Having children is evil

[Accursed2]

In the short term, life is not something fun

Sure, a few people are happy. They have a job that they like, a wife, decent health… But for most people life is hunger, homelessness, disease, hard work, boring work, suffering, rape, torture, violence, war, imprisonment, loneliness, insecurity, fear. And as the Earth gets more polluted and over-populated, the resources more scarce, and people more wicked, it’s only going to get worse.
**
In the long term, you spend the eternity in a lake of fire**

Since we are all sinners and most people don’t believe/repent/confess, most of them will go to Hell. Catholic countries are turning atheist. Most newborns will be atheist, regardless of what their parents are. Even if it’s their “choice”, it’s a poor choice to make that they are going to regret and suffer for it.

If someone had a horrible genetic disease, and the doctor told them that their children had 50% chances of having it too. Most people wouldn’t want to play the Russian roulette with the life of their children and take the risk of them suffering. Surely the odds of having a normal child are not worth the risk of creating someone who suffers intensely.

Why do people react different if their children risk something infinitely worse, namely eternal damnation?

If someone is good, in my opinion, they shouldn’t create more misery on Earth and in Hell.

 

[MichaelHowling]

Bringing forth a child does not create more misery.

Your position and view of the world around you is very sad. Yes, there are many autrocities and maybe the tide of good is getting weaker…BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE SHOULD STOP DOING GOOD, HAVING BABIES AND WORKING FOR THE BETTER.

What you are asking for is cowardly and in the spirit of not trusting God.

I have a 16 month old son…and yes I worry about the future…and his future. But I trust in God, I am going to do my best for my boy and we’re talking about having another.

When a baby comes into this world…it’s a sign of hope!

 

[bzkoss236]

If a good person has a baby, and raises them well, and the baby grows into a good person, and they do the same, and the process of good people continues, but instead of just having one child, they have many good children that grow up to be good people, doesn’t that create a hope of reducing the evil? The problem with your world view is that the media typically only covers the bad stuff, so that is all you see… the misery… they may, from time-to-time, report on something extraordinarily good, but there are plenty of good things that happen all the time, random acts of kindness, someone doing something nice for someone else, someone working towards the greater good.

Having children is a blessing. Imagine a world where no children could be born. Would that really be a better world? Would that create peace? No, it would just kill off the human race, and what would be the point of that.

EDIT:

Might I also add that we, as the human race (not necessarily on and individual basis) were given a command by God to be fruitful and multiply. So, if every stopped having kids, we would be defying God, and then sinning ourselves, which would then damn everyone to hell.

 

[Accursed2]

It’s not about not trusting God. You can’t trust in God for your child to be saved. God does not interfere with free will. It’s your child’s choice. You can flip a coin to know if they are going to make the right choice. Even if you teach them the right things or try to force them to believe what you believe. Do your best as you say. They will be their own person different from you and make their own choice.

Likewise, you can’t create a new race of good people as bzkoss236 suggests, for the same reason. The son of a criminal is not necessarily a criminal. The son of a good man is not necessarily a good man.

I don’t believe that it’s cowardly to refuse to play with the life of another being when the odds are that they are going to suffer for eternity since indeed there are much more non-believers than faithful Catholics in the world. If anything, it’s a proof of courage because you have to fight your horniness and not make children.

 

[MichaelHowling]

Yes they will be their own person. I as a parent offer a healthy growing situation. So I don’t see why we should stop having children because there is pain and suffering in the world…that makes no sense.

As you stated…their life is there own…how are we playing with it ?

You’re a coward because you throw up your hands and say to hell with the world and the future and offering the chance for eternal life to someone. The odds are in the persons favor…they have EVERYTHING they need at their disposal.

 

[mdleagedguy]

In the short term, life is not something fun

Sure, a few people are happy. They have a job that they like, a wife, decent health… But for most people life is hunger, homelessness, disease, hard work, boring work, suffering, rape, torture, violence, war, imprisonment, loneliness, insecurity, fear. And as the Earth gets more polluted and over-populated, the resources more scarce, and people more wicked, it’s only going to get worse.
**
In the long term, you spend the eternity in a lake of fire**

Since we are all sinners and most people don’t believe/repent/confess, most of them will go to Hell. Catholic countries are turning atheist. Most newborns will be atheist, regardless of what their parents are. Even if it’s their “choice”, it’s a poor choice to make that they are going to regret and suffer for it.

If someone had a horrible genetic disease, and the doctor told them that their children had 50% chances of having it too. Most people wouldn’t want to play the Russian roulette with the life of their children and take the risk of them suffering. Surely the odds of having a normal child are not worth the risk of creating someone who suffers intensely.

