The Voluntary Movement for the Extinction of Humans, spelled VHEMT but pronounced "Vehement"-as I'll spell it henceforth, for phonetic harmony-lists many reasons why humans ought to not have children and, sooner rather than later, go extinct:
- The alternative to the extinction of millions of species of plants and animals will come from the voluntary extinction of one species: Homo sapiens.
- Each time another one of us decides to not add another human to the burgeoning billions now squatting on this ravaged planet, another ray of hope shines through the gloom.
- When every human chooses to stop breeding, Earth's biosphere will return to its former glory, and all remaining creatures will be free to live, die, and evolve, in the natural way they have been doing successfully for half a billion years. The health of the Earth will be restored.
- Returning Earth to its natural splendor and ending needless suffering of humanity are happy thoughts -- no sense moping around in gloom and doom.
- The decision to stop reproducing is morally correct, since we are presently engineering the massive die-off of humanity, and should thus not sentence another human to life.
- Allowing humanity to take its present course of destroying the planet is unconscionable. There is far too much at stake.
- Not all Vehement members are necessarily in favor of human extinction, but agree that no more of us should be created at this time. Vehement opposes the involuntary extinction of any species, including humans.
- Unfortunately, many concerted efforts support the horror of involuntary extinction: production and use of weapons; toxins everywhere; rampant destruction of natural resources and habitats; global warming; water and fossil fuel depletion; ozone breakdown; countless wars; the rise of fascism; and so on.
- A major goal of Vehement is to advance the population-awareness movement, which appears to be stalled, if not pushed back to where it was 35 years ago. Progressive population awareness groups advocate a one-child average and two maximum, but few, if any, dare to advocate zero procreation. Environmental groups avoid the controversial topic, preferring to work on consequences of our excessive breeding.
- Vehement members want to preserve the future of life on earth. Humans have the potential for achieving the awareness needed to reverse civilization's direction and begin restoring Earth's biosphere.
Vehement's website gives more detailed explanations of why they believe that voluntary human extinction merits our consideration.
My first reaction upon contemplating the foregoing notions was: "Whoa! These folks are out to lunch. There are millions of people like myself who have been working hard to make sure the human race continues. I've spent twenty years in education-pushing science and environmental education in particular-I've worked on several solar projects, built windmills, lived off the grid for fifteen years, talked at environmental and energy hearings ad infinitum, written countless letters to the editor regarding protecting life on earth, tried to vote and encourage others to vote properly, and, among other things, made efforts to reduce my consumption of resources. My underlying assumption has always been that we humans SHOULD continue spreading and sprouting our seeds, and pass this beautiful blue-green planet on to future generations, hopefully educated and numerically limited ones. Why else am I and others putting so much energy into doing the things we do, other than to propagate our species?"
But Vehement's ideas rapidly sprouted roots in my brain and refused to let go.
I considered: I have one biological son-the other I adopted-and I might well not have procreated that one time, if not for the fact that my wife had ovarian cancer. The doctor had informed us: "We need to operate, and if you plan to have a child, now is the time to do it."
That proclamation forced my hand, but there is a more than likely chance that had this not happened, I would have had no progeny of my own. After all, I worked with kids all day, and didn't particularly think I needed to have another one waiting at home for me after a day of teaching. And even in 1975, the future of the planet and civilization looked incredibly grim. I was not excited about bringing another person into the mess, particularly one I imagined I would love and who would most likely outlive me.
Geery lived off the grid for 15 years in an earth-sheltered, solar heated home, while his kids learned in school that solar energy isn't feasible. NAPTA hosts a page on Geery's foibles in education, and explains how he got his butt fired from a tenured teaching position. Here's a short clip of his most recent solar contraption; for more on that project, and Geery's contention that the Wright Brothers took a wrong turn, please visit his airship page (hyperblimp.com). Apparently, Geery is the only one in the world to respond to Osama bin Laden, call bullshit on him and George together, and expose them for the pansy ass rich kids that they are. Unfortunately, bin Laden has been too scared to write back and explain himsself; and George is still working hard to finish his goat book.
