Is the world too "cruel" a place to raise children?

Post Reply New Topic

May I ask the obvious question: Whether or not the world is "too cruel a place," where else would a child be raised?

I dunno. Whenever I start thinking about how crazy the world has become, I am reminded that the world has always been hostile, just in differing ways. Primarily, who would have and attempt to raise children during most of world history when parents would need to have 12-16 children just so that three or four would survive to adulthood? Childhood disease was rampant until the early 20th century when physicians figured out hygiene in all its facets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene . The genealogical myth that "the average age in the 19th century was just 35 years" implies that many, many children died early in life, not that all people automatically died at 35 years of age. Many people used to live to about the same age (late 70s to early 80s) that we do today. It was childhood deaths that skewed the average age.

Then, there were many times in human history when one region or nation battled against others causing the fathers of many children to die unnaturally. There were famines, tyrannies, hostile religions, planned economies and other causes of cruelty.

So, all in all, I would stick with the mid 20th century for family-making. The last 40 years or so has seen a return of the all the things we had slowly conquered over the last few centuries. But, I wouldn't bail out of family-making altogether.

While I don't trust the government with that power, it's not as outrageous an idea as it sounds. I know from personal experience it's downright ridiculous in my province how much support teenage single mothers get, one even getting fully paid driving school despite not being able to afford a car! I almost think there is a conspiracy to destroy stable families who don't need help.

I wouldn't base it on economics but more on can they change a diaper, do they understand the legal responsibilities and are they capable of responding to an infant's large physical and emotional needs. Sadly, some of these aforementioned teenage mothers can't even take care of themselves.

I do chuckle when I hear how "dangerous" schools are. Geez, a kid was attacked and it made front page news! That was a weekly (sometimes daily) occurrence to me and nobody considered it even worth dealing with. Kids are FAR better behaved than they were in the 80s even with the prison style schools we have now.

Depending on how you look at it, the world was more cruel decades ago than it is now. Yes, it is still a cruel place, but nature itself is cruel. Normally, a species can only thrive at the cost of another one; the difference between men and other animals is that, being the apex predator in pretty much every ecossystem in existence, men thrive at cost of everything else.

And that is my greatest worry: there are too many people already. A huge population requires a huge ammount of resources (including livestock, which requires even more resources) and, while the environment is self-sustaining enough to periodically restock most of those resources (vegetable life, oxygen, water), at some point people's needs will grow more than the environment's ability to provide them. The world is not getting any bigger, after all. And, while I am an unrepentant misanthrope, I like the world I live in; even if I am not going to live long enough to see it all go to hell, I still do not appreciate the idea.

I think people should consider adoption as an option. And there should be some form of regulation for parenting ability, because some people simply do not have the skills or resources to be adequate parents.

Life is cruel but there's always someone in a worse boat than you are, so you have to make the most of it.
People might do unexpected things you dislike, unexpected things may happen, the worst thing you can do is throw a tantrum like a child.

If you have energy that is angry at injustice and cruelty, use that energy to change the world around you..

so only the rich can have kids, and keep making more and more selfish don't care about anyone but them people. yay.
speed it 100 years and theres no more workers, no more cops, no military, only rich politicians with no one to govern over.still bickering back and forth

einstein's family wasn't well off yet he was a genius, plenty of histories important people came from poor families. also consider rich smart people also make plenty of selfish stupid kids. natural doesn't follow such stats when deciding to make amazing people its quite random. and for this and general human rights we should never regulate who can have kids. my kid might be like me, or maybe they end up billionaires or the next great general or one of our best presidents. no one can predict this.

I personally do want to have kids, It'll never happen but I is something I strongly desire.

Not necessarily rich, but certainly they should be able to properly provide for the child.


I'm not talking about eugenics. Rather about how the child is taken care of regardless of the child's intelligence.


I don't think it's a right, I think it's privilege.

'

my family was poor, my grandparents were poor. all of us were provided for, you only need food and shelter to provide for kids, they don't need all those expensive toys, gadgets and fancy schools. I'd guess most kids come from poor families rich people tend to bee busy spending their money on expensive toys. they say you need 8million to raise one kid but its not true. most the population does it on far far less. as most aren't millionaires.

disagree its a right, one that is more likely then others to cause people to rebel for. you can't tell people what they can and can't do with their bodies.

No, androbot01 has a very good point. Sex is something people do with their bodies. Having a child, on the other hand, will result in a brand new life, which makes it much more serious than just two people playing with each other's bodies.

Raising a child is a huge responsibility, the greatest one most people will ever have in their lives. It should be seen as privilege reserved only for those who can grasp the magnitude of that responsibility and deal with it in a competent manner.

But I agree with you that money should not be a requirement. As long as people can afford to raise a child in a decent way, there is no need for them to be rich. But extremely poor people should abstain from having children they could not even feed, just like extremely rich people who cannot give children a proper education should abstain in the same manner.

Any such attempts have NEVER gone well. History teaches us better. You can promote and sell an idea - like having less children - but forcing it is wrong.

In answer to the original question: No.

While the world can be a cruel place, life isn't best lived without any challenges or adversity. And even in difficult circumstances you can find children filled with happiness. In many ways all the mess is just humans making things more complicated for themselves; it is like we NEED it all to be messy; but that also means we actually have the power to improve our lot. And that is what we hope for with our children: a chance to do it better, and improve the species. We are driven to survive.

http://news.distractify.com/people/inte ... rens-toys/

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 05 Mar 2015, 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

When did the Middle East turn to s**t? Thousands of years ago. I think it started when the Babylonians started fighting the Mesopotamians or something like that. Yes, there were several parts of history when they had much better technology than the rest of the world, including medieval times, the bronze age and the neolithic revolution but there has always been conflict there. I think the heat drives them to violence.When I see parents I think - I could never be that selfless.

What is weird is how people think its impossible for that to happen with the one we have here....hasn't everyone seen The Titanic, they should know what happens when such things are said lol or maybe its not a laugh worthy joke but I thought it was funny.

lol at the difference between Norway/Swiss/Swedes/Colorado vs Lebanon/Malawai/

http://www.cubebreaker.com/children-aro ... ke-really/

Why?
This species is destroying it's own environment.
Life is painful and disappointing.
You don't need them anymore to look after you in old age (and they probably won't anyway.)


It's the vanity of parents to think they are doing something special by creating a life. Really they are just passing on a painful burden. Maybe to give their own existence some legitimacy. But I don't get it.
Maybe if people have to meet requirements to procreate they will take more value in their own lives and waste less energy depending on their kids to do better than them.
I think people feel that by creating offspring that they are part of something larger than themselves, something that will make them part of the future. This is unrealistic and magical thinking.

It is in our biological nature to want to reproduce. It probably has something to do with we want our genes to live on, plus we are very sexual beings as well. In some people this need is strong and in others they don't really want to have children. But the majority of people want to eventually have kids of their own. And you're right, some people just aren't fit for being parents. Maybe they don't have the resources, commitment, or maturity of raising a child.

Is the world a cruel place for having kids? Depends on where you live and your situation. I live in the USA (one of the greatest countries in the world) and I live in a middle class family. Family-wise, I was pretty blessed. I still have both parents, we're definitely not poor, and theres no abuse in the family. Not everyone can say the same about their situation.