|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:26 pm
I'm bored. So here's something I was thinking about.
Two main points come to mind. First off, are you Child Free? That is, do you never want to reproduce, for whatever reason? Do you know anyone who is? What are your feelings on this "movement" (for lack of a better word)?
Secondly, do people who are morally Child Free have a right to demand that they be sterilized? And, if they can't attain this medical procedure, and they get pregnant through contraceptive failure, do they have some moral claim to getting an abortion?
Personally, I'm not Child Free, but I do support the idea. I certainly don't want to have more than two (and possibly only one) biological children (though I want to adopt). I think that, as a whole, human beings should try to purposely lower the birth rate. There are many problems that come from there just being too many people. I think that proper contraceptive use is a must for any couple that isn't actively trying to get pregnant.
And I think it's rather stupid that younger adults aren't allowed (by doctors) to choose to sterilize themselves. I mean, if they want children later they can certainly adopt or foster. I think it would be better for society as a whole if doctors would preform sterilizations on any adult who wanted one.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:23 am
I'm not child free, however my plan is to have only on biological child, but things happen and if another one comes along it's not a problem. I don't personally know anyone who's child free, but I'm okay with the main concept of it.
Anyone should have the right to demand sterilization. However I don't see how being child free should should give anyone more right to have an abortion than what anyone would think they should already have.
I have to wonder the view on how having biological children is held in higher regard than adoption. Some couples would go through expensive medical procedures to conceive rather than to just adopt and I find that to be odd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:26 am
I wouldn't call myself child-free but i'm not sure if I want child or not. Right now i'm single and even if I wasn't I can't care for a child so I would do all I can to prevent pregnancy (If I got pregnant, I would most likely have to give it up for adoption), right now i'm also dealing with health problems and taking medication so I don't know how well a pregnancy would go (the medication would probably effect that).
But as for the future? I don't know, maybe when i'm in a stable relationship and feel ready I would have one or two kids. Maybe even adopt one. I'll just have to wait and see what happens and what the future holds.
I don't know anyone who are child free or ever had abortions so I never talked about it or gave it much tought.
If it's proven safe, I think one you become an adult and thought things through (and are sure and serious about it), then I see no problem with them being sterilized.
That would prevent unwanted pregnancies which means less abortions and less children in need of adoption. And if they change their mind and want children, they could help adopt one.
If they can't get it done I don't see how they can have moral claim to abortion. I don't really understand that.
Abortion is legal here so I don't see how some people have more moral claim or rights then others.
As for population- it isn't so much that the whole world is over populated as it is some cities being over populated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:33 pm
Child free? Sure. Do what you want. Sterilize yourself, neuter yourself, whatever. I don't care. So long as, of course, you harm nobody else in doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:31 pm
I'm childfree, at least biologically speaking. I wouldn't completely write off the idea of adopting kids. WatersMoon110 Secondly, do people who are morally Child Free have a right to demand that they be sterilized? And, if they can't attain this medical procedure, and they get pregnant through contraceptive failure, do they have some moral claim to getting an abortion? I'd say anyone has the right to demand to be sterilized, but there's no moral justification for abortion. If you really, really, really don't want to get pregnant, nobody's forcing you to have vaginal sex, at least not legally. I'd be right behind a woman who wanted to be sterilized but was denied, was raped and got pregnant. Despite the insistence some people have on bonding spiritually via a p***s in their vag... stare ...oh COME ON, I've never heard anything so phallocentric and patriarchal from so-called liberals!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:47 pm
La Veuve Zin I'm childfree, at least biologically speaking. I wouldn't completely write off the idea of adopting kids. WatersMoon110 Secondly, do people who are morally Child Free have a right to demand that they be sterilized? And, if they can't attain this medical procedure, and they get pregnant through contraceptive failure, do they have some moral claim to getting an abortion? I'd say anyone has the right to demand to be sterilized, but there's no moral justification for abortion. If you really, really, really don't want to get pregnant, nobody's forcing you to have vaginal sex, at least not legally. I'd be right behind a woman who wanted to be sterilized but was denied, was raped and got pregnant. Despite the insistence some people have on bonding spiritually via a p***s in their vag... stare ...oh COME ON, I've never heard anything so phallocentric and patriarchal from so-called liberals!Can't they do that and be sterilized at the same time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2008 9:05 am
you're going to get what you deserve
and not a penny less
I'm not child free at all, however I have no problem with people being child free. I want to experience pregnancy at least once, and then after that I will probably just look more into adoption, rather than getting pregnant again.
