I had to have been born to ask the question, so its sort of a moot point.

I actually have the viewpoint that existence is in a very important sense voluntary. First for the obvious reason that anyone can choose not to exist, but second because I believe we as individuals are an instance of the human will-to-survive which has taken form in us. This however is very easy not to see or to forget. I think there is an ancient doctrine called voluntarism which expresses this view. It is a very positive view because it engenders an attitude of being here on a voluntary basis: I have volunteered to exist, and whatever I do is done as a free act.

I'm still cursing my parents for not giving me a choice. If I had had a choice ... I'd say, what? Get born into a f---ed up stinking hell hole of a f----ed up planet like this cesspool. Put your f---ing penis back in your pants ... assole!!!

Does that mean you will never be having children?

I'm still cursing my parents for not giving me a choice. If I had had a choice ... I'd say, what? Get born into a f---ed up stinking hell hole of a f----ed up planet like this cesspool. Put your f---ing penis back in your pants ... assole!!!

Does that mean you will never be having children?

Not necessarily. But he'll give them a choice whether to be born or not.

You've got it. There's no way I'll be party to contributing to the mess which is the world's bludgeoning population.

Being alive now, conscious and capable of thought, all things considered, would you rather never have been born?

Discuss...

Seeing as I am not committing suicide, this would be strongly confirming that I am glad I decided to be born.

One perspective would be, life itself, all living things, seem to show a great zest to live. I think if one is fortunate enough to be born healthy and one lives healthily, the organism itself will continue to demonstrate this attribute. As to whether one pre-exists this life, one does in the abstract sense of one's cultural, genetic, and physical inheritance, combined with this kind of impersonal life-force. And actually, in this day and age, it is a serious question, because there are too many people who decide in balance that it does have no purpose, which is obviously tragic for those who love them.

Not necessarily. But he'll give them a choice whether to be born or not.

You've got it. There's no way I'll be party to contributing to the mess which is the world's bludgeoning population.

Bludgeoning, haha?

But I salute your attitude, to my mind, this is the correct way of thinking. There's enough suffering in the world, why add to it?

Seeing as I am not committing suicide, this would be strongly confirming that I am glad I decided to be born.

Quote:

The tricky thing is that if you dont have children, people like you, who are willing to not have children for the sake of not over-populating the world, will be less present, so, at the same time, you are etically enticed to both have and do not have children.

It's a catch 22. I agree.

Quote:

I mean, part of the world's problems probally comes from the fact that the poor have lots of children while the rich have few, meaning that richness and knowledge remain undivided

.

The poor die off to the tune of 30,000 children each day, but the population keeps rising because the ethic of those who have them by the truck load seems to be, some of these sickly children might survive to take care of us, and some might live long enough to get sponsored by some rich person who'll send us money. So it can be argued that sponsorship results in third world countries spawning more children, and hence, more poverty, more starvation, and a need for even more sponsorship. Is this why there's more sponsorship adds on television now than in the past? There certainly are more of these adds.

This is also why I refuse to sponsor a child. Am I being unethical? I don't think so. As for those who do sponsor third world children, I won't applaud them. In fact, I'd argue that their supposed altruistic behaviour is not ethical if it results in more poverty in the end. I'd even call their actions irresponsible and shortsighted. This is the same reason I'm against any nation sending any other nation any kind of foreign aid. We've got homeless people on the streets in our own town. And the analogy I think would be something like this:

If my neighbour living next door has a child who's hungry. And I have a child who is hungry, who's child should I feed? Our foreign policy as it stands is saying: Ignore your own child and feed your neighbour's child. It's your moral imperative!

This is bullshit, pure and simple. As long as there is one homeless person on the streets of Vancouver's eastside (home to Canada's most downtrodden) then not even one cent of taxpayers money should be going to third world nations.

The reason I refuse to have children (I've convinced my wife to my position and she's actually happy for it) is because of one reason alone: We can't afford it.

I refuse to bring a child into the world if I cannot provide for the child and make life as easy as possible for them, financially speaking. Otherwise, I think I would make a fantastic father, mainly because I have a compassionate and understanding wife with high moral fibre. I think the world would be far better off if everyone thought my way, but of course this is arrogant, isn't it? But the economic system we're governed by demands that most of the population be of a lower education and working class, not lawyers/doctors/rocket scientists etc., but just menial lower class labourers, to make the system work. If there were no peons where would the kings and queens be? So shy would I want to contribute to such a sickening system of deliberately induced impoverishment and slavery?

Quote:

Off course, you could instead just try to spread your ideas, like you are doing now =)

I hope these ideas are as infectious as the black plague.

One ending note: "If all the humans on earth suddenly dropped dead all the animals would offer up one great collective sigh of relief."

I refuse to bring a child into the world if I cannot provide for the child and make life as easy as possible for them, financially speaking. Otherwise, I think I would make a fantastic father, mainly because I have a compassionate and understanding wife with high moral fibre. I think the world would be far better off if everyone thought my way, but of course this is arrogant, isn't it? But the economic system we're governed by demands that most of the population be of a lower education and working class, not lawyers/doctors/rocket scientists etc., but just menial lower class labourers, to make the system work. If there were no peons where would the kings and queens be? So why would I want to contribute to such a sickening system of deliberately induced impoverishment and slavery?

Bravo, particularly that last sentence. Why indeed?

I tried to get at these sorts of issues before on a thread on this forum, but was met with the usual nonsense about how life is a wonderful gift, god blah blah blah... Rubbish!

Why oh why would anyone in their right mind think being born and trapped in work for 60 years was a worthwhile endeavour? Keep it! I'm sure when I was just a random collection of atoms floating around the cosmos unconsciously, I was perfectly okay. That is how my children shall remain.

Why subject them to this?

So your just a collection of some random atoms trapped together working in perfect harmony to achieve absolutly nothing?Is that really any different than floating around trying to achieve nothing?.....Rubbish!
What does a wonderful life have to do with anything,life sucks,but just because you dont appreciate this contradictory state of being doesn't mean your children wont....Rubbish!
You want to know what i think gogo,i think your brain needs a hug.