Catholics in particular have to include forms of fruitfulness that don’t involve biological children in what it means to lead a full and flourishing life. Cloistered, celibate religious lay down their lives for the sake of a deep relationship with God and interceding for the world.
Children are a sign of living generously, making one’s life a gift to others. And a culture with declining marriage and fertility raises questions about how we’re preparing to see our lives as not only our own. But it’s not fair or accurate to tag any particular person without children as selfish or disconnected from the future.
I see two fundamental points your analysis gets wrong. The rest of the article is downstream of these errors. First, you reduce the desire for children to the “selfish gene.” You describe the virtue of George Washington, but seem to dismiss the notion that parenthood is a virtue. It is actually virtuous to be a parent. Where you see something selfish, I think most people see the creation of life and the self-sacrifice that entails to be decidedly unselfish. We are created and ordered towards life, and so fulfilling that calling is virtuous.
The second point you get wrong is a basic category error. Where you point out the virtue of childless George Washington as an individual, Vance is calling out “childless cat ladies” as a group. There’s no historical evidence that Washington actively chose not to have kids. Rather, historians believe he was simply infertile. That’s wholly different than a belief system in which entire swaths of women (and men) either de-prioritize having children in favor of careers, or actively choose not to have kids. Vance isn’t saying that childless people cannot be virtuous, especially those who wanted children but were unable to conceive or never managed to get married. Rather, he’s saying choosing to not have kids is unvirtuous. Given that a key feature of our design is procreation, it’s no wonder that studies are suggesting that the cohort to which this group of childless by choice overwhelmingly belongs (Progressives) face higher rates of mental health struggles and feel unfulfilled in their lives.
Catholics in particular have to include forms of fruitfulness that don’t involve biological children in what it means to lead a full and flourishing life. Cloistered, celibate religious lay down their lives for the sake of a deep relationship with God and interceding for the world.
Children are a sign of living generously, making one’s life a gift to others. And a culture with declining marriage and fertility raises questions about how we’re preparing to see our lives as not only our own. But it’s not fair or accurate to tag any particular person without children as selfish or disconnected from the future.
Thanks, Noah, and good to hear from you :)
I see two fundamental points your analysis gets wrong. The rest of the article is downstream of these errors. First, you reduce the desire for children to the “selfish gene.” You describe the virtue of George Washington, but seem to dismiss the notion that parenthood is a virtue. It is actually virtuous to be a parent. Where you see something selfish, I think most people see the creation of life and the self-sacrifice that entails to be decidedly unselfish. We are created and ordered towards life, and so fulfilling that calling is virtuous.
The second point you get wrong is a basic category error. Where you point out the virtue of childless George Washington as an individual, Vance is calling out “childless cat ladies” as a group. There’s no historical evidence that Washington actively chose not to have kids. Rather, historians believe he was simply infertile. That’s wholly different than a belief system in which entire swaths of women (and men) either de-prioritize having children in favor of careers, or actively choose not to have kids. Vance isn’t saying that childless people cannot be virtuous, especially those who wanted children but were unable to conceive or never managed to get married. Rather, he’s saying choosing to not have kids is unvirtuous. Given that a key feature of our design is procreation, it’s no wonder that studies are suggesting that the cohort to which this group of childless by choice overwhelmingly belongs (Progressives) face higher rates of mental health struggles and feel unfulfilled in their lives.
Ain't that at some level r-strategy vs. K-strategy?
They should really teach Isaiah 56 in Sunday school…