Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Pregnancy & ParentingParenting · 9 years ago

Agree or disagree with this?

"If there's poverty, the world is overpopulated. If the world is overpopulated, then having children is selfish, cruel, irresponsible, and negligent"

I'll explain the logic behind this but first..

Q: Yes or no, you have compassion for those suffering in poverty, and you want to better their lives. And you certainly don't want to worsen their lives or inflict suffering onnthem? If yes continue. If no, then by definition, you're cruel and sadistic.

Q: Yes or no, having a child knowing you can't take care or provide it a decent life is cruel and selfish?

Can we give a person in poverty an average quality of life? If we can, why have we denied him this? If we can't, then neither can you give it to your children.

Therefore, having children is cruel, inconsiderate, selfish, negligent, irresponsible, and inflicts suffering on others.

Update:

"If a person in poverty wants an average quality of life it can without a doubt happen, but it's up to them"

That's not the point.

1) Those who do have the opportunity are confused and been exposed ti incorrect Information and incorrect conditioning. If you're child was raised in the same environment and culture, they'd make the same decision. Of your child was raised in nazi germany, they'd be a racist. If they were raised by romans, they'd feed and watch christians be fed to lions. If they were raised by headhunters, they'd decapitate people.

The point is is that these people are suffering.

2) I'm referring to the children who don't have access to the basic necessities of life.

Update 2:

"1. The issue is too complicated to simplify this way.

2. The person who might grow to be able to fix all of these problems may be born to a mother who lives in poverty. You never know where genius will strike. Bottom line, you do not have the wisdom to debate this topic. Your views are too basic and rigid."

Look honey, it doesn't take a genius to work out how to cease poverty. If you're interested, look up the venus project. But for the time being, we either don't have the necessities for the children we want to have, or we're robbing the necessities from those who need them.

It's simple, no variables orfactorss are left out.

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The human species is bound for extinction. There is nothing we can do about it. It's a mathematical certainly, so don't bother trying.

    I know many of us are used to being so arrogant to think that we can "manage" or "control" the natural course of life, but that's one of the biggest flaws of our character. The think we're above nature.

    If one were to give the human species a grammatically correct dictionary-based word, the word would fit closest would be "Parasite".

  • Bella
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    1. The issue is too complicated to simplify this way.

    2. The person who might grow to be able to fix all of these problems may be born to a mother who lives in poverty. You never know where genius will strike. Bottom line, you do not have the wisdom to debate this topic. Your views are too basic and rigid. Simple is a great way to describe yourself.

  • LisaLu
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    There is a big difference between just helping someone who has nothing and helping someone who has nothing and wants to change that.

    If a person in poverty wants an average quality of life it can without a doubt happen, but it's up to them. Many would prefer to stay in poverty and have more children so they are guaranteed enough money from the government that they never have to work.

    1. Yes

    2. Yes

    But again, it's up to the person. It does not matter what you do for them, they have to make a point of changing their lives.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    If you can provide for your own children and your own family having children is not selfish.

    Having children when you are in a place of not being able to support them is selfish. You are hurting yourself and your children and yes, possible could contribute to the poverty problem.

    But if everyone stopped having children that would not solve all the worlds problems. We need children to educate them about the problems in the world so they can grow up to be non sadistic, not cruel people, and help the world.

    People who don't want to help others suffering are selfish whether they have children or not! There are so many people (especially here in America) who are so caught up in their own world and its so incredibly sad. They truly don't care about other people, or don't want to do any work to try and help them!

    People being self centered, close minded, and ignorant are why they don't want to help. Not because of having children.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    If you can provide for your kid then I don't think it's remotely selfish.

    Surely if you're already living in poverty you should stop having so many kids?

  • ?
    Lv 5
    9 years ago

    There is a certain degree of truth to what you say; however, this is a far too complicated issue to whittle it down to just one statement like that.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.