stop making kids

^^ I've heard that His Kingdom is not of this world, so I doubt if He cares much what we do to the planet.

As to criminal penalties for "overbreeding". While it may (probably not , but maybe) be a wise law, it would be ultimatly enforced by people like those in Washington. Hmmm..... Nah. bad idea!

 

OK but can we keep practicing? I mean, this moratorium can't last forever...

Oh, and Crystal is right. I've been to Northern VA. All the Hispanic people there have 30, 40, I saw one lady with 42 kids.

 

What if that only child dies? Huh? Then what? No I'm going to stick to my plan and have 5 children, I don't even care if I have to make two mothers, I'm going to have plenty of kids. Our planet is going to die anyway, what are you trying to do? Stop the inevitable?

You are a raging hippie, think straight for once.

 

The salvation of civilization rests in the hands of our youth and the most irresponsible people on the planet today are their parents...parents that never seriously lift a hand to help resolve overpopulation or the suffering of the children that are already here...parents that figure the best way to save the planet is to produce more kids that will join the rest of us to consume what is left of this wondrous planet...parents that spend their life punching the time clock, watching TV and teaching their kids to compete with the Jones...and worst of all parents that send their kids to schools without gardens!

 

What? No seriously, what the hell do you mean by that?

 

Unfortunately if you are unfamiliar with the garden there is no way for you to know...but it is never too late! I suppose the hell of it is that you think that hell is in the meaning.

My point is that everything that you (me and everybody else) eat, wear, breath, drink and build your shelter from comes from this wondrous earth. We are taught how to own it, possess it and exploit it but we have lost touch with the sacredness. We have lost the spirit of sharing.

You are probably familiar with the saying “feed a man a fish and he eats for a day… teach a man to fish he eats a lifetime.”

...teach our children to be good stewards of this earth, to plant seeds, pull weeds and celebrate the harvest and you teach OUR children to celebrate life and to love each other.

Every important lesson in life should be taught in the wholist of all places…the garden. But unfortunately most are brainwashed…public, private and religious schools plant the seeds of competition, capitalism, materialism, monotheism… the conceptual foundations of American (western)thought.

We worship what we don’t have and piss on that which we do.

"You must teach your children that the ground beneath their feet is the ashes of your grandfathers. So that they will respect the land, tell your children that the earth is rich with the lives of our kin. Teach your children what we have taught our children, that the earth is our mother. Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of the earth. If men spit upon the ground, they spit upon themselves." - Chief Seattle,

A true revolution would be reclaiming the sacredness of this wondrous planet.

 

how are you going to have a revolution with out new minds to teach the revolution to? In the end to make any change, ur going to have to produce more children, blank slates!!

 

Ahh! The great dilemma! Fortunately there are some parents that see the error of their ways and are able to teach children not to make the same mistakes that they made. There are no blank slates. Karma is what is and if a kid has irresponsible parents then chances are they will also be irresponsible parents. If our children were taught to be responsible they would be able to do what our parents were unable or unwilling to do…make sure we do not overstress this wondrous planet with more kids!

How about a simple moratorium! Stop having kids until we take care of the ones that are already here. We could reduce the population of this earth by at least ¾’s in your lifespan. No wars... just plain ole interresponsibility!

 

I am sure your intentions are good, but you must realise that what you preach will never happen, ever, the majority runs this world, and the majority isn't all that bright, I think our world would benefit greatly if all convicted rapists and murderers were shot, the crime rate would go down severely for those crimes because of the hefty penalty, but that's probably never going to happen either, some can only dream.

 

I have no illusions…the road to hell is littered with good intentions BUT I also believe that the human spirit has been suppressed for way too long. Our intuition is restless and seeking relief. Instinctively peace and love speaks to us all but there are enormous obstacles that challenge us to live it. The competitive, materialistic mindset feeds the aristocratic capitalistic elite. Our leadership has betrayed all citizens of this planet (including themselves) and they have had their heads in the clouds for way too long. Our kids and their kids all have been abused and exploited and I do believe that we are experiencing significant tremors of a profound spiritual revolution. Truth is revealing the madness. Hopefully debate and discussion will help minimize the misery and challenge us all to join together to claim our birthright…peace and love.

