Why Have Children?

image courtesy Matt Romack

Get married. Buy a house. Have kids. Retire. Die.

Why step three? Is it part of an egotistical drive to preserve one’s DNA? A desire to raise the most exotic pet of all – a human? A need to obtain a trophy to prove you had unprotected sex?

None of those, says a team of Cambridge and Stanford researchers. Instead, Dr. Partha Dasgupta and Dr. Paul Ehrlich posit, it’s part of the age-old question of “keeping up with the Joneses.” Physorg reports on the duo’s study which uses …

… data from several sources to compare population growth rates between people in Africa—where population growth is exploding in some areas—with others where it is not, to show that when people experience peer pressure to have large families and also feel pressure to keep up with the consumption habits of other people where they live, the result can be explosive population growth.

The results of Dasgupta and Ehrlich’s research won’t be a surprise to some. In her recent book Why Have Children?: The Ethical Debate, Christine Overall of Queen’s University in Canada notes that,

There are many urges apparently arising from our biological nature that we nonetheless should choose not to act upon. If we’re going to keep having kids, we ought to be able to come up with a reason.

118 Comments on "Why Have Children?"

  1. kowalityjesus | Apr 24, 2013 at 4:46 pm |

    agh fuck your depopulating paradigm. It so pisses me off. Anyone who can rationalize or debate about whether they should have children is someone whose offspring I want mine to be around.

    • Hadrian999 | Apr 24, 2013 at 5:05 pm |

      I’m guessing there is an error in here somewhere

      • mannyfurious | Apr 24, 2013 at 6:25 pm |

        I think he’s saying that anyone who’s smart enough to question whether they should have children are precisely the type of people who should be having children.

    • BuzzCoastin | Apr 24, 2013 at 8:05 pm |

      I’m not necessarily for depopulation
      that is, I don’t feel strongly one way or the other
      but spend four years in China like I have
      experience lots of people everywhere all the friggin time
      more people than you ever thought could fit into a bus, subway or sidewalk
      nothing but people people people everywhere
      than tell me what you think about population control

      • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2013 at 1:31 am |

        thank heaven China listened to Malthus instead of Hitler. Lebensraum with a billion people would have spelled a very different world history.

      • but spend four years in China like I have….
        …THEN tell me….
        You’re an awesome guy, Dude, but your phallusies are elementary and conclusions do not follow. (“You have to know what I know before you can be right like I am right.”)

        On the other hand … arguing on the internet is like sticking one’s dick in a fan-blade … and I know you are wise enough to have known that for years.

        I hate Disinformation and Psychological Warfare.
        editor in chief of Der Homelanders

        • BuzzCoastin | May 17, 2013 at 6:55 pm |

          > but your phallusies are elementary and conclusions do not follow

          thanks for the great example
          I can see why yer editor in chief of Der Homelanders

  2. Nomansland | Apr 24, 2013 at 4:56 pm |

    People have children, especially in poor countries, because not most of them die and the ones who survive can help work and take care of their parents and siblings

  3. Chaos_Dynamics | Apr 24, 2013 at 5:40 pm |

    Continuity of existence.

  4. Joel Tattooing | Apr 24, 2013 at 5:53 pm |

    Why do anything?

    • That’s what I’m trying to understand. Ultimately everything is futile and human beings will be extinct soon. Especially with all this technology we are producing. Let’s just stop everything and focus on bringing about our end in comfort rather than the malevolence we are currently engaged in.

  5. Did not look like a good idea to me. Besides, why the fuck would I wanna create more wage slaves for The Empire? No thanks.

    • mannyfurious | Apr 24, 2013 at 11:38 pm |

      It’s a double edged sword. Why let all the morons be the only ones to procreate.

      • Just cuz the mouth-breathers breed like bunnies doesn’t mean I need to add to the insanity by bringing more people into this madhouse.
        The morons are welcome to it.

    • i find this attitude totally lacking in gratitude for your own life and the amazing potential you have, just by being alive and breathing – and how you can also offer that potential to a new life, as well as giving it a great amount of love! why do anything, why not do anything. ugh!

      • Stephanie Buday | Apr 25, 2013 at 12:51 pm |

        I don’t see a connection to gratitude and having children if one doesn’t want them. If you want to show gratitude, then take care of your parents in old age or do something extraordinary with your life. There are 7 billion people competing for resources on this planet and Americans, 5% of the world population, take up 30% of the world resources. It is not a source of gratitude to contribute to that problem. If you want kids, great. But you should actually *want* them and not procreate out of a sense of duty.

