Wtf?!

[KvHagedorn]

Originally posted by DukeP
Look.
Kids are bad, Mkay?

The world has enough problems as is.
Dont add children to it.

Live a happy life.
Live without children.

Think about the future!

~~DukeP~~

People that have 15 kids should have been neutered after the first one.

I really hope you are being facetious, because if you are not, you are a fool. If those who really want the world to be a better place refuse to have children, only those who are irresponsible will procreate, and this terrible world will be even worse. What good have you done then?

I know it's a supposed to be a chick flick, but go watch The Joy Luck Club. One of the main themes of this film is the parent-child relationship (specifically Asian, and specifically Mother-Daughter, but much of its wisdom has a broader scope.) One quote which I found quite enlightening was where one old mother tells her daughter that she has passed her hopes on to the daughter. I think this is the essence of parenting. As one gets older, there is less and less to hope for for oneself, and if one has no children and then no grandchildren, all the hopes and cares you have ever had were for nought. What a selfish, deluded soul one is to presume to be immortal! You are going to DIE! If you have no children, that's the utter end of it. What a black hole of negativity people are who "choose not to have children." I'm sure many of these people will be cursed later in life with the full realization of their stupidity.. when it is too late. But then again you might be lucky enough to never understand and die in blissful ignorance.

[az]

Though at her age she should stop having even more children. The last two already needed a ceasarian, that should be a sign for them to stop now.

AZ

[KvHagedorn]

Yes, fifteen is a good number.

If I had my way, people like Claudia Schiffer would have 20 kids and Rosanne would be sterile, but then, I don't get my way often.

[az]

...with Claudia Schiffer?

AZ

[DukeP]

I WAS leaning a bit heavily on the sarcasm.
I too want to have children of my own.

But the point IS valid - this globe is HEAVILY overpopulated.
We currently have SOO many problems dealing with this, that adding children - and especially in such a vast number! Should NOT be glorified - not at all.

You ARE right tho - every idiot can MAKE children. Its the raising that takes skill. And the tendency to make more than one or two children seems firmly fixed in the lowerclass (at least here in EU).

The solution is NOT to let the "intelligent, the rich and the insightfull" have MORE children - its to make the society so that its not advantageous for the less well off to get soo many.

Oh, and dont get me started on artificial insemination.
Thats just an abomination, an egoistic selfappeasing trip.

As long as theres one lonely parentless kidd living in an orphanage (If lucky!) around the world - then every insemination is one too many.

Abortation then. Yes, as much as possible. If You are not ready to take care of a baby - the for Gods sake Dont Have It! Dont just add another innocent child to the statistics (especially not based on some pseudo-christian morality code).

~~DukeP~~

[KvHagedorn]

In Northern Europe, the birth rate is exceeded by the death rate. Births number fewer than 2 per woman. (I'm talking about NATIVES of Northern Europe.) Northern Europeans are NOT the people who should worry about this among themselves. Their worries should be exactly the opposite.. having enough kids to simply enable the survival of our people. Places like Latin America and Africa and the Middle East are where this is a problem. These are the places we need to discourage having children.

Adding children where there are not enough must be glorified and encouraged, though.. at least to the point where we can maintain our population. This comes at an average of 2-3 children born to each woman. If you have 2 children, each of them must also have 2 children to maintain the population, but that never happens. People die.. even young people. Wars still happen, disease still happens, and now, open homosexual pairings happen or people never find someone they want to have kids with, or any number of things. You have to allow for this, so 3 children would be about right. But it really angers me when people think that WE should procreate even LESS than we do, to make up for other societies that breed like rabbits.

I'm almost absolutely sure that none of you in ultra-civilized Europe has overheard 2 Mexican males in their teens talking about all the girls they have tried to get pregnant. That is their culture.. according to their stone-age mentality this makes them macho. But do you talk to them? No you do not. Even when they stream across our border and get our own daughters pregnant and then leave the responsibility of raising the child to the girl and her parents. Most of these girls have had their guard lowered by political correctness and have no clue what is going on.. it's reproductive terrorism, plain and simple.

[Sasq]

[Greebe]

Originally posted by KvHagedorn
In Northern Europe, the birth rate is exceeded by the death rate. Births number fewer than 2 per woman. (I'm talking about NATIVES of Northern Europe.) Northern Europeans are NOT the people who should worry about this among themselves. Their worries should be exactly the opposite.. having enough kids to simply enable the survival of our people. Places like Latin America and Africa and the Middle East are where this is a problem. These are the places we need to discourage having children.

Adding children where there are not enough must be glorified and encouraged, though.. at least to the point where we can maintain our population. This comes at an average of 2-3 children born to each woman. If you have 2 children, each of them must also have 2 children to maintain the population, but that never happens. People die.. even young people. Wars still happen, disease still happens, and now, open homosexual pairings happen or people never find someone they want to have kids with, or any number of things. You have to allow for this, so 3 children would be about right. But it really angers me when people think that WE should procreate even LESS than we do, to make up for other societies that breed like rabbits.

