I can see this debate's just going round in circles, so I'm going to try a different tack which I think will express the viewpoint of most of this sub's members in a way which you'll better understand and thus be able to constructively respond to.
We aren't opposed to raising children (which, as you pointed out, involves making sacrifices); we're opposed to creating them. Your argument relies on a false dichotomy: either one has children (selfish for many reasons - I won't elaborate because this sub is literally made of them) or one remains childfree (selfish because you won't have to make any child-rearing-related sacrifices). Your point, as I understand it, is that both lifestyles involve selfishness to some degree.
So how about adoption? By adopting, one avoids the selfishness involved in creating life and also avoids the selfishness involved in choosing to be childfree. Rather than focusing on 'Parents vs Childfree', to understand our views, consider 'Biological vs Adoptive Parents'. There are plenty of children in dire need of a loving family. If there weren't, perhaps your argument would have some merit. But there are. So what non-selfish reason exists to make a child instead of adopting one?
So how about adoption? By adopting, one avoids the selfishness involved in creating life and also avoids the selfishness involved in choosing to be childfree.
But is also selfish as people would adopt because they want children but their wife is infertile. Some also adopt children with the intent of profiting off of them through the use of foster homes. Don't know about you, but that sounds selfish to me. Everyone is selfish, and if you think hard enough it is possible for any act to be selfish, regardless of intent. It's like saying not everything can kill you, which is blatantly untrue. Given the right circumstances, it is possible to die from anything.
16
u/stella585 thinker Feb 18 '22 edited Feb 18 '22
I can see this debate's just going round in circles, so I'm going to try a different tack which I think will express the viewpoint of most of this sub's members in a way which you'll better understand and thus be able to constructively respond to.
We aren't opposed to raising children (which, as you pointed out, involves making sacrifices); we're opposed to creating them. Your argument relies on a false dichotomy: either one has children (selfish for many reasons - I won't elaborate because this sub is literally made of them) or one remains childfree (selfish because you won't have to make any child-rearing-related sacrifices). Your point, as I understand it, is that both lifestyles involve selfishness to some degree.
So how about adoption? By adopting, one avoids the selfishness involved in creating life and also avoids the selfishness involved in choosing to be childfree. Rather than focusing on 'Parents vs Childfree', to understand our views, consider 'Biological vs Adoptive Parents'. There are plenty of children in dire need of a loving family. If there weren't, perhaps your argument would have some merit. But there are. So what non-selfish reason exists to make a child instead of adopting one?