      • Sorry but I have no “gratitude” being born on a place I never asked to be on. To a place where the potential to suffer is great, and where I have suffered greatly, and where I remain in constant discomfort. Life has no potential. It’s only direction is decay. Better to have not been born than to be here. In the words of Adam Jensen “I never asked for this”.

        (Also there is no such thing as “love” :/)

        • Damn dude, hope you feel better soon.
          And may you find some kind of joy and love in your life.

        • Dennis Rage | Apr 26, 2013 at 3:17 am |

          Maybe you shouldntl have kids Johnson. I hope your fortunes turn for the better.

      • Grey Knight | May 3, 2013 at 2:38 am |

        I want nothing more than to see every single human being burn to death so that I may relish their screams. Every human is guilty of the crime of creating me. I love to destroy life.

        Why would I have children and risk creating even more abominations like me? Not all of them will have the self restraint to just drink themselves to death quietly.

  6. …because it feels better without a condom?

  7. I think in the original hunting and gathering tribal situation, of our common human evolutionary past, there was more sex going on, less monogamy, and the kids were kind of raised communally by the village. I think modern humans have been trying to recreate this using birth control with mixed results.

    • Eric_D_Read | Apr 24, 2013 at 11:56 pm |

      I don’t think birth control has anything to do with that at all.
      It’s more like, “He/she looks like they’d be a good time, but I don’t want to be stuck raising a kid with them.”

    • Calypso_1 | Apr 25, 2013 at 12:20 am |

      Anthropology much?

    • I like this paradigm much better than the Hobsian brutal and short, red in tooth and claw ideas about our ancient past. Horny slacker seems so much more in line with, at least my true nature, than the brutal kill or be killed bullshit ideas we’ve been sold.

      • Read “sex at Dawn”

        • Calypso_1 | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:06 am |

          I figured that’s what you had been reading.

        • I have. brilliant read for sure.
          Also, Riane Eisler’s The Chalice and the Blade. She deals with partnership vs dominator cultures. She suggests that this competitive, hierarchical, kill or be killed model is a rather late development in our cultural evolution. That before that we lived in partnership societies that were less hierarchical, more cooperative than the dominator model that unfortunately took over later and that we have inherited.

      • I’m descended from cold blooded killers though. True story. But if everyone goes back far enough we are all descended from egalitarian hunter gatherers that used to eat berries, bathe in cool streams lay around and fuck (probably after eating magic mushrooms).

        That must be before all the Reptilian DNA got in the gene pool. Seriously though, a thousand years ago my ancestors were sublimating their sexual energy in order to be fearless on the Battle field. I think I still feel the effects of this in my morphogenetic field. Western Civilization is a Motherfucker. The sexual revolution was a real revolution.

        • Now that I think about it, I am also descended from cold blooded killers. My ancestors are the evil fucks that were part of the colonization the Americas during the 16th century. Before they were raping and killing natives in South America, they were fighting Moors on the Iberian peninsula.

  8. People are so lost up their ass that they don’t realize a wife and children represent the epitome of unselfishness. Not having children and homosexuality represent the ultimate form of selfishness at the very most fundamental level. Playing into desires that do not promote progression, but rather, optimize the cyclical self-efficiency of sitting in your own excrement drug-eyed looking at the sky.

    • Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 24, 2013 at 8:03 pm |

      Modern society is kind of like the rats in the maze in the 60s, when scientists connected their brains to switches that stimulated pleasure. Rats never evolved with such things in their environment so they had no ‘gag reflex’ to curtail the amount of pleasure recieved. And so they forgot to eat and of course procreate and those rats left no descendants. They became a dead end.

      What people want is not whats best for them. And when you say that you’ll be accused of totalitarianism but the people most likely to object, live lifestyles made possible only in a sick society.

    • lifobryan | Apr 24, 2013 at 9:25 pm |

      “No wife, no horse, no mustache ….”

    • >”People are so lost up their ass that they don’t realize a wife and children represent the epitome of unselfishness.”

