Trying to guilt trip people about social costs isn't going to work. There
are real benefits to not having to support a family, and it is personally
fulfilling to know you don't have to be responsible for someone else in
Under the current US system, those without children are helping to educate the
children if others. Making them pay for their own retirement
Joseph Smith said that someday only Latter Day Saint women would want to have
Under the current US system, those without children are helping to pay for the
education of other's children. This is done under the premise that
eventually they will see a benefit from this contribution. If the tax/social
security structure is changed so that those with children pay less (or none at
all) into social security, or the retirement money collected from their
children's pay checks is earmarked as for them only, it is entirely
possible that the pushback will result in those without children not helping to
educate children who will provide them no benefit. The article hints
at but does not explore one major flaw with the premise of continual growth. It
is mentioned in the article that urban density leads to less kids. The article
points to suburban living as a solution but than says that only works as long as
there is space for suburban growth. Keeping in mind we need a certain amount of
land for food and resource production, space is a limited commodity. The model
presented in the article requires constant population growth - what happens when
we run out of space for suburban living?
A very interesting article, but the writer neglected an important part of the
equation - immigration. The statistics focused on industrialized nations, but
the birthrate has not dropped off nearly as much in Latin America and Africa.
The elderly in industrialized places could be cared for by those born in poorer
countries. The host countries would be affected - for instance, Europe will
increasingly become Muslim, the United States more Latino, etc. Yes, cultural
heritage might be lost and the demographics of nations would change, but I doubt
we'd see the end of the human race. The more "conservative" parts
of the globe are still having children. They'll just create a world very
different from the one we know.
Time goes by so fast.... If I had somehow been DISTRACTED in my twenties from
marriage and having children, well, I would not now, as a so-called senior
citizen, have the life-long companionship of my thirty-something year old
children and a posterity with which I am so happy and honored.
The greatest joys I have experienced in my life have been with my wife can
Maybe we can all be like Britney Spears and divorce through text message or have
a 48 hour marriage.Kim Kardashian marriage? x7 weeks?You
want to see what is brining any 'harm' to marriage?Look at
the ones who abuse it. Not the ones denied marriage.
There are certainly a lot of people (married and single) who like to focus on
this subject and think that they can generalize the profile of those who are
single and married without children (and married with children). Yes, there are certainly single people who have decided to remain single and
there are a lot of couples who have chosen not to have children. But there are
also a lot of single people (myself included) and married people without
children who didn't expect to be in the situation we are in. That being said, why penalize someone or a couple because they didn't
have children? We all need to be good to each other, no matter what our personal
situation. And, we should all strive to be happy, productive, and fulfilled
people. I spend a lot of time supporting nieces, nephews, and children of my
friends and I believe in family and care deeply about mine. Remember
- everyone has a story and no statistic will ever tell it. We need to respect,
support, and love each other no matter what our personal set-up is.
Different strokes for different folks. I'm married 18 years with three
kids. Would I wish that for everyone? Of course not. Not everyone wants a
family and a fancy house, picket fence, two cars parked outside. That reality
is not shared by or desired by all. So why worry about it? The population of
the earth is nearing 7 billion people. We should be glad that not everyone is
choosing to propagate the species. If we're so worried about people
growing old single then we probably should be embracing marriages between
consenting adults regardless of the gender make up of each partner. Something
else we ought not be worrying about.
As mentioned, immigration keeps national populations growing throughout Europe
and America. Like in all of nature, species compete for space and resources.
It's only the european related groups and the mainland chineese groups that
have chosen habits that will remove them from the planet. Eventually, America
will be a hispanic nation, while Europe will become Middle Eastern and African.
All the people who choose to be single may be unpleasantly surprised and
forgotten senior citizens. Who will care for the elderly? Without children or
extended families, I foresee the extremely costly warehousing of millions of
elderly in the coming years. People living the "me first" life early on
will reap sorrow and abandonment to, at best, a sterile system in their final
years. Life is a bell curve with dependency on others at both ends of the
If he doesn't have a girl friend or only one that he see's
infrequently, this seems like a lonely kind of life.
I'm the oldest of six, have five children from 29-39 yrs old, none married,
no grandkids. My sister 11 yrs younger has 6 grands, 5 from one 29 year old!
