![\"Antinatalism\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.beliefnet.com\/sites\/375\/2016\/04\/Antinatalism-1024x625.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Should people consider the economic costs of having a family? Sure.\u00a0No-one should bring up children they can’t afford to raise. But let’s look at the more militant versions of the idea of not procreating. One is the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Another is anti-natalism.<\/strong><\/p>\n You can ready about voluntary human extinction at the VHEMT site<\/a>. Essentially, they worry for the human impact on the Earth’s biosphere. A legitimate concern. For them, human breeding is at fault. If the human population would only decrease, resource shortages would end, the negative impact on animal habitats would stop, and the eventual extinction of humans after living a long life but not having kids will make the Earth safe for all those\u00a0animals we might care\u00a0so dearly for. So, should people stop being born? Are we really that bad?<\/p>\n Followers of such a movement can abstain from having kids and depart from our plagued world, but what can it do about the people who disagree?\u00a0Surely, one\u00a0of the problems with the VHEMT is that its goal is impossible? At best, all the VHEMT could accomplish is its own extinction, the extinction of the people who want to be extinct. Good for them.<\/p>\n Supposing the VHEMT got maximum coverage, it might convince family after family not to have kids.\u00a0But even at the height of its measurable success, the VHEMT would not have made humans extinct, but its own supporters. The movement’s own extinction is the only thing certain, making “Voluntary VHEMT Extinction Movement” possibly a more fitting name, whereas any possible impact on human numbers throughout the movement’s\u00a0period of operation could only hope to be\u00a0pitiful.<\/p>\n What can a movement supposedly so broad in scope\u00a0do about the billions of people who won’t\u00a0listen or can’t<\/em> listen for reasons of their religion, culture, the political regime they live under, etc?\u00a0The progeny of all the people who disagree or didn’t even hear the message at all will still be here, long after all the followers of such a movement as the VHEMT have all voluntarily gone extinct or slightly altered the demographics of the countries they operate freely in (the only possible practical outcome).<\/p>\n Interestingly, one or two historical Christian sects genuinely did decide that having children was immoral and castrated themselves (the Skoptsy<\/a> are one known example).<\/p>\n If\u00a0VHEMT proponents\u00a0stop to think and\u00a0understand\u00a0the level of resistance that comes from trying to suppress human biological behavior,\u00a0they would be wisest to\u00a0decide that coercion is a much more measurable and achievable\u00a0plan (are they going to be the future\u00a0environmental terrorists constantly hinted at\u00a0by Lifeboat Foundation writers<\/a>?).<\/p>\n Fast forward to the future. Earth is in greater throes than ever. Persuasion alone is just making their own supporters extinct. They need a way to get at their opponents too. But a\u00a0resource-consuming war of starvation, sterilization or extermination to stamp out\u00a0human biological behavior for the good of the planet would, ironically, be very bad for the planet, making\u00a0coercion just as useless\u00a0as persuasion in such a movement’s toolbox. As such, the VHEMT is an ironic creature. Support it, and you are only helping it<\/em> go extinct.<\/p>\n Children cry when they are born. They don’t seem happy to be here. Medically, that’s\u00a0just a reaction to using their lungs for the first time, which previously were filled with fluid. But let’s get on to the real issue at hand.<\/p>\n The second view I wanted to discuss\u00a0is anti-natalism<\/a>, and this is more interesting. Rather than appealing about the fate of\u00a0other species and the Earth’s tragedies\u00a0like the VHEMT, or\u00a0asking for us to be hyper-environmentalists with the ironic task\u00a0to\u00a0be prolific messengers who aren’t so\u00a0prolific at all, anti-natalism is more a philosophical school of thought. They don’t claim to have any practical, measurable or achievable plan. They simply believe that it is best not to be born.<\/p>\n According to them, all the\u00a0heartbreak, anguish, agony and physical pain\u00a0of life (including the “ultimate” trauma\u00a0of death) are apparently so chilling that it is inhumane to create a person at all, knowing they\u00a0will go through such torments and have to die at the end. Therefore, they will say, it is the most\u00a0moral choice\u00a0not to have a child, since having the child at all means the child will need to die eventually. Whether or not humans should be extinct is not the issue for anti-natalists.<\/p>\n Their focus is more on humans and the suffering they endure. One can draw a parallel with Buddhism, which sees all life as suffering and laments being part of it at all.<\/p>\n But in Buddhism, we also have the idea of the Bodhisattva, the one who stays here in full knowledge of\u00a0all the suffering to guide others, rather than simply achieving and keeping\u00a0enlightenment for oneself. Rather than deciding to flee from life by not participating in it, not raising a family, you can play the part of someone trying to abolish suffering.<\/p>\n Similarly, people\u00a0so compassionate enough to consider their own extinction just to make life better for others<\/a>\u00a0can do\u00a0better than disappear and leave\u00a0empty chairs.\u00a0They should stay, and if they choose to have a family, be blessed.<\/p>\n One of the ironies of wanting to\u00a0persuade people not to have kids is that it is impossible in any practical sense, even if you agree with it philosophically.\u00a0At most, all that can be accomplished is that the few impressionable people or nearby people in the states\u00a0where such advocacy exists will\u00a0fall to the arguments presented and won’t have children.\u00a0It won’t do anything to curb the human population globally, or do anything to subvert the people who were\u00a0just too fertile and too driven by base instincts\u00a0to listen.<\/p>\nShould people stop being born? Is this even a measurable or achievable\u00a0goal?<\/h2>\n
Is it inhumane\u00a0to bring children into the world?<\/h2>\n
![\"hjb](\"https:\/\/wp-media.beliefnet.com\/sites\/375\/2015\/09\/hjb-signature-new-transparent-300x86.png\")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"