      Huh?! I think that what you just typed is the opposite. First of all family is all about possession. HAVE a wife, HAVE kids, HAVE a house, OWNERSHIP of anything is ultimately SELFISHNESS TO THE MAXIMUM DEGREE, OUTRIGHT. Furthermore, producing progeny in a world filled with 7billion+ humans and counting; greedy, and needy humans, and thus ultimately, UNSTABLE humans is the EPITOME of stupidity and irresponsibility. YOU are playing into desires, confusing child rearing and producing to “progression” and unselfishness, when actually this has been the opposite over time. Also, the child did not ask to come on this earth. You fucked and did something to bring a product on the earth (human) that would otherwise NEVER APPEAR OF IT’S OWN ACCORD! The Earth went from a pristine state to a toilet bowl. I think that homosexuals and straight people who choose to NOT HAVE CHILDREN are some of the most reflective, unselfish people on the planet. Indeed they do have selfishness, they love themselves as all human beings do. But they ARE NOT SELF-CENTERED enough to think replicating lines of DNA, actually means anything.

      • Chris Sirias | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:36 am |

        ^ Complete moron. I don’t know how else to say it. And for sure has never had a kid.

        • Complete retard. I don’t know how else to say it. You just reject my argument, with an insult, quite revealing really, cause really you know you have no argument to support bringing beings into the world AGAINST THEIR WILL AND FOREKNOWLEDGE. YOU JUST DO IT CAUSE YOU HAVE A FUCKING PENIS IN BETWEEN YOUR LEGS AND YOU PROCREATE LIKE A MINDLESS APE. FUCKTARD. If you have any kids or are planning to I feel very sorry for them. They are going to, or do, have an idiot father. (Most fathers are idiots anyway.)

          • Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 25, 2013 at 1:52 pm |

            In a sane society that argument would be considered batshit insane even without the block capitals lol.

          • I think people who mindlessly procreate and advocate this, are batshit insane.

      • Actually no… everything you said about populational instability will be attenuated through technology. so thats that. It takes time. We are growing in technology.

        What I am saying is:
        technology will not fix moralistic nature. Homosexuality is a choice.

        Environmental stimuli produce epigenetic changes, so then should homosexuality produce epigenetic changes. Thus the choosing of stimuli, is the choosing of a genetic morphology.

        In a world limited by material access, epigenetic changes are now pushed and promoted by survivability through material pursuit – and not reproduction. (new age)

        Furthermore: those who control the accessibility and unveiling of material product – control the population epigenetic strategy and rate; thus by choosing homosexuality you bow your genetics out to wal-mart material.

        Having a child is not as self-centered as you think, if it is done correctly. It should produce more output, than input. It should be a beautiful thing. I do not see hairy cornhole as an equivalent comparison.

    • Anybody who is interested, needs to go to http://www.vhemt.org/ there you will see exactly why having kids is ultimately disastrous.

      • Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 25, 2013 at 1:51 pm |

        That sites funny, it denies that humans are a part of nature.

        Left-green thinking is another self-hating guilt morality.

        • “Left-green thinking is another self-hating guilt morality.”

          Usually those who have no morality are called psychopaths. Which you probably are. And it’s pretty clear at this point human beings hate nature. We really do. Over the collective span of the species we have turned the once pristine earth into a toilet bowl. Recently scientists did a study in the deep ocean and found garbage even down AT that depth.


          That’s not a good sign of human existence. That’s not a sign of human intelligence or wisdom or goodwill.

    • Forbidden Fruit | Apr 25, 2013 at 9:21 am |

      How exactly does bringing more children into an overpopulated world qualify as unselfish? Especially when so many children WHO ALREADY EXIST need loving homes? I can think of nothing MORE selfish than the desire to pass on your own DNA (which isn’t really “yours” but a chance occurrence you had no control over) when the world is in such a vile state. You’re not thinking of your child’s quality of life or how another brat will affect society and its resources, but of your own “legacy”. Egotism at its finest. Gag.

      If you want to do something truly selfless, become a foster parent. Adopt. Become a mentor. Contribute ideas rather than another mouth to feed. Your semen is not as precious as you think.

      • Chris Sirias | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:26 am |

        ^ Been drinking the dummy juice.

      • Heterosexuality allows for offspring production who hold selfless respect as life. Thus in the present time, creating a minority in the majority.

        Not having kids/ homosexuality promotes the risk of populational entrapment into a single mindset; a mindset of the cyclical-selfishly driven – inspired by material excitement. Once people are lost in desires, (everything that is not pure conscious), only more is wanted.

        In heterosexuality, the focusment of personal energy into a person before yourself, inwhich may or may not garner any value in return. In doing these acts, vitality of conscious is promotes – as only the ‘good’ will tend to stay together and survive. Evolution, natural selection, of the good if you will.