My sis two years my junior has 10 kids (3 steps), and 10 grands. No rhyme or
reason, no forced marriages...But my southern Cal "pagan"
children are not stressed about getting hitched or procreating under threat of a
bioligical clock. They'd rather "do it right". While we all love
the cousins and grandkids immensely, it is obvious which families have the bulk
of the work. Maybe mine are reticent about jumping into the diaper bag life,
maybe they love their toys and sports too much...But I prefer the
grankids' arrival with the anticipation of planned acceptance, to the
hectic lives the cute little "oopsies" caused! Oh, wait- I had a few
of those myself back in my Mormon days. Darn that Brigham Quiver-full
Philosophy!At least there's no regrets for the lives God sent
into each home. That should be the goal.
I will always be grateful towards my LDS membership for the very reason that had
I not had a spiritual reason to marry and have a family, I probably never
would've even bothered with dating. I was one of these single dudes very
content to do my own hobbies and pursue lesser goals. It wasn't til after I
got married and had kids that I realized just how fortunate I have been to be a
part of it. It is a great challenge, full of hard work, sacrifice and the need
for strong character, but it is also the most rewarding thing I've ever
done. They say no success in the world can compensate for failure in
the home, but I say, No failure in the world can cloud over a successful loving
family life. I've had setbacks at work, in professions, education and
physical health, but my loving family has kept me positive and happy to keep
going and trying harder. Families are forever!
With 6 billion people in the world, we need to promote the idea of
single-for-life and staying childless. The earth can only support just so many
people before we run out of resources. It is irresponsible and selfish to have
more than two children.
The historical fact is that society depends upon families for survival of the
race and survival of the culture that collapses in the absence of the family. It
is no wonder there are so many violent acts on a nearly daily basis as there is
no common respect for life and that unfortunately starts at the very top of
government. Disrespect the smallest life and soon disrespect for all life.
What makes a house a home? It's a family to me. It seems that every thing
is upside down, and the meaning of words aren't the same what I thought
they mean. So to me there is a homeless problem.
One of my granddaughters and her husband have chosen to have one child. That
child will be faced with the care of her parents plus the four grandparents as
they age. I'm assuming I will be dead as will be her other great
grandparents. If she marries a man who is also an only child, They will be faced
with the care of 12 parents and grandparents. This is an impossible tasks.
There will be no one to share the burden. I'm not even considering the
possibility of that couple having a child. Multiply this scenario by millions
and society will not be able to handle the care of the aged who will have to be
abandoned left to their own devices. Probably euthanasia of the aged will be
the answer unless they have someone to agree to care for them.
Before one has kids they should be able to show that they can-*
Provide for them - ie- be able to SUPPORT Them * Be an on hands Parent -
Social Services is not suppose to raise your children and neither is their
grandparents.The government has chosen to reward un-employed people
by paying them to have babies. And to pay them extra if each new child born is
from a different father. (How many Baby Mommas You Gots) So those who have 5 or
6 children can be paid quite well. Sadly when our government signed all those
trade agreements ( Nafta Gatt) the manufacturing jobs by the millions went with
them. So instead of working they manufacture babies as their job. These young yuppies think that traveling the world , picking up and moving
whenever the mood strikes them is what life is all about, well they will miss
out on life's biggest joy - holding their newborn , watching their kids
grow up and fly the nest and all in between. And then one day the grandkids
start arriving and the cycle repeats. But each has to seek their
own path and not all have what it takes to be a parent.
Not one of the 18 comments mentioned God. God told us in the Bible to be
fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth. Families are the foundation of
God's plan of happiness and why this world would be created so that His
spirit children can come to earth to gain experience and be tested and to learn
to walk in God's light and having faith in Him by keeping His commandments.
He knew that we would make mistakes as we experience life. Some are big
mistakes. That is why there needs to be a Savior to atone for our sins. His name
is Jesus Christ. The Son of God. Not only has he atoned for our sins if we would
repent and not repeat them but he also wants us to give Him our sorrows and
hurts through no fault of our own. Jesus suffered all these things for us so we
could walk with Him and talk with Him. Our Father in Heaven is the answer to
these problems discussed in this article. Ask Him personally what each of us
should do. If we do these things He tells us it will be a better world.
