Re: When will breeding again be justified?
> Perhaps a red herring is what you're sniffing.Les, thank you for making this clear. I have to tell you, though,
> discussion of lowering birth rates is what this forum is for.
that the stated purpose of this group (and VHEMT) is too clever by
half. The question "Why breed?" is ridiculous (as we have
demonstrated). It is certainly not equivalent to the question "How
can we lower birth rates?". Yes, your "red herring" position grabs
attention and encourages interaction, but in the end it is counter-
productive, don't you think?
> 1) grant universal reproductive freedom. All couples who don'tAgreed. However, couples already come pre-equipped with the primary
> want to breed should have the means to not do so.
means: between their ears.
> 2) cease encouraging breeding with natalist tax incentives andEliminating tax deductions for children is an interesting idea. I
> social pressure.
hadn't thought of that.
Pressure to breed is innately biological (as I'm sure you know). I
don't see any purpose in attacking societal manifestations of this
urge. Rather, I suggest that we educate people (much as we are
starting to do regarding other urges, such as the urge to eat sweets
> 3) encourage responsible reproductive choices, perhaps reward thoseAgreed. Do you have any suggestions? And can you
define "responsible reproductive choices?
> Even a birth rate of zero would not necessarily cause a breakdownYou're slipping back into red herring mode here, I think. A
> of civilization. Adjustments could be made. Economies in
> industrialized regions seem more dependent on cars than babies.
prolonged drop to zero birth rate would be the most dramatic event in
> It seems to me that you don't have to create a new human life toHaven't we covered this already? *I* don't have to create a new
> celebrate and be awed by it
human life myself, but *someone* does.
> How long a hiatus would be necessary before we make a dent in thesethat we don't know,and well...theres really only one way to find
out,now isn't there?
Please consider the the damage to children, other species,
> and the earth that would occur in the meantime.that's the whole idea..."in the meantime", we would be working to
quell and reverse such damage,as well as the damage we've already