In one of the Star Trek episodes Locutos, a Borg asks Worf, the Klignon why did he resist the assimiliation
- We only try to raise the standard of living for all species,- says Locutos.
- I like my species the way it is,- answered Worf.
There is no 'why have kids?'. We have children because that's what we are. Whatever happens that is our 'species the way it is.'
And one more episode. In the end of the 19th century Thomas Malthus was popular with his theory on curbing the population. Once those theories were discussed in the presence of Wilhelm Steinitz, the first official Chess Champion of the World and a very educated man.
- Poor people must not have many children,- said one dame.
- Those children also are frequently mentally disabled,- said another.
- My father was a poor shoemaker,-said Steinitz and proceeded,
- He had 13 children and I, Wilhelm Steinitz was the 13th.
Who can say better than that?
by
Mark Sashine (44 articles, 19 quicklinks, 228 diaries, 3268 comments)
on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 at 8:36:58 AM
I would like to hear readers' thoughts on this question, particularly as I attempt to organize my own thoughts and compose a response over the next few days.
If you're not comfortable posting publicly, note that there is a link to directly email the authors of articles in this column.
by
Daniel Geery (26 articles, 55 quicklinks, 121 diaries, 660 comments)
on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 at 9:47:30 AM
I've thought about that alot myself. Having lived in Utah most of my life, (where a little girl at church told my mom that she was "weird" for only having 2 kids) I've seen the positive and negative sides of having a large family.
Here's a sight we're probably all familiar with: at the grocery store (or wherever) there is the tired, haggared looking mom who's brought all 7 of her kids, age 7 and under, with her. All the kids are screaming, running around the aisle, grabbing stuff off the shelves, climbing all over the shopping cart and basically creating an unpleasant experience for everyone around them. I'm always torn between feeling sorry for the mom, and thinking "Why can't she get those kids to shut up?" and "I am never, ever having children." It's an all too familiar sight here, the result of breeding without thinking about it. Family planning is a *good* thing...
I'm the oldest of 2, and my sister is 6 years my junior. Whenever she or I complain about people with annoying kids, my mom reminds us "Neither of you were like that." My theory is it's because trying to raise and discipline one young child at a time is alot easier than 5 or 6. If my sister or I misbehaved, there were consequences (usually some privilege being taken away) which were always enforced. It seems like it would be much easier to keep an eye on the behavior of 1 or 2 kids, rather than lots of them. It also makes it easier to spend quality time getting to know them.
On the other hand though, I've seen large families that functioned very well. Some parents just seem to be able to deal with lots of kids better than others, which is why it's important to really put alot of thought into the decision to have children
Personally, I'm still undecided. There are many reasons not to have kids. The article listed some good ones, and I have a few of my own: I don't want to put myself through the pain of pregnancy and childbirth; kids annoy me and I'm not very good with them; the world is a horrible place and I couldn't subject an innocent child to that; I'm very self-centered and kids would be a drain on my time and financial resources; I'd probably be a miserable failure as a parent anyway, etc.
But I also can't help but think how great it would be to teach my child how to read, to help them learn about nature, music, art, other cultures and all of the beautiful things the world has to offer; how cool it would be to take them hiking or on their first trip out of the US; and how I'd want to challenge them to form their own opinions, and be tolerant and kind towards others, even when no one else is; and to be the ones who are bringing a little bit of what's good and right to the world when the majority either doesn't care or is doing wrong.
If I do have children, I'd only want 1 or 2. I know myself and I know that I get overwhelmed by having to interact with alot of people at once; I'm much better at one on one interaction. I'd want my kid(s) to trust me and know that they could come to me for help with anything, especially in a world that's becoming more and more of a living hell.
