This story (via Drudge) is pretty amazing, and highlights one of the main reasons why I see a problem in trying to forge a consensus between crunchy conservatives and environmentalists. How do people who see having children as a form of pollution and an act of selfishness find any common ground with people who see the continuation of the human race as a good thing, and the having of children as a selfless act of love, hope, and trust?
The two couples featured in the article are adamant about their position, even though they claim not to be judging people who have made the energy-draining and wasteful choice to become parents:
Mark adds: "Sarah and I live as green a life a possible. We don't have a car, cycle everywhere instead, and we never fly."We recycle, use low-energy light bulbs and eat only organic, locally produced food.
"In short, we do everything we can to reduce our carbon footprint. But all this would be undone if we had a child.
"That's why I had a vasectomy. It would be morally wrong for me to add to climate change and the destruction of Earth.
"Sarah and I don't need children to feel complete. What makes us happy is knowing that we are doing our bit to save our precious planet."
I have two questions, and they're both sincere. First, if you really, truly believe that human beings are a wasteful drain on the planet, on what grounds do you continue to live, rather than arranging your own death as soon as possible? (I actually asked this question of a radical environmentalist classmate in college; he admitted that it was the only possible moral action for him, but further admitted that he was willing to live with his own immorality in this one area.)
The second question to people like Sarah and Mark, who say they're doing their bit to save their precious planet, is: why? For whom are you saving it--other people's posterity? I honestly don't understand this; but that's probably because, as a Catholic, I see the Earth and its bounty as gifts from God, requiring and even demanding careful and thoughtful stewardship, to be sure, but always and everywhere provided for the benefit of human beings.
The Christian who is concerned about the environment takes seriously the notion that the world is not ours to exploit; but the Christian will never see the birth of a child as a affront to the planet. It is hard to see how we will ever be able to overcome our differences in this regard in order to work for positive change in the environmental realm.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
rebeccat:
I think the whole idea that not having kids is selfish is interesting.
Is it selfish not to have kids when one has a chronic disease that will impair one's parenting? Is it selfish not to have kids when one may well pass that chronic disease (along with tendencies toward alcoholism and diabetes) on to one's kids genetically? Is it selfish not to want to repeat the dysfunctions of both one's childhood, one's parents' childhoods, and one's first (childless) marriage? And frankly, is it selfish to make such a decision realizing upon reflection that one may love kids, but not have much patience for them?
I realize to a faithful Catholic, the answer to all of those questions is nevertheless a resounding "YES!!" So there are reasons why some of us are not faithful Catholics anymore.
Very sad.
My situation, or that I feel the way I do?
Please elaborate.
I think Larry makes a good point. There are many reasons why people choose not to have children. It's hardly fair to assume that they are just selfish, or morally inferior in some other way. Sometimes they are contented with their situation--and in that case, why is it the place of morally righteous people to try to make them feel bad? Sometimes the choice of childlessness reflects some very painful realities--in which case, why is it morally righteous to add to their pain by shaming them on top of that? In any case, why is it anyone else's business? Surely those of us who have the blessing of children, and are happy with that, could enjoy our own lives without trying to diminish the worth of others' lives. I don't see why it's necessary to prove that childless people are bad.
I also don't see why merely having children merits admiration. Lots of people have children for reasons that have nothing to do with moral virtue. They have them to prove their own standing in the eyes of God and their fellow believers, or because they expect children to gratify their emotional needs, or to prove their masculinity or to get the attention of a boyfriend. Sometimes they never wanted children at all, but couldn't muster the attention to use contraception effectively. The amount of suffering that unwanted and badly treated children have to endure is heart-wrenching. It would be better for everybody if people had children only when they were prepared to love them as they deserve. It's not selfish to recognize your own limitations.
I don't see why it's necessary to prove that childless people are bad.
AS the title of this blog entry suggests, it's not ALL childless people who are 'bad,', it's childless environmental whackos. I'm still wondering why no one challenged Erin on her false, demonizing accusation of "pollution." Even the environmental drama queens are not characterizing children as "pollution," they're saying that children are just additional consumers, competing for the earth's increasingly scarcer resources. The radical environmentalists are coming from a resource/over-population position, not a pollution position.
But then, if our host Mr Dreher is right about peak oil in his Sunday piece, oil depletion and oil wars will take care of overpopulation.
Again, I recommend Garret Hardin's essay The Tragedy of the Commons to anyone interested in the environment and the issue of over-population.
http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_tragedy_of_the_commons.html
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.