Make no mistake. The concept of a hierarchal bureaucracy…of a monotheistic God has enslaved our souls.

Your power to change and my power to change are at hand…claim it!

Be here now! You DO have a choice! Celebrate this wonderous life. We are all in this together.

 

The majority is very bright if left to their own means.

School is brainwashing and trains dependency on people and material things.

Work is slavery, no one should ever have to work.

Murderers and rapists aren't born, they are a sign of sick society and our society is very depressed, oppressed and exploited.


Stop feeding the system. Children might be sweet little souls to you but to a capitalistic mind they are future workers to be exploited and oppressed. If you cannot give them a free, and clean world than don't have them.

 

Something new is to teach our kids to respect nature and each other, to not overstress and pollute it, to respect that harmony and resonance goes to the heart of our being. If they learn this they would not have kids until all kids already here have a chance. We’re way over populated already. We’re already reaching the tipping point. Fucking for fucking sake without precaution is insane. Fucking to have kids in an overpopulated world is the act of abusive parents.

 

Again, I am sure your intentions are good, but no way in hell are your dreams going to come true, sorry, life sucks in many ways.

 

Education should be free, most public schools in North America don't teach much in the big picture of things, people start to really learn in University, and it costs too much, University should be free and public schools should have the same high education offered in private schools, however in the real world, equality will never exist and thus the majority will be left as " average " minded people.

Riiiiiiiight, yeah, the roof above your head exists because someone worked to build it.

Not an excuse, the criminal must be punished. Rape and murder aren't a result of society, some people steal because they have to, but no one has to rape or murder.

I don't believe in a soul, I believe in continuing my bloodline and one kid isn't going to cut it, that one kid may die accidentally, develop a disorder, become a failure, no, I have to have several kids.

 

I'm cool with not having kids, but that's not to say that it should be for everyone...I don't think the origional poster actually meant that everyone should stop having kids, just that not everyone should. I know pleanty of people in this world who have kids and shouldn't....same goes the opposite way, I know a few people who can't have kids and would be really great parents.


In my area I do see people that have many-many kids, and to be honest, some of them have kids to get money, I wouldn't say minorities, but more people with lower incomes tend to have more kids in my area because IF they're on welfare they'll get more money for each kid they have, if they're not on welfare, they may not have health insurance or the means to get birth control. On the other end of the spectrum, my husband is the oldest of 8. His parents were not the type of people that had kids to get money, but simply had them because they truely love kids had the money to afford them and wanted a big family...they even run a daycare.

My husband and I at this point in our lives have no desire to have any children and we've been married for about 4 years. That's not to say that this won't change, but if down the line we decide that we want children, we'll most likely adopt. There are pleanty of children out there in the world already who need homes as it is. Also if I were ever to have or adopt children, I would want to be financially stable and have a house to live in that was mine, or at least on the way to being my own. That's another problem I see, people having kids and not really being able to afford it.

I could go on, but I'm afraid I'll just start rambling.

 

good points mlo. in new zealand i've seen poor families who get more welfare money for each new child, which is the worst kind of encouragement.

i guess the best argument against having children is that you're subjecting your offspring to a terrible future. many of us will live to see the beginning of climate change's dreaded effects, imagine what someone living 80 years from not will have to suffer through. the only thing they have to look forward to is medical advanement and the development of flawless virtual reality systems that will mean it doesn't matter how fucked-up earth is.

maximus: dude, what's this obsession with your bloodline? it's been said before, but your thinking is 500 years out of date. nobody gives a fuck about bloodlines except maybe the royal family. when i'm dead, i won't care if my DNA continues or not, because i'll be dead... if you think that you are so special, you should get yourself cryogenically stored (not when you die, but now, so you'll be in your prime) and then thaw out when we've solved all the world's problems and everyone is celebrating how great their genes are, or some other irrelevant shit.

