Do People Have a Right to Procreate?

Post Reply New Topic

What I meant to say is that if we implement some form of control over a whole population and start having requirements in order to procreate, there will be an adverse effect on society and it will be very taxing on pretty much every individual psyche also. And no we don't merely have the compulsion, for many people it is an integral part of their ego and their capability to be self motivated and sane. I understand that there can be a cost involved for the people who are born into less than ideal situations.

The problem with this idea is that there would be more of a cost as it rips society apart, when you sterilize so many people sexually you must take heed that those same sexual chemicals drive everyday behavior. As testosterone is frustrated it complicates other areas of life. There would be a mountain of clinical depression and related suicides.

Well that's a good/interesting point. I don't want to keep up with the argument for too long to put you on the defensive though. so I'll stop here. I like the second point, the truth of uliliatarian ethics probably won't catch on because of how hard they'd be to implement. look how many pro-natals there are just in this thread there's no way any anti would be able to do anything this generation other than spread the truth and hope it sticks.

(also I'm not for population controll I'm anti-life, and anti-procreation.)

News flash: sex is how people procreate. If you intend to stop procreation you have to stop sex. Medical complications can arise when people use contraception drugs:

1. My sister had a pulmonary embolism (blockage of the main artery of the lung or one of it's branches) because she was "on the pill". Not long after that she became better situated to have children, but she wouldn't have been able to survive a pregnancy so she gave up on it. This has been very taxing on her all of her life as she is a distinctly maternal person.

2. My aunt, on the other hand, was "on the pill" for about a decade because she figured she would never want children. When her and my uncle decided that they did want children she was sterile.

And how about another news flash? Condoms break. I've had quite a few break on me for the obvious reason that sex involves a lot of friction. And guess what else? When women have their tubes tied an alarming number of them find that the operation didn't work and they are pregnant. So as far as I'm concerned it's unethical to require people to use contraception if they don't want to, and not only that but contraception isn't guaranteed to work.

I'm sensing this. I never have understood the need to have children, but I am neither self motivated nor sane. Perhaps this has something to do with it. I feel very detached from society. If I had children I would have a vested interest.



That's a heck of an introduction, but Welcome!


Fair enough. Practical implementation would be a huge logistics issue in this scenario.

thanks for the welcome, but I've been around for a couple weeks, I might need your help for operation scorched earth coming up pretty soon. not sure what tattics will be used but if you are interested i'll send you pms and other users who are interested as well the fire rises.(lets not deviant or disrupt the conversation though there is a good conversations about ethics of reproduction going on now. :] )

Let me re-emphasize this earlier point as well:



Not only would it take a toll on everyone's psyche but it would gradually begin to undermine cooperation in society. Many of us learn of the vagaries and difficulties of cooperation through marriage and family. Just look at what happens in areas like ghettos and slums where the family is de-emphasized: society is ripped apart by the guts.

People in ghettos often live in desperate situations, are violent, display casual disregard towards their health, and are generally unhappy. This is not necessarily because they are inferior, as a good part of it is that they come from broken homes and frightening neighborhoods, and I wouldn't wish that kind of life on anyone (let alone the other deplorable situations around the globe). Think of how much society in general could degrade into something like this if we tamper with a force that has helped on an instinctive level to support cooperation and human bonding throughout all of human history. Getting rid of sex might have much the same affect on people as rampant births out of wedlock and other typically unfavorable family situations, when it comes to things like crime rate, average income, and hard drug use.

I take the opposing view.

There are a lot of people who clearly will be unfit parents.

There are a lot of people with genetically-inheritable issues that should choose NOT to have children in an effort to stem the ever increasing number of people with the condition.

The problem I always have is finding a fair and equitable way to determine who should and should not be allowed to procreate. I don't think any one person (or group) could be trusted to not turn it into something very ugly.

True, but I'm not sure this would disappear. It might be that society itself becomes less divisive.



True. People would have to have a lot of faith in the society in order to trust the government with this. I guess procreation is the original right - the right to expand one's clan.

This is an issue that is inherently more offensive when viewed from the female perspective, because any unexpected/accidental/illegal pregnancies would occur within women's bodies. To end these pregnancies, you would have to forcibly operate on them, violating their bodies and their autonomy. You would have pregnant women hiding in basements, pregnant women being dragged from their homes by the police while they and their spouses sobbed and begged for mecry, secret illegal babies being born in shacks in the woods. Is that the society you want? How long do you think it would be before the people rose up and overthrew your dystopia? Not long, I'd wager.

Many people succeed despite "bad genes."

"Good genes" does not guarantee good results.

I know a family: the mother was a librarian, the father an employment counselor. They had two daughters. Both the daughters committed suicide when they were in their 30's.

The irony is: there is, sometimes, a compulsion for the product of "bad parenting" or "bad genes" to succeed. It's an ego boost for this person.

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 14 Nov 2014, 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Okay, so then this would be a total no. I missed the specific offensiveness you are talking about because I have no desire to have children (and no TOM.) So women then have a right to conceive and bear children inalienably.

They have an inherent right---but they should also use that right appropriately.

With rights, come responsibilities (to paraphrase one of the premises of Spider Man).

I've never had kids; I never felt ready enough.

People hardly ever stop having sex while they?re still physically able to do it. Of course, in order to stop, you need to have started first

Of course we all have the right to procreate. People aren't animals to be bred - or kept from breeding. If the latter was a concern, someone I'm sure would get around to saying that we Aspies and other autistics should be kept from keeping our genes in play. Everyone who has ever wanted to limit a certain group from carrying on their genetic line has done so only to dehumanize "the other" - and that includes everyone from the Nazis sterilizing Jews and the disabled, to American eugenicists who sterilized everyone from the criminally inclined to the mentally disabled, and who had wanted to extend the practice to blacks and other racial minorities.