4 ms·

I think in addition to questioning having kids as a default in life society needs to ask if it is ethical to continue having kids. We have an impending climate

I think in addition to questioning having kids as a default in life society needs to ask if it is ethical to continue having kids. We have an impending climate crisis we haven't even begun to address that will make the life of any child born today much harder and much different than life today.

txsoftwaredev 7y ago
Life expectancy is at an all time high. World hunger is at an all time low. More humans means more opportunity to create and discover. There is nothing unethical about having children.
- makerofspoons 7y ago
  Those things are true in the current climate regime. They may not hold true when global average temperatures exceed 1.5 degrees over preindustrial. In addition to decreased crop yields what we will be able to grow will be less nutritious, not even getting into increased mortality due to heat and other human impacts: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-degree-of-concern-why-global-temperatures-matter/ https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-degree-of-concern-why-g...
  - kochikame 7y ago
    Maybe, just maybe, we should ask questions about people who have 10-12 kids or something like that, but a replacement rate of 1-2 kids seems more or less unquestionable to me. I mean, if you feel you don't want to bring kids into this turbulent, uncertain world, by all means don't, but please also recognize that one of life's biggest purposes is to beget life and we will do nothing (and have never done anything) if we didn't reproduce
rayiner 7y ago
> We have an impending climate crisis we haven't even begun to address that will make the life of any child born today much harder and much different than life today. I find this argument extremely offensive. Do you think the life of a child born in a +3C USA is going to be worse than the life of an adult currently in say Bangladesh? If not, the implication is that it wasn’t “ethical” for the parents of living Bangladeshis to have had kids given how “hard” their lives are. That currently living Bangladeshis would’ve been better off never being born than suffer such a low standard of living. Presumably, there is a standard of living where it becomes “ethical” to have children. Show me where in the happiness scale (from Norway at the top to Central African Republic at the bottom) that transition happens: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/206468/happiest-unhappiest-countries-world.aspx https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/206468/happiest-unhap.... Italy has a happiness rating a full point lower than the US. Was it “unethical” for the previous generation of Italians to birth the current generation of Italians into such a hard life? Or do we need to go further down the scale? About a point below Italy is Nigeria. Is that the transition point? Once you can expect your kids to have a quality of life better than that of Nigerians currently, it’s ethical to have kids?
- didgeoridoo 7y ago
  God damn rayiner you are a treasure.

txsoftwaredev 7y ago

Life expectancy is at an all time high. World hunger is at an all time low. More humans means more opportunity to create and discover. There is nothing unethical about having children.

makerofspoons 7y ago
Those things are true in the current climate regime. They may not hold true when global average temperatures exceed 1.5 degrees over preindustrial. In addition to decreased crop yields what we will be able to grow will be less nutritious, not even getting into increased mortality due to heat and other human impacts: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-degree-of-concern-why-global-temperatures-matter/ https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-degree-of-concern-why-g...
- kochikame 7y ago
  Maybe, just maybe, we should ask questions about people who have 10-12 kids or something like that, but a replacement rate of 1-2 kids seems more or less unquestionable to me. I mean, if you feel you don't want to bring kids into this turbulent, uncertain world, by all means don't, but please also recognize that one of life's biggest purposes is to beget life and we will do nothing (and have never done anything) if we didn't reproduce

rayiner 7y ago

> We have an impending climate crisis we haven't even begun to address that will make the life of any child born today much harder and much different than life today. I find this argument extremely offensive. Do you think the life of a child born in a +3C USA is going to be worse than the life of an adult currently in say Bangladesh? If not, the implication is that it wasn’t “ethical” for the parents of living Bangladeshis to have had kids given how “hard” their lives are. That currently living Bangladeshis would’ve been better off never being born than suffer such a low standard of living. Presumably, there is a standard of living where it becomes “ethical” to have children. Show me where in the happiness scale (from Norway at the top to Central African Republic at the bottom) that transition happens: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/206468/happiest-unhappiest-countries-world.aspx https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/206468/happiest-unhap.... Italy has a happiness rating a full point lower than the US. Was it “unethical” for the previous generation of Italians to birth the current generation of Italians into such a hard life? Or do we need to go further down the scale? About a point below Italy is Nigeria. Is that the transition point? Once you can expect your kids to have a quality of life better than that of Nigerians currently, it’s ethical to have kids?

didgeoridoo 7y ago
God damn rayiner you are a treasure.