        Homosexuality is not true selflessness, in the long-run you deem your learned experiences unworthy of being molded into a child. You render your own experience-based ideas incapable of participating societal reciprocity. You say homosexuality is more important than:

        – the only act of survival needed

        – the pride of the life-cycle

        – the epitome of giving

        – the epigenetics of offspring

        Animals are not homosexual. Animals do not become homosexual. They are the equivalence of biological robots. Yet, humans, the only beings capable of moralistic thought, choice, action, and manipulation; have thought it evolutionary correct to procreate with the wrong gender. That does not make sense.
        We are in a swing of technology in which the problems you stated, will be attenuatable through the development of technology – thus only requiring time. All your worries will be attenuatable. Time will correct, as technology advances.


        time, nor technology can correct moralistic nature.

        especially if (more study is needed) the act of homosexuality causes unique epigenetic morpholigies..thus if the population falls into this selfish cycle, a unique epigenetic population can be created. but thats jus sayin

    • Chris Sirias | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:25 am |

      You hit it right man.See my post above.

  9. Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 24, 2013 at 7:57 pm |

    Ehrlich’s understanding of this issue is simplistic, not least that there is no global population problem, as there is no global population. Instead there are many different populations responding to their own particular circumstances.

    This is basic population biology.

    • Way to define words arbitrarily.

      • Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 25, 2013 at 2:27 pm |

        So how exactly am I defining words arbitrarily?

        • Applying “population” to ethnic groups but not to humanity.

          • Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 25, 2013 at 3:21 pm |

            There is no such thing as humanity, its an abstraction. Populations are not.

          • Calypso_1 | Apr 25, 2013 at 3:36 pm |

            Would you not define H.sapiens as humanity?

            Or are you talking about the abstraction of humanism?

          • Daenerys_Targaryen | Apr 25, 2013 at 4:06 pm |

            Species concepts, like human races (in the zoological sense) are simply abstractions. Only the populations are real.

            The common ancestry shared between all modern human groups is no more nor less real than is that shared with bonobos, frogs, pine trees or cyanobacteria. No one is talking about all members of those clades as though they were one population, purely because they share a common ancestor.

            This is why Ehrlich is a junk scientist.

          • “Populations” are abstractions. Only individuals are real.

          • Calypso_1 | Apr 25, 2013 at 6:33 pm |

            : ) my statistician side enjoys that concept on so many levels.
            What variance does any given individual show from the abstracted population?

          • Sure, but Jin’s gonna kick my ass.

          • Calypso_1 | Apr 25, 2013 at 3:35 pm |

            Genotypes & endophenotypes though correlated to ethnicities are not equal to them.
            To make sociopolitical distinctions on these grounds certainly requires decisions by individuals & groups about how they wish to exercise their rights in balance with each other and the environment. I am reminded of the vid w/ Prof Anton regarding personal identity in relation to others.

            Global, diversity, individual, relationship, survival, population, groups, us, them, me, you – all tenuous tessellations of patterns we are intertwined with inescapably.
            To know so much about so little & still make choices about who we are becoming is frightening.

    • Calypso_1 | Apr 25, 2013 at 2:46 pm |

      It is interesting that Ehrich’s work on non-human species makes clear distinctions in regional variances of diversity & the effect it has on population dynamics.

  10. The main reason to have children is because you aren’t able to find a girlfriend who doesn’t want kids.

  11. BuzzCoastin | Apr 24, 2013 at 8:10 pm |

    > Get married. Buy a house. Have kids. Retire. Die.

    this little program has been running things for a long time
    and because the program is designed to activate as early as possible
    so that it coincides with biological urges
    it goes on unexamined and
    is therefore a powerful program that keeps things in place

  12. Hadrian999 | Apr 24, 2013 at 9:50 pm |

    I can understand wanting to have a family. Having an heir to take control of what you have created, weather it is a business, land, or your lifes work is understandable and part of many cultures. If certain groups get away with their plans for medicare and social security you will defiantly need someone to take care of you in your old age. at worst we need to stabilize the population, at best get growth below the replacement level. we can’t afford to have our population double again.

    • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2013 at 1:35 am |

      there is the argument that the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to have fewer children. Thus: ignorance=population bomb.

      Both my parents have master’s yet I have two siblings. Humbly, I wish more people would follow suit.