@Arizona RocksThe word "replenish" means "to make full
or complete again, as by supplying that which is used up." In other words,
replenish means to restore the level of something to the level at which is was
before. Unfortunately, too many Christians believe replenish means to restore
to a level above what it was before.My wife and I are active LDS and
we have two kids. There are two of us. We have done our part to "replenish
the earth." Replenishing does not mean two people having eight kids in any
way, shape, or form.
I have a 29 year old sister who has dated many different men over the years and
never found the right one. We as siblings have been supportive of whatever path
she chooses, but I can see her fading more and more into the contented single
life rather than pursue a life with marriage and kids. She says she is happy,
but we can all tell that she is finding temporary placeholders to fill her time
and existence. I honestly hope she can stay happy as a single
person, but I honestly believe that it cannot be lasting happiness and
eventually she will feel lonely and depressed if she chooses the single life
over the married life. I know that for me, 13 years of marriage and 4 kids have
been my greatest adventure and I can't imagine living my life without those
5 people surrounding me and supporting me everyday. It is hard and its a
sacrifice, but when I'm 60 I'm going to look back and remember my 4
year old watching the super bowl and cheering with me...what will Seth have to
look back upon that will fill him with joy?
There is no right or wrong way to go thru life. Having kids or not, or getting
married or not is a personal choice.And for many, being single or
being childless is the right choice.It is rather presumptuous for
anyone to tell others how they should live their lives.Do what is
right for you. Leave others alone.
Raise the retirement age. Problem solved.
A cousin and I have agonized for many years about a childless uncle and aunt
(unable to have children). The bio-uncle is a difficult man and after 59 years
of marriage Aunt R. bailed out (with the help of a niece). We are relieved we
don't have her care to consider, but when she left the uncle didn't
know how to write checks, clean house, prepare meals, etc. Each of us spent
significant time last year trying to help him determine his course. The cousin
arranged for his care in assisted living, but we still have to deal with his
personal property, try to give him emotional support and there are many other
details to address. Of course there are finances too. He was a professional with
investments and preparations, but they are inadequate. I am so glad I have
children, and though I don't want to be a burden on them, we have helped
them so I hope they will be willing to help us when we need it. Children are a
blessing in countless ways.
@Arizona RocksHe issued that commandment when there were only 2 people.
Now we have what... 7 billion? Ever notice all those articles about Utah and
Nevada water disputes? There's a limit to how many people we can fit on
this planet with the resources it has. I will not attempt to say what the limit
is, merely to suggest that there is such a limit.
DGDENTON,You said "They will be faced with the care of 12
parents and grandparents. This is an impossible tasks." You are right it is
an impossible task, but also an unrealistic expectation that you hold. You are
responsible to fund your retirement and that includes any medical care that you
@Mountanman -- Good for you. Some of us would like the opportunity, but
aren't about to jump into something with the wrong person just because
they're available... as if it were some kind of merit badge we were
earning. "Get a wife". Check. Now I can be happy.@Californian -- Irresponsible comment. Not everyone who is single thought
their lives would turn out this way. Sometimes it's not a choice. I
don't consider the 'available women' much of a choice at this
point. Hoping for a miracle, but as faith has failed me over and over again in
this regard, I'd rather spend my life doing constructive things than
sitting around moping about why God hasn't sent a miracle to my door.
Being single without children, while paying taxes and for schools and what not
is such a bad thing as this article suggests? After WW II the Soviet
Union, now Russia, after losing so many men and to a lesser extent women wanted
to repopulate its country. The Soviets provided economic incentives for Soviet
Women to have babies with or without husbands. Well Soviet Males took advantage
of this policy and many practiced a secular form of Polygamy. New Russia is
still suffering from this replenishment program. The author shouldn't wish
too hard for something without considering the unintended consequences
I think the real number to look at is the dependency rate. That is what sharp
changes in the fertility rate tend to cause. We have seen this with the Baby
Boom Generation who overcrowded classrooms in the early years. Then they made it
possible to provide generous pensions for the World War II generation when they
went to work. But now they are entering retirement themselves. This would argue
for a stable birthrate.
