23 3

What do people think of the idea of being childfree?
What are your opinions on anti natalism. There was a debate between Sam Harris and David Benatar ( he claims it's wrong to have children ). You can find the debate on YouTube. Any thoughts?

WillieLarge 3 June 1

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


I'm happily child-free. They should only be had by people who want them. The idea that you have to procreate has got to die.


I am pro-choice. I believe if you choose to have a child or children, people should not judge for that choice. If you choose to NOT have any children, or not have a child at that particular time in your life, same thing. This maxim is easily applied to pretty much any child- or non-child-resulting situation.


They will debate anything. It is a personal decision ideally for a couple to make together.

I totally agree with this sentiment.

Interestingly though, the debate they had was a very thought provoking discussion surrounding whether there is a net good for the individual child/person being born as the result of the birth.

It may be impractical or a bit esoteric for most people, but if you enjoy getting into the proverbial philosophical “weeds”, then it is still worth a listen.

@tsacrey i may listen just to see how deep in the weeds they get.

@Donna_I you should! Like I said, I agree with your sentiment above, but, it is really not about the choice two people make from the practical point of view of the average person.

@tsacrey that may be but the average person did not have to get up at 2 am to try to figure out why my infant son was crying, take my daughter to get a cast after breaking her arm, or the various other emergencies small and large over the past 20 years. (Rant done ?) I will listen.


It is up to the person who has to be pregnant, give birth, and rsise the child. If she doesnt want to, she doesnt have to. If she wants to, she can.

What a funny comment. Doesn't the person with the sperm have a say?

@mosuper No.

@mosuper Do you think that a man can decide for his wife to have a baby, even if she doesn't want too? I can't imagine that. If he is with someone who doesn't want children, and he does, if thy can't resolve it, it is time for him to move on.

Men do have a say, but usually we are to interested in sex to avoid it, and because of that women currently have the upper hand at making babies whether we want them, or not.

There is a push for male contraceptives, and we should have more options available in the near future. The Parsemus Foundation, is developing there version of Risug, called Vasalgel. Risug and Vasalgel, is a polymer semi permeable gel placed in a males vas deferens, which is suppose, neutralize sperm, but is suppose to allow fluid to pass through. It is a easy surgery.

Risug as been in the process of getting approval in India for 30 years, but do to with it having difficulties taking the proper testing steps, it hasn't been approved yet. They know it works 100% on preventing babies.

In early 2010, Parsemus Foundation began developing a polymer contraceptive for the rest of the world outside India. The new polymer contraceptive is called Vasalgel™, and 12 months of rabbit studies have shown no sperm from the second semen sample onwards! Sperm flow quickly returned in rabbits that had the polymer flushed out 14 months later. A study in monkeys proved that Vasalgel was a successful contraceptive, with no pregnancies after 1-2 breeding seasons. The goal is to have it on the market as as soon as possible, with the first clinical trial expected to begin in 2018.

@Vintenar this is great, but it is a different issue. If a woman does not want a baby or to remain childless, a man has no right to force a pregnancy on her. If he wants a child and his wife/girlfriend doesn't, he should find another woman who does. Hopefully, they will figure this out before they are in a committed relationship. It is the same for a man. He should not have an unwanted child forced on him. Find a man who wants a child.


I think if someone doesn’t want to have children, they shouldn’t have them.
I think if someone wants to have children, they should have them.
Seems like a valid, personal choice to me.


I go back and forth. Missing out on being a parent is somewhat depressing. Than I hear a kid screaming and all of that goes out the window.


I like being child-free, it was a choice and the right one for me.

Given that overpopulation is the most significant problem facing our world, I think people who choose to have children are being selfish when there are lots of unwanted children who need to be taken care of.

The real problem are people who don't think about it at all and just keep popping out babies that they are unable to pay for or raise with any skill.


I was once married and have a daughter, a son, 4 grands and 4 great-grands. I have a good family, we all get along and love each other and I am proud of my family. I will say without hesitation, knowing myself as I do now, that if I could do it over again, I would not marry and I would not have children. There I said it and I'm glad. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.


Those who do not want to have children should not do so. I believe this is just a personal choice...not good...not bad.


I've seen charts and read gender studies showing that people on the extreme ends of the gender characteristics sliding scale-i.e. the most "femme" women and "macho" men, are the most successful in long-term relationships and producing progeny, since they have the most hard-wired traits needed for courting and raising young.

But statistically, they also have the lowest average IQs.

As the gender marker slides toward the center, indicating an increasing mixture of gender traits, the IQs also rise, so that the ones in the middle have the highest average IQs, but also their mixed traits make them less inclined to courting and reproducing.

Instead, they usually are often too busy inventing things, directing movies, writing music and books, being successful actors, etc. These people are often beautiful and talented, but can't seem to maintain successful long-term relationships, since they lack the necessary instincts.

For instance, females typically rule cis hetero relationships, and when men don't listen to them, the marriages don't last. But high IQ men with independent female traits typically don't want to listen to their mates, so the relationships break up.

"John Gottman, a well known marriage researcher, and his colleagues followed 130 newlywed couples for six years to find what marriages succeeded and why. Turns out, happy, stable marriages had one thing in common: The husband was willing to accept his wife's influence.