      • Chris Sirias | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:31 am |

        So you are saying you wish you were an only child? Or the one that never got procreated?

        • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2013 at 12:03 pm |

          I never thought about how my statement could be confusing, thank you for asking for clarification. I am saying that I wish there wasn’t a direct correlation between the intelligentsia and low fertility rates. I like your other comment.

  13. DrDavidKelly | Apr 24, 2013 at 10:15 pm |

    I met a girl, she was awesome. We had a child – something to love other than ourselves. Happy with one … geez now that I do think about it I don’t think I ever thought about it. Damn.

  14. The Well Dressed Man | Apr 25, 2013 at 4:00 am |

    We’re expansionist by nature, it seems. Once we run out of frontiers, the birth rate goes down and the average age increases. The ‘first world,’ meaning Europe, North America, Japan, and Oceania, with an aging population, is, at the moment, being genetically outcompeted by the developing world. There is some evidence that this population growth in the developing nations tapers off once a certain standard of living is achieved. Still, our history as tribes competing for resources in a scarcity environment is coded deeply into our social structures.

    Either we deliberately control our population as a species, or we court future extinction events or at least massive bottlenecking of our gene pool.

    Perhaps the solution most suited to our expansionist nature is to begin colonizing off-world. Not only will this relieve the pressure of our homeworld ecosystem, but will be an insurance policy for our ultimate survival.

    • >”be an insurance policy for our ultimate survival.”

      As biological beings our extinction is ensured. Why delay the inevitable? Why outsource our suffering and derangement to other planetary surfaces? You do know what happened when Europeans encountered indigenous people’s? Do you really want that to play out on other worlds? I didn’t think so.

      • The Well Dressed Man | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:37 pm |

        I find myself typing the words “I used to feel the same way” on these forums at least once a week. I used to feel a general sense of misanthropy and a profound guilt because the weight of history’s atrocity had been placed on my shoulders. It’s absolutely terrible that nations of people are swept aside by migration, famine, disease and war. Colonialism is by no means an exclusively European phenomenon, just the most visible at this point in history. Our impetus to explore and expand can be part of our darkest nature. Yet, I believe that we are empowered by reason to choose moral actions. Our species’ potential is limitless, and we are just beginning to understand how vast a territory there is to explore. We could hang out waiting for some kind of disaster to destroy our world (or actively cause such an end), paralyzed by fear and self-hatred, but I believe that we are better than that.

  15. Lance von Ende | Apr 25, 2013 at 8:00 am |

    What if all the men who were tricked into having children and getting married had to go around with a symbol tattooed on their forehead?

  16. The one thing I didn’t see is some people have children so they have family who will help take care of them when they are old and can no longer take care of themselves. I don’t always get along with my parents granted, but I am working on moving back to my hometown to be closer to my aging parents. Thankfully my job accommodates but I have one sibling whose job does not.

  17. Chris Sirias | Apr 25, 2013 at 11:23 am |

    How about this for a reason… It makes you a better person. It teaches selflessness to those that have half a mind.

    • Having children makes you a better person? Makes you unselfish? Hmmm…. What a neat little argument…for a 5 year child. I don’t even think a 5 year old can be this simple minded. Cause having children that you will struggle to clothe, house and feed; siphoning resources for their existence which means you will be taking away from others, ie lessening resources that others may have and could have used, is the HEIGHT of Unselfishness (you stupid backwards thinking retard). What a retarded savage you are.

      • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2013 at 1:21 pm |

        wow, just wow. like seriously, can you come up with a better argument than “someone else could have used that”? In your simplistic worldview, is there any such thing as a human being that is not simply a resource sink?

        • The truth is very often quite simple. Human beings ARE resources sinks. Deal with it. We are not spiritual beings, we do not have a “purpose”, there isn’t some great mystery or potential or benefit to being here. All we do is want, need, desire, consume and leave behind TREMENDOUS waste. Please spare me your offense to this truth.

          • kowalityjesus | Apr 27, 2013 at 5:45 pm |

            Its ignorant, that’s all. It ignores the reality of grace.

            Your sentiment is true; humans are huge wasters. I feel genocidal when I realize that the amount of hot water my roommate uses is roughly equivocable to that used by the general populace. Being a wastrel is not a life-sentence, though. Conscientiousness in resource use is very learnable.

