We shouldn't have children.

I thank the Con for a very detailed and relevant response to my argument. I'll discuss each point that was brought up. Indeed, it is not the fault of children to be unable to help around as others do. They are helpless at that stage, and should only be of use later on. I believe that con's argument is that when children grow into fully functional human beings is when they can be a rewarding presence. Or maybe con is just saying that it is important to be selfless because having children is just a part of our nature. Animals live to reproduce and continue their species. The former is the claim that children need to become adults in order to not be a burden. I acknowledge that Con is aware that even adults care for themselves to some extent because of their survival instinct. I am aware of the fact that children are blameless for having a limited perspective. That is the very reason that they are problematic. They can be very difficult to take care of. They can be extremely spoiled and demand a great deal of effort from you. Until they become adults, they will get in the way of your own survival instinct. According to sociological theory, as people gain more time for themselves, they pursue a vocation. In urban times, this is seen more greatly. Children can get in the way of a career which demands your skill to be used greatly. As Con acknowledges, even adults care for themselves to some extent. In many cases, when children grow into adults, they will use you to establish their life. In addition, their ideas of a happy life may vary from yours and they will rebel. This can make you very unhappy. It's an investment that did not pay off. In extreme cases they will abandon you and in milder cases they may not succeed in certain ways. All those negative factors are excellent reasons for not having children. The latter argument is the claim that having children is just a part of our nature. I actually happen to agree to this point. But I argue that since we are intelligent enough to be self aware, we should choose to not follow our instinctive needs for important reasons. Firstly, children can suffer because they require mature parents in order to be raised correctly. An immature parent can trigger mental issues later on in their lives [1]. Secondly, what I was claiming in my conclusion is not that the fear of death is a reason of which someone should not exist. I was speaking of a possibly controversial philosophical idea of how it's better to not exist then to exist. When someone is alive, he should definitely live on and make the best of it. But to bring another person to life is to make him have to move and work and survive. Anyway that person will die again and not have to face all this. Why bother bringing someone to life and make him work? Thirdly, global warming and pollution can be reduced by having less children. I believe that Con is not acknowledging that. Fourthly, it can be argued that since having children is a part of our nature we have to spend our time on them because it's important to us. I believe that there are other ways of being happy in life and for all those important reasons I have discussed, it's worth choosing to be happy in other ways. One way to be happy is pursuing a vocation as I've stated. A different way is having a romantic love. Yet another way is to explore one's curiosities. I hope that I answered many of the topics that Con spoke of. If I missed a point, I'll be glad to touch on it more. [1] http://heathen-hub.com...