Why it is wrong for humans to breed

[Red]

I believe at this point in human evolution that having children is immoral.

Why do you believe this? What do you mean when you refer to 'Human Evolution'?

However, if we do manage to create a utopian society where there is no suffering then I think having children would be fine.

A utopian society is quite a ways away. If we don't have any children now, there'll be no one to enjoy a utopian society.

[Your_Construct]

Hi Red,

By human evolution I mean every aspect of it, evolution on the genetic level of a single individual as well the evolution of our society. As of now, there is a lot of suffering in this world due to economic inequality. There are a lot of homeless everywhere, not just in America. It seems immoral to bring in even more suffering. Unless you are very rich, you cannot guarantee that your children will not suffer. Not having enough economic resources can greatly stress an individual and more often than not this individual does take it out on his or her children. I feel that at the very least, all homelessness should be eliminated and all orphaned children be adequately taken care of before having your own children. I am aware that orphaned children in some type of foster care program are often abused physically and sexually. This aspect of foster care also needs to be fixed.

As for your point about having children now otherwise there will be no one to enjoy utopia, I have no counter.

[Red]

As of now, there is a lot of suffering in this world due to economic inequality.

I wouldn't say that's the case in the first world. I consider income inequality to be somewhat of a red-herring; Sure, the average person may not have as much as say Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates, but after a certain point, you don't need that amount of wealth. For one person in the US, about $30k a year is all you really need to live a comfortable life. It's easy to compare your wealth with those that are in your immediate vicinity, but when you look at wealth globally, first worlders are like in the top 5%.

As for other countries, wealth is not a finite resource. As the world economy grows, the people at the bottom of the economic pyramid will gain wealth, as well as trading with them to circulate more money and jobs into their economies (Look at countries in Asia like India and China when we opened up trade with them). The sweatshop jobs they have now suck, but it's a necessary part of the solution so they can work their way towards being a developed country and work better and more comfortable jobs.

There are a lot of homeless everywhere, not just in America.

As I implied, these issues will eventually be worked out. It's just a matter of time.

It seems immoral to bring in even more suffering. Unless you are very rich, you cannot guarantee that your children will not suffer. Not having enough economic resources can greatly stress an individual and more often than not this individual does take it out on his or her children.

In the first world, where basically everyone is rich and presented with many oppurtunities, it's just a matter of being able to budget yourself. A big cause of financial concern is generally because people made bad decisions, like having kids without being financially secure, or taking on debt or buying a new car.

Also in the US where not everyone has healthcare, I think a lot of money and hospital trips can be saved if people just ate better diets given how heart problems and various cancers are the leading causes of death (I will say a downside of wealth is more meat consumption, but there are also more available vegan options too), which might help save a lot of countries on healthcare too.

I do agree in a way that having a child in a poor country can be seen as immoral, but again, think about what I said about utopias. If none of them have kids, no one in their countries will be able to enjoy the benefits of a wealthy country. Like, life until about the late 1800s was dangerous and uncomfortable, but if none of them had children we wouldn't be here to bask in comfort. In some way, it's actually the ethical thing to do long-term.

I feel that at the very least, all homelessness should be eliminated and all orphaned children be adequately taken care of before having your own children. I am aware that orphaned children in some type of foster care program are often abused physically and sexually.

That's pretty difficult to pull off. People will have kids whether or not they are financially secure; I think step one would be having more educational programs to encourage people to use more protection and make sure women have access to abortion clinics (which may be a problem in some parts of the States).

If we lived in an ideal scenario, you'd probably be right.

This aspect of foster care also needs to be fixed.

I agree with this, but it's a matter of how.

[FredVegrox]

As for other countries, wealth is not a finite resource. As the world economy grows, the people at the bottom of the economic pyramid will gain wealth

It is finite. You or I might not see the limit, but this world and its resources are limited, and economy totally depends on what can be exploited, and that will have a limit. Civilization cannot go beyond that. Future generations will face the consequences of civilization running out of resources that can continue to be exploited, if there is not collapse already from its instability with changing conditions in the world.

[brimstoneSalad]

@FredVegrox finite, but extremely large. Wealth is a product of infrastructure, which can be built from alternative materials if the low hanging fruit is all taken. Many of those materials are essentially renewable -- such as wood -- or make up a large part of the Earth's crust as minerals.
Limited energy is only an issue as long as we rely on fossil fuels.
Renewables and nuclear have immense potential.

Just accounting for sunlight, at 1370 watts per square meter times pi (6,378 km)^2 there is 175,000 terawatts available from the sun striking the Earth.
Some is reflected and it might be problematic to absorb it for the heating implications, but there's a lot of room there for energy capture. Being smart with resources we could sustain a hundred times the current population and build wealth for everybody.

These are technological problems, and avoiding turning the Earth into an uninhabitable world for humans with global warming. If we all lived carefully and sustainably, those numbers and limits of possible wealth creation are incredibly large. So much so to seem infinite from the current vantage point.