Breed or Adopt - VeggieBoards
View Poll Results: Breed, adopt or op out?
Breed 2 4.44%
Adopt 14 31.11%
Opt out (choose no children, live of happy solitude) 29 64.44%
Voters: 45. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 01-25-2012, 08:30 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Children?

Seeing as almost all on this board believe in adopting animals from shelters due to the huge rate of animals being killed because of over population, how do you all feel about breeding when there are millions of starving and abused children?

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 01-25-2012, 08:33 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Snowcone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Your Mother's basement.
Posts: 2,587
Trick question. Sending them to the cornfield is obvious choice.

"A-yup. Ya wasted yer life, son"

- Old Man
Snowcone is offline  
#3 Old 01-25-2012, 08:34 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowcone View Post

Trick question. Sending them to the cornfield is obvious choice.


Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 01-25-2012, 08:36 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,127
Adoption. It's the only choice that makes any sense to me at all. I would never buy a companion animal from a breeder when there are so many who need homes in shelters. I would never create more children when there are so many who need shelter, food, and love. Breeding is the most obnoxiously selfish thing one can do, imho.
reneeannem is offline  
#5 Old 01-25-2012, 08:36 PM
Super Moderator
 
Werewolf Girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 16,664
I honestly can't even answer this question, it's one of the biggest question marks in my life right now. I'm leaning towards adopt or life of happy solitude though

"If we could live happy and healthy lives without harming others... why wouldn't we?" - Edgars Mission
Werewolf Girl is offline  
#6 Old 01-25-2012, 08:37 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 3,131
I'd say either adopt or opt out. I know lots of people say adopting is expensive, and it is, but if you can't afford it, then you don't need and shouldn't have a child anyway, and maybe the price hinders those trying to have kids for status and because of societal pressure. I just think it's more ethical to adopt if one wants children, instead of reproducing even more.
disney.jessica is offline  
#7 Old 01-25-2012, 08:44 PM
Veggie Regular
 
sequoia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by reneeannem View Post

Adoption. It's the only choice that makes any sense to me at all. I would never buy a companion animal from a breeder when there are so many who need homes in shelters. I would never create more children when there are so many who need shelter, food, and love. Breeding is the most obnoxiously selfish thing one can do, imho.

+1

"If you are lonely when you're alone, you are in bad company."
Jean-Paul Sartre
sequoia is offline  
#8 Old 01-25-2012, 08:58 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Spang's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,722
I can't seem to get pregnant, so I guess I'll have to adopt or opt out.
Spang is offline  
#9 Old 01-25-2012, 09:10 PM
Veggie Regular
 
ElaineV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,026
Obviously many people can do both. And I think that the majority of adoptive parents DO do both. That's what I originally wanted but it's probably not going to turn out that way for us.

We are adopting. We've got one son right now and we're adopting him. When he turns four we plan to adopt another. And then we will probably be done. But there's a chance we'll adopt a third. And there's also a chance that we're already done now. Who knows what the future holds?

My experience has taught me that most of the preconceptions people have about adoption are totally wrong. If anyone is seriously intersted, some good basic info that's pretty easy to digest can be gotten from a book called In On It. And there's also a magazine called Adoptive Families. If you read through 6-12 issues you'll get a good overview.
ElaineV is offline  
#10 Old 01-25-2012, 10:04 PM
Super Moderator
 
danakscully64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 34,591
Any of the 3 are fine with me.
danakscully64 is offline  
#11 Old 01-25-2012, 10:58 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,861
Try to adopt in the UK and the kiddie will be ready to move out of your home before he/she has actualy moved into it. Well, almost.

It's currently a bit of a scandal here. Happily the Govt. recently made rumblings about taking speeding up the process seriously.


Quote:
.. Couples are forced to go through an overly bureaucratic process that can reject them on grounds of race or simply because they are overweight or smokers, while children have to wait on average two years and seven months to be adopted ..


