If a couple is fit, then they should contribute to the next generation of society in order to benefit the future of society. A couple who are stable are less likely to have children who grow to have problems that are to the detriment of society. By removing the children of this stable couple you are making that society less fit.

    2) If a couple are planning on using any society or insurance programs when they retire, these programs are dependent on the current working population of that society. By having no children they are not contributing to these programs while adding to the burden. Unless they save up the money they have, they are hurting future society (insurance does not count as, again, it's dependent on the healthy working group they did not contribute to.)

    3) Children are part of taking care of you in your own age. There are many people who don't want to move into a nursing home who, instead, have their children take care of them on different levels. Assisted living apartments are not cheap, and having insurances cover them again puts the burden on the working class, the group of people they did not contribute to. Basically, the childless are a pure burden, and if it was something they chose to do then it's not only not benefiting the future it's hurting it.

    4) Most people who choose childish states are either afraid they don't have a parenting gene (which is ignorant since this behavior is learned, not inherited...) or say they just want the freedom they are accustomed to (self-serving even at the detriment of society, basic definition of selfish.)

    To counter some of the arguments presented... If the world is at a high population and should not increase population, the experts recommend attaining a negative population growth, which requires a 3 child average in order to replace the parents and take into account mortality and those naturally infertile. Currently, most places in the world are at a negative population growth, which causes an increase of burden on the working class and hurts the overall health of society. Since a negative population growth hurts society, having at least 2-3 children should be considered necessary for society's health, though it could be argued having more than that would be selfish but having none is as bad or worse.

  • With the assumption the couple is capable

    One needs to assume that the person, for all other purposes, would be a fit parent. I'm not addressing people who, for mental, physical, or even financial reasons choose not to have children. I'm talking about the person who has no reason other than 'I don't want a kid.'

    1) The more intelligent, stable, affluent marriages are in the best position to produce children who will benefit the next generation of humans. These children have the lowest rates for becoming criminals, drop-outs, drug users, etc. These are things that benefit society as a whole.

    2) Society programs (such as social security) are dependent on the beneficiaries having children. These programs are not paid for by your working dollar, they're paid for by the working dollar of the children or grandchildren who are working when you are retired. Basically, if you are childless you should not receive any society benefits when you retire. This is going to become a bigger problem as people choose to have fewer or even no children.

    3) The most common reason someone gives is that they are either not comfortable around children (indicating they believe that there is something wrong with them and did not inherit a parenting gene... Which studies show doesn't exist, parenting is learned, so these people are simply ignorant), or that they want to be free to pursue their own interests. Since the definition of selfish is "lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure." then choosing something that would negatively affect the next generation but personally profit yourself would be selfish.

    4) Even when the person will not be using society programs, there is the burden of an elderly couple who have no children to help take care of them. A large percentage of elderly who need help, but are not bad enough to live in a nursing home yet, are cared for by their family, often children or grand-children. Assisted living places are not cheap, and insurance paying for them drives up the insurance for, again, the working age group which the couple did not contribute to.

    The argument then becomes whether it's wrong to be selfish. Many today live for 'number 1' and look out for number 1. Excuses of "well, it's better for the planet..." ignore the fact that the population growth is actually at a negative when it comes to births in most places in the world, and that a 'zero population growth' is actually what most advocates argue for, not a negative one. Negative population growth can have extreme effects as the retiring group leaves and there's not enough workers to replace them. So, if you're going to go that route, then anything above 3 (taking into account infertile couples or children who die) would be selfish, but up until then it serves society to at least maintain a zero population growth.

  • Having children is the only way to really grow up and continue your legacy.

    Top arguments of most that do not want children:
    1.) I get to do whatever I want and don't have to worry about taking care of some needy child.
    2.) I just don't want them
    3.) Too many people in the world

    Counter: How is this not selfish? Isn't this the very definition of selfish? By contrast, having a child puts you in a position to take care of another human being, in a parental role, where as you are responsible for someone other than yourself. You are responsible for someone who is helpless without you (until a certain age of course). You are the #1 role model in this human's life and mold them into the person they will become. So, becoming a parent that takes full responsibility for the child, and doesn't pawn the kid off to everyone else, doesn't neglect their responsibilities, and who grows as a person is definitely the less selfish option.

