How many kids do you want, and is it immoral to have more than 2 kids? Bonus: what names?

[KaiRai]

If you can financially support more than 2 kids, go for it. If not then yeah it is immoral, because you're just using them as a tax break, or extra benefits or w/e.

Me personally? I hate kids, but I wouldn't hate my own kids, purely for the fact I can actually discipline my own kids. Personally, I'm planning 2 kids, but 4 at an absolute maximum. William Terence and Scarlet Elizabeth

 

[Thomas Rembrandt]

People, if you want more than 2 kids and other people give you crap for it, just come to Germany, we desperately need more children. Our population has actually been shrinking for the past years, so .. Willkommen.

 

[Tharwen]

It would be hated, but I think the most effective way to
manage the population would be a global one-child policy. When China tried it, it worked but had some side-effects. I don't think those side effects would be such a problem in Western countries.

 

[GreatVladmir]

The world can go screw itself, if I want to pump-out enough children to start my own independent state, I can, who is going to stop me? I say if you want children, have as many as you want.

Boy: Duke, Elric, Andrew Ryan (Ryan would be his middle name), AdolfStalinMaoSaddamTitoPotGaddafiHoChi

I'd let my wife name a girl, I'm far to manly to think of a good girls name.

 

[Comte de Frou Frou]

Wait, so a bunch of people are saying that it's not immoral as long as you can afford to raise your kids. That doesn't address the long-term overpopulation problem though, why not just adopt kids from abroad since that's where most of the overpopulation is happening? That way, you can reduce the number of children brought up in poverty while also having your 'own'.

adopting from abroad doesn't solve an overpopulation issue, it just moves the figures around a little bit. To solve overpopulation you need to encourage family planning and contraception.

 

[Sigel]

1)Hell no, though they are good eatin. Taste like chicken.
2)Yes, I do think it is selfish and ir-resiponsible(sp?) to have lots of kids. They are using up all my air damn it.
3) If I f*ck up and do have one, the agreed upon name is Lil Dude, cause I want to start that complex off early.

 

[JanatUrlich]

I'll adopt kids but I definitely do not want to give birth.

Totally not pushing one of those bastards out of my vagina.

And the only girls name I like is Victoria so if I adopt a girl it will definitely have to be a Victoria. I like a lot of boys names so we can go to town on that one ;D

I don't think it's immoral to have more than 2 kids if the parents are capable emotionally, physically and financially of taking care of them. But then again, who am I to judge whether they are or not??

 

[Aerodynamic]

I only want two.

I only want sons though, If I get a daughter I will be pissed.

First born son will be named Arturo after me respectively.

Second born son will be named Jesus.

 

[Composer]

non...because i cant stand childern

 

[Stoic raptor]

I will probably have children. Not definite though, I am only 14

 

[Spectrum_Prez]

Wait, so a bunch of people are saying that it's not immoral as long as you can afford to raise your kids. That doesn't address the long-term overpopulation problem though, why not just adopt kids from abroad since that's where most of the overpopulation is happening? That way, you can reduce the number of children brought up in poverty while also having your 'own'.

adopting from abroad doesn't solve an overpopulation issue, it just moves the figures around a little bit. To solve overpopulation you need to encourage family planning and contraception.

True, 'solve' is a bit of a strong word to use. Adoption surely alleviates the problem though doesn't it? And at least it doesn't make the problem worse.

For example: Family A lives in the US or a Western country with a declining population and wants to have a large family with 'x' number of kids. Family B lives in a developing country and already has a large number of kids, say, also 'x'.

There are two options here: Family A has a large number of kids, and thus the world ends up with 2x number of kids. Or, Family A adopts half of Family B's kids and you end up with x number of kids total but an increase in the population of the Western country and a decrease in the population of the developing country, thus helping both sides.

So which is the better option? Seems pretty obvious to me.
(Obviously, this is an abstraction of an adoption.)

 

[JanatUrlich]

Fabrizio

Spoiler

[http://tinypic.com]

 

[Tharwen]

Wait, so a bunch of people are saying that it's not immoral as long as you can afford to raise your kids. That doesn't address the long-term overpopulation problem though, why not just adopt kids from abroad since that's where most of the overpopulation is happening? That way, you can reduce the number of children brought up in poverty while also having your 'own'.

adopting from abroad doesn't solve an overpopulation issue, it just moves the figures around a little bit. To solve overpopulation you need to encourage family planning and contraception.

