« One quarter of gamers watch online video via a console | Main | FCC passes network neutrality proposal »

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ita

SD, and EngineerChic,I agree wholeheartedly about lots of chlriden. There is little benefit to the future, even though there have been very significant contributors to civilization that were fifth and seventh and later chlriden. And some of them farmed, raising food for the rest.The single point I made was that more is not better - but none is not sustainable.Just one for-instance. Do you want to know that in your community, in the next generation, there is at least one person that was raised to the sensitivity, the understanding, and responsibility that you value? Because most of the people in the next generation will not be raised by people that think failing to raise chlriden is the primary option.Adopt chlriden, foster care? By all means -- that is a good, partial answer. But, like recycling, it also has the unintended consequence of providing a social 'market', a permission, a demand for something that shouldn't have been produced in the first place. There should be no unwanted babies -- no rapes, no unintentional parents. I am *not* talking about abortion, or even abstinence or 'protection'. I merely point out the social pressures creating adoptable chlriden must be addressed to reduce that problem, not adopting the result. Even building and instructing today's world will ultimately pass, often replaced in a generation or two. But other people's chlriden.Refusing to bear chlriden in this generation might make sense - if anyone believed that the overpopulation problem would be solved within one generation.Instead there are barriers to solving this problem - the Biblical and Greek teachings enjoining believers to raise sons to fight in the army, to win the wars in the next generation, are but one example. Today in America, parents with chlriden in the military take justifiable pride in their chlriden's service -- a form of patriotism that has served America, like faiths and nations before, very well.And, again, I am not about to suggest that large families are better -- at solving the overpopulation problem.Various societies and cultures in the past addressed the problem of too many people and too few resources. Of the success ones, many of their teachings and practices are still available. Of those that simply chose fewer births -- we can't find much of their legacy, and they surely didn't contribute to solving the larger, multi-generational problems.I understand your point of view, but I think we will likely continue to disagree. Blessed be.

Air Jordans

*People are always telling you what to do, but what's right for them may not be right for you.

The comments to this entry are closed.