2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

In the following I provide a critique of the overpopulation arguement for being childless.  The dominant rationale provided is that overpopulation severly impacts natural resources, thereby resulting in irreversible environment damage.  Therefore, childbirth should be restricted, as this is the cause of overpopulation.

This arguement fails to acknowledge that the increase in lifespan has a significant role to play in overpopulation.  Following the logic of protection of natural resources, should not there then be "cap" on lifespan, such that people are only allowed to live to a certain age?  Taking into account that the resources (on average) to maintain a 18-30 year old versus a 50+ are significantly less, and the formers potential contribution to society is far greater, should not we "swap" the 20 year olds for 50 years old?  In practice, this is in much more accord to the "natural order" of the environment, than remaining childless.  

Basically, the old were meant to die, and the young were meant to be born.  That is how every able species survives on this Earth.  It is unnatural to assume that we should not bring new life into this world, at the expense of being able live past 40.  In my opinion the forsaking of youth for the elderly is the greatest selfish act dominant in Western thought today.

posted 3 years, 7 months ago
view in context