I don't think a child free person has anymore right or grounds to have an abortion, than anyone else. Especially if you're going to base the right to abortion on a bodily domain argument.
As for the sterilization I can see the argument from both sides. I mean I know of people who were all like "I don't want children ever!" until they turned like 40 and then decided they really wanted a child. And at that age you're usually considered to be too old by most adoption agencies, especially for a baby etc. However at the same time, you CAN reverse the process if you do get sterilized. It doesn't guarantee anything but it's something at least.
I think most doctors are fairly ridiculous with the ages they set for sterilization, but I can see why they would feel uncomfortable preforming something like that on a 19/20 year old. Because speaking as a 19/20 year old I know that I fluctuate like crazy on my future life plans.
concrete the natural absurd
only killers call killing progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:09 pm
Beware the Jabberwock I'm not child free at all, however I have no problem with people being child free. I want to experience pregnancy at least once, and then after that I will probably just look more into adoption, rather than getting pregnant again. Me too! Beware the Jabberwock I don't think a child free person has anymore right or grounds to have an abortion, than anyone else. Especially if you're going to base the right to abortion on a bodily domain argument. I didn't really think that anyone would (heck, even I don't see things that way), but I wanted to see what people would say. Beware the Jabberwock As for the sterilization I can see the argument from both sides. I mean I know of people who were all like "I don't want children ever!" until they turned like 40 and then decided they really wanted a child. And at that age you're usually considered to be too old by most adoption agencies, especially for a baby etc. However at the same time, you CAN reverse the process if you do get sterilized. It doesn't guarantee anything but it's something at least.
I think most doctors are fairly ridiculous with the ages they set for sterilization, but I can see why they would feel uncomfortable preforming something like that on a 19/20 year old. Because speaking as a 19/20 year old I know that I fluctuate like crazy on my future life plans. 40 too old to adopt? I've known people who've had kids at 40 (though not many). Maybe 70 or 80 would be too old to adopt a child, in my opinion, but I don't think that 40 is too old to adopt. But, still, I don't think that people should be limited in their choice to sterilize themselves. Even if they later regret it, it should be their choice to make, I feel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 4:54 pm
La Veuve Zin Despite the insistence some people have on bonding spiritually via a p***s in their vag... stare ...oh COME ON, I've never heard anything so phallocentric and patriarchal from so-called liberals! It's only "phallocentric" if you're only claiming heterosexual sex is THE way to bond with your partner. It might seem "phallocentric" since it comes up in abortion debates and presumably PIV is how you fell pregnant, so when they say BUT SOME PEOPLE NEED SEX TO BOND WITH THEIR PARTNER they're probably talking about p***s in vajayjay, but I've never heard any self-proclaimed liberals come out and say, "Hey, I can bond spiritually with my partner through heterosexual sex, but lesbians can't! It's the p***s that does it, kids!" THAT would be phallocentric. Just saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 4:59 pm
I'm not Childfree, but I think people should be allowed to make whatever reproductive decisions they want. I wish doctors felt more secure and less paranoid about frivolous litigation for regretting a sterilization procedure, and maybe that would help more men and women who want early sterilizations. That, and I wish some medical professionals wouldn't take it upon themselves to dictate biological order and refuse sterilizations because of moral or religious reasons, but that's really their prerogative. I guess the best way to counter THAT is the litigation thing or something, so doctors without that particular agenda might perform more.
I don't really think any person ever has a more 'moral' claim to an abortion.
Incidentally, my personal experience with people who like to call themselves childfree is largely negative, due I'm sure to the strange nature of my area to violently polarize the population--conservatives here are REALLY conservative, and liberals are REALLY liberal. Moderates... just keep quiet I guess.
I take offense at the habit really hardcore childfree'ers have of calling moms "moos." I wonder if they call their mother that or if their mom was special since she gave birth to THEM and not any other ugly crotch-dumpling or whatever an eqully derogatory name for a baby is.
