this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
1260 points (95.3% liked)

Comic Strips

12960 readers
2894 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 month ago (20 children)

The catch-22 is that if the people with environmental values don't have kids, those values aren't passed on to the next generation (unless they become teachers or media personalities).

[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 month ago (10 children)

You don’t need to have kids to pass on values. The basic premise of your statement doesn’t hold up.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (8 children)

Well, like I mentioned you still need some sort of interaction with kids. Or maybe influence their parents enough to have them indirectly pass on those values you imparted on them. But I still think that if the smartest, kindest, most compassionate people among us stop having kids... well then that's not great for that next generation. I've just always felt that giving up one of the primary factors of life, reproduction, seems very defeatist. But on the other hand, if someone genuinely doesn't want children then by all means don't.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I know at least one friend that wants to adopt/foster once they're ready, instead of having biological children.

The justification was similar to what you said, where they want to pass on their values / legacy, but don't care about the genetic side

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

This is the answer. The problem is the huge expense to adopt at least in the US. Money that could make a better life for the child being adopted is taken by the state.

We need to streamline adoption while still vetting the potential parents as unlikely to be abusive.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)