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/89...on-system.html

Clueless Git is offline  
#12 Old 01-25-2012, 11:06 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Phoenix Days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,969
I think when I'm older I'll adopt 2 or 3 kids.
I wouldn't adopt a newborn, though

DON'T BRING MY MOTHER INTO THIS!
Phoenix Days is offline  
#13 Old 01-26-2012, 12:02 AM
Beginner
 
MaisieF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 150
Until I met my husband, I was certain I was going to be happily childless forever.

Now, I'm feeling the biological clock ticking. I feel an urge to have at least one child with my hubby. We've both discussed the issue at length, and are both happy to remain childless if we can't have a baby. Personally, adoption is not for us, but we certainly both admire those who do.
MaisieF is offline  
#14 Old 01-26-2012, 12:11 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,749
Attachment 17641

sorry it's so tiny - you have to click on it to see it
LL

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
#15 Old 01-26-2012, 12:31 AM
Veggie Regular
 
yally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,922
I would support adoption, but I think the only way I will end up with kids is if the biological urge to create them gets too strong.
yally is offline  
#16 Old 01-26-2012, 12:31 AM
Veggie Regular
 
yally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,922
But I opted out
yally is offline  
#17 Old 01-26-2012, 12:31 AM
Veggie Regular
 
vepurusg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 319
I think "breeding" is better than having no children at all. As long as one raises one's own child with vegan ethics, and with environmental consciousness, then it's a moral positive for the world. We need more good people in the world, and that comes from positive memetic nurture. (That said, raising a biological child as a meat-eater is certainly unconscionable.)

Adopting is one better still, of course, because you actively interfere in the process of raising a likely socially and environmentally apathetic omnivore (in state care), and create a morally conscious vegan instead.


Not raising any children: +0 good people
Having your own biological child: +1 good person
Adopting a child: -1 destructive person (who might have otherwise resulted), +1 good person.

We can't, however, evenly equate the prevention of a destructive person to the creation of a good one. It may be that the destructive effects of a destructive person far outweigh the positive effects of a good person.

So, for example, maybe: prevention of ONE destructive person = creation of TEN good people.

It's hard to say how they really stack up against each other. Adopting may be eleven times or a hundred and one times better than having a biological child by virtue of having changed the course of that life from morally destructive to good.


Of course, you can also have a similar effect to adoption by advocating for vegan ethics; every now and then somebody will hear your voice and consider a positive change. The more lasting that change, the better.


I do not think that you can compare adopting human children to adopting pets. Human children may not have ideal circumstances in state care, but they (usually) aren't being systematically killed off. Moreover, whether you have a pet bred or adopt, raising a dog or cat is not really carrying on your values in our civilization (it doesn't necessarily add a moral positive beyond avoiding that death).
And finally, whether you adopt a pet or have one bread, the pet is still not biologically yours- unlike in the case of children where there may be compelling reasons to biologically procreate.

Adopting a pet is a moral positive first and foremost in that it prevent suffering and death- having a pet bred for you offers nothing in the way of that. Adopting or birthing and raising a child is a positive first and foremost in that you have the chance to instil a great moral presence in another human being, affecting the world after you in a more lasting and profound way.


If we could say that having a biological child is immoral when you could have adopted instead (a greater good), then we would also have to say that adopting a young child is immoral when you could have adopted a teenager instead. And that having no children is very immoral when you could have adopted a teenager. And that only adopting one teenager is immoral when you could have adopted a couple of them, and every few years (as they go off to college, or move out to work).

Just something to think about.

"I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me." "[...]my remarks have been elaborated and exaggerated nearly beyond recognition." -Albert Einstein
Don't buy everything you read on the net. Most "Einstein" quotes are lies. He can't defend his honor now; where's the respect for a...
vepurusg is offline  
#18 Old 01-26-2012, 12:38 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by vepurusg View Post

I think "breeding" is better than having no children at all. As long as one raises one's own child with vegan ethics, and with environmental consciousness, then it's a moral positive for the world.

There's just no way to know how one's kid will turn out. You can increase the chances that they will be an ethical person, but I've met plenty of people who had ****ty childhood's who turned out to be very ethical people, and people who had very good childhood's with decent people who turned out to be not so decent.

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
#19 Old 01-26-2012, 12:40 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,749
Also, if you really want to change peoples' values in the world, it's vastly more efficient to go out and try to do that directly than to put all the effort into raising one individual whom one hopes will have good values.