@AZ Rocks. Why should a Deity be involved in whether a person
remains single or not? Unless the Deity actively provides potential spouses to
the Singletons out there. Personally, if the Singletons out there are actively
looking for spouses they will find them . Its all a numbers game.
I have to agree with Hutterite here. As much as I love being a parent, it
isn't remotely for everybody and we shouldn't be guilted into trying
to live up to the DN's norms. I have the greatest daughter a man could
ever hope for and that's all I want to have. It's odd that the same
people who like to go about about living within one's means and taking
personal responsibility are the ones who want to pressure people into having the
biggest families they can as soon as possible.
As wonderful, albeit challenging as my life has been - I cannot fathom being of
the mind to NOT have had children knowing they would have great experiences like
my own parents provided me. Beyond my parent's sacrifice, the kindness and
great interactions I've had with people high and low.... I Just
can't imagine myself making a choice that would end or highly limit the
continuity of life and experiences for generations of other who could follow;
who knows what solutions they might provide, what amazing people they might be
and serve and the value they might add to culture and history? I find choosing
to end the chain to be perhaps the most judgmental and pessimistic act
available, given the potential of a child.
Unfortunately, we already have pressure in Utah to make parents more responsible
for the cost of educating their children, as if they were a burden to society
instead of our future. Representative Briscoe, (R-House District ) is right now
sponsoring Utah's H.B. 55, which would reduce the future tax deductions
parents now receive for their children--a virtual reverse head tax. If
anything, government should be increasing the personal deductions. By raising
children parents are building the future of our society.
I used to work with a lot of single women at an LDS owned company in Salt Lake
City. These type of editorials published by the Deseret News (now on a daily
basis) have the tendency to make single people feel really bad about themselves.
However, as a person who has done it both ways (married and single), I know
that life is awesome in either situation. So, don't listen to these people
with narrow-minded views on life. You can be extremely happy in any situation
Staying single and waiting to have kids would do the world a lot of good.
"Utah's H.B. 55, which would reduce the future tax deductions parents
now receive for their children--a virtual reverse head tax."So,
let me see if I understand this logic.If you don't get a tax
deduction for your children, that constitutes a head tax?In Utah, it
costs over $6000 per school kid per year. That will be over $70,000 to educate
one kid thru high school.While I agree that we all benefit when kids
get an education, I find it hard to fathom that some think that those without
kids should pay more then you do to educate your children.
@John C.C.That's right. That's the personal
responsibility Utah is famous for. Have all the kids you want - pay not taxes.
Those of us who haven't been fortunate enough to have more than one will
carry your load. That sounds fair.
There is HOPE for CHANGE in a few generations afterall. The far left wing and
the mentality and selfishness of people will deplete the population. Leaving
those that actually care of and for little ones in the future. Let me explain
about caring before people become upset. The democrat party is hijacked by
those that feel the woman has a right to extinguish another human life, even
when she willingly engages in a behavior and made a choice that wasn't
forced upon her. She feels that it is her body rather than another human being
that she is carrying. So with that sad definition she feels she can flush that
life away as though it was a cancer or disease to have to deal with.A book and lenghty discussion could be written about this. But, since
we're limited I'll leave it at that. How sad to think that one can
choose to sleep around, create a human life and then legally murder the
defensless child. Yet the democrats cry when there is a school shooting and
claim to take the high road in defending the defensless.I guess when
the victim isn't seen itdoesn'tmatter
In my opinion there are three types of people. 1. Non producers, they take more
from society than they give. If they have children, much of the time the
children follow the same path. 2. Producers, they give more to society than
they take. Examples would be creating business, jobs, or performing job where
they can fully support themselves and pay more taxes than they derive benefit.
3. Producers with families, they are the most valuable to society because they
do the same as the producers while raising by example more producers. Without
producer families, the future generations are in for troubling times.
Utahboni,Populations that choose to have 2 or less kids as you
suggest will eventually die out (minus immigration). This is proven fact.
Wouldn't that be "selfish" and "irresponsable"? The irony
of your namecalling is quite notable. Go read up on Russia and the struggles
they are having right now as they are in a serious population decline. My only
ask is that people get informed on this topic before trying to tell everyone
else how many kids they can/should have. That is a personal decision and i give
yout that same right without calling you names.