Why do people react different if their children risk something infinitely worse, namely eternal damnation?

If someone is good, in my opinion, they shouldn’t create more misery on Earth and in Hell.

Your premises are both flawed, and incomplete. To begin with, it is not true that hunger, war, disease, poverty, etc. equate to unhappiness. To the contrary, it is entirely possible to be happy in the midst of these things and so your premise that this makes life an evil rather than a good is flawed. It is incomplete because you neglect the fact that these conditions are not static. It is entirely possible to ameliorate them, and the struggle to do so in itself is a source of happiness. Rather, you have taken the road of pessimism which is essentially a whiny, weepy attitude of helplessness. We are not helpless. Buck up and grow a pair. If you see something that is not right the proper response is to fix the situation, not to sit there being a quivering mass of helpless disillusionment. Your attitude is wimpy. Don’t be a wimp. Wimpiness in the face of adversity allows evil to exist.

Regarding the second part of your argument, you need to read Aquinas. Even atheists can make it to heaven. He argues that we are saved only by and through the Church. We are either actually in the Church, or we are potentially in the Church. We trust in the mercy of God. After death, a person who was only potentially in the Church can become actually in the Church through the mercy of God, and so a person’s invincible ignorance created through circumstances that make acceptance of the faith impossible in this life can be ameliorated after death, of course providing the person’s ignorance truly is invincible.

Like I said, buck up and face adversity. Adversity is entirely susceptible to change if we do so. If we fail in our efforts, then our efforts still have moral worth. What is morally damnable is the decision that it’s all hopeless, so we’re going to just let adversity roll over us and destroy us. My wife recently met with a childhood friend who now works for an NGO in Africa. She works with people who are living in extreme poverty, and she commented that these very poor people who seem to have such trouble in their lives but they are the happiest people she ever met. They didn’t grow up with the idea that our lives should consist of receiving pleasure and avoiding pain which is what utilitarian philosophy has taught the First World. We are not here to be pleasured. We are here to love each other, and that can mean hard work and suffering, but that is certainly preferable to pessimistic resignation. My hardest most painful days in life have been some of my most rewarding. I wouldn’t trade them for all of the comfort in the world.

 

[MichaelHowling]

mdl,

thank you! learned a lot from that post.

Well debated!

Michael

 

[johnnyjones]

Is it a guarantee that if you raise a child well that they will travel the most productive path? No, of course it is helpful though.

I think often of the parents that birthed and raised a Hitler or Ted Bundy etc…
An argument could be made that having children is a **** shoot. Possibly evil, possibly good. The act of having kids is not evil. It is just that many things are unknown in this life and evil could rear it’s head to the peril of others.

The alternative; no children , no people, no nothing. The world wrestles between the two forces (good, evil). Live with choices and suffer much.

 

[VirtusTransitus]

I’m not into eastern philosophy, but there are some essential kernels of truth in it.

To understand light, there must be darkness. To understand comfort, you must know pain. To value goodness, you must know evil. Etc.

The OP’s stance is completely passive and fatalistic and has nothing to do with living and everything to do with simply letting things happen TO you.

The most important joys of my life have come on the heels of either difficulty or disappointment. That is THE PURPOSE of free will, in my opinion. Struggle. Learning. And joy.

 

[SamH]

If someone is good, in my opinion, they shouldn’t create more misery on Earth and in Hell.

Where did you learn this “pearl” of wisdom?

 

[Razanir]

When a baby comes into this world…it’s a sign of hope!

This. There’s a reason that in the episode “Serpent’s Pass” of Avatar: the Last Airbender the couple named their child Hope.

Also, your first post sounds like materialism. I’d take a good look at A Christmas Carol. Scrooge was certainly better off financially, but Bob Cratchit’s family was certainly much happier

 

[antunesaa]

In the short term, life is not something fun

Sure, a few people are happy. They have a job that they like, a wife, decent health… But for most people life is hunger, homelessness, disease, hard work, boring work, suffering, rape, torture, violence, war, imprisonment, loneliness, insecurity, fear. And as the Earth gets more polluted and over-populated, the resources more scarce, and people more wicked, it’s only going to get worse.
**
In the long term, you spend the eternity in a lake of fire**

Since we are all sinners and most people don’t believe/repent/confess, most of them will go to Hell. Catholic countries are turning atheist. Most newborns will be atheist, regardless of what their parents are. Even if it’s their “choice”, it’s a poor choice to make that they are going to regret and suffer for it.

If someone had a horrible genetic disease, and the doctor told them that their children had 50% chances of having it too. Most people wouldn’t want to play the Russian roulette with the life of their children and take the risk of them suffering. Surely the odds of having a normal child are not worth the risk of creating someone who suffers intensely.

