Is it vegan to have children?

[Anon0045]

...because I don't think it is. There is a small chance that the child will grow up to be vegan because group pressure is stronger than a desire to do good, and the child will do a lot of damage to animals and the environment anyway, as everyone do just by living. Adding one or more person to this world, seems far worse than not "going vegan". Of course, we do want people who do have children, to be vegan, but still, vegans should at least be aware of the damage they do. At the very least the vegan message should be to adopt if they can. I know that adopting a child is a difficult/expensive process though.
I guess one reason why vegans are not actively against having children, is because is something a lot of people are very passionate about, passing on their genes; it's what they live for, and people wouldn't be receptive to that message, and it could hurt the movement.

[Jebus]

https://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=793

[knot]

For vegans I would order it like this

Adopting > having your own kids > not having kids

I think it's better for vegans to have kids than not, because we need more people fighting the good fight. One vegan baby could end up changing many minds and doing a lot of good.

It's the religious meat-eaters who seriously need to stop breeding.

[Anon0045]

https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... f=17&t=793

Ah, I should have searched for "kids", not "children".

For vegans I would order it like this

Adopting > having your own kids > not having kids

I think it's better for vegans to have kids than not, because we need more people fighting the good fight. One vegan baby could end up changing many minds and doing a lot of good.

It's the religious meat-eaters who seriously need to stop breeding.

The ones who "could" do a lot of good, need to make up for those who don't and the ones who don't stay vegan. I think, because of peer pressure, the chance is already very small that people stay vegan. Right now only a few percent of the population is vegan, so the peer pressure is quite big, I'd like to see some stats on how many people stay vegan, and how much they themselves influence others to be vegan. If they stay vegan at 50% and each vegan "convert" 1 person, then they've made up for the ones who didn't become vegan, but they still do damage to animals and the environment by being vegan, so they need to "convert" more people to make up for that as well. Moreover, people who become vegan have usually been non-vegan for a long time, so they probably need to persuade a bunch of people to make up for those that don't become vegan. The 50% number is likely not realistic. I know that kids usually follow whatever their parents do, even until adulthood, but the peer pressure is pretty high, and humans are very sensitive to peer pressure.

[Lomedin]

By definition, every and each human being, even the most strict vegan, is causing the suffering and death of animals, directly or indirectly. The best thing it could happen to ALL animals is the total extermination (or simple vanishing) of all human beings.

[brimstoneSalad]

By definition, every and each human being, even the most strict vegan, is causing the suffering and death of animals, directly or indirectly. The best thing it could happen to ALL animals is the total extermination (or simple vanishing) of all human beings.

Hi Lomedin,

Do you believe in exterminating humanity through violence?

[Anon0045]

https://youtu.be/UaEqyyotENQ

[garrethdsouza]

Vegans consume a lot less resources for food than their omnivore counterparts . clips from Cowspiracy

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWJa--XL274
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wM4q6bNHpU8

So a vegan who has a vegan kid, to some extent both might have less consumption of some resources in comparison to a single omnivore. Plus vegans tend to have some effect on others going vegan as well. Idk about recidivism rates, if folks who are attempting a "plant based diet" as a fad or for temporary health reasons I'd guess that might be a reason. For recidivism as opposed to folks being vegan for ethical reasons. If relatively more ethical folks stopped having kids (even no adoption), there'd be that many more fundies/less ethical folks around and thats not good for anyone, animals included.

Total extinction of humans would be the worst thing because we have the capability maybe in the future to end/greatly reduce wild animal suffering, if extinct it would continue to go on. Also we are the only reasonably intelligent species afawk in the universe which is a pretty beautiful place, it would be a shame for no one to enjoy it.

[Anon0045]

@garrethdsouza I view it as a math problem. Like Lomedin said, having a child, you always starts off at a big minus. The hope is that this child will grow up to not only stay vegan (still at minus), but also become a vegan activist (still at a minus?) which I think the possibility of is low, since people have enough trouble just getting by, having a job and all other kinds of responsibilities, and social pressure to be carnist is very high. I tried to explain what I meant in my previous post by the example. We don't have the numbers for the variables, so if you're positive, you'll assume the best, but if you're more of a pessimist like me, you don't. There are of course more factors to consider than what I gave in my earlier post.
In any case, the better choice is clearly to not have a child if you can adopt, do more activism yourself, take care of orphans etc. I see it as an extremely selfish act to have kids, and if the kid end up doing good for the world, it's a mere coincidence. We shouldn't encourage people to have kids, nor say it's okay, because of the big risk of ending at a minus. People who want to have kids will use any rationalization they can get and gamble with the lives of animals and the environment.

Total extinction would be the consequence if no one had a kid, which I don't think is realistic, but it's an interesting thought experiment, which I haven't thought about. It depends on what our societies are capable of, which I am not sure of. I think with the current technology level, if people live like they do today at least in the modern parts of the world, it would be better if we were extinct.

[Anon0045]

After watching several youtube videos on antinatalism, I'm quite disappointed with the rationalizations people use. It's really perplexing. Of course, being in the majority, it's easy to be condescending as well. I would understand the attitude versus antinatalists if people actually had good arguments.