• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should childless couples be considered inferior?

Should childless couples be considered inferior?

  • Yes. Having children is a moral obligation to God/society/family/etc.

    Votes: 4 2.8%

  • No, they are free not to have children. They don't have to answer to anybody

    Votes: 105 74.5%

  • Not if they have reproductive problems.

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • Yes, even if they have reproductive problems. They can adopt, you know.

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • They should get a medal for lowering world population.

    Votes: 20 14.2%

  • Other

    Votes: 9 6.4%

  • I don't know.

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Total voters
    141
wolfie said:
I'm shocked SM..why ever did you make such a decision at such an early age??

Do you dislike children?

Hey..they are not everyone's bag..
Click to expand...

Because I don't want kids, I never have, and I don't see any reason to believe I ever will. Why wait? Why continue blowing money on temporary, recurrent costs, and constant opportunities for user error when I could just be done with it? It's a load off my mind.

I don't particularly care for children. Dislike might be a bit strong. I understand they're just doing what they do -- but I don't like what they do. I prefer not to spend too much time around them if I can help it, especially if they're under 10 or so.
 
I feel sorry for people who have so little going for them that they think their ability to reproduce makes them better than those who choose otherwise.

I guess if that's all you got, then go for it, but I will continue to regard people according to more meaningful criteria.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Because I don't want kids, I never have, and I don't see any reason to believe I ever will. Why wait? Why continue blowing money on temporary, recurrent costs, and constant opportunities for user error when I could just be done with it? It's a load off my mind.

I don't particularly care for children. Dislike might be a bit strong. I understand they're just doing what they do -- but I don't like what they do. I prefer not to spend too much time around them if I can help it, especially if they're under 10 or so.
Click to expand...

Thank you..I love truthful people..:clap:
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
No, just the tube that leads them into the blood chamber. The ova are still there. They just wander off to die somewhere in my abdominal cavity.
Click to expand...

So, I guess, no more monthly cycles, sanitary pads, condoms and fear of unwanted pregnancy?
 
Canell said:
So, I guess, no more monthly cycles, sanitary pads, condoms and fear of unwanted pregnancy?
Click to expand...

Everything about my cycle is exactly the same. A tubal ligation does nothing but block the fallopian tubes. All the same hormones are in play, and the uterus will get the signals even if the ova never shows up at its intended destination. And I'm glad. I think of it like a monthly "All clear!"

No condoms assuming I'm monogamous and we're both tested, which presently is the case. I was still a bit nervous the first new months -- years of having that in the back of your head don't go away overnight. But not so much anymore, no.
 
Last edited:
No, however they should not be giving advice on how to raise childrend like so many high educated without children do.
 
MaggieD said:
They are biological failures. Isn't that enough?
Click to expand...
Lol. Now that's funny. Mother Teresa was a biological failure, but a tremendous success in fields outside of biological reproduction. Some one-celled creatures reproduce asexually. I'd hardly call that a triumph, but it's certainly a biological success story. Maybe the childless are actually helping out with the gene pool a bit, in which case we owe them a debt of gratitude. I, for one, certainly appreciate the fact that Michael Moore hasn't reproduced. At least, I hope not.
 
I'm all for couples in healthy relationships reproducing, it's a wonderful thing. Some couples, however, should be commended for restraint. Not everyone is cut out for parenting. In either case, merely reproducing doesn't reflect the worthiness of an individual or a couple for that matter.
 
assuming i meet someone who i feel is not going to turn my life into a nightmare, i'd like to have at least one kid. that being said, i don't get some societal gold star if i **** successfully, and i don't get a demerit if i don't. having kids is a choice, not a requirement. there are many ways to contribute to society, and if your only contribution is ****ing, then you're not contributing much, IMO.
 
humbolt said:
Lol. Maybe the childless are actually helping out with the gene pool a bit, in which case we owe them a debt of gratitude. .
Click to expand...


So when we reduce our families...the third word is breeding willy-nilly...

Shouldn't we be more concerned about this??
 
wolfie said:
So when we reduce our families...the third word is breeding willy-nilly...

Shouldn't we be more concerned about this??
Click to expand...

Yes. And we should aim towards helping them reduce their own numbers, not increasing ours.

After all, part of the reason they're third world countries is because they breed to the point where they have no time to pursue education, and no ability to care for themselves or their multitudinous offspring.

And the reason for that is because they have little access to birth control, and there's a lot of rape going on. The fact of the matter is this: when you give women a choice in the matter, most of them will not choose to pump out an entire football team, nor are they built to. Most will have a couple, some will have none, and some will have more.
 
wolfie said:
So when we reduce our families...the third word is breeding willy-nilly...

Shouldn't we be more concerned about this??
Click to expand...
I don't know enough to say one way or the other. The third world is just as you say, but I have learned not to worry too much about those things over which I have no control. We'll see the consequences of the third world population explosion soon enough, and hopefully endemic poverty won't be the unhappy outcome in the end. It hasn't proven to be in the past, but we're in uncharted territory in sheer numbers now. I will note that extraordinary people rather routinely come from unlikely backgrounds. I do view this procreation business as a personal choice (made much easier by medical advances) to be respected.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Yes. And we should aim towards helping them reduce their own numbers, not increasing ours.

