Renting rooms in a burning building?
April 14, 2008 by katesaltfleet
According to VHEMT founder Les U. Knight, this is the moral equivalent to having children in the age of impending destruction in which we live.
And, for all the carbon offsetting, recycling and frugality, another person adding to the burgeoning 6 million plus world population will add to the burden for all of us. Received wisdom of “stopping at two” won’t help, apparently, as, according to Knight:
For example, in terms of energy consumption, when a North American couple stops at two it’s about the same as an average East Indian couple stopping at 60, or an Ethiopian couple stopping at more than 600.
Unsurprisingly, there is a lot of opposition to Knight’s argument. I suppose it strikes deep into our survival instincts, that our purpose is to produce more of us (to do what?). Knight turns this on its head and gently suggests that the planet may actually be better off without us humans, or at any rate, with fewer of us. The key to Knight’s message is that it is VOLUNTARY, people choosing not to breed, or limit their families, or adopting children.
Ah, adoption. An interesting one. There are not that many healthy babies around for adoption these days, so most of the children needing homes are older children. Their families may not have been able to look after them properly or abused them, so many of these children are “damaged” in some way. Does our desire for a family extend to these children who desperately need loving homes, or do we just shrug them off as the problem of social services and produce our own kids (who will be perfect, of course)? Does it really make sense to have a(nother) child when 40,000 children die of starvation every day? If you really want to be sobered up, just have a look at Worldometers. For more involved reports on studies, here is a link to the Optimum Population Trust website.
Human beings have an enormous capacity for empathy and compassion, but are notoriously selective about how and where they choose to feel it. We don’t want to know about things that cause us pain. I find this with my meat eating friends who don’t want to know about the pain and suffering that went into their burger. It hurts too much, so they turn away. You could sum this up by saying “Ignorance is bliss”. Pain is part of life, and the way I see it is that there is enough pain and suffering without me adding to it.
The result is that I am quite ambivalent about having children of my own. I don’t hate kids (although they can be annoying), and I have seen enough grim examples of youngsters while teaching or doing my supermarket shopping to make me question the wisdom of bringing one into my life 24/7. I just don’t think I could do that. There are many wonderful parents out there who love their kids and raise them responsibly, but there are many that just breed and expect everyone else’s taxes to pay for the upkeep of their litters.
Maybe I will feel the urge to have a baby of my own one day, but maybe I won’t. Besides, with HTB around, having a child is redundant 
Stumble It!
Great post, lots of food for the old Monday morning thoughts! It’s definitely an interesting question, whether or not to have children. It’s often a hot topic in vegan forums with some people quite vehemently against those people they label “breeders”.
We have a daughter, as you know, who we are raising vegan and hopefully with some sense of ecological awareness (it’s hard to tell at 17 months!). My way of looking at it is that, yes, the poor world is in a shocking state and very overpopulated, but I like to think (maybe delusionally) that by raising the next generation to have a conscious respect for the Earth, its animals and everything else, that we might in some way help dig our way out of this mess.
By not “breeding” would we doom our ideals, our environmental care, our vegan ideals, would that all die with us? Would we be leaving our poor Mother Earth in the hands of children who are being raised with the sense of entitlement to big cars, big money and a big life, whatever the cost?
I’m rambling, I know, but I do think that is one aspect worth considering, if every eco-minded, greenie, veggie, Earthy-type person in the world chose not to have kids, would the next generation care about anything worth caring about?
Oh and I totally know where you’re coming from about kids. I’m so not a kid person, littlepixie is fantastic (of course!), but other kids are just nuts, I’m not very much of a baby person
Thanks for posting about this important topic!
I’m vegan and my husband and I chose to adopt instead of reproducing, for the many environmental and social reasons that you touched upon. If you’re looking to adopt a healthy baby, there are actually quite a few available around the world.
If you want kids, please consider adoption! We know that adopting a dog from a shelter is better than breeding. When will we realize that the same holds true for humans?
While I wax amply on many issues, I have never taken on the “morality” of veganism.
We are soon coming to the point that “meat” can be economically grown without any sentience involved, just a ham in a bottle…not many moral issues with that I suspect, but anyway…
However, consider the following:
If all humans, tomorrow, stopped eating meat…
there would (for quite some time) be an excess of food available (if it could be distributed equitably)
We could let the current cattle and pigs and chickens live long and die out…and no more pets, they eat way too much fish!
and, we’d continue to breed…
and, sooner than later (much much sooner) we’ll have eaten our way off the planet (again!).
As our technology overwhelms natural limits, we become subject to every natural consequence…
FOOD RIOTS IN HAITI OVER THIS PAST WEEKEND
1,000,000,000 people in the world TODAY that don’t have ready access to potable water.
Ice Shelf Calving in Antactica (removing another barrier that keeps ice on the continent…when it moves off the continent oceans rise!)
Vegan? Carnivore?
MOOT POINT.
Voluntary Human EXTINCTION is the only MORAL choice!
The die off of humanity is inevitable, and not long in coming.
Therefore, to minimize the suffering, no more children ought be born.
At all.
Voluntarily.
By anyone…anywhere.
Forever.
Question for halfpintpixie:
Were you raised by vegans? How many of the vegans that you know were raised by vegans? If your time was spent raising awareness instead of raising children, you could perhaps generate hundreds of vegans instead of a few.
@HPP - I think if you are going to have children, then you really need to consider the environmental impact and raise them responsibly. I just think there are other ways I can help the environment without having my own
@Donna V - if at some point we decide we want children, then I think that adoption will be come under serious consideration.
@Frish - the “morality” of veganism??? Don’t think I mentioned this. And the V of VHEMT stands for Voluntary, so to say it is “the only moral choice” is a little blinkered IMO. I think you just got a vegetarian bingo with the ol’ “We’d be over run with animals” comment
@Joan Phillips - it is true that just because you raise your children a certain way doesn’t mean they won’t rebel. Having your own children is only one way to contributing to the future, and you don’t have to be someone’s parent to be an influence in their life.
[...] stretch marks and want your own version of the Waltons, you go on right ahead. But think about the environment, please. I digress. As far as I can see this multiplied fruitfulness benefits the church in [...]