 

I may not see the end of this planet, I want my children to, I want to be apart of the last humanity on earth. I also have dreams of politics and in politics it's good to have a large family, you don't have to, I just want to have several children because I was an only child, and I know in the big picture it won't matter but what the hey, if the future trully is crap, mass suicide is always an option, or, better yet, WORLD WAR III, YEAH!!!!

 

Thomas Malthus, the supposed "father" of all this population phobia gloom and doom nonsense, supposedly said that somebody must die, to make room for each birth. What utter rubbish! There is a rather obvious alternative that far better promotes the greater good of the many. How about that humans instead, go on accumulating in numbers. There's really no need for prospective parents, to wait and wait, probably "until hell freezes over," (when maybe the population size might eventually or never finally dip a little smaller in size?) to go ahead and enjoy having all the children they were meant to have. The obvious way to handle the population concern, in a world with so many, many people already, and respect human dignity and human rights, and welcome people to have all the children they were meant to have or "all the children God gives," is to populate the planet denser and denser, and more efficiently. The world may no longer be "empty" losing merely but one of the 100s of great reasons to procreate, but neither is it "full" either. Where to put the burgeoning billions of people? Simple. Where they have always been put. In between all the people living already. Who do we think we are, to try to anger God, in pretending that we can somehow decide who gets to live and breed, and who doesn't? There can simply come to be, more places with lots of people, and fewer places far away from lots of people. Cities only occupy but 2 or 3% of the land. It could be more.

And what exactly, is "nature?" Isn't the natural increase of humans, quite natural? Aren't humans, in some way, part of "nature?" So if nature could have preference, or "have its way," then even nature would multiply us all the more, and consider even our cities, that it probably takes just to house so many, many people, also part of "nature." Nature then would "prefer" for human-filled cities, to grow denser and larger, all the more, if such growth is largely population-driven.

You talk of "nature" and "harmony?" Well what about people or supposed "environmental" extremists, talking a more consistant talk, and being much concerned about people directly polluting their bodies, with such horrors as nasty cancer stick cigarettes, ugly tattoos or hideous body piercings, or polluting their bodies with shoddy, experimental, make-humans-to-be-guinea-pigs-or-laboratory-test-rats contraceptives??? What about a bit more respect for people's, often-quite-serious, religious beliefs? "Good" Catholics talk against "artificial" contraception, as being against God's will, or going against nature. Well yeah, there's lots of unpleasant "side effects" not to mention the deliberate attempt at preventing valuable human beings from coming to life. What could be more natural than for women to go on squeezing out babies from between their legs? We don't try to limit how much people may breathe or eat or how much they may eliminate body wastes, but rather accomodate such needs. There's no quotas on how much our bodies may pump the necessary blood circulation. So why bother to limit how many babies the naturally growing numbers of women of childbearing age, may "pump" into the world? Isn't prolife accomodation of all the necessary human lives, far easier than population "control" that God never intended for humans? Why do they forever seem to keep coming up with ever more a bewildering array of contraceptive "options?" Because all the previous "options" were flawed, as humans were never designed to use "birth control." God's commandment to humans, to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, should have clued us into that, and also obviously implied, that the proper world population size, is up to God to decide for us, as God should also plan our proper family sizes, for us, thus that we need not bother with awkward and shoddy, anti-life, anti-family, anti-human "birth control."

So if "artificial" contraception isn't a very good idea, according to the "good" Catholics, and also according to probably most religions, BTW, does that leave the Catholic-tolerated "natural family planning?" Well not exactly. While there of course are virtues to "self-control" and more "natural" means, plus that it is free for the poor, and thus doesn't fund anti-life human-hating interests, the world counters that married people, lying together in the same bed at night, obviously have some problems with "self-control." What part of "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth," do we not understand? I can't possibly have enough children, to meet the natural desire that humans were granted by God, to have more and more people coming to life and enjoying living. So large families should be encouraged worldwide. So that leaves us to discuss, the virtues of the "no method" method of "family planning." BTW, did I mention how natural the "no method" method, is?

So we are "way over populated" already? By what standard? By what the world population size was, in the past? Come on, some changes in nature, only go but one way. Food usually goes into the mouth, not out of it. Babies grow bigger, into adults, not the other way around.