Why do people react different if their children risk something infinitely worse, namely eternal damnation?

If someone is good, in my opinion, they shouldn’t create more misery on Earth and in Hell.

Why should I abstain from having children if I believed I could educate them and help them make the world a little better and give testimony to Jesus Christ? Actually that’s what I’ve done and haven’t been sorry a single minute, despite all the difficulties we face in this neo-pagan Europe. It’s been a permanent joy! You see, that’s why Hope, Faith and Charity are such magnificent virtues. You seem to lack the first two, my friend.

Take care.

 

[Skye_Ariel]

In the short term, life is not something fun

Sure, a few people are happy. They have a job that they like, a wife, decent health… But for most people life is hunger, homelessness, disease, hard work, boring work, suffering, rape, torture, violence, war, imprisonment, loneliness, insecurity, fear. And as the Earth gets more polluted and over-populated, the resources more scarce, and people more wicked, it’s only going to get worse.
**
In the long term, you spend the eternity in a lake of fire**

Since we are all sinners and most people don’t believe/repent/confess, most of them will go to Hell. Catholic countries are turning atheist. Most newborns will be atheist, regardless of what their parents are. Even if it’s their “choice”, it’s a poor choice to make that they are going to regret and suffer for it.

If someone had a horrible genetic disease, and the doctor told them that their children had 50% chances of having it too. Most people wouldn’t want to play the Russian roulette with the life of their children and take the risk of them suffering. Surely the odds of having a normal child are not worth the risk of creating someone who suffers intensely.

Why do people react different if their children risk something infinitely worse, namely eternal damnation?

If someone is good, in my opinion, they shouldn’t create more misery on Earth and in Hell.

Your view of life is completely messed up! Where to begin? Imagine if slaves had thought the same thing and stopped having children, imagine if people hundreds of years ago when life really was much harder and people lived much shorter lives, had thought the same thing and stopped having children! Never give up hope for the future and having children is our only hope for the future of the human race. Stop reproducing now and you stop mankind in the place where we are now, keep having children and there is hope that things will get better, maybe not in our life time or our children’s life time but in their children’s children’s lifetime things may get better. Yes there is a lot of evil in the world, but life now is better over all for the human race than it was hundreds of years ago when people died from the flu or infection from a simple cut and diseases that can now be cured in days. Imagine if Christians back in the days when Christians were being killed just for believing in God had stopped having children?? The world would be much worse than it is today because those who believed in God would have died out from not reproducing. Also even if your idea was sane, the only ones who would stop reproducing would be the ones who think like you, while those who really don’t believe in God would keep on multiplying and we’d be leaving the earth to** their **offspring while those who believe in God would die out from not reproducing then you would just be bringing your own fears into reality. No, having children really is the only hope for the future of mankind. The Bible says Christians are the salt of the earth. We are what keeps mankind from going completely under. As long as we keep reproducing and raising our children with the truth, there will always be some who turn their heart to God.

 

[Accursed2]

it is not true that hunger, war, disease, poverty, etc. equate to unhappiness. To the contrary, it is entirely possible to be happy in the midst of these things

This was obviously a non-exhaustive list. Sure, some people are stronger or don’t feel pain, they are happy while living the worst. However, unhappiness does exist, and you cannot deny it. It doesn’t matter if it’s something that I listed or not unless you want to be nitpicky. For many people, life sucks, and they wish they weren’t born. You can blame them and call them wimpy. Or maybe you should refrain from judging them because you know nothing about them and haven’t lived their life, and have a different brain that reacts differently to pain and trauma.

and so your premise that this makes life an evil rather than a good is flawed.

It’s flawed only if you took my list for being exhaustive or deny that many people have an extremely unhappy life. And if you somehow deny unhappiness on Earth, you cannot deny that Hell is eternal unhappiness and suffering. My first paragraph about Earthly suffering was only a bonus to it.

Same comment to Razanir who ignored my second paragraph. Not wanting your children to suffer in Hell has nothing materialistic. And since Jesus’ gate is so narrow, he said it himself, most people will end up in Hell. It doesn’t matter if some atheists will be saved. How can this be ignored? Most of your children will be in Hell. Only the class pet will make it to Heaven. How can this be worth the suffering of his siblings?

 

[Skye_Ariel]

Your whole premise of this argument is built on a flaw, most people are not going to hell.

 

[Accursed2]

Your whole premise of this argument is built on a flaw, most people are not going to hell.

What about this?

Matthew 7
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”

 

[MichaelHowling]

lol Accursed,

I think your stance got ripped up one side and down the other.

I love when you guys pop in here from time to time trying to get us barking and you get proved down.

