In a system where all are free to choose to reproduce or not to reproduce, and all children will be supported by the social collective, but space is limited, what is the effect of Person A choosing not to reproduce?
They'll put less pressure on said social collective?
Clearly we need some people to have children and plenty of people WANT to have children. Some people are DESPERATE to have children and prepared to pay enormous sums of money on fertility treatments if need be.
That a few hipsters decide that they've got some kind of moral imperative for their decision not to have children, hardly matters much in the scheme of things. Sure, if the majority of the community thought like them we might have some serious backlash - and heck, simply the decision to have LESS children is causing problems of an ageing population. But so long as they remain a minority, they are causing nobody any real bother and in a way they are right to say that they are decreasing the number of children that society must support.
Look, perhaps you'll think I'm completely missing the point, but I think my main disagreement is with this: However, personally choosing not to have children doesn't help the situation, because other persons who understand how to play the game better will just have more children
Nobody ever decides to have more children specifically because a few hipsters decided to have none. That is nonsense. Yeah, sure so those few people won't be able to spread their own values directly to their progeny.
But in any society there will be some people who do not have children and why should it not be by choice? Are people any lesser for not having children (in a moral sense)?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: 2013-07-28 10:58 pm (UTC)They'll put less pressure on said social collective?
Clearly we need some people to have children and plenty of people WANT to have children. Some people are DESPERATE to have children and prepared to pay enormous sums of money on fertility treatments if need be.
That a few hipsters decide that they've got some kind of moral imperative for their decision not to have children, hardly matters much in the scheme of things. Sure, if the majority of the community thought like them we might have some serious backlash - and heck, simply the decision to have LESS children is causing problems of an ageing population. But so long as they remain a minority, they are causing nobody any real bother and in a way they are right to say that they are decreasing the number of children that society must support.
Look, perhaps you'll think I'm completely missing the point, but I think my main disagreement is with this:
However, personally choosing not to have children doesn't help the situation, because other persons who understand how to play the game better will just have more children
Nobody ever decides to have more children specifically because a few hipsters decided to have none. That is nonsense. Yeah, sure so those few people won't be able to spread their own values directly to their progeny.
But in any society there will be some people who do not have children and why should it not be by choice? Are people any lesser for not having children (in a moral sense)?