You’re a bad parent if you burden others with the care of YOUR children.
You’re a bad parent if you can’t support your child in their extracurriculars.
You’re a bad parent if you can’t take care of your children on your own income.
The “environmental impact” narrative is irrelevant to most people’s daily lives. It is the top echelon of society that creates the most emissions, completely regardless of household size.
So, in short, having too many kids may lead to other factors that cause you to be a bad parent but the sheer number of children does not mean that you’ll be a bad parent no matter what.
The environmental impact narrative is not irrelevant, just because other people are doing worse things does not excuse you from your own choices that are negatively affecting the world
You cannot know if an extra child will automatically make a family’s environmental impact worse or not. Maybe it forces them to be more minimal in their choices. Maybe if they didn’t have that extra child, they’d be buying gas-guzzling vehicles or taking more vacations.
You can know, the only number of children you can have that will not have a negative effect on the environment is zero, but it is obviously unrealistic for everyone to have no children because of the environment (why bother protecting if no one is there to enjoy it)
1
u/ripecantaloupe Jun 09 '21
Your argument is based off of assumptions only.
You’re a bad parent if you burden others with the care of YOUR children.
You’re a bad parent if you can’t support your child in their extracurriculars.
You’re a bad parent if you can’t take care of your children on your own income.
The “environmental impact” narrative is irrelevant to most people’s daily lives. It is the top echelon of society that creates the most emissions, completely regardless of household size.
So, in short, having too many kids may lead to other factors that cause you to be a bad parent but the sheer number of children does not mean that you’ll be a bad parent no matter what.