Monthly Archives: March 2012
In that very same flame-war with said Catholic nutcase over contraception, she outright pulled that card. She says “If God chooses to bless you [Bless? Really? I don’t view children as any sort of blessing.] with a child, it will happen even if you’re using contraception.”
So let me get this straight, dumbass. You’re chalking up contraception failures to God? Um, no. Contraception is not perfect, and some people just don’t use it the right way. Don’t you think that would result in failures, especially for those who aren’t using it right? Even if used perfectly it might fail, again, because it’s not perfect (and why do you think I had to give two semen samples before I was officially declared sterile?). Of course, that’s why they’re so pro-NFP because God can decide to “change up the woman’s cycle” (and I’m using a direct quote from this idiot once again) and get the woman pregnant. Well, no wonder so-called NFP has a ridiculously high failure rate, and a much higher one than the 99.5% they claim. That “statistic” is utter BS and I and every other educated individual knows this. A woman can get pregnant at any time, not just certain times like NFP says, hence the high failure rate.
At any rate, I digress. This brings up a whole other issue, and I might piss some people off here but oh well. If your “God” would choose to “bless” someone with a child (using your terminology) against their will, then your “God” is a fucking asshole not deserving of any worship, admiration, praise, or love. Seriously. Forcing someone to do something against his/her will is slavery, and having children is no exception to that. Of course, that just gives further credence to my belief that the Judeo-Christian “God” is one of the two most evil fictional villains in the history of literature (the other, of course, being the Allah of Islam, which many will argue is the same deity).
I can’t believe religious people sometimes, and especially religious breeders. They think they’re all high and mighty doing “God’s will” by pushing out as many children as possible, and anyone who doesn’t must be in rebellion against their deity of choice. Whatever. I’ve read the Bible and the Qur’an both and I can’t find anything against the childfree life in either, though I can see why some would interpret it that way. Alas, I guess it’s a good thing I’m an atheist. That way I don’t have to put up with any of that crap.
So, I got into a heated debate (you could almost call it a flame war) with someone who was whining and crying about the new mandate in the States that requires insurance companies to cover contraception in their health insurance plans (yes, it was a Roman Catholic who’s whining about her beloved “Church” being forced to provide coverage, to which I say get the fuck over it because how long have you imposed Christianity on Americans through anti-choice laws [until 1973], anti-gay rights laws, etc.?). I brought up the fact that whether or not she realizes it, there are couples who just do not want to have children for whatever reason, and that should those couples end up with a kid they’d be crappy parents because they wouldn’t have the desire to pour their lives out for their kids.
Well discourse continued for awhile, where she ripped me to shreds about the CF choice, but ultimately decided that she “respected” people’s choice to be CF (on which I call obvious bullshit), but that their choice came with a “price.” That’s when my jaw dropped almost all the way to the floor.
I can’t think of any price that being childfree comes with. The only price I can think of comes with the territory of having children. With the sticker price on a child being almost a quarter of a million US equivalent, all the countless hours you’re going to have to sacrifice, giving up your sick time to take care of the kid instead of using it for yourself, and even giving up many of your hobbies (or at the very minimum, reducing the amount of time you spend on them), having a kid comes with a HUGE price.
Conversely, let’s look at the “price” of being CF. You save all that money and time to use on yourself. You’re able to be more independent, buy things you wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford. So what “price” is there? Not passing on your family name? Well, it’s really narcissistic to think passing on your family name is that important. Not having someone to “take care of you when your old?” What the hell is the matter with you? Take care of your goddamn self! Why do you even want someone taking care of you? That’s no way to live (quite frankly I’d rather die if it came to that).
Well, whatever. If there’s some other price I’m not seeing please enlighten me, because to me it’s just not there. You gotta love them breeders, most of them are so full of shit that it’s not even funny.
…Cool Childfree Guy is getting old!
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, today is that specific day I was born, this time 25 years ago. I’m halfway to 50 years old, and that is a scary thought in and of itself!
At any rate, today I celebrate 25 years of childfreedom. I was born childfree, I’m still childfree, and I always will be childfree. There’s just no way around it!
With that, I’m going to go and enjoy my oh-so-childfree birthday. Grab a nice dinner, cosmic bowling, and probably going to crack out my ‘pipes, which I’ve just recently re-discovered my love of playing.
Thanks to all of you who really helped jump-start my blog. It is because of you that this site has been as successful as it has, and I look forward to many more years of bringing you great childfree content!
-LGM, the Cool Childfree Guy
So when Google searching childfree blogs I came across this hilariously ridiculous entry from Encyclopedia Dramatica about the childfree community:
Enjoy the laugh!
You know, if it’s another way the childfree get shafted it’s in tax law. Sure, legally we childfree couples do have the ability to file jointly on taxes. It’s always been that way and I don’t see it changing anytime soon. However, that’s about all the tax breaks the childfree get, because childed couples get a really unfair tax break: the “having children” tax break as I call it.
