you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 3 years ago* (12 children)

Canadians, like most developed countries, already have a very low birth rate. If you want to reduce the growth of human population, you have to look at countries and regions where the birth rate is significantly higher than two children per woman.

If you are concerned about the carbon footprint of individual people, you need to look at where most of that carbon goes and what can be done about it. In Canada, the two major contributors are heating and car use, both of which would be reduced by transforming suburban single family home developments into walkable medium density mixed-use neighborhoods.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 3 years ago (11 children)

    None of those are even close to as effective as not having kids though.

    I'm not even talking carbon footprint entirely though, I mean why would you bring a human into a world that is almost surely over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    Exactly. If you have a heart, you don’t generate an innocent being to suffer and to unavoidably increase the suffering.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Yup. I'm a 1994 kid and both my parents have apologized for bringing me into the world. Back then things weren't so bleak though and they were rich at the time too so I can't fault them.

    So proud that my parents are intelligent and are discouraging me and my siblings from having children. The family name dies with us.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    If the world is almost surely over, then you won't have a heart. These are the concerns of someone who thinks that life will go on for a long time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I’m not surprised that you feel defensive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago*

    I'm not surprised either. I doubt anyone here failed to feel the concern that we have a long life ahead, allowing hearts to remain and children to suffer.

    But is it realistic? On what basis do you think we have such longevity ahead of us? Perhaps the claim that the world is about to end is the more viable conclusion?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I have brought two wonderful people to this world because I don't underestimate humanity's ability to understand, adapt and overcome the challenges ahead. Humans have lived and thrived through much tougher times in history. A defeatist attitude sure won't help.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I can understand your viewpoint since you already have children. I apologize if my words were harsh, btw

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    Nothing to apologize for. I understand that some people, particularly those who are young, environmentally conscious and lacking financial stability, look at the world and think that it's all going to shit.

    I'm old enough to remember the cold war and the fear we had of nuclear holocaust and nuclear winter. It's just an example, there have been doomsday headlines every day for as long as I've lived and every single time humans have prevailed.

    I'm not saying climate change isn't serious, it is very serious. I'm saying our children and grandchildren will, for the most part, live good lives. Better than our lives in some ways, worse in others, just like it's always happened. People adapt.

  • source
  • parent