My point is, that whether someone decides to have children or not, they should ask themselves why; and really think about it rationally and logically. To do otherwise seems irresponsible.
by
Amanda Butler (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 21 comments)
on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 at 12:52:08 PM
I am doing my part in all of this because I am gay. By design, that means I am not interested in procreational sex since it would involve having sex with females; something I find personally distasteful. Yes, I have gone there...and I never want to again. Thank the goddess nothing came of it, literally.
In a world that is being raped and chewed to bits on every side, what rational reason can there be for bringing more life into a world already strained to the breaking point? Just Yesterday, the census clock clicked over to 300 BILLION people on this planet. Three hundred billion? Do we really need that many people?
How many of those people are living in sub-standard areas? The lion's share. And still, we keep on making more kids. Every day to the tune of one child born every ten seconds, we continue to fill our world up with more people demanding more water, more food, more air, more of everything.
And so few get the message. We are already at a tipping point as far as global warming is concerned. The last thing we need to do as a species is to keep piling more of ourselves on the negative side of that teeter-totter.
On the other hand, it might be just what we need to do. Since we, as a species, have demonstrated an inability to learn from our mistakes, perhaps we need to keep on filling the planet with more of us until the world is finally beyond the point of recall. When the oceans swallow up even more of the shoreline, the world's glaciers are no more, the salinity of the oceans are completely compromised, and our atmosphere can no longer absorb all the CO2 spewed into it, maybe then and only then will our species do what it has needed to do for quite some time now, DIE!
In the long run, I really don't give a shit. By the time the tipping point comes, I won't be here. Whether or not our race of "intelligent apes" survives, the Earth will. It survived for millions of years before we made the big leap from the primordial ooze to what passes as sentience. It survived the entire time we were making that leap. It will survive for millions of years even after we all leap hand in hand from the precipice we presently face like the mindless Lemmings we are.
So, when it comes down to it, you folks can do whatever turns your collective cranks. You want to keep popping out kids with no reason whatsoever? Fine, have at it. It is they who will ultimately have to pay for the loans we have drawn on our world, its atmosphere, its ability to sustain us with food and water, and the economic decay we have set in motion. I will be in the grave oblivious to it all.
Of all the commandments given by the supposed god of the christian bible, why is it the only one people can seem to get right is, "Be fruitful and multiply?"
Blessed be!
Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 at 3:36:34 PM
Well, I hate to admit I was wrong, but I was. I said that the census clock had clicked over to 300 billion people the world over. That's completely incorrect. It clicked over to 300 Million here in the US.
While it's a smaller number, I still think there are way too many people on this planet for its good, our good, or the good of the other organisms that share our space. I also don't know what made me think it was a worldwide thing, but at least I corrected my error. I guess there are worse mistakes I could have made in life, like voting for the War Criminal, DUBYA. At least I didn't make that mistake.
Blessed be!
Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Thursday, October 19, 2006 at 12:54:34 AM
Somewhere on this globe, every ten seconds, there is a woman giving birth to a child. She must be found and stopped.
Sam Levenson (1911 - 1980)
- More quotations on: [Birth]
by
Gavin Geazy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Thursday, October 19, 2006 at 7:53:46 AM
"Why have kids?" is indeed a good question. It's not exactly the same as "Why breed?" though that's usually what people mean.
Adoption and foster care are options for couples who feel they are ready to commit to parenthood. Madonna, for example, just adopted an orphan from South Africa.
That could satisfy the one reason your professor felt was worthwhile: "We have kids so that we can have friends in our old age, and hopefully while we're growing old."
Over the years, I've collected reasons offered from breeding. They may be seen at http://vhemt.org/biobreed.htm#reasons . (Scroll down just a little).
Thank you for the thoughtful, thought-provoking article on the most important decision we have to make in our lifetimes.
Les
by
Les Knight (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Friday, October 20, 2006 at 8:29:14 AM
