Woman aborts child to save the environment

Post Reply New Topic

Are you a waist of space?

wsmac, that has been true in the deep past and may still be true in *extremely* remote areas, but in most of the world, most children survive these days. If that were not the case, the population would not be growing.

Or the child may have been a pol pot who went on to orchestrate the executions of thousands of people. Statistically, it's equally likely.

Sub Saharan Africa, pretty much all of it, has a pretty high rate of mortality. And you have to remember, we're not necessarily talking about a majority to make parents feel they need multiple children. If, by the time they reach 16, 1 in 4 children will have died, well most people wouldn't feel like those are great odds - it's still not a majority, though.
In some countries, such as Malawi, 1 in 6 will die of AIDS by the time they reach 30 (and remember, those kids are supposed to look after you in your old age, you need them to last longer than that - there's no social safety net except your children for when you get old), factor in malaria and you probably want to have 8-10 children to be sure there'll be a couple of boys (girls will head off to someone else's household) who live long enough to look after you. It's really not hard to look over the developing world and understand why the poor have such large families. Decent sex ed, and in sub-Saharan Africa, an adequate supply of mosquito nets, could probably reverse the trend in mortality enough to cause those populations to stabilise, or even drop. Incidentally, the number of mosquito nets required would cost about the equivalent of the Pentagon's budget for a day.

Well, I do have a more existential point of view whereby life really has no meaning outside of the one we give it therefore children in general are more statistics than people until they do something to change that. If there were far fewer children we would be able to spend more time actually making sure that they become useful members of society instead of just passing them to the sidelines of life so that we have some one to flop our whoppers for us. Yes, I will admit that we will still need something to flop our whoppers (except me, vegetarian) but I am sure that most of those people could be replaced with a robotic arm and a very simple shell script.

This is an interesting website about this topic...

http://www.vhemt.org

Personally I couldn't do it (I plan on having 2 kids, to replace my husband and I, and that's it) but there does seem to be some logic. It does seem very cold though.

I don't think aborting a child to save the environment makes sense though - why not just not get pregnant? Or just abort it because you don't want it? Sounds like attention-seeking to me kinda. Or making excuses because she feels guilty.

Personally I am taking the route of preventing a child before aborting a child. I got divorced from the wife because she tried to get pregnant without informing me of this intent ahead of time. I should note that we already had come to an agreement to not have kids (at least yet) before she decided that she was just going to "surprise" me.
Now I am just more careful in the selection of mates trying to be more preemptive and make sure that whome ever I am relating with in an horizontal manner has the same interests in teh way of chilr rearing as I do. Namely being the heterosexual version of D.I.N.K.s (dual income no kids).

Thank God for this woman. Once I read this article, I took my kid out back into the woods. You get the picture. One less pollutant!

Jesus Christ -.-

Quite true - can't argue with that. It just shows the futility of trying to second guess the effect that that person might have had on the planet.

Well, this planet was made to support a certain amount of life. Her viewpoint, whilst being polluted by WP'ers, makes a standing for those who don't think you should contrive life through off-spring as being healthy (You rationalize from your standpoint that over-population is killing what we have left of the planet). Having children today might cause you more strife than you imagine. What if in the next couple of years, all of earth is imprisioned by a martian race that condemns you to slavery. I wouldn't want that for my children. Hypothetically speaking of course!

mmm, has anyone ever been made to feel like a failure cos u don't have kids? there is that mentality as well.
abortion is not good for the planet. me thinks that wasn't the point when she went for the proceedure, could have decided she didn't want the kid and made up this reason to sound like a hero.

To me, if you get very fussed over one person's opinion, you're taking life too seriously (in response to tweety). Live your own way, but of course try to conform to the comforts of others.

Now if only most NTs could do the same for us... we're kind enough to conform to their ways of life, why can't they cut us some slack?

I am a waste of space. It's quite obvious. I wish that I never existed.

Sounds like she's just trying to make herself feel better about her position, by adopting a popular politcal stance to justify it. "No no, I'm not a baby killer, I'm saving the environment!" In other words, she found a rather clever cop-out for having to stand behind her decisions.

i think its actualy a good thing shes not having kids, i mean really do we want ideots like that to breed and raise children?

There is such a difference between having an abortion and being a baby killer. If you have an abortion you are terminating a pregnancy. If you are a baby killer you are grabbing a kid out of a cradle and stepping on its head. I know it is just a minor difference, but still. I have to admit that I have been tempted to do the later, I hate kids, I hate all kids, I don't care how cute you like to think that your Mongoloid babies are, I hate them. I m not having kids, I have never gotten anyone pregnant, I am making a point of not doing so. I think that more people should. It is either going to be that, the bird flu, or World War Three that is going to be the result of our senseless over population in this world.
I know that people think that I am cold and heartless when i say things like this, but I like to think of it more as a realist. Everyone dies, it is only a matter of when. I oppose sending food aid overseas because if they can't feed themselves now, how are they going to be able to do it the next time that life goes to s**t, again. Frankly if we feed them, they live, they breed, and in ten years there are going to be even more starving people. If we don't feed them they die, they can't breed (because they are dead) an in ten years maybe they population they have is more sustainable on what resources they have.
Having an abortion I know is a touchy subject but hell, the kid was going to die anyway. What difference does it make if we let them waste resources for sixty or seventy years before they eventually croak or not. I admit that there are special people in this world that are worth saving but they are the exception not the rule. 99.99999% of people we could happily live without. Sorry, just the way it is.
In closing, don't breed, we don't need any more of you running around. We already have enough mouth breathers to go around. Unless you have exceptionally good breeding you should not be allowed to have children, we have far t many as it is, and they are not going to amount to anything anyway.