But however vulgar some of the crazies here are, I think they have a right to refuse reproduction whenever they want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:25 pm
you're going to get what you deserve
and not a penny less
WatersMoon110 Beware the Jabberwock I'm not child free at all, however I have no problem with people being child free. I want to experience pregnancy at least once, and then after that I will probably just look more into adoption, rather than getting pregnant again. Me too! Beware the Jabberwock I don't think a child free person has anymore right or grounds to have an abortion, than anyone else. Especially if you're going to base the right to abortion on a bodily domain argument. I didn't really think that anyone would (heck, even I don't see things that way), but I wanted to see what people would say. Beware the Jabberwock As for the sterilization I can see the argument from both sides. I mean I know of people who were all like "I don't want children ever!" until they turned like 40 and then decided they really wanted a child. And at that age you're usually considered to be too old by most adoption agencies, especially for a baby etc. However at the same time, you CAN reverse the process if you do get sterilized. It doesn't guarantee anything but it's something at least. I think most doctors are fairly ridiculous with the ages they set for sterilization, but I can see why they would feel uncomfortable preforming something like that on a 19/20 year old. Because speaking as a 19/20 year old I know that I fluctuate like crazy on my future life plans. 40 too old to adopt? I've known people who've had kids at 40 (though not many). Maybe 70 or 80 would be too old to adopt a child, in my opinion, but I don't think that 40 is too old to adopt. But, still, I don't think that people should be limited in their choice to sterilize themselves. Even if they later regret it, it should be their choice to make, I feel. I don't really agree with the age that seems to be set (and of course it's not set in stone, the kids that are really unlikely to be adopted are more likely to be allowed to be adopted by someone older) but it seems to be the case more often than not.
Anyway, like I said, I agree it should be up to the person, however as I also said I can understand why it makes some doctors uneasy when an 18-20 year old comes in and says they want to be sterilized. I mean doctor's aren't around to give patients whatever they want medically, they're there to try and do what's best for the patient medically. And if they have concerns that this person is going to change their mind in 5 years time and have the process reversed, than I can understand why a doctor would hesitate referring the patient to have such a procedure done. Especially in the case of females, where the procedure is fairly invasive because 2 invasive surgeries that are medically superfluous is not what's best for the patient.
What I think they should do for younger people, is basically the same thing they do for Transsexuals before they approve their operation. Have a time period where the person is using something, like say Mirena, and give them like say 2 or 3 years to think about their decision. If they haven't changed their mind than have at 'er. I mean this is obviously for people around my age, I just truthfully don't think that most people my age can with a huge amount of conviction say what they're going to want in 5, 10, or 15 years down the line.
concrete the natural absurd
only killers call killing progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:03 pm
Jazzberry I'm not Childfree, but I think people should be allowed to make whatever reproductive decisions they want. I wish doctors felt more secure and less paranoid about frivolous litigation for regretting a sterilization procedure, and maybe that would help more men and women who want early sterilizations. That, and I wish some medical professionals wouldn't take it upon themselves to dictate biological order and refuse sterilizations because of moral or religious reasons, but that's really their prerogative. I guess the best way to counter THAT is the litigation thing or something, so doctors without that particular agenda might perform more. I don't really think any person ever has a more 'moral' claim to an abortion. Incidentally, my personal experience with people who like to call themselves childfree is largely negative, due I'm sure to the strange nature of my area to violently polarize the population--conservatives here are REALLY conservative, and liberals are REALLY liberal. Moderates... just keep quiet I guess. I take offense at the habit really hardcore childfree'ers have of calling moms "moos." I wonder if they call their mother that or if their mom was special since she gave birth to THEM and not any other ugly crotch-dumpling or whatever an eqully derogatory name for a baby is. But however vulgar some of the crazies here are, I think they have a right to refuse reproduction whenever they want. They call moms "moos"? That's horrible and I thought they are supposed to be pro-choice and support any womans decision with pregancy, including the ones that choose to have and or keep their babies. I hate to see how they treat their own moms. The again I wouldn't be surprised if they are the ones that call pro-lifers anti-choice and lump us all together to try make us all look bad just of a few out of control ones. Seriously, weren't not all the same, just like not all pro-choicers are the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:18 pm
