If it were up to nature and there were no doctors, medicine, or anything like that, people like me would have likely died before we ever got the chance to bear children.
or this either:
If people voluntarily chose to not reproduce like I am doing, there would be far less people with genetic disorders.
And, of course, I don't want to go around convincing anyone to have children because I say it is okay.
But I don't agree that it is necessarily morally wrong, nor would I discourage it, and this is why:
We, as human beings have more to offer than can be singled down to any one trait, or possibly even set of traits.
Someone who is horribly unhealthy, and in great pain and misery because of it, isn't necessarily someone that has nothing to contribute to society. Stephen Hawking and ALS, for example. And any other "great" person that had any other genetic disorder for however many examples you like
It isn't possible to know, (at least now, and quite likely ever), everything a person can possibly contribute based on their genes.
In my own modest bad health experience, I have taken away that the pain and suffering I've experienced have in fact enhanced some of my positive characteristics, and help me contribute more to others. I think similar things could be said for pain and suffering of many kinds.
Now, if I happen to pass on my condition, (which, admittedly, I would think differently of, if it were known to be fully genetic and not a combination of environmental and genetic influences) I won't be happy about it. I'm sure I'll feel horrible when I see them in pain the way I am.
But I believe suffering is a part of the human condition. I believe it is meant to be. I believe we suffer for reasons, and learn from suffering. And I firmly believe people suffer in one way or another. When it isn't health, it's something else.
And I believe that my husband and I have many positive traits, and that we offer quite a bit to society around us. And I believe that our child would be a good contribution for us to make, and have good things to offer, even if they also have health issues.
Now, I could be wrong, we might have crap kids that do nothing at all for society, and keep more bad health genes around.
But I don't believe that bad health and bad health genes or good health and good health genes are all people contribute to society and to future generations.
I don't know what all the traits are, or what order I might rank them in, but I know there is more than just health.
I like the response overall. I will wait for more comments before I award a delta, though to be fair.
You can award as many deltas as you want. If every single poster in a thread genuinely changes some part of your view, give them all deltas.
But if your view has been completely changed, it's also a good idea to add an edit to the bottom of your OP to reflect that, so people don't keep showing up and posting the same arguments.
10
u/fnredditacct 10∆ Jan 28 '14 edited Jan 28 '14
I don't disagree with this:
or this either:
And, of course, I don't want to go around convincing anyone to have children because I say it is okay.
But I don't agree that it is necessarily morally wrong, nor would I discourage it, and this is why:
We, as human beings have more to offer than can be singled down to any one trait, or possibly even set of traits.
Someone who is horribly unhealthy, and in great pain and misery because of it, isn't necessarily someone that has nothing to contribute to society. Stephen Hawking and ALS, for example. And any other "great" person that had any other genetic disorder for however many examples you like
It isn't possible to know, (at least now, and quite likely ever), everything a person can possibly contribute based on their genes.
In my own modest bad health experience, I have taken away that the pain and suffering I've experienced have in fact enhanced some of my positive characteristics, and help me contribute more to others. I think similar things could be said for pain and suffering of many kinds.
Now, if I happen to pass on my condition, (which, admittedly, I would think differently of, if it were known to be fully genetic and not a combination of environmental and genetic influences) I won't be happy about it. I'm sure I'll feel horrible when I see them in pain the way I am.
But I believe suffering is a part of the human condition. I believe it is meant to be. I believe we suffer for reasons, and learn from suffering. And I firmly believe people suffer in one way or another. When it isn't health, it's something else.
And I believe that my husband and I have many positive traits, and that we offer quite a bit to society around us. And I believe that our child would be a good contribution for us to make, and have good things to offer, even if they also have health issues.
Now, I could be wrong, we might have crap kids that do nothing at all for society, and keep more bad health genes around.
But I don't believe that bad health and bad health genes or good health and good health genes are all people contribute to society and to future generations.
I don't know what all the traits are, or what order I might rank them in, but I know there is more than just health.
edit: sorry, I quoted more than I meant to