TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- People who don't want kids are selfish and immature, and their lives are pointless
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

People who don't want kids are selfish and immature, and their lives are pointless

I have seen people say this many times here and elsewhere, though maybe not so bluntly.

Do you think it is true? Why?

Not at all. For one, Isaac Newton didn't have kids. He wasn't the epitome of human maturity (whatever that means), but his life was far from pointless. I can't be arsed to find more counterexamples, but he's my favourite.

Who cares? You can still have a positive impact on future generations without spawning. Defining a person's life based on whether or not they have children is reductionist. Breeding doesn't necessarily make a person's life any more or less pointless in the grand scheme of things.

I'd rather be immature than broke.

I don't think it's true. The whole point of having kids (from a scientific standpoint) is to pass on your genes and hope that your kids pass them on and hope that they [........] and you become the dominant species/organism in a territory/region/whatever. I think with our place on the planet it's not necessary for us to try and establish dominance as a species anymore. Now as individuals, the idea would be to contribute to human society. So then the question is: "Do we need everyone to have kids in order for us to function as a society?" Well, probably not.

So there are a lot of different views, for and against, that one could take from there.

Playing devils advocate, you could even argue that certain people who do have kids are a detriment to society.

* sits back and eats popcorn *

This is going to be an interesting topic ..... And I have a good idea what the consensus would say.

I think people who have kids but can't properly raise
(99%) them are the most selfish and immature of us all.

I personally think many breeders are selfish, because stupidity breeds faster than intelligence so eventually we'll see so much backwards evolution that we'll be back in caves again.

inb4LaMilf[deserved]hate

Idiot conservatives unable to over-ride their redundant biological impulses.

quote:

Originally posted by Ygrene Playing devils advocate, you could even argue that certain people who do have kids are a detriment to society.

Precisely. I tend to abhor statements like "everybody that does X is Y, so we all ought to do Z" because they seldom encompass all the relevant situations. In this case, it's implicit that we should all want to have kids, and this is not desirable in any sense.

quote:

Originally posted by Ian I personally think many breeders are selfish, because stupidity breeds faster than intelligence so eventually we'll see so much backwards evolution that we'll be back in caves again.

A friend once told me about this film, what is it called?

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Idiot conservatives unable to over-ride their redundant biological impulses.

at least in the US, it's actually the opposite.

quote:

Originally posted by shaw at least in the US, it's actually the opposite.

Aren't they against that only before marriage? I always thought they supported some sort of family child-spewing brat-spawning baby-making frenzy

I'm referring to the kind of people who believe the whole point of life is to fulfil the opening monologue of Trainspotting.

One could make the argument that we're biologically designed to reproduce and continue our blood line. Thus, not doing so would certainly render ones existence pointless.

That said, I don't feel that not having kids makes you selfish or pointless.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I'm referring to the kind of people who believe the whole point of life is to fulfil the opening monologue of Trainspotting.

[Obligatory]

[/Obligatory]

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Aren't they against that only before marriage? I always thought they supported some sort of family child-spewing brat-spawning baby-making frenzy

Not as much as the poor, uneducated masses seem to be able to, before & after marriage.

Also, Shawn Kemp has produced at least 732,417 children this year, on his own.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira A friend once told me about this film, what is it called?

maury ?

quote:

Originally posted by shaw Not as much as the poor, uneducated masses seem to be able to, before & after marriage.

I don't see your point, or what it has to do with what I said.

I think his idea is that the high-breeding poor are generally liberal, whereas the low-breeding rich are politically conservative. Of course, your comment was about a socially "conservative" attitude and not really about politics, so his attempt to score a political point here is kind of a non-sequitur.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I think his idea is that the high-breeding poor are generally liberal, whereas the low-breeding rich are politically conservative. Of course, your comment was about a socially "conservative" attitude and not really about politics, so his attempt to score a political point here is kind of a non-sequitur.

I considered that, but also considered that the two tend to go hand-in-hand more often than not, and that the motivation to make the first point is the same that would motivate one to make the second, regardless of whether that was the intended purpose in this specific case.

quote:

Originally posted by shaw I considered that, but also considered that the two tend to go hand-in-hand more often than not, and that the motivation to make the first point is the same that would motivate one to make the second, regardless of whether that was the intended purpose in this specific case.

I'm not interested in politics.

Of course you can contribute without breeding, but lets be realistic here everyone.

Do we really want Mike Judges Idiocracy to become a scientific reality?

If all the brilliant, inventive, poetic, strong, fast, agile and beautiful humans out there don't procreate because it isn't "convenient" for them to have a brood; guess who will, with pleasure.

This is the singularly most concrete argument against someone who has any of those attributes but chooses not to pass on their genes.

Selfish, maybe. Immature, hardly, in fact, I'd argue that I know far more parents who are more immature than those who have made a conscious decision to go against society's expectations. If your sole reason for wanting children is because that's what everyone expects you to do and "it's what people do when they grow up," you don't deserve children.

To be honest, my lack of desire to have kids has a lot to do with the shitty environment they'd grow up in because of the poor parenting skills I witness now. There's only so much 2 parents can do to shelter their own child from his/her friends.

As for lives being pointless, which is more pointless, someone who devotes their life to other pursuits, which may require specialization or rare talents, or those who do the same thing that everyone else with functioning sex organs can do?

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I'm not interested in politics.

I consider your decision selfish & immature. Your disinterest has rendered your life pointless.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.