4 ms·
> People who care about their childrens future should start planning now. If you believe this, wouldn't the ethical thing be to not have kids? Besides, global
by sevenless 10y ago
> People who care about their childrens future should start planning now.
If you believe this, wouldn't the ethical thing be to not have kids?
Besides, global warming-derived refugee flows into Europe could well put it in a much worse position than the US.
- staticelf 10y agoWell.. yes. But I think a lot of people are going to have kids nonetheless and a lot of people here maybe already have kids.
- collyw 10y agoOr nephews and nieces or other kids that they might actually care about leaving an inhabitable world for.
- goodcanadian 10y agoIf you believe this, wouldn't the ethical thing be to not have kids? I see this over and over . . . If you don't have kids, who exactly are you saving the world for?
- sevenless 10y agoI take it the world isn't going to be 'saved'. The question is how we respond to that. Why do you see 'saving the world' as a priority? The natural (non-human) environment doesn't have any right to exist. Our priority should be to avoid harming humans, and people born into a world that's mostly uninhabitable for them will have pretty shit lives. Long term, the world will be fine, we won't.
- davidy123 10y ago> I see this over and over . . . If you don't have kids, who exactly are you saving the world for? The billions of people (including kids) who already exist. Whether through adoption or supporting better general social programs. Clearly if that were the focus and the way humans thought the world would be a better place. But of course it's wishful thinking and people have every right to have and enjoy their own children.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- davidy123 10y agoHoly downvoting. Why?