X-Message-Number: 15316
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 20:47:12 -0800
From: Lee Corbin <>
Subject: To Be or Not To Be

Joseph Kehoe wrote

>>I submit that we should regard each human life as quite
>>valuable, and praise those (who we call parents) who
>>rescue people from non-existence.  In other words,
>>abortion is bad because someone doesn't get to live---
>>but it's not quite as bad as failing to conceive in the
>>first place, for which a lot of us are guilty.

>err...
>I met some women at work today. Was it wrong of me not
>to have children with them (even if my wife- and they-
>would disapprove).  Should I have children by everyone
>I meet?.... My parents had six children - was that
>selfish of them? Should they not have stopped?

Hi Joseph, I have already apologized for the sloppy way
that this is phrased.  No, it was not "wrong" of you in
the most important meanings: e.g., disobeying the most
reliable and powerful lessons that all of our traditions
have taught us (murder is wrong, theft is wrong, lying is
wrong).  Nor is it wrong in terms of ethics, especially
business ethics (wrong is breaking one's word, failure to
hold to a contract, etc.).

Whether you want to have children with everyone that you
meet is up to you.  If this is for you, then I say go ahead.
If you can truly visualize the issue of your act, and see
them as *human beings*, not faceless numbers, then you will
realize the wonderful thing that you have done.  In the same
way, each of your ancestors has contributed to the wonderful
fact of your own existence.

In most cases, such as your parents, yes, to put it bluntly,
it was selfish of them to stop having children.  But before
you react, know that we are all entitled to a certain amount
of selfishness, and the mild meaning of that term is merely
"self-interested".

"Should they not have stopped?"  Only certain kinds of 

extremists the ends of the political spectrum make it
their business to tell others what they "should" do with
their personal lives.  Of course, if you were really
interested in an answer to that sort of question, you
would have phrased it differently.

>At the risk of being labeled a "hairy legged feminist"
>I think that the above ideas would appeal to us men more
>than women who actually have to bear the children!

Much traditional knowledge, to which I was referring earlier,
denigrate such attempts to drive wedges between family members.
Of course, I might agree with you that soon we may have better
ways of creating humans (or intelligence).  Meanwhile, I have
the greatest respect for the Jewish and Mormon traditions, to
name just two, that emphasize the importance of family and
children.  Evolutionarily, that's how those groups survived so
well, and a big part of their success consists of being able
to resist those "hairy legged feminist" memes you're spreading.

Lee Corbin

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15316