In Iraq , most people think 3 is the minimum ,our next door neighbor has 6 (5 girls and 1 boy) and only the father has a low-paid job so for that they ended up making 4 of them girls to get arranged marriage and all of them were less than 18 when they did. Basically I believe this is a crime ,to be poor and have more children than you can afford

It's irresponsible to have ANY children now.

Spay, neuter your adult humans....and rescue/foster/adopt children.....

I'm childless, but I don't think there's anything wrong with having kids -- I love my 4 nieces and nephews dearly and have a lot of hope for them. What I do think is wrong, though, is having kids because you're "supposed to" or you feel you are "incomplete" if you're not a parent, or if you're looking for a child to make you happy. I'm sad and angry for the children raised in homes where they're neglected or abused, or where the parents put unrealistic expectations on their kids because of something they feel they're lacking in their own lives. I also have problems with groups like the "quiverfulls" who believe in having as many children as possible, regardless of whether or not they can take care of them, and who feel that the only important thing for a woman to be is a broodmare.

I think having kids is a personal choice. I respect equally, those who choose 0, and those who choose 10...

I think spreading my genetics on should be a crime of child abuse. I would like to foster a kid when I'm on disability, that way I can really help them.

It is. Assimilating that awareness into global practice is another matter. I've read before that there's sort of a birthing war being waged. The number of whites in the US and Europe are declining, so some regard that as an impetus for more babies. Less developed countries tend to have more babies as a matter of survival, due to nutrition and environmental conditions. The consensus of what I've read suggests that agnostics/atheists are aware of this and incorporate into their lifestyles, whereas others ring the alarm and sound the battle cry. Almost feel like I should read this in the voice of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.

IMO yes.

Disregarding the biological imperative for the sake of this conversation: honestly I think it's irresponsible to have any children at all, knowing what I know of the present. The future is a whole new ball of flaming hell, subjecting a child to the world we live in NOW is cruel enough.

This isn't to say children aren't of value or parenting is a worthless endeavor...simply that it is, in my mind, irresponsible to subject anyone to suffering and cruelty on purpose, and to make an active choice to bring another life into this nightmare of toxic isms is just that.

Actually, it should be no more than replacement level, 2. And one should not say more is ok to make up for those not having any kids. I feel sorry for the kids born today. Theirs will be a very difficult life.
A former friend wanted to have a large family. She discovered and joined ZPG and realized the importance of reducing her progeny. After 2 she quit. She also became an activist for the overpopulation movement and won several awards for her work.

It's hard for me to imagine why people want such big families. A bigger family means more people; more people risks overpopulation; overpopulation can lead to increase poverty and environmental pollution/species extinction

I didn't have any, so someone else can have my three.

Shit in today's world it's irresponsible to have any, life is just gonna get tougher for each generation, it's already too crowded

No

i think so..

For our "1st world cultures" I'd say 2 is maximum.
Interestingly, for me, I spent some time recently in the Amazon rainforest in Peru. The people there, highly intelligent, have a different view. They believe having many children is natural and that they are able to teach their children everything needed to sustain a comfortable life in the forest. And they do. So, maybe it's a model based on consumption of available resources that we should look to.

Personally, I think having one child is irresponsible, but don't put any value in my opinion. I don't have any and really don't know.

Good question. I think if you live where lack of resources is already making it hard for people to be happy and healthy, it’s immoral now. The world has enough resources for our current population, but they aren’t evenly distributed, so it’s a localized issue. If you live where resources are abundant, the morality depends on how long you will continue to have adequate resources. If global warming is coming and we won’t be able to support our current population, it’s immoral. However, we might be on the verge of something like cold fusion energy and AI that will provide us limitless resources and support all the people we can make. So, it depends on your level of optimism.

I don't have any so it kinda balances out.

I've always been unsure about having kids... I still am. There are just so many reasons... Life is very expensive and I wouldn't want them to be born so they will be enslaved by debt. But yeah, I'm glad there are a lot of people now; there's no pressure to keep populating the planet. The funny thing is that my friends call me "the unicorn" because I'm Mexican, I'm an only child, I come from a small but educated family, I have my degrees, and I'm over 30.

I don't know I think each of us has to decide that for ourselves I have two children but only because one died .I have five grandchildren,

How you figure? What do you know? Stay in your lane... I will stay on mine.