I am a bit torn with the kids thing...some days I think 'why should i bring another selfish human into this world, what would it be like for them in 25 years?' but then I think if anyone should be bringing new people into the world it should be us!!!
bring on the caring, ethical population!
hum.. yes indeed.. you're far more capable (perhaps) of raising a non-selfish child if with the bent, of those whom choose not to have children.. aka for ethical reasons.
(I mean if you forego the luxury of spoiling your children in all the wrong ways,
you're more likely to be caring for them and supporting them as they add to you,
as any relationship should. Instead of being a cope of compromise or regression.)
the rational should overcome the ethical in this instance...
who are — setting an example for...? the tribes i which having 7 kids makes you less of a mother... proving your fertile and thus importance/self with 20 kids.
it would make more sense to raise your own children..
would adopting solve that issue, as these people breed until collapse? as in... have as many kids as they can or even can't sustain.
so.. it is like a space for another body to fill.
well I don't know... hmm
I think... this choice falls short on this premise, but holds great substance in the focuses it allows for a life. though maybe it is those drives of raising young which give the later years?
maybe without those drives engaged, one would stop growing... as such
though we're talking about a scrupulous and perspicacious individual of un-quantifiable constitution. so again, maybe those drives un-engaged with ones' own possession (a child)... this is what those focuses (i choose not to be more unequivocal) are in lieu of...
one or the other perhaps? in a dedicated sense of being.
(I refer to a self pruned tree, who bares no seed, but also loses no branches to a misguided life ~ haha then gets technical like the purpose of fallen branches in slowing water movement and fallen bark in allowing time for rain to soak down in mulch)
