Procreation is pointless and unethical

[dimon3000]

discuss...

[Blarghagh]

Best thread ever.

[GhoulishVisage]

I agree.
Children are far too noisy in movies and restaurants and they're unhygienic. Also they constantly watch that horrible live-action Disney stuff. Nothing good can come of that.

I say we do away with the entire business of creating children, which probably involves all sorts of dark magicks and ritual sacrifices. Not the sort of thing any upstanding citizen would involve themselves in.

[Pidesco]

Is this a thread in favour of only recreational sex?

[HoonDing]

Kids are alright, just leave them to the nanny.

 

[Kroney]

I find other people's procreation to be a source of constant irritation. I don't know if this answers your implied question, which I think might be "Why don't girls like me? :("

 

Nah, just kidding blud, you're sound.

[Walsingham]

I tell you what, why don't we split into the ayes and nayes, and let reality decide who's right?

 

Reconvene in 100 years?

[Kroney]

I tell you what, why don't we split into the ayes and nayes, and let reality decide who's right?

 

Reconvene in 100 years?

 

Pointless. If we stop procreating, the women will spontaneously change gender because of that frog DNA and bone themselves. Life will find a way.

[Malcador]

I tell you what, why don't we split into the ayes and nayes, and let reality decide who's right?

 

Reconvene in 100 years?

 

We'll all be dead by then, so wouldn't matter to us, really.  The second point one could put something less ridiculous forward on though, overpopulation and so on.  Which is rather silly, but not completely so.

[Blarghagh]

Well, we tried not procreating as much for a bit here in Holland, now we're paying through our nose in pensions because there are more old people than young people.

 

So I guess the only solution is global genocide.

[Hassat Hunter]

Well, we tried not procreating as much for a bit here in Holland, now we're paying through our nose in pensions because there are more old people than young people.

 

So I guess the only solution is global genocide.

That's more the result of mass-procreation shortly after WW II, then that we really started to decrease it.

 

I think that's more something going on in China...

[Nonek]

Who were the gentlemen who advocated this philosophy, the Cathar's?

[Rostere]

I don't really agree with all you children-haters...

 

I'm finding this discussion a lot in 40K hobby as well, lots of people are really hating on "children" in the hobby. But then they kind of forget that they themselves were children once, playing 40K. I know for sure I wouldn't think 12-year old me an unworthy opponent in 40K, or chess. But of course there are also annoying children. I would mostly blame stupid parents for that, though.

[Hurlshort]

I understand the logic behind such an assertion.  Some of you might say "but Hurlshot, you have kids, and you spend your days educating the youth!"  That may be, but I am not blind to the problems that our population explosion across the globe is causing.  My main issue with discouraging reproduction is this:

 

If you win this debate, the only people that will stop procreating are those educated enough to understand your argument.  That leaves two groups to carry on the next generation, those who are ignorant and those who are deliberately rebellious.  Logically this will only hasten the decline of civilization.

 

 

From a personal and emotional perspective, I will add that my life was lacking any real purpose until I had children.  What is the point of growth and wisdom if I do not pass it on to the next generation?  Sure, I can share some experience with my students.  I can write a book or create something that will outlast me.  But you really can't beat having your own genetic material and helping to shape it day by day into a functional adult.  

 

That sounded creepy, but I think you all get the point.  

[dimon3000]

Well, we tried not procreating as much for a bit here in Holland, now we're paying through our nose in pensions because there are more old people than young people.

Robots will take care of old people

 

From a personal and emotional perspective, I will add that my life was lacking any real purpose until I had children.  What is the point of growth and wisdom if I do not pass it on to the next generation?

Your also impose death and suffering on your children. And why should they care about your "wisdom"?

 

But you really can't beat having your own genetic material and helping to shape it day by day into a functional adult.

It would be more logical to clone yourself. Edited December 13, 2013 by dimon3000

[Walsingham]

100% agree with Hurlshot. In practical terms it's a non-starter. The only people who would volunteer are the people who shouldn't. And equally even I can't imagine telling a specific couple they aren't allowed kids.

 

You try it. Imagine having to go up to two couples you know and saying "I have decided that no matter what happens and how much you love each other, you won't be allowed any kids."

 

EDITED

 

 

Anyone else's genes taking executive control?

Edited December 13, 2013 by Walsingham

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

This thread is pointless and unethical. Attempting to solve overpopulation and overconsumption of resources by stopping reproduction is a laughable idea.

[dimon3000]

This thread is pointless and unethical. Attempting to solve overpopulation and overconsumption of resources by stopping reproduction is a laughable idea.

Overpopulation is irrelevant. I'm talking about death, fear and suffering that all conscious beings experience.

[Kroney]

Oh Gawd

[Amentep]

 

Well, we tried not procreating as much for a bit here in Holland, now we're paying through our nose in pensions because there are more old people than young people.

Robots will take care of old people

 

But who will take care of the robots? WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE ROBOTS?

 

 

From a personal and emotional perspective, I will add that my life was lacking any real purpose until I had children.  What is the point of growth and wisdom if I do not pass it on to the next generation?

Your also impose death and suffering on your children. And why should they care about your "wisdom"?

 

"I had to face my fear...that was more important than just going on living...a tear, Sarah Jane? No, don't cry. While there's life, there's..."

 

 

But you really can't beat having your own genetic material and helping to shape it day by day into a functional adult.

It would be more logical to clone yourself.

 

If he can't clone his own memory and experience, then we're back at your first complaint that he's imposing death and suffering and wisdom (not sure how those all correlate together, but I'll roll with it) on a "blank slate" entity so not really a good answer under those parameters.

 

His best option is to be immortal and thus be ever able and eternally available to have plonkers hit him up for wisdom whenever they want at his guru mountain or something...

[Walsingham]

Any line of reason which negates the reasoner is - so far as I can see - self-negating.

 

There simply cannot exist any human rationality that advocates the elimination of humans.

[Malcador]

From a personal and emotional perspective, I will add that my life was lacking any real purpose until I had children.   

 

Man, that's sad.

[Orogun01]

Any line of reason which negates the reasoner is - so far as I can see - self-negating.

 

There simply cannot exist any human rationality that advocates the elimination of humans.

Jersey Shore

 

Edit: Forgot you're British. 

 

Geordie Shore

Edited December 13, 2013 by Orogun01

[Walsingham]

 

Any line of reason which negates the reasoner is - so far as I can see - self-negating.

 

There simply cannot exist any human rationality that advocates the elimination of humans.

Jersey Shore

 

Edit: Forgot you're British. 

 

Geordie Shore

 

 

Unless you are actually in Geordie shore, and think the people in Geordie shore should be destroyed, then that's not exactly relevant. ;p

[Orogun01]

 

 

Any line of reason which negates the reasoner is - so far as I can see - self-negating.

 

There simply cannot exist any human rationality that advocates the elimination of humans.

Jersey Shore

 

Edit: Forgot you're British. 

 

Geordie Shore

 

 

Unless you are actually in Geordie shore, and think the people in Geordie shore should be destroyed, then that's not exactly relevant. ;p

 

Good case for eugenics though.