"It is high time, to accept as forever gone, the sparsely populated world of the past, and to move on and make an orderly transition, to the populous world of the future." Pronatalist

Just like a baby can't remain small forever, neither can human populations. Humanity shows a remarkable penchant for growth in human numbers, and it is our God-given destiny and birthright. And yet we are among the slowest among creatures, at multiplying, and being supposedly intelligent, already have ample means of adapting and adjusting to our naturally rising numbers. If to some population worrywarts, our planet perhaps appears to be becoming "pregnant" with people, so much the better, as "pregnancy" leads to a wonderous "birth" of some sort, and not all the gloom and doom that some overly "religious" "environmental" extremists so like to fancy.

We're already reaching the "tipping point?" Huh? Maybe the "tipping" point at which more and more countries flip from having many acres of land per person, to many people per acre? Then for the greater good of the many, hadn't we, if we want to worry about it, that is, be exploring, how humans can in fact, learn to and adapt to living and breeding in closer proximity to other people, on the global scale at least? I think it cool, to consider a reversal from people depopulating the countryside for the excitement or jobs and opportunity of the cities, to moving back to the countryside, but now at urban densities, because there is getting to be so many of us. If we are reaching some supposed "tipping point" then that is all the more reason to advocate people having naturally, possibly large and "unplanned" families in the growing cities and towns, as perhaps there's no longer room enough for everybody to live in the "countryside" anymore, and for it still to be considered "countryside?" Urbanize the planet to whatever extent needed, for the sakes of course, of our possibly numerous children.

They say that you can't stop people from having sex. Well why don't they complete the idea? People been blinded by the liberal immoral mindset, grand ol' "bait and switch" of rather than "choice" to not have children, contraceptives help bring rampant promiscuity, abortion, selfishness, divorce, and the "obligation" to supposedly not have "too many" children for the supposed sake of "the environment?" Complete the idea to say, that we can't stop people from having babies. The more populated we get, the more people there are, who rather like living, and probably expect to reproduce too. Many of the children soon to reach childbearing age now, likely came from large families, and may want to repeat the wonderful experience of growing up with many brothers and sisters, for their children. As I have explained, married people should fuck naturally, inviting pregnancy to possibly come, should God allow it. Love should be welcome to "overflow" and result in babies. That's the obvious main purpose to sex. Without it, one could question, why exchange bodily fluids at all? Isn't that sort of "unsanitary" were it not necessary and legitimized, as a natural part of married life and necessary procreation, so vital to the continuance of the human race?

No, it's the act of loving parents. I am not "better" than my children, and so I want to erect no unnatural obstacle, to the possible conception. I invite human life to flourish and multiply and spread, naturally. For children to be explained to why, their parents don't practice any means of "birth control," helps them better understand how valuable they are, and how much they are loved, that possibly more children, as God may permit, are always welcome. People do need to, as the Bible says, the just shall live by faith. We do need to depent upon God, at least, somewhat. Children very much want to come to life and live, even if into "overcrowded" homes or surroundings. More housing can be built "later" but human fertility is fragile and fast fades with age, and so married couples can't simply have their children "later" or they might not come at all, if they don't let them come when nature "prefer" or God blesses.

Also, talking about promoting what is "natural," means allow the body to sort of "know" when it's time to get pregnant, avoiding "unnatural" "birth control," and letting the human race grow naturally, even if seemingly "out of control." Population "control" should be a rather obvious evil. The very word "control" should lead a logical person, to ask embarassing questions about who can we trust, to do all this barbaric "controlling?"

As I see it, there are 3 perceptional dimension into which, growing human populations can yet expand: outwards, inwards, and upwards. I will have to explain that later, as I am out of time. But if there was any real shortage of land, unlikely within the forseeable future, why not just stack people upwards into taller buildings?

 

i'm suprised no one has addressed the issue that people today have a longer life span than before. I find that is more a factor in overpopulation than the amount of kids we're having. You can't deny a person the right to live because of overpopulation though.

 

Any of you heard of the "Quiverfull" movement?

http://www.quiverfull.com/aboutus.php