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
#20 Old 01-26-2012, 01:05 AM
Veggie Regular
 
vepurusg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

Also, if you really want to change peoples' values in the world, it's vastly more efficient to go out and try to do that directly than to put all the effort into raising one individual whom one hopes will have good values.

Yes. Cost and time-wise, there's no doubt about that. With the cost and time of raising one child from birth to leaving the nest, not considering university, you could probably convince hundreds to go veg or at least reduce meat consumption substantially.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

There's just no way to know how one's kid will turn out. You can increase the chances that they will be an ethical person, but I've met plenty of people who had ****ty childhood's who turned out to be very ethical people, and people who had very good childhood's with decent people who turned out to be not so decent.

Some parents really do a crappy job of instilling morality, no matter how well they may take care of the children in other regards.
Child rearing is also more than just direct parental influence; one must be conscious of the child's peers as well, to avoid corrupting influences. If one's child's friends are eating meat, and particularly if they are drinking alcohol, chances are pretty good that one's child will also engage in that activity out of peer pressure.

There may be some children out there who are just inherently 'evil', and will buck the social norms that they are exposed to, in order to do that which they know is wrong. Psychopathy may be an example of that, as an emotional defect.

I think that if a parent actually does his or her job responsibly, though, it should not be likely.
Not everybody is cut out for it; and if they aren't, they shouldn't be having children.

"I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me." "[...]my remarks have been elaborated and exaggerated nearly beyond recognition." -Albert Einstein
Don't buy everything you read on the net. Most "Einstein" quotes are lies. He can't defend his honor now; where's the respect for a...
vepurusg is offline  
#21 Old 01-26-2012, 03:40 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Cyclone T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 814
My husband and I were blessed with 2 children, now adults. Had we not been able to have children we would registered to adopt. Had I not married I would have opted out.

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein
Cyclone T is offline  
#22 Old 01-26-2012, 03:47 AM
 
GingerFoxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,340
I can recall being a young child in grade school and feeling two things 1) That I never wanted to have any biological children and 2) There are so many kids out there with no one to call mom or dad, that it almost seemed selfish not to adopt, should I decide I ever wanted to raise a child. As it stands today, that is still my position. Fortunately, my biological clock isn't sending off any annoying signals, and if it did, I would chalk it up to hormonal imbalances and ignore it. Fortunately, my man feels the same way I do about either adopting or just having none at all. I don't feel any parental desires, so odds are, I will continue to opt out. Adoption would be my only alternative of choice. I have no patience for children.
GingerFoxx is offline  
#23 Old 01-26-2012, 04:11 AM
Veggie Regular
 
fadeaway1289's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 10,324
No doubt opt out for a bizillion different reasons.

I really thought this thread was going to be about animals when I first read the title and I couldn't understand why this was even a question on this board.
fadeaway1289 is offline  
#24 Old 01-26-2012, 05:06 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Beancounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by disney.jessica View Post

. I know lots of people say adopting is expensive, and it is, but if you can't afford it, then you don't need and shouldn't have a child anyway.

So only people who can afford the cost of adoption are worthy of raising children?

Happiness is not the result of a mathematical equation comparing the good times and bad times someone has had. It is a state of mind.
-nomad888
Beancounter is offline  
#25 Old 01-26-2012, 07:21 AM
Veggie Regular
 
ElaineV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,026
Fostercare adoptions are typically very low cost or free, for the record. The average cost to adoptive parents is $400 (last I read). The state pays the rest of the associated costs (background check, legal fees, home study, etc).

In general, international adoptions are the most expensive. (up to $30,000) Many families fundraise to help them pay for their adoptions. In religious communities adoption is often considered a good deed/moral duty rather than a private choice. In many tight-knit groups (religious or ethnically based) parenting itself is a communal affair and not an individual responsibility.

This whole notion that parents should be able to do the job entirely themselves isolates families and ultimately hurts kids, IMO.