            I don’t know how it is with other people, but God makes His presence known to me very obviously. If I know that there is a higher force that cares about what I do ON A VERY INTIMATE AND MINUTE BASIS, I also know that my way of life and my decisions are not without their eternal and cosmic implications. Maybe other people aren’t important enough for God to bother making Himself known to them. I doubt it; its probably a combination of an incapacity for subtlety, unobservance, and denial. Even so, Atheism and cynicism (not to necessarily bind the two) are alien to my experience.

            To bring this into context, I don’t look at the heinous wastrels that surround me and their offspring as walking environmental parasites, as I infer you do. I would rather view them as spiritual Children of God with MUCH to learn about what their actions imply in an earthly as well as other-worldly sense.

          • I like this – it seems athiests ect are least happiest in their own value, and tend to dismiss their value as lesser than what it should be. (just my opinion – and i feel this same concept can present itself in many ironic phenotypic displays of attitude.)

          • Please explain what “resources” and “waste” are without referencing usage or users.

  18. How about some volunteers for negative population growth. Everytime I read some flippant entry against having children it is always some all or nothing argument. One hundred percent of most vociferous advocates of this idea were born into this world and yet they continue to consume and destroy the planet they are allegedly claiming to want to save. Hypocrites.

    If you want to argue for only one birth experience per couple, the judicious use of fertility enhancement, or any number of responsible birth control measures then you speak from a voice of reason.

    The very notion of equating a child to an exotic pet is insulting and ignorant, The foolishness of justifying a reason to have a child through some quantifiable matrix is laughable. There is little security in this world for the aged. Just like 100-1,000-10,000 even longer, When you are old and feeble it is a child that takes care of you. No one else wants to do that for free. Hell the kid might suck at, but at least most of them try.

    And on a little more intangible note, maybe just maybe you can provide a child with a better world than the one you were given. A chance for hope, arm a child with bleakness and despair then that is what you will get.

    So to all the exotic pets, turn that frown upside down and realize that beautiful flowers can grow from turds.

    • No. Just no. Sorry to offend you and others, but a child can be equated to a pet. We were all “raised” = domesticated, thought to hold our primal rages and urges in, “civilized”, and cultivated and generally directed in what to do, say, think, and how to act, from birth. Raising and training a dog is very similar to raising and training a human. Our ancestors realized this, that is how they reined in wolves which became dogs.

      And I am not a hypocrite by being on a world I never asked to be in. My position is perfectly consistent when you realize that by being here, and spreading the idea of preventing unneeded birth (ie not committing suicide, as you seem to be implicitly telling proponents of antinatlism to do) I am preventing what essentially might be me, in another form. When one recognizes that sentience among healthy human beings is generally the same. You will realize that committing suicide is not the answer. Because eventually sentience much like your own arises again. I am trying to prevent this so essentially (I*) will not suffer and come on this planet again.

  19. It pains me greatly to have to remind modern people that family is all we have inth

  20. Apathesis | Apr 25, 2013 at 8:41 pm |

    Because if you don’t, radical Muslims/Evangelicals will.

  21. Any two idiots can have sex and raise kids..

    I have seen plenty of people get married and have kids because of mainly social pressure, many of them have lived miserable unproductive unhealthy lives that caused them & their children more harm than good, I have seen people that do not deserve to have kids yet procreate, I have seen people who are not in a position to raise children yet have kids and I have seen people have kids because they are so self loathing & hope their offspring will compensate for their shortcomings.

    Not everybody should procreate and contributing to this world can happen in many ways. Its just really hard to break this mold.. Plus sex education and less tolerance to social pressure needs to be taken more seriously

  22. Maybe the better thing to do is adopt.You don’t contribute to overpopulation by having one of your own,and you give a proper upbringing to some child.Bonus: Someone will take care of you in your golden years!

  23. I didn’t mean to, but it happened and I love them. Didn’t God tell our ancestors to multiply and replenish the earth? If we do it right, there wouldn’t be wage slaves and we could all be happier. Just a thought….

  24. Grey Knight | May 3, 2013 at 2:31 am |

    There is little reason to reproduce. It brings no benefit to create little half clones of me, who will no doubt be even bigger assholes than I am, and fuck up the world even more.

    I’m not sure where I went wrong, but I want it to end with myself.

  25. Robert Lai | May 20, 2013 at 4:57 pm |

    Sadly not going to stop. Damn shame, too. The human joke stopped being funny a long time ago. We never do know when to quit, do we?

Comments are closed.