Couples without kids are selfish?

to be fair "a parent" was just responding to my question of kids are worth it - (given that parents really can't 'regret' having kids after the fact)he didn't make a statement at all about whether being a parent is selfish or not (in terms of the contribution to society)

Mr. Wizard wrote:

a parent wrote:But in the end, no parent would trade their kids for anything, just as no runner would give up running for anything. It's the most demanding job in the world, but in the end, unequivically, it is worth it.

In other words, parenthood, like running, is fulfilling, i.e. a selfish pursuit. I'm not being critical here--I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting your life to be pleasurable and fulfilling (however you define it). But I side with those who want to keep the sanctimoniousness of many parents in check. Bringing your genetic progeny into the world and raising it is not really a selfless act. Or are teenaged mothers really budding saints?

Selflessness? How about adopting kids (not infants) from abusive backgrounds. Or infants with severe disabilities? How many of us sign up for that?

shellfish wrote:

Does that mean single people are selfish and everyone has to get married?

Well, if that single person lives their life only thinking about themselves, then yes. but I could say that about all types of people... married, single, asexual...

Marriage has nothing to do with it.

Single people can think about others... Their partner, their friends, the elderly neighbor next door, the poor, the neglected.

The USA has too many people living everyday only to pad their pockets and screw the next guy. That sucks. We should try to get out of that mentality.

I had to do some flying over the past week for work, and the way in which "the public" acts is just disgusting. It really makes one lose faith in mankind.

The guy sitting 2 rows ahead of me cut off a young pregnant woman and knocked her really hard with his overhead bag trying to beat her out of the plane.

Yeah, but no one truly loves you.

You have no one who will watch you die. You will be all alone with your money.

Sad.

I feel sorry for you.

If your reason to live is money, you are beyond saving.

I don't have kids either, but I would never justify it financially.

Open Wide wrote:

Yeah, but no one truly loves you.

You have no one who will watch you die. You will be all alone with your money.

Sad.

I feel sorry for you.

Again, I'm not being critical of selfishness--broadly defined--when it comes to the way we lead our lives. We should do what makes us happy, whether that means raising your own kids or not raising your own kids.

But, since the topic is whether childlessness is a selfish choice, I have to point out just how very selfish this defense of parenthood is: "Open Wide" wants someone to love him unconditionally and someone to take care of him when he's old.

Mr. Wizard wrote:

"Open Wide" wants someone to love him unconditionally and someone to take care of him when he's old.

Don't we all?

No.

Mr. Wizard wrote:

Again, I'm not being critical of selfishness--broadly defined--when it comes to the way we lead our lives. We should do what makes us happy, whether that means raising your own kids or not raising your own kids.

But, since the topic is whether childlessness is a selfish choice, I have to point out just how very selfish this defense of parenthood is: "Open Wide" wants someone to love him unconditionally and someone to take care of him when he's old.

I realize that you quoted my post completely out of context, but did you even read it?

My point is that he is justifying not having kids simply so he can be rich.

I don't have kids, and I certainly don't want them, but not so that I can have greater wealth. That seems sad to me.

Do not confuse this with not being able to afford them! People who cannot afford kids should not have them.

Open Wide wrote:

People who cannot afford kids should not have them.

Sadly, nor should most people who can.

most people are bad parents wrote:

Sadly, nor should most people who can.

Agreed, and I am one of them.

I am one of these too....I don't feel guilty about it and am very glad..I did however realize that I needed to give back somehow to youth..so, i volunteer coached for (still am) a high school distance program for the last 6 years...

I was successful in business and many of the poorer kids wear good training and racing shoes that normally would not have.

I spend a couple thousand every summer and winter on off season racing, entries, food, things like that.

I an my wife realize that we will be lonely in our old age.

So, we decided to make it count now.

Still glad not to have kids.

Family, friends, a girlfriend...how can you say he is not truly loved. That comment is sad if you think kids are the only ones capable of love.

