Hats wrote:"Frodo! Cast off your [s]sins[/s] into the fire!"
While individual locales might differ from the norm, the world itself is overpopulated and getting worse. We have a fixed amount of resources here and an ever increasing supply of people to try to share them with. Even now 1 billion+ people don't have clean water to drink. More people will only make that (and desertification, climate change, food shortages, etc) worse.Yuki-Anne (post: 1483717) wrote:Okay, the overpopulation thing only applies to some countries. Here in Japan we have the opposite situation: Japan is in crisis because there aren't enough younger people growing up to carry on for the older generation.
EDIT: Haha, I said I'd leave but...
ich1990 (post: 1483735) wrote:While individual locales might differ from the norm, the world itself is overpopulated and getting worse. We have a fixed amount of resources here and an ever increasing supply of people to try to share them with. Even now 1 billion+ people don't have clean water to drink. More people will only make that (and desertification, climate change, food shortages, etc) worse.
I know it can be easy to get caught up in the local view of whatever country you are living in, but the world is bigger than that. If Japan really wants more young people they should create immigration incentives for Indians or another such overpopulated country.
ADXC wrote:God has a purpose for everyone so we should not be afraid of overpopulation IMO. God will take care of us.
Rusty Claymore (post: 1483729) wrote:Ok, so it's not very Christ-like of me, but I do occasionally find myself looking down on those who don't want children. (Not those who can't or don't believe they can have them.) Mostly because it royally ticks me off that someone finds themselves inconvieniced by a fearfully and wonderfully made little critter. However, I definitely appreciate my rights to my opinions, so I won't force them on others. (btw, that's just my personal take on it, and I'm not implying this on anybody here. XD)
I think Shooraijin makes a good point.
Okami (post: 1483763) wrote:Anyone wanting to see my personal stance on celibacy may do so at my testimony thread here, I won't repeat it, when it's already been written and thought out.
That being said, I have run across quite a bit since my decision/calling in October. I have run across those who think it is selfish, those who believe I need to give my parents grandchildren (I know they wouldn't mind, either ]pretty[/I] sure I'm capable of being myself without being with someone. (My best friend and I had this discussion earlier today). But we are communal creatures - and Jesus Himself is the best example we have to living in community. A spouse and kids do not complete us, but God does, and for the single person, the offset is the community we pour and invest our lives into.
ashfire (post: 1483767) wrote:If what I heard tonight comes about. The government could shut down the use of birth control pills. This could mean having to use other means to prevent having children. Some of which could mean doing something that people consider un Godly.
I myself do like the idea of doctors preforming something that could end a life but I do favor birth control over that.
I know some older parents that after years of not having a family change their minds and want children which could be dangerous for the mother and the child. Many problems can also come about and may not happen. I would say it depends on what on God's willing.
Yamamaya (post: 1483765) wrote:While I don't agree with some of the traditional Christian ideas on sex(which is an entirely different can of worms) I definitely respect your decision Okami and I think a lot of good will come out of it. I definitely admire your goal to reach the broken and less fortunate.
This is a problem in our society. Single people think we are somehow worth less than those who are in a relationship, which is ludicrous. Books like Twilight which insists you are nothing if you don't have a significant other don't help
You can dedicate yourself more to your dreams and spirtual work with your method. Although like Paul says, it is important that we do not apply these standards to everyone and insist that everyone take that path.
Edit: As TWWK mentioned, people change and I might change my mind and decide to have kids later in life. But as for nao, nothxk
Yamamaya (post: 1483768) wrote:FIRST RULE OF POLITICS BRO
DON'T TALK ABOUT IT.
Seriously though, this thread will get locked if we go in the direction of a birth control and abortion argument.
That is fine, you have the right to disagree. I respect that. I don't understand it, but I respect it since you seem to have thought your ideas through.Yuki-Anne (post: 1483759) wrote:Not to get overly political, but I don't buy this argument at all, simply because certain parts of the world (Japan and the USA, for example), actually have a MAJOR surplus of supplies, while other countries have problems that could be solved simply by the introduction of more modernized technology and more efficient governing techniques.
Yuki-Anne (post: 1483781) wrote:Don't forget that Mother Teresa, one of the most famous and influential women of the past century, was celibate.
EDIT: Also, not to be condescending or anything, but you guys who are 16 or 17... I'd seriously be more worried if you felt like you were ready for kids. You're not even legally old enough to be married.
Yamamaya (post: 1483688) wrote:
My brother in law who has two kids agrees with my logic when I say, "The nice thing about being an uncle is you get to see your nephews for a while, then they go home to their parents"
ich1990 (post: 1483783) wrote:Given its current exponential rate of growth, eventually is going to happen sooner rather than later.
ich1990 (post: 1483783) wrote:Why not start fixing the problem now, gradually, before (according to your opinion) it becomes a significant issue?
The above still doesn't address the moral problem of ignoring orphans, but you are right, this is very off topic. I will withdraw from the discussion.shooraijin (post: 1483792) wrote:This is likely to get dreadfully off-topic, but essentially this is Malthusianism. No one seriously believes the world's carrying capacity is limitless, but at the same time as our population has grown technology has also grown at an arguably faster rate to compensate, particularly with regards to the so-called "Green Revolution" (not to be confused with environmentalism). Moreover, the sorts of inadequacies you mention are definitely not equally distributed. In fact, as Yuki-Anne pointed out, many developed nations are struggling with low birth rates and a shrinking pool of people of working age. Even the United States has some issues in this regard, and Japan and many European nations have this problem acutely.
So, while there is certainly impoverishment in many large regions of the world, I think that is not really relevant to many or even most of us when making the personal decision to have children, and there are many good arguments in developed countries for even trying to increase the birth rate. Moreover, it is hardly a given that technology will not continue on a similar trajectory. After all, births certainly haven't. Wikipedia summarizes this well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_rate
But, all that is entirely orthogonal to Yamamaya's original post.
Yuki-Anne (post: 1483832) wrote:I think if I hit 30 or 35, have a stable job, and there's still no possibility of marriage in sight, I'm going to see what my options are for fostering/adoption.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 234 guests