After all, part of the reason they're third world countries is because they breed to the point where they have no time to pursue education, and no ability to care for themselves or their multitudinous offspring.

And the reason for that is because they have little access to birth control, and there's a lot of rape going on. The fact of the matter is this: when you give women a choice in the matter, most of them will not choose to pump out an entire football team, nor are they built to. Most will have a couple, some will have none, and some will have more.
Click to expand...

We pump billions of pounds into Africa etc..nothing changes..we are still faced with dying and sick children..as a taxpayer here..I would like a breakdown of where these billions of pounds have gone..War lords??..Greasing the palms of big businessmen??

To be sure..Female contraception is the last thing on the list..

African men have a code..If it is willing (or not) screw it..

Africa is rife with AIDS..and it's children..
 
Of course not. No one has the duty to have children, and if a married couple chooses that kids aren't right for them then that in no way makes them inferior to those that do have children.
 
Canell said:
Many couples don't have children for various reasons. Should they be considered inferior in society? :confused:
Click to expand...

People make choice in their lives and to make the choice NOT to procreate is something they decide - no one else. I'm assuming you mean those that CHOOSE to remain childless. There are instances however that for whatever fertility reason, people run into difficulty having children. Do I see those people as inferior? No - mostly because I am one of those people and do not see myself as inferior simply because I could not at one time, become pregnant.

Are people inferior who adopt? Hell no.

What exactly does your question imply, is what I'm wondering. Choices are a lot different than circumstances. Maybe a bit of clarification is needed as to why you pose such a question?
 
A couple choosing to be childless simply to play their part in reducing the world's population when it would be in their multi-faceted best interest to have children is like people choosing to be vegetarians or vegans for the political/ethics of it when their specific blood type/biological nature requires they eat meat in order to thrive.

It's just really self-defeatingly dumb.

If everyone who wants to have children limited the number of children they had a part in creating to two then they would not be participating in growing the population, and those who naturally chose to have one child or no children would function to reduce the population.

The resultant negative population change rate would, over time, eliminate over-population .. and eliminate poverty soon thereafter as a result.

That's one of the reasons I'm watching the new pope -- to see what his position on the modern-day insane "go into all the world and multiply [like rabbits!]" historic Catholic edict will be, if he has the rosaries to rescind it, so places like Mexico City can stop the senseless breeding and have a chance to lift themselves out of their miserable squalor with the help of some U.N. charity in the form of birthcontrol.
 
Without question - considering others to be inferior , for any reason, is the worst possible thing. And, it is one of our "national problems" which will be solved , over time...
The first thing to learn is honesty.
And this applies to all of us, including me.
 
IMO, those who adopt are "superior", BUT, we cannot overdo this inferior/superior thing...Best to be slightly judgmental..
TheGirlNextDoor said:
People make choice in their lives and to make the choice NOT to procreate is something they decide - no one else. I'm assuming you mean those that CHOOSE to remain childless. There are instances however that for whatever fertility reason, people run into difficulty having children. Do I see those people as inferior? No - mostly because I am one of those people and do not see myself as inferior simply because I could not at one time, become pregnant. ..

Are people inferior who adopt? Hell no.


What exactly does your question imply, is what I'm wondering. Choices are a lot different than circumstances. Maybe a bit of clarification is needed as to why you pose such a question?
Click to expand...
 
We should try pumping the right things into Africa.
This is not difficult.
Just talk with the people..
Ask - "what do you need" ?..
They may say "nothing" , just leave us be...
But, in order to determine this, we must ask.
wolfie said:
We pump billions of pounds into Africa etc..nothing changes..we are still faced with dying and sick children..as a taxpayer here..I would like a breakdown of where these billions of pounds have gone..War lords??..Greasing the palms of big businessmen??

To be sure..Female contraception is the last thing on the list..

African men have a code..If it is willing (or not) screw it..

Africa is rife with AIDS..and it's children..
Click to expand...
 
earthworm said:
We should try pumping the right things into Africa.
This is not difficult.
Just talk with the people..
Ask - "what do you need" ?..
They may say "nothing" , just leave us be...
But, in order to determine this, we must ask.
Click to expand...

The only thing we are pumping into Africa..is greasing the palms of the fat dictators so we can pillage their land..

Women come much lower down in the scale...
 
Canell said:
Many couples don't have children for various reasons. Should they be considered inferior in society? :confused:
Click to expand...
why would we want people who DO NOT want to have children to then have what they do not want

if we could only get those who cannot support their own children not to have them in the first place
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
No, just the tube that leads them into the blood chamber. The ova are still there. They just wander off to die somewhere in my abdominal cavity.
Click to expand...

I thought all tubals were potentially reversible but that success rate varied with type of tubal. At that's what the doc told my wife after she had hers - which was after we had two children. At any rate there's in vitro should you change your mind - which is quite possible, a lot of what I believed and cared about at 23 was discarded in the ensuing 30 years.

On the original question of course they aren't inferior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom