This article was difficult to write because I stand for a completely different moral system than we live in now. You may not contain your laughter – but it is creating as many individuals (humans, robots with consciousness) who will live the most ecstatic moments. Maybe it is total utilitarianism or some edited form of it. The system we live in now is very close to moral nihilism. So implementing some of my moral system to his poor moral system is very difficult. As a progressive (from the political spectrum they offer, but I also reject it), what is my opinion on abortion and reproductive rights?
Abortion and reproductive rights in history
Every time people had an intimate relationship, a baby was a product. In the past, women without contraception faced a grueling reality. Their lives revolved around childbirth, as there was no reliable way to prevent pregnancy. Many women gave birth repeatedly, with pregnancies stacking up one after another. This relentless cycle was exhausting and dangerous. Each pregnancy brought risks – complications, infections, and, for some, death. Women knew they might not survive childbirth, yet they had little choice. Pregnancy and birth were not only physically draining; they also took a toll mentally. Some women feared pregnancy, feeling trapped in their own bodies by this recurring ordeal. They struggled with fatigue, pain, and the constant demands of childrearing. The burden never lifted.
A matter of life
Beyond the physical toll, society imposed heavy expectations. People expected women to bear children, often as many as possible. A large family was a mark of success for many communities. Some women tried folk methods to prevent pregnancy, but these methods often failed. Others, desperate, turned to dangerous and secretive measures, risking their health and even their lives. Some used toxic substances or sharp objects, attempting to end pregnancies. Many of these attempts ended in tragedy. But they continued, for some women felt they had no other way out. Each failed attempt only added to their suffering, and society condemned those who tried. Women lived with this constant fear and pressure, which shaped their identities and roles in communities.
Their choices were limited. Wealthier women had more options, as they could afford midwives or herbal remedies. Some also avoided frequent pregnancies by hiring wet nurses or, occasionally, living apart from their husbands. But poor women rarely had these options. They carried the full weight of frequent pregnancies and childcare, with no support. The ordeal drained them, physically and mentally. They bore the cost of reproduction in their bodies and in their souls, often suffering in silence. For these women, life was a cycle of birth, labor, and loss, with little relief. Their stories rarely appear in history books, but they shaped societies in profound ways, as silent witnesses to the brutal toll of life without contraception.
Dangerous historical form of abortion
Abortion in the past was risky, secretive, and often fatal. Women who faced unwanted pregnancies had few safe options, so they turned to desperate measures. Some used harmful herbs or potions, hoping to induce a miscarriage, but these substances often poisoned them instead. Others sought out untrained individuals who used crude, dangerous methods, sometimes with makeshift tools. Women understood the risks but took them anyway, driven by desperation. If discovered, they faced harsh punishments and social condemnation. Abortion was a last resort, a terrifying choice that carried the weight of shame and the real possibility of death. In this hidden world, women bore an invisible burden, one that society ignored or condemned, leaving them to face these dangers alone.
Reversed reality now: basically no children at all
Every time people have an intimate relationship now, no baby is a product. Native Europeans are experiencing a steady decline in birth rates, driven by economic factors, evolving lifestyles, and widespread access to contraception.
With more people prioritizing careers and personal development, family planning has shifted; fewer people choose to have large families, and many delay having children. Access to effective contraception has empowered people to control their reproductive choices more precisely, further lowering birth rates.
Economic pressures, such as high housing costs and job instability, also discourage young adults from starting families. This trend poses demographic challenges, as aging populations rely on a shrinking workforce, putting stress on pension and healthcare systems. Governments are attempting to reverse the decline through incentives like parental leave and childcare support, but the effects have been modest. Meanwhile, migration partially offsets the gap, subtly reshaping Europe’s social landscape as low native birth rates continue.
Dumb luck, killing a child, a few children born
The average ejaculation contains around 100 million sperm cells. Women are born with approximately 1-2 million eggs, but only a fraction of these eggs will ever mature and be released during ovulation over the course of a woman’s reproductive years.
When you consider the potential combinations of different sperm and egg pairs, the number of possible genetic combinations is incredibly large. Each sperm cell carries a unique set of genetic information, as does each egg. When one sperm fertilizes one egg, it creates a genetically distinct individual.
To calculate the number of potential genetic combinations, you would multiply the number of sperm by the number of eggs. For example, if there are 100 million sperm and 1 million eggs available for fertilization, the total number of potential genetic combinations would be 100 million multiplied by 1 million. It would result in 100 trillion possible combinations.
Those people could have lived a better life than you, be extremely moral, and have had intelligence a few standard deviations above, matching John von Neumann. So this also pinpoints why this moral system is wicked.
Killing a child versus no children born; pressure for low IQs
I am definitely not a supporter of killing children. But when you kill a child in Christian culture they regard you as the worst scum. Prisoners will torture you because a child is a God’s gift and because they were abused in their childhood as well.
However, if the child isn’t born at all everything goes. And this is, in my humble opinion, one of the biggest flaws of the current Western moral system. But we unfortunately live in a primitive, animal-like moral system. Evolution programmed us to have children all the time. Contraception means didn’t exist in the vast majority of human existence so there consequentially wasn’t any pressure when people didn’t have kids.
So there is now evolutionary pressure on the population to have lower IQ because the main natality-risers are people with low IQ.
Abortion and reproductive rights: Giving a birth as an imperative?
A lot of families decide whether to have a child given their socioeconomic status. People cannot have children because of lack of money or the respective child can’t compete with his or her peers. Or basically, they compete for children – not once again; killing a child – a huge problem; mocking someone unable to have a child – nothing happens. But as I always say, this moral system makes only little sense.
I made my calculation: If the US super-rich gave “only” 2 trillion, 6 million children would see daylight without parents having to pay for the care.
The statistics are derived that an average cost of a child per year is $17,375. And parents paying the checks for 20 years.
And be sure the super-rich are much wealthier.
A petty theft results in jail time, capitalism’s flow not – fewer babies born
If you steal from a multinational company, you won’t elude punishment. But have you ever heard about core capital from deposits and short-term borrowing, lending and credit flow (retail and corporate loans for interest income), trading and investment portfolios (proprietary trading, securities, derivatives for profit and risk management), global transactions and forex (cross-border currency flows and hedging), investment banking and advisory services (M&A, IPOs, wealth management fees), liquidity and risk management (liquidity buffers and reserves for stability), internal fund transfers (cost allocation through Funds Transfer Pricing)? I guess you didn’t.
But this is a crime – not taxing it, not some petty hungry thiefs stealing food in some multinational supermarket with unimaginable profits.
However, not redistributing the surplus value (or just taxing it) isn’t enacted, but it still bears moral imperative.
Moral system: Abdundant society should have financial stimulus to have children
I believe that in a world where the super-rich owns the majority of everything, financial stimuli should be a priority for parents who plan to have babies.
The families should be selected through criteria so they wouldn’t start to make a business out of it.
To establish a financial incentive program for prospective parents without encouraging exploitation, criteria should prioritize stability, responsibility, and genuine commitment to family life. Financial readiness is essential, as families need to show they can support a child’s basic needs independently, reducing the risk of reliance solely on government aid. Evaluating motivation and intent is equally important; assessing parental commitment ensures families view child-rearing as a life goal rather than a means of financial gain. Age and health criteria play a role, too, in setting basic standards for the physical and emotional demands of parenting.
Education level can serve as a useful measure since it often aligns with stable life circumstances, and requiring parenting courses or workshops demonstrates a serious approach to raising children. Screening for criminal or abusive backgrounds adds another layer of assurance, protecting the program from misuse by those with harmful histories. Finally, families should show plans for long-term support networks, such as family, friends, or community ties, to help them through the challenges of parenthood. This comprehensive, values-based approach supports families who truly wish to build a stable, nurturing environment, safeguarding against profit motives and fostering responsible family growth.
No children? A punishment? Makes little sense
Since we care not only how many children died, but also how many children could have been born, a small penalty for families who would meet the aforementioned criteria could take effect. But would it be right?
Financial incentives to boost birth rates could backfire. Some families may feel pressured to have children for money, not readiness. This could lead to neglect. Parents who aren’t genuinely motivated might not give children the emotional care they need. Kids could suffer from trust issues and low self-esteem. Without warmth and attention, their social skills would struggle.
Families attracted by incentives may also face financial difficulties later. They might fail to meet their children’s basic needs. Food, shelter, and healthcare would come under stress. Economic strain leads to physical neglect, which has a lasting impact on kids.
Children raised in neglectful environments can develop deep psychological issues. They may struggle to build relationships. Their future in society may be limited. More cases of neglect would also strain social services. Resources would stretch thin, leaving some families without adequate help.
Neglect
This neglect could create a cycle of poverty. Children who grow up without proper care often remain trapped in disadvantage. Lack of education and health support harms their potential. They may find it hard to break free as adults, which keeps social problems alive across generations.
Parental burnout would rise as well. Those unprepared for the demands of parenthood may feel exhausted and resentful. Frustration and emotional distance grow when children aren’t wanted for the right reasons. This resentment can harm family dynamics, leaving children without the care they need.
Quality parenting isn’t just about meeting physical needs. It takes empathy, engagement, and patience. When children become financial assets, this quality suffers. Kids miss out on crucial developmental experiences. Education and social opportunities fade, leaving them unprepared for adulthood.
Policies that drive families to have children for incentives may end up creating larger problems. The financial help might not outweigh the societal cost. Incentives alone can’t create healthy family environments. Vulnerable communities could face this burden more than others. Social inequality would grow, and neglect rates would rise within these groups.
To avoid these risks, incentives should come with broader support. Parenting education, mental health resources, and social programs can keep families stable. Support systems that focus on children’s well-being can balance incentives and ensure a more positive outcome for society.
Finally, the sad abortions besides other reproductive rights
I may deeply surprise you but since I am pro-birth, I am basically on the side when abortion should be illegal. But here are some exceptions:
The first is to save the mother’s life. If the pregnancy risks her life, many argue abortion is necessary for self-defense. Here, the mother’s life holds equal value. Ending the pregnancy is not seen as a choice but a tragic necessity.
Mental health concerns also create grounds for exceptions. If carrying the pregnancy could lead to serious psychological harm, abortion may be justified. Protecting mental health here is essential for the mother’s overall well-being and quality of life.
Multiple pregnancies with complications might permit selective abortion. When one or more fetuses threaten the health of others, selective reduction helps protect the remaining fetuses and the mother. The goal is survival and well-being for those who can make it.
Nonviable pregnancies, like ectopic pregnancies, where the embryo implants outside the uterus, are another exception. Here, there’s no chance of survival for the embryo, and the mother’s life is at risk. Most ethical views support abortion in these cases because the pregnancy cannot succeed.
Lastly, if the embryo isn’t healthy, meaning it may suffer severe disability or impairment, abortion can be morally permissible. The aim is to prevent future suffering and hardship, giving parents a choice about whether they can provide the care that would be needed.
When the person is challenged by economic hardship, it isn’t the reason for abortion as the government can pay the costs.
These exceptions show that even strong anti-abortion views recognize the complexity of life. Preserving life matters, but other rights, well-being, and compassion may allow for morally permissible abortion in extreme cases.
The current moral system is closer to moral nihilism: balancing between giving lives and personal comfort
Something even Stalin, Hitler or Mao hadn’t in mind. They considered their victims as necessities or collateral damage. However, contraception inventors, in a way, have had a profound impact on population dynamics. This created a tool that has prevented billions of potential lives. Seen through a stark numerical lens, contraception could be considered one of the biggest killers ever, simply by the sheer volume of births that have not occurred. But focusing only on this view misses the true significance of contraception: the transformation of women’s lives and autonomy.
In summary, without contraceptive pills, the global population might be around 15-20 billion today, though it’s impossible to know exactly, given the complex interplay of factors that influence birth rates.
Transforming women’s lives
Contraception has not only shifted population numbers but transformed women’s lives in profound ways. It has given them a way to balance personal comfort, health, and societal expectations, empowering women to make choices about their futures. With contraception, women are no longer bound by the physical toll of consecutive pregnancies, giving them the freedom to pursue education, careers, and personal growth on their terms. By reducing the physical strain of repeated pregnancies, contraception has allowed women to actively manage their reproductive choices, giving them control over their health and well-being.
This control goes beyond the physical; it impacts mental and emotional health, allowing women to plan family life in ways that align with their personal values and goals. With contraception, women can delay childbirth until they feel financially, emotionally, or physically ready, fostering a sense of agency that previous generations lacked. They can pursue long-term plans, build stable homes, and choose the timing and size of their families. This autonomy has led to a new level of freedom, one rooted in both comfort and the ability to plan for a healthier, longer life with fewer health complications.
By empowering women to make these choices, contraception has redefined family dynamics and gender roles, challenging traditional expectations that often limited women’s roles to motherhood. It has broadened women’s societal contributions, allowing them to shape not only their lives but also the communities they live in. The ability to control reproduction is, at its core, a freedom that supports both individual well-being and social progress, reshaping the narrative of what women can achieve beyond traditional roles.
Abortion and reproductive rights: good women’s lives, but billions of unborn shadows will haunt us forever
Once again, without contraceptive pills, the global population might be around 15-20 billion today.
We need some balance (if we don’t want to change our moral system) between sheer human existence and women’s health and well-being.
Once again, I am strongly against women being the only vehicles for giving birth to children. But I am also fully aware that brains like Einstein, von Neumann with moral leaders (from common moral standpoints), and political activists lusting for change for this awful global patron-client system will never ever see the daylight.
Without contraception, billions of lives would have existed. Each one has a unique story, a potential, a spark that never became. There would have been sons and daughters, each with their own paths, faces, and voices. Among them, maybe a son who would have grown to be an engineer, building bridges that connected cities, his work standing tall against the skyline. Perhaps he would have become a doctor, saving lives, holding the hands of those on the edge of life, and bringing comfort and hope to families.
Another might have been a teacher, inspiring thousands of young minds, passing on the knowledge and wisdom he gathered, leaving a mark on each child who passed through his classroom. Or maybe he would have been a writer, his words stirring emotions across generations, stories that could have changed the hearts of millions. Each child could have grown to be someone, shaping lives, giving meaning, filling empty spaces in the world.
These shadows will haunt us forever…
Without contraception, a world of these souls was possible. Each would have had moments of joy, struggle, love, and loss. Each would have had a voice, thoughts, and dreams, the laughter of children, the wisdom of the old, the endless cycle of life renewed over and over. This world could have been overflowing with faces we’ll never see, voices we’ll never hear, hands we’ll never shake.
It’s tragic to imagine the absence of these billions, lives that would have touched our own in unseen ways. Roads they would have built, books they would have written, discoveries they might have made – all lost, like shadows fading before they ever came to be.
Leave a Reply