And what a sick comment, "you have no one to watch you die." I hope not! I want to go out on top (if you know what I mean) and I certainly don't want my kids watching!

Seriously though, who wants to watch someone die?

What I love is how people with children often get preferential treatment. I must admit I am engaged but we have made the decision that neither of us want children. I should also state that I think it is great if you want children. It comes down to a personal choice and what you want out of life.

But nothing pisses me off more than coworkers with children getting all the breaks because of children. There are numerous coworkers who show up late with the excuse of that their children were sick, had to go to the doctor or had some issue at school. And I love all the coworkers who have to leave early all the time because they have to go to a school function, take the kids to the doctor or get to the daycare before it closes. No one says a word. Why is the time spent raising children more important than the time of a single persons? Just because I don't spend my time raising kids doesn't make that time any less relevant. I have left work early to go to a track workout and my boss talked to me about it. It is absolutely ridiculous. And what is it with parents thinking it is ok to bring their children to work if they have a day off at school or the baby sitter didnt show up.

And my other favorite is the parents who work at home occasionally for many of the reasons listed above. Maybe I want to work from home to spend time with my dog. I feel I have to create a pretend family to get all the breaks my coworkers seem to get.

Snoochie Boochie wrote:

And what a sick comment, "you have no one to watch you die." I hope not! I want to go out on top (if you know what I mean) and I certainly don't want my kids watching!

Seriously though, who wants to watch someone die?

Love is watching someone die.

Hey man, I think you are getting all worked up and pissed at the wrong people.

Parents who put their kids over work are the ones that are doing things right. We need fewer parents leaving their kids alone while spending all their time at the office. these parents raise hellions, while the attentive parents might possibly produce a productive member of society.

About your desire to "get away" with leaving the office...

You need to take control of your life. If you want to leave work to workout at 4:30, make it happen. You can design your life however you like, especially if you do not have kids. It sounds like your boss is an ass, maybe you should get a new job or go talk to him. Seriously, sit down with him and make arrangements. Do you really want to work from home? Go for it. I did it for a year and it wasn't all it cracked up to be, but I made it happen.

Do not get angry at other people b/c they are empowering themselves to live life how they want. Stop silently brooding and make it happen for yourself.

Your argument is akin to being angry at someone with cancer b/c they leave to go get chemo treatments. Live intervenes man, and you have to except and expect that. Do you really think these parents should not be allowed to leave to take their kids to the doctor?

Empower yourself to live how you want to live. You have one life, what is important to you? Make that a priority.

Don't let someone else set your priorities.

Frat Boy wrote:

Live intervenes...

"Life intervenes"

Sorry.

Snoochie Boochie wrote:

Seriously though, who wants to watch someone die?

I shot a man in Reno once, just to watch him die

That is actually a very good post. I cannot figure you out. Sometimes I think you are a troll but other times you give really sound advice.

Actually you don't get my entire post. It isn't a matter of me not taking an initiative to change something in my life. It is a matter of my company actually giving people with children breaks that are above and beyond those given to people with no children. This is a case of my company turning a blind eye to people with children. That is great they are wonderful parents spending time with their kids. That is NOT the point I was making.

This is not a situation that is unique to my company. I saw a story on CNN where they were discussing this very same issue. That there are a lot of companies that give people with children more breaks and believe that time is more important than the way a single person spends her time. CNN provided an example where a lot of single people at this specific company were the ones often asked to stay late because the people with children had to leave early. Now is that fair?

Amazed wrote:

Why is the time spent raising children more important than the time of a single persons? I have left work early to go to a track workout and my boss talked to me about it.

There's a bit of that at my office as well; I stopped giving a reason. I just say it's an appointment, as I consider leaving early to make it to the distant trails an appointment with myself. They don't need to know.

If it ever got bad, I thought it would be fun to concoct stories about a fictional pregnancy, only speed up the timeline so that within 18 months you'd be leaving early for fictional soccer games. I don't think anyone would pay enough attention to notice.