I don't think it's selfish for someone to not have children. I think
it's more selfish to have children so they can act as insurance for old
I couldn't agree with HopScotch more. It is not your place to judge why
someone is single. Assuming that they are all "distracted" by a career
or "playing with toys" is wrong. None of us really know the true story
of another's life. That said, why is it a bad thing for someone who's
story hasn't played out the way they anticipated to enjoy what's good
about their life - and yes, be OK. I don't think this means giving up on
an opportunity to get married if it presents itself, but the idea that all
single people should mope around and allow others to convince them that they
should feel sorry for themselves or become neurotic about getting married is
crazy. Please know your judgements are harmful to others and someday, you will
receive your own judgement. Please, try to live your own life and enjoy the
blessings you have and let others do the same.
Solution to so many ills-Marriage is good when you have a compatible
spouse. So don't marry until you are fully mature. In my case, 25.When married, have 2 to 3 children. On average, this creates a steady
population column with one generation easily taking the place of he earlier one
without the problems of overpopulation. Either you or your spouse
should work full time. The other should work part time or if affordable, do
charity work. Leave a space for another family to have someone get a good paying
job. (This is also part of the reason marriage can be so beneficial to
society)...but alas, who would do this if not imposed by government,
which would necessarily have to be a totalitarian state.
Fewer families mean fewer minivans. This is bad, because...?
@ MelvinRBy #3, you mean more consumers of earths finite resources,
Having children is what makes people into responsible adults. They learn about
sacrifice and what it means to truly love others more than they love themselves.
But personal growth is hard and takes work. That's why the immature choose
to be children throughout their lives, selfishly doing whatever pleases them at
the moment, free from responsibilities, and free from change. They may add
little to society, but will still expect to be supported in their old age. The spoiled "Me first" generationmay may well prove to be
the demise not only of our social system, but of our culture, as well.
Nature, which humans are part of, has had population ups and downs and manages
to recover. Things like the plague, famine, war also reduce populations but
they recovered. Hippie kids did not turn out the same as their parents. While
I understand that hose single too long won't have kids, others will. Love
mine but don't depend on them for my care.
It is nice to read an article that shows, analytically, the importance of
children. To watch all these governments in a panic trying to solve all of the
problems associated with dwindling population is quite humorous and sad at the
same time. Children are a blessing to present and future generations, something
that can't be denied, even when self-centered living becomes the norm.
Just last week an article in the Deseret News brought up the point of over
population, something that was derided by some who posted their comments, as if
7 billion was somehow too much for this planet to bear! The problems of poverty
are caused mostly by governments trying to make things better. When governments
recognize the sacrifice and the faith that comes with a family, perhaps they
won't continue to hold them up in derision. God bless men and women who
get married and have a family, the source of real happiness!
I can only respond from my own experience. I was married at 26. I dated a lot
before that, I also enjoyed the single life. I have a strong belief that the
family is ordained of God and it is something I have always wanted. I am home
from work after teaching school. One son is sitting next to me playing a game on
the iPad. Another son is messing around with toys by the fireplace, my daughter
and I just enjoyed ice cream together and my beautiful wife is teaching piano
lessons. This is much better than anything I ever experienced as a single
person. You may tell me that single life and family life can be equally
fulfilling but I would disagree based on my experience. Family life is the
greatest blessing in my life. I am much happier, much more fulfilled, and more
able to recognize my gifts from God because of my experiences as a father. Sure,
there are tough days that I forget what it is all about. More often and not
though is a peace that comes to me knowing that things are good and I am happy.
//"And in the long term," wrote Jeff Wise recently in Slate, "on the
order of centuries — we could be looking at the literal extinction of
humanity." That is, if fertility rates worldwide settled at the 1.5 percent
currently common in Europe, by 2300 the world's population would fall to 1
billion.//Where is the downside to this? 1 billion people does not
equal extinction. Furthermore, this would only be a good thing. The Earth is
suffering from human overpopulation; our current way of life is not sustainable.
Reducing the population to 1 billion people would free up resources and allow
each individual to have access to a greater amount of resources.