I have made several posts expressing my concern about over-population, but this doesn’t mean I don’t like children. In fact, when I argue for a smaller population it is precisely the children that are top of mind.
Let me pose this question. Which choice below seems more aligned with the concept of individual freedom?
Option A: One may have as many children as one desires regardless of the conditions into which these children will be born and without considering the overall quality of their life into the future.
Option B: One should ensure conditions are sound before bringing children into existence and ensure the overall quality of their life in the future will be optimal.
Hmmm….before you make your choice, contemplate that we shouldn’t just think about the freedom of the “parents to be”, but also the future freedom of the children and the society that will either “support” them or enable and in fact “benefit” from them.
Do we as Americans, or as a species as a whole, currently provide our children with the ultimate foundation to grow and develop into intelligent, enlightened, healthy adults? Do we as Americans, or as a species as a whole, provide our children with inspiring visions and purposes such that when they enter the “real” world they won’t have to endure the painful discovery that Santa Clause was merely a myth and that the world is run by the Scrooge?
Alternatively, do we simply leave problems unsolved and bring more and more beings into the world further complicating or exasperating our unsolved problems relying on blind faith that some future generation will solve the problems through miraculous new inventions?
Are our unsolved problems passed on from one generation to the next analogous to the cycle of a tropical depression evolving into a tropical storm, a category one, a category two…all the way to category five? Is there a limit to the number of potential categories and at what point will we figure out the answer to that question?