In contrast, when husbands responded to their wives' complaints by stonewalling or belittling them, the marriage was almost sure to fail: More than four-fifths of those relationships — 81 percent — fell apart."

Gottman, John M., and Nan Silver. (1999). “Principle 4: Let Your Partner Influence You,” in The Seven Principles for Making Marriages Work (Chapter Six, 100-127).


People should do whatever they want.
That said, not everyone who can be a parent, SHOULD be a parent.

There is no way in hell I would have ever listened to a word anyone else
had to say about what I "should" do as far as children went.
Luckily, I'm passed that age, and didn't have any of my own.
I collect other people's kids though. I'm "Aunt" to more kids than Carter's has pills.
I don't have put braces on any of them, or put any of them through college.
It's a win/win.


I’m childfree by choice and anti-natalist. Breeding more humans onto this overpopulated and dying planet is morally wrong and incredibly selfish.


Isn't it our biological purpose to have children?

No. My purpose is whatever the hell I decide it is on any given day.
There are already far too many people procreating, who have absolutely NO business being responsible for children.
There is no biological imperative.

Nope. That kind of thinking is why we're ending up with an overburdened planet.

So, then, no women is useful to you no matter how well you get along and how much you love each other UNLESS she has a working uterus? It's this kind of thinking that reduces women to ONLY their body parts and it's this type of thinking that needs to end. Women (and men) are complete people in and of themselves. Reproducing does not add anything of value to them as a person. Reproducing is a selfish and arrogant act. If we can't take care of all the people already here....from children to the elderly...then we have no business adding more people to the problem. That's just madness.

Sure, do whatever you like and choose the life you want to live. I never said anything against that. But, I thought biological theory was basically that our genes want to reproduce, hence our biological purpose.

So, if we have an overburdened planet, isn't the precisely because all the people on this planet are fulfilling their biological purposes?

Lol, not sure how you got to that conclusion (that no women are useful to me) and I'm not even sure what that conclusion means (I'm not sure what useful has to do with anything in my statement). Happy to listen if you want to walk me through it.

@mosuper I think, over time, that has changed. Another facet of evolution, perhaps. Our cells may seek to reproduce, our species, however, maybe not so much. Goodness knows we've practically reproduced the species into near-extinction with our consumption of finite resources. I imagine that unless some outside force (my personal choice is an asteroid), or a truly horrific natural disaster (the Yellowstone Caldera erupting), we'll be the architects of our own demise through our prolific procreation.

@KKGator It makes me think of the "mouse experiment." I can't remember all the details and at some point I need to find the right reference. But, my memory is that they put these mouse in an environment with unlimited resources and the mice, most/many of them anyway, turned into degenerate sexual mice--not reproducing in the normal ways. There are theories that homosexuality arises in this way too, I think.

I'm not really sure what to say about any of it, but for sure there are plenty of people who have a strong biological drive to reproduce.


I think it’s a damn fascinating philosophy. I listened to that talk with Sam Harris. I personally have not had children for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that I feel I could never justify bringing more consciousness into this world to suffer through life.


I decided not to have children at quite a young age - like others I thought it was irresponsible and bad for the planet. We really should try to get the world's population back under 500 million. Megacities of 30 million are a crazy invention.


We are thankful every day to not have kids.


The Norwegian philosopher Peter Zapffe had the same outlook, asserting humanity had a moral duty to aim for self extinction.

If it were possible to ask a future consciousness, yet unborn, if they would like to be born or not, and if it were possible to see this person's future life, and to see what kind of life it would be (it may be a happy life or tragic) this future consciousness may decline and say - "no thank you, I don't wish to be born if I'm going up have a miserable life trapped in poverty or plagued with health issues".

This scenario is impossible, so all decisions are made by the person choosing to have the child. There is no consent. Instead all choices are defined by their wants. Their gratification.

I think it is incredibly selfish to choose to bring a child into the world. It can't be anything else but selfish since the child has no say.

I realise my opinion will be unpopular.


My son is great by getting pregnant was an unpleasant surprise. I also think the fact that I did not really want to have children is the main reason I devoted myself to raising him to be a good person. If I was going to do it, I for damn sure was going to do it well.

Many people have/want multiple children shouldn't be allowed to have a plant let alone a little person.


My surviving child is 43. I prefer to date childless women. And if she's an only child, so much the better. I'm just not good with rug-rats.


I think having children is a personal decision and sometimes people want to put their energy to something that would deprive children of a parent...children do need present role models and care!


Telling people if they can't have babies isn't going to work. I have children and I'm glad I have them. We don't know much about this guys personal life and I gotta wonder where his perspective stems from. All I have gathered so far on this is that his idea is pain is bad and pleasure is good, it's good to not have pain and it isn't bad to not have pleasure. I believe that is incorrect. It is bad to not have pleasure. He is basically saying it isn't worth it to be born because of all the hell involved with life and sometimes true we do feel that way. Feelings change. Live. There is literally nothing else to do.


I think it is a degenerate philosophy. All puns intended.


I have two amazing adult kids. I wouldn't have it any other way. That being said, everybody should decide for themselves. Nobody should have a baby for the sake of procreating. To each their own.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:96735
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.