Adopting instead of concieving reduces the number of people in the world by 1, so it does help.

 

[The_Decoy]

Erm well I'm a third child...does that mean I'm inherently immoral?

And I guess I'll have a couple of kids if I find someone nice and society hasn't gone completely to shit.

 

[olijba]

I wanted to call my future daughter Tequila Mockingbird, but my girlfriend refused after realizing my efforts...

Otherwise, Thaddeus is a good one. I like the thought of announcing it in a school playground. Mind you, announcing anything in a school playground these days just sounds wrong...

 

[AmayaOnnaOtaku]

Already have one son. (c section FTW!!) Not sure on whether to have another child considering the world we are in as well as medically if it would be wise to do it again. If I did have another child Helena is a good for a girl and possibly James Maynard for a boy

 

[Bato]

I don't, ever want children.
For these same reasons:

A few reasons, number 1, I'd be a terrible father. I'm a very selfish person, and I couldn't handle children. They'd end up growing up quite mentally fucked.
Number 2, I don't like children. They annoy the shit out of me. I can't be in a room with anyone under 12, or I have to leave.
Number 3, the world is fucked. Seriously, we're all going to die, and quite quickly too. Probably not in our lifetime, but certainly soon. I wouldn't want my children or my childrens children to go through that kind of pain.
Number 4, which kind of contradicts number 3, is that the only way we can save this planet is if a lot of us don't have children. Having children is one of the worst things you can do to the environment, overpopulation is killing the planet.

Especially 4, we don't need more people damnit!

Oh yeah, and my balls are a genetic cess pool.
All sorts of mental and physical defects run in both sides of my family, hell it's a fucking miracle I have so few of these conditions. But I still hold the potential to pass them on to any kids I would have.

 

[SturmDolch]

My girlfriend wants many children one day. I don't want any more than two, though. I'm an only child myself, but she has two sisters. I couldn't bear more than three. That's my absolute maximum. Preferably, I'd have one kid. Or one boy and one girl (preferably with the boy as older...).

I'd name a girl Emily or Julia. I like those names. Not sure about guys. Maybe Michael. They're always successful.

 

[Comte de Frou Frou]

Wait, so a bunch of people are saying that it's not immoral as long as you can afford to raise your kids. That doesn't address the long-term overpopulation problem though, why not just adopt kids from abroad since that's where most of the overpopulation is happening? That way, you can reduce the number of children brought up in poverty while also having your 'own'.

adopting from abroad doesn't solve an overpopulation issue, it just moves the figures around a little bit. To solve overpopulation you need to encourage family planning and contraception.

True, 'solve' is a bit of a strong word to use. Adoption surely alleviates the problem though doesn't it? And at least it doesn't make the problem worse.

For example: Family A lives in the US or a Western country with a declining population and wants to have a large family with 'x' number of kids. Family B lives in a developing country and already has a large number of kids, say, also 'x'.

There are two options here: Family A has a large number of kids, and thus the world ends up with 2x number of kids. Or, Family A adopts half of Family B's kids and you end up with x number of kids total but an increase in the population of the Western country and a decrease in the population of the developing country, thus helping both sides.

So which is the better option? Seems pretty obvious to me.
(Obviously, this is an abstraction of an adoption.)

For a short term solution yes (also reducing the amount brought up in poverty was genius btw ) but it still doesn't stop Family B from breeding like rabbits afterward, starting the cycle again. For it to do a decent amount of impact a lot of developed nations need a declining population to absorb the surplus from others. And as far as I know only Germany and I think Switzerland have a declining population (although it has been 3 years since I studied population, there probably is more).

Cross-national adoption and encouraged contraception, not to mention better healthcare so the infant mortality rate drops, would work hand in hand perfectly though

 

[Sux2bu]

One for me , here is why

1) He/She will be an only child so i wont have to hear "DADDIEEEE ect. took my ect!"
2) Over population will kill the planet but someone needs to carry on my heritage.
3) If the world does go to shit I don't want so many mouths to feed, I do not eat babies


And the name for if its a boy will be.... William.
For a girl it will be Jessica.

And no its not immoral to have more than one child but i don't recommend it =P