And compared to birth, adoption often costs about the same. The only difference is that insurance usually covers the costs associated with having a bio child whereas it doesn't pay for adoption.
ElaineV is offline  
#26 Old 01-26-2012, 07:43 AM
Veggie Regular
 
delicioso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,945
If you adopt a child after you retire, your social security payments go up. I believe it applies to foster children, as well.
delicioso is offline  
#27 Old 01-26-2012, 08:30 AM
Veggie Regular
 
ElaineV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,026
I point out the finances of adoption because so many people have the misconception that "adoption is expensive." It's wrong. And it's just one area where people are grossly misinformed about adoption. I strongly recommend that anyone remotely interested in adoption do some research and learn about it before making serious life decisions about growing their family.

As it turns out, fostercare adoption is the least expensive (and thus perhaps the most financially responsible) way to grow a family. If you're the type of parent who wants to save up for your child's college expenses and think that might be difficult to do, but you can afford the basics of childcare, then growing your family through fostercare adoption makes saving for college entirely possible. With a little careful financial planning, you could give your child everything you want to give them. This is one of the reasons we chose this path.

Quote:
Originally Posted by delicioso View Post

If you adopt a child after you retire, your social security payments go up. I believe it applies to foster children, as well.

This sounds a little fishy to me so I looked into it. Here's what the SS website says:
"When you qualify for Social Security retirement benefits, your children may also qualify to receive benefits on your record. Your eligible child can be your biological child, adopted child or stepchild. A dependent grandchild may also qualify. "
link: http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/yourchildren.htm

So, the issue is that Social Security benefits are partially calculated by the number of dependents you have. And yes, adopted children count as dependents just like biological children count.

About foster children and SS, that's a tricky issue. The state already compensates foster parents for the care of the foster children. It's a monthly payment. In order to receive any tax deductions or other government assistance related to these children, they have to become your dependents. You can only claim them as dependents if you claim the state's compensation as income and pay taxes on it. It turns out this is only financially sensible if the child is in your care for about 7 months. That's because they have to be in your care more than 6 months for you to claim them for the entire year, but if you receive compensation for the entire year then the untaxed compensation is worth more than the tax deduction. Are you following me? So what ends up happening here is that there's a financial incentive for foster drift. (Foster drift is the name for how children in the system move from home to home without finding permanency of adoption, reunification, or guardianship. It's terrible for children's emotional and intellectual development.) I'm not sure how well this is understood by most foster parents, but it exists nonetheless.
ElaineV is offline  
#28 Old 01-26-2012, 09:22 AM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadeaway1289 View Post

No doubt opt out for a bizillion different reasons.

I really thought this thread was going to be about animals when I first read the title and I couldn't understand why this was even a question on this board.

That was actually done a little on purpose so people may see the link between unwanted souls with no home.

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#29 Old 01-26-2012, 09:56 AM
Veggie Regular
 
be_it's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 282
Adopt only. My biological clock is ticking, but I'm not at a place in my life where I should be raising kids, so when that time comes, I plan to foster, eventually adopt, but continue to foster through out my life, until life tells me to stop. It was one of the first conversations my manfriend and I had when we got serious. I want kids in my life, I want to help others, I will not give birth. And ElaineV is awesome! I totally look up to you, and one who fosters and adopts, then instills great life lessons, is a winner in my book.

How come I love reading other people's witty signatures, but can never seem to make an awesome one for myself?! Life is hilariously cruel.
be_it is offline  
#30 Old 01-26-2012, 10:02 AM
Veggie Regular
 
be_it's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beancounter View Post

So only people who can afford the cost of adoption are worthy of raising children?

Honestly, I once believed the same way. The cost to raise a child is huge, if you can't afford to adopt one, hoe could you possibly have money to take them to the doctor when they're sick, or feed them, or clothe them? If the money to care for your child is the money that comes out of my taxes, maybe you shouldn't have a child. Honestly, my thoughts. But then my good friend had a baby at 19, lives with her grama, works the best she can, but utilizes her options. She's one of the best mothers I'vep ever seen. Which makes me rethink my stance. I'm assuming you asked wanting an honest answer, and here is mine.

How come I love reading other people's witty signatures, but can never seem to make an awesome one for myself?! Life is hilariously cruel.
be_it is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off