sachiko_sohma Jazzberry I'm not Childfree, but I think people should be allowed to make whatever reproductive decisions they want. I wish doctors felt more secure and less paranoid about frivolous litigation for regretting a sterilization procedure, and maybe that would help more men and women who want early sterilizations. That, and I wish some medical professionals wouldn't take it upon themselves to dictate biological order and refuse sterilizations because of moral or religious reasons, but that's really their prerogative. I guess the best way to counter THAT is the litigation thing or something, so doctors without that particular agenda might perform more. I don't really think any person ever has a more 'moral' claim to an abortion. Incidentally, my personal experience with people who like to call themselves childfree is largely negative, due I'm sure to the strange nature of my area to violently polarize the population--conservatives here are REALLY conservative, and liberals are REALLY liberal. Moderates... just keep quiet I guess. I take offense at the habit really hardcore childfree'ers have of calling moms "moos." I wonder if they call their mother that or if their mom was special since she gave birth to THEM and not any other ugly crotch-dumpling or whatever an eqully derogatory name for a baby is. But however vulgar some of the crazies here are, I think they have a right to refuse reproduction whenever they want. They call moms "moos"? That's horrible and I thought they are supposed to be pro-choice and support any womans decision with pregancy, including the ones that choose to have and or keep their babies. I hate to see how they treat their own moms. The again I wouldn't be surprised if they are the ones that call pro-lifers anti-choice and lump us all together to try make us all look bad just of a few out of control ones. Seriously, weren't not all the same, just like not all pro-choicers are the same. Any choice is right, so long as it is the one they would make. Seriously, how do those types live with themselves? How does a person's brain get that ******** up so that they can accept such hypocrisy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:59 pm
divineseraph sachiko_sohma Jazzberry I'm not Childfree, but I think people should be allowed to make whatever reproductive decisions they want. I wish doctors felt more secure and less paranoid about frivolous litigation for regretting a sterilization procedure, and maybe that would help more men and women who want early sterilizations. That, and I wish some medical professionals wouldn't take it upon themselves to dictate biological order and refuse sterilizations because of moral or religious reasons, but that's really their prerogative. I guess the best way to counter THAT is the litigation thing or something, so doctors without that particular agenda might perform more. I don't really think any person ever has a more 'moral' claim to an abortion. Incidentally, my personal experience with people who like to call themselves childfree is largely negative, due I'm sure to the strange nature of my area to violently polarize the population--conservatives here are REALLY conservative, and liberals are REALLY liberal. Moderates... just keep quiet I guess. I take offense at the habit really hardcore childfree'ers have of calling moms "moos." I wonder if they call their mother that or if their mom was special since she gave birth to THEM and not any other ugly crotch-dumpling or whatever an eqully derogatory name for a baby is. But however vulgar some of the crazies here are, I think they have a right to refuse reproduction whenever they want. They call moms "moos"? That's horrible and I thought they are supposed to be pro-choice and support any womans decision with pregancy, including the ones that choose to have and or keep their babies. I hate to see how they treat their own moms. The again I wouldn't be surprised if they are the ones that call pro-lifers anti-choice and lump us all together to try make us all look bad just of a few out of control ones. Seriously, weren't not all the same, just like not all pro-choicers are the same. Any choice is right, so long as it is the one they would make. Seriously, how do those types live with themselves? How does a person's brain get that ******** up so that they can accept such hypocrisy? That would make them more pro-abortion not pro-choice. I can really answer the rest of your questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:43 pm
WatersMoon110 40 too old to adopt? I've known people who've had kids at 40 (though not many). Maybe 70 or 80 would be too old to adopt a child, in my opinion, but I don't think that 40 is too old to adopt. My mom had my little sister when she was 42 (and had her tubes tied right after that.) I think you'd really only be too old to adopt if you're getting to the point where you need assistance yourself, but then, it's better than growing up in a group home. I wouldn't want to have arthritic hips and try to chase after a 3-year-old. eek And I've seen childfree child-haters who admit to being pro-abortion, not pro-choice. That's just ******** sick, they've got some serious issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