Come on guy…even your name… “Accursed” … you need to check your mentality. There is some pretty amazing and beautiful things in this world and some awsome roads to go down. We all have to build ourselves up and journey on together!

 

[mdleagedguy]

This was obviously a non-exhaustive list. Sure, some people are stronger or don’t feel pain, they are happy while living the worst.

It doesn’t have to be exhaustive. What you have pointed out is the existence of pain. So what? Happy people feel pain too. Unhappy people might lead relatively pain free existences. It has more to do with attitude. If the problem is the attitude, the attitude should be adjusted.

However, unhappiness does exist, and you cannot deny it. It doesn’t matter if it’s something that I listed or not unless you want to be nitpicky. For many people, life sucks, and they wish they weren’t born.

But that’s no reason to prevent happy people from being born. There are plenty of happy people, including people who face considerable adversity. You take the existence of evil, and advocate throwing out the good along with it. The solution is not to throw out the good, but to expand the good by countering the evil.

Or maybe you should refrain from judging them because you know nothing about them and haven’t lived their life, and have a different brain that reacts differently to pain and trauma.

You make a number of judgments yourself in you initial post, and they are bad ones. We all have decisions to make in life. We can decide to whimper, or we can decide to take action. I’m not judging anyone. I’m judging actions and attitudes. I’m saying how we ought to live. The first step to making a difference, no matter what one’s neuropsychological make might be, is to decide to make that difference, and then act. Every time I’ve wallowed in a little pity party, things have only gotten worse for me. When I’ve decided to do something, then things get better. It’s that simple. I know exactly what a pity party looks and feels like, and you’re having a pity party. Stop it. It’s that simple. Now there are people with genuine psychological disorders or variations in psychological strength, or different external circumstances who might not be able to overcome adversity. That’s not whom I’m directing my comments to. Yet, even in that case, another person can take action and make life better for them. It is the duty of the strong to take care of the weak, and so you’ve still not made your case. The strong aren’t merely self-interested. They alleviate the suffering of those who cannot do so for themselves. At any rate, see my first point. The existence of evil is no reason to get rid of the good along with it. You’re still only making bad arguments. You have judged the good and the happy as unworthy of life because not everyone is good or happy. That’s an utterly ridiculous attitude. That’s like saying no one should have chocolate because some people are allergic to it.

It’s flawed only if you took my list for being exhaustive or deny that many people have an extremely unhappy life. And if you somehow deny unhappiness on Earth, you cannot deny that Hell is eternal unhappiness and suffering. My first paragraph about Earthly suffering was only a bonus to it.

Hell is freely chosen, either through action or inaction. You propose inaction. Again, it’s wimpy. Even taking your point that not all are able to rise above their circumstances, Hell is the result of not taking care of those people. Again, we are here to love each other, not to be pleasured. You propose that we are here to be pleasured, and because that has failed we shouldn’t be here. You have bought into the false premises of utilitarianism and correctly concluded that if they are true, they lead to despair. But they are not true. Happiness resides in love of God and neighbor. The reason you have embraced unhappiness and despair is because you have not embraced love. Love brings good out of evil by seeking to overcome it rather than accept it. If love succeeds in overcoming evil, then evil is banished and your argument falls apart. But even if love does not succeed, the attempt in and of itself is a good thing and a source of happiness. One thing I learned working in nursing homes is the simple act of trying to help, even if ultimately unsuccessful, has the potential of lifting someone’s spirits and making a difference. Your solution would take the bad and make it worse. My solution would take the bad, and work against it. Your solution proposes annihilation as the proper response to evil, when annihilation is an evil itself. It repays evil for evil and and absurdly attempts to paint it as somehow compassionate. It is not compassionate to those suffering evil because it doesn’t try to bring about good, and it is not compassionate to those who are happy because it destroys their happiness. You have made bad arguments that lead to bad conclusions, and ultimately bad solutions to life’s problems.

 

[mdleagedguy]

What about this?

Matthew 7
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”

And so those who find it can bring a lot more people to that narrow gate. In fact, they must if they wish to enter through it.

 

[Skye_Ariel]

What about this?

Matthew 7
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”

LOL! I didn’t see the word “hell” or “Heaven” in there. That sounds like the life choices that people make here on earth that can lead to life or death. Like some people today choose the road to drugs, drinking, or crime etc and few may find the road to lead to a good life. Some who choose the wrong road can still turn their lives around, but that verse does not say most people will go to hell. Also it means there’s more opportunity to make bad choices in life than to make good choices and everyone makes a bad choice at some time or other, few make perfect choices all the time. It does not mean they will ultimately go to hell. Many people can and do turn their life around.