    What is our role as a species? To prolong and make better the future of our own. People that don't want children are simply not progressing in maturity, most likely due to the many distractions our society has to offer. Why have kids when you can party all night, go to college until you're 30 or older on student loans, and have sex with random partners without really ever, truly committing to someone else? This debate needs to touch on the erosion of the traditional family due to a tragic decline in morals and common decency.

    It seems the crowd that supports not wanting children at all costs also supports more progressive, liberal points of view that include the LGBT movement, abortion rights, and so on. This crowd is also usually the least successful (income wise), uses the most drugs, and has more casual affairs than the supporters of traditional families.

    Do I think not wanting kids necessarily makes you a bad person? Not bad, but definitely immature and selfish. It is obvious that people that have families end up living more for others, than themselves, in most cases. It is true that some have kids out of wedlock, on accident, and even under the influence of drugs. These people are more of the crowd that is against traditional, conservative principals that have kids out of necessity, because of an accidental circumstance. However, even some drug addicts see the light after they have a child, and turn their ways around. The single, childless drug addict can continue on until they OD, more often than the drug addict who has something else motivating them.

    This site's "debates" are pretty weak. Most of these people debating the subject don't even know what a debate is and type like uneducated nitwits.

  • Look at the "reasons"

    When you look at articles, most of the reasons women cite for not wanting kids include things like "it would bring too much money stress" or "I can't picture myself being a mom" or "I don't want to change my sleeping schedule." That is selfish to me. Ask any mother, and she'll tell you yes, having kids is hard, but it's the most fulfilling job in the world.

  • Over inflated confidence

    If everyone chose not to have children , then humanity would cease to exist and i think for the stress that parents and grandparents experience raising their own children, i think that the next generation need to understand true unselfishness, which you can only understand once you sacrifice your life for your child

  • One must sacrifice of his personal goals, aspirations, etc.

    Yes. Children need devotion and love. Children are hard to raise. To have them is not only to bear them but to make personal sacrifices for them and to devote time for them. No one is lacking in the ability to have children but the selfless will to do so.

  • It is not selfish.

    I can play with children, take care of children, and if I see a child run out in traffic I would not hesitate to jump in front of a car to protect them. Does that make me special? Of course not. We as human beings are hardwired to take care of children and want them to be happy. But does it make mean you only care about yourself if you decide not to have children of your own? Sure people can say I didn't have them because I didn't want to change diapers, and wanted to be able to go out whenever I wanted to. But I say there are plenty of people out there who had children for purely selfish reasons. To have someone love them unconditionally, be dependent on them. Someone they can mold into a "mini-me". Someone to carry on the family name. Someone to take care of them when they are sick. Maybe even just because it's what everyone else does so they think they have to as well. I maintain that not everyone who decides not to have children is a selfish person. I think it is a shame that questions are drawn on a person's (especially a woman's) character if they decided not to be a parent. People make that decision for all kinds of reasons, and it can't be automatically assumed that those are selfish reasons. They may be sad reasons (or not so sad), but those reasons should be respected. God bless the parents of the world, I ain't one of them!

  • The word "selfish" is not a term that defines one group of people, and certainly not the child-less.

    As a married woman, I nurture many people in my life: my husband; my two cats; my in-laws; my sister and mother. Am I still "selfish" because kids aren't on that list? One could argue that not adopting kids already living in unpleasant situations is equally "selfish" because you're choosing to create more life instead of taking responsibility of the people already alive. Of course, that would be completely unfair, right? Not everyone is suited for adoption. Just like everyone isn't suited for parenthood - even if that reason being they simply don't want children.