I'm almost absolutely sure that none of you in ultra-civilized Europe has overheard 2 Mexican males in their teens talking about all the girls they have tried to get pregnant. That is their culture.. according to their stone-age mentality this makes them macho. But do you talk to them? No you do not. Even when they stream across our border and get our own daughters pregnant and then leave the responsibility of raising the child to the girl and her parents. Most of these girls have had their guard lowered by political correctness and have no clue what is going on.. it's reproductive terrorism, plain and simple.

Originally posted by Sasq
Get off the xenophobia trip KvH before I change your avatar to a white pillow case.

I like pillow cases... so does da w00ber

[DukeP]

Without responding to the racial issues - while worry about a decline in population?

Thats exactely what I want!
The last 100+ years have driven the population UP by a factor of 5. Let it go down to the level of people 200 years ago. Please???

As it is now, we are a the limits of our technological resources rape. The Oceans cant take it much longer - thats where all our waste end up. The land isnt much better. I estimate the amount of "nature" in Denmark to be less than 0.1% of the dry surface area.

All this leaves is a rather poor place, for this all too big population.

If we where but a fifth (1/5) there would be much more air, land and sea for everybody - you could go fishing with a friend (and actually catch something), go wandering in more or less pristine forests and still enjoy watching Cows grass on the fields.

Am I the only one that finds Concrete and Parking lots to be depressing?

As for Africa - it mostly manages to destroy itself (ok, perhaps we are helping a little, but thats politics). India is trying to limit its growth by politics. This might or might not work - but if it fails, the lack of fresh water will surely decimate them within the next 30 years (their groundwater level have been dropping exponentional for the last 18 years - Last I heard it was on average 110meters below surface).
China has more or less control over the birthrate (This kind of action must be soo much easier in a tyranny like China's).

As for the rest? Well. Lead by example, I say. And carry a big stick.

~~DukeP~~

[KvHagedorn]

I would agree... except that the vacuum would suck in that many more immigrants, and there are those interests who care nothing about the culture, or nature, or quality of life, but just about propping up the economy, so they would extoll the wonders of multiculturalism and encourage immigration with this economic agenda in mind.

What you would wind up with is a place that is not only crowded, but not even Danish anymore.

[Brian Ellis]

The problem is at the other end. We are living too long. Modern medicine has saved my life at least four times. Man was never designed to live more than about 40 years, with 50 at the outside. The biblical three-score and ten is a load of codswallop. At the time that was written, 30 would be nearer the mark.

Just think of the physical degeneration that starts as we pass the 40 mark:
eyes, ears, teeth, sex and so on. The menopause was almost unknown 200 years ago: women died before it kicked in, often during childbirth. Those that did undergo the menopause knew that Death was already knocking on their front doors. Even in my memory, the retiree was a rare bird and died within a year or two of his retirement, like my father who survived just 4 years, longer than most of his contempories. I maintain that this overcrowded planet is not because of children but because of medical science defying nature. In my own case, I would probably have died at 20 (pericarditis), 37 (encephalitis), 59 (total AV block of the heart) or 64 (cancer) had it not been for medical science. I'm grateful for it, and don't want to kick the bucket just yet, but I know I'm long on borrowed time.

[GT98]

Originally posted by KvHagedorn
I would agree... except that the vacuum would suck in that many more immigrants, and there are those interests who care nothing about the culture, or nature, or quality of life, but just about propping up the economy, so they would extoll the wonders of multiculturalism and encourage immigration with this economic agenda in mind.

What you would wind up with is a place that is not only crowded, but not even Danish anymore.

GUess you dont like immgration

I think your taking too strong of an anti immgration stance here...alot of the immgration problems that the US has is self-inflicted with special interest catering to the miniorty , due to PC concerns, instead of the Majortry.

[DukeP]

In EU we have VERY strict immigration rules.

You cant just enter.
Its not enough that theres a war going on in your home country.
In fact, to get a visum you need to be directly and personally threatend by a government entity (Like the Jews during WWII - they where very much directly treatend, with their names on search papers etc.).

Otherwise - its Hasta la vista, baby.

EU have maintained the stance that people should be helped where they live. Go back, we WILL send aid.

I actually took a course in age research once, with one of Europes only proffesors within this area.
He's quite convinced that we used to live FAR LONGER than we do now. Genetically, we seems to have been through a bottleneck incident, which destroyed a simple mechanism thats responsible for keeping the Telomers at their proper length.

For him, the "natural" age for humans would be around 250 - 500 years. Thats around the time where random mutations will start to render our DNA weak and sickend.

Mayhaps the Old Testament was right after all - before The Flood, everybody turned 300 years.

~~DukeP~~

[Sasq]

Interesting concept.
I'm not so fussed at how long I live, just quality of life that goes with it.

Longegity or the Lazarus Long (Time enough for love - Robert Heinlin) gene would be great, but only if i'm not stuck in adult diapers for 200 years

[DukeP]

Hehehe.
Yeah, the thought, eh? Im pretty sure I saw a homepage on that subject...


Actually age is only expected to get less, ehm. Old. The "small glitches" that would have killed of Brian long time ago, we can repair.
As for the getting old part - did You know that the maximum bodystrenght of a 75yearold is only 12% less than that for an equally trained 25yo?
Our "newest" member in our diving club is 62. He's just started taking his certificate. Lean and strong as a bull.


~~DukeP~~