Yes, I understand that children are expensive. As I’ve mentioned on here many times over, the latest figure for the cost of raising a kid for 18 years is just under a quarter of a million US dollars. That said, along with having children comes the financial responsibility for that children. If you can’t afford to raise a child, you should not have kids and if you do have them, should have them taken away. I’m 100% opposed to any form of government assistance with the cost of raising a kid, and that includes tax breaks. I don’t want MY tax dollars being used to raise the kids I didn’t want to have. In essence, I’m paying to raise other people’s kids the way I see it.
Now, obviously, there is one exception to the above. If you are truly and honestly disabled and can’t work for whatever reason, then fine. That is entirely reasonable. It’s not someone’s fault if they have a debilitating illness or condition that makes it impossible for them to work, and I actually have some compassion for these people.
However, for people who are perfectly capable of work, I don’t want to hear it. You chose to take on the financial burden that having a child comes with when you decided to have a kid. I don’t give a damn if you have to work three jobs to make ends meet, you do what you have to do. Forget tax breaks and other government handouts just because you wanted children for your own selfish desires. I’m tired of it.
I hope this addresses a lot of the questions about the no-needle, no-scalpel vasectomy procedure I had done 18 months ago. Its efficacy is just as good as any other vasectomy method, but it is less painful at the outset (about the most painful part is the administration of the anesthetic, which is about like a rubber band pop). It’s really hard to explain the procedure, so I figured I’d share this little video with you.
So I have a friend back in the States who’s really into the GSN’s raunchy “Dating Game” spinoff called “Baggage.” For those who’ve never watched the show: it’s like the dating game, but each one of three potential dates has three pieces of baggage, which can be embarrassing, bad, or just plain disgusting secrets. There’s one small, one medium, and one large piece of baggage, and whoever the contestant selects then has to decide whether or not he/she can deal with the contestant’s baggage.
Well, my friend yesterday just had to IM me and tell me what went down on yesterday’s episode. The contestant was a woman, this time going through three potential men. At the end when she selected her date, she of course then had to reveal her baggage. Her piece of baggage was essentially that she didn’t like kids and did not want them. Ultimately, the man she selected said he couldn’t deal with her baggage and after the show said he’d always dreamed of having a “large family.”
This really brings up two things I wanted to address in today’s blog, and I wanted to address each one, so here we go:
To the lady: kudos to you for being so upfront and honest about being childfree. For you, and most other CF people, this is a very important aspect of who we are and how we identify ourselves. I think it’s better for you to be honest and lose out on a date than to wind up dating someone who has different visions than you do. Quite frankly, if that’s the worst of your baggage feel free to look up any CF dating site and find the CF man of your dreams. We do exist, so please do not get discouraged.
To the man: kudos to you for saying you couldn’t accept her baggage. It says something about you that you’d be willing to turn down a date with a CF woman instead of pursuing her and trying to manipulate her into having children and/or trying to forcibly change her mind. In that regard I have a lot more respect for you than a lot of other people who desire children. However, I do want to suggest that you think long and hard about having a “large family.” I hope you have a financial plan and a way to support them before you do. I bet you could find any number of Catholic women who could make you happy, so that’s not an issue whatsoever.
I’m a firm believer that couples should both be on the same page concerning children, whether you’re CF, desire children, or a fencesetter (seriously, I think it’d be better if two fencesetters married than a fencesetter marrying someone who has a firm decision on children). So in that way, I’m glad that they didn’t go on a date or pursue a relationship, because neither one would be happy with the other’s child status.
That’s just my take though. Did any of my readers watch yesterday? What are your thoughts?
Another thing that pisses me off is when breeders ask the very question above, or some variant of that question. Are they seriously implying that the only reason to get married is to have children? If that’s not their implication, then they SERIOUSLY need a reality check and they don’t know what marriage is all about.
I personally can think of many reasons why you’d want to get married even if you don’t want children, and I think many people can. In my opinion, the only reason to marry someone is because you are madly in love with them and you want to spend the rest of your life with them. Of course, the tax breaks and other legal benefits you get with being married are an added bonus and add incentive to go ahead and tie the knot (as opposed to having just a long-term relationship), but the reason you should marry someone is for love and no other reason.
Further, as is evidenced by all the illegitimate children out there, you don’t have to get married to have a kid anyway. People have casual sex and/or premarital sex all the time. It’s not like you have to be married to have sex. I’m not against premarital sex, don’t get me wrong, but all it takes is one time to get pregnant. Granted, one way or another, it is favorable if the kid has access to both parents in the home, but I’m just making the point marriage isn’t necessary to have a child.
Oh, and here’s another reason that question pisses me off: what about those who CAN’T have children? If these people had their way, would there be some sort of required fertility test to get married? I absolutely cringe at the thought! If they really think breeding should be a prerequisite for marriage, then that’s the only way to go about it. Talk about a serious infringement on personal autonomy and rights!
One last thing I will mention about this ridiculousness. The lack of breeding potential is a common argument against gay marriage. In that light, you can see mainly where the whole argument comes from: religion. Laws against gay marriage are stupid and so is any religion-based legislation (well, religion is stupid too but that’s beside the point).
Breeding should NEVER be a reason to get married. That’s just stupid. Marry because you love a person, not for their fertility.