  • Yes voters appear not to be reading No voters arguments.

    Here is a quote from one of the "Yes" voters:

    'Top arguments of most that do not want children:
    1.) I get to do whatever I want and don't have to worry about taking care of some needy child.'
    (clipped)

    The above argument from the "Yes" voters is common, but reading the "No" voters arguments, I can't find a single one that argues the above reasons for not having children.

  • We don't need a "mini you"

    The only reason people have children is to make a mini version of themselves. The world will not be blessed by more of you.
    It is so selfish to bring a child in this world. Because you want a kid, not be lonely, have something to take care of, get out of working, the child has to grow up in this messed up world?

  • Are you kidding me?!

    I once read an article where a middle-aged woman was talking about how my generation's decision to not have children didn't make sense to her. Out of curiosity, I read through it hoping for an educated argument about why having children is "so important". What I read was the most insensitive, heartless, rude, and ABOVE ALL selfish thing I'd ever read. "I'm worried there won't be enough children to take care of my generation when we get old" Are. You. Serious? And WE'RE the selfish ones? We, who don't want to bring more children into our overpopulated world. Our selfish world. Our sex-obsessed world. Our screwed up world. Our MISERABLE world. We are the selfish ones? Why do we never think of the needs of the child who is being brought into the world? Families who can't afford children but choose to have them anyway are "not selfish". Women who bring children into the world just because everyone else does it are "not selfish". People who have kids for insurance reasons or to get government support are "not selfish". But, by God, people who conscientiously chose not to bring children into a world that won't take care of them? Oh yeah! They're so selfish!

  • Are you kidding me?

    I once read an article where a middle-aged woman was talking about how my generation's decision to not have children didn't make sense to her. Out of curiosity, I read through it hoping for an educated argument about why having children is "so important". What I read was the most insensitive, heartless, rude, and ABOVE ALL selfish thing I'd ever read. "I'm worried there won't be enough children to take care of my generation when we get old" Are. You. Serious? And WE'RE the selfish ones? We, who don't want to bring more children into our overpopulated world. Our selfish world. Our sex-obsessed world. Our screwed up world. Our MISERABLE world. We are the selfish ones? Why do we never think of the needs of the child who is being brought into the world? Families who can't afford children but choose to have them anyway are "not selfish". Women who bring children into the world just because everyone else does it are "not selfish". People who have kids for insurance reasons or to get government support are "not selfish". But, by God, people who conscientiously chose not to bring children into a world that won't take care of them? Oh yeah! They're so selfish!

  • Why would it be selfish?

    I'm looking on the other side of the argument, and all of those reasons seem pretty selfish to me. Apparently, they think it's our duty to society to have kids, which I find to be total BS. This society always has been, and always will be, fucked up. Me not wanting to bring a child into this world because I don't think any human being deserves to live in this type of world isn't being selfish, its me being sympathetic. Also, what if I just don't want kids? I shouldn't be pressured to do something I don't want to do because "the population would suffer if everybody made that decision" or the old retirement excuse. We need to stop pushing people to do shit they don't want to do, especially when our reasons for pushing them are selfish in themselves.

  • It's more selfish to have kids

    I feel that it's more selfish to bring kids into an uncertain world, where you are not always going to guarantee that child food, clothing or shelter. Why should another human being be brought into the world just to satisfy another human beings desire?, who knows what challenges this human being is going to have to face in their life?

  • Nope. Be you and no one else.

    There is no reason why you should have children. You need no reason to have or not to have children.

    If you wish to have children, then do so. We thought are not cattle and owe nothing to the past except to be good people.

    The world is very much full of people and we don't need more. Keep it simple. If you want children, then do so. If you don't want children, then don't. Be you and no one else.

  • Selfish Women Indeed

    Women who have children ARE selfish. What do they always say, I want a child because....Take care of me when old, someone to dress up cute, etc. etc.....Not once has a woman ever thought of what the unborn child wants. Not everyone wants to be born and have to live!!!


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.