Having kids

Someone recently posted a question about having kids to one of the Heathen lists I'm on, wondering if it was considered "unHeathen" to choose not to have children. It's led to some interesting debate. Heathens, being about as agreeable as any other group of religious people, don't have only one view on much of anything - including, it seems, childbearing. There's no question that family ties - both to your ancestors and to your descendants - are a major theme in much of the lore that we have to guide us, as well as what's been found in many archaeological digs at Nordic and Viking sites, but there's a lot more to Heathenism than just that.

As with most tribal societies, the need to have children was very strong, especially in a land where harsh and long winters could easily kill. Children are, without a doubt, vital to the survival of the tribe as a whole. Even now, that is one of the main reasons cited by those who feel that someone who refuses to have children is not fulfilling his or her religious or spiritual duty. There are several different branches of Heathen faith (all based on the ancient Norse/Viking lore and ways, but which, like the different Christian denominations, vary in the details), but even taken all together, Heathenism as a whole isn't a huge religion at this point. And, since we don't proselytize in order to gain new converts (if someone is interested in learning more, we'll gladly talk to them about it - but it's rare you'll find someone trying to tell you to accept Odin if you want to go to Valhalla or that Heathenism is the One True Way™,) Heathens having children and raising them in the faith is one of the best ways for Heathenism to continue through the next generations.

There are, however, a couple of realities that I think people - even religious people - need to keep in mind when it comes to deciding how important it is for other people to have children. First and foremost is that Jord (the Norse Goddess who embodies the Earth) doesn't have an infinite capacity for humans. Overpopulation is a genuine concern, and its known that where people are plentiful and resources are scarce, violence is a likely result. While Jord periodically takes matters into her own hands and will bring about famine, earthquakes, fires, storms and other natural disasters to thin out the population, I firmly believe that humans need to help out by not necessarily reproducing quite so frequently.

Secondly, it is very clear that there are some people who are well-suited for parenthood, and some who quite simply aren't. Sadly, because religions often put a heavy focus on the idea that having children is a religious obligation, and because even when religion doesn't lay the "obligation" guilt-trip on someone, society often will, we end up with a lot of people who probably would choose not to have children if they thought that was an actual choice open to them.

Now, granted, we're not going to solve the overpopulation problem by making it easier for people to voluntarily opt-out of the gene pool, but it is a good place to start, and it doesn't require government involvement, unfair or inequitable restrictions or other draconian measures to enforce it. All it requires is for people to start understanding that having children is a personal decision, and one that only those who would be responsible for raising said children are qualified to make.

I can understand why different faiths want people to have kids - and why some even encourage people to have lots and lots of kids. It is a good way to help ensure the propagation of the faith. Most people stay in the faith they're raised with, and raise their own children the same way. I would think, however, that it would be in most religions' best interests to go for quality over quantity. Rather than focusing on raw numbers, it would be more logical to make sure that the kids who are born into the faith are ones who have every opportunity to become people who can contribute not only to society at large, but to the faith community as well. It's true that people from bad homes can, and often do, become very valuable members of society - but it seems that by allowing people who think that they have the potential to be abusive, neglectful or otherwise "bad" - as well as those who just don't want kids for whatever reason - to remain childless, you'll have more kids with a good chance for success - making for a stronger community overall.

Now, if, along with finding a way to change societal attitudes so that there is less pressure on people who wish to remain childless to go ahead and have kids anyway, we could also find a way to effectively help people who have kids without having first given any serious thought to whether they should or not, we might actually start making some good headway on the population issue. I'm not saying we don't need kids. Obviously, as a species, and within our faith communities, we do. There's no question about that. But the goal shouldn't be to have as many kids as possible and spend time, money and other resources trying to fix the problems caused by avoidable bad parenting, but rather on making sure that every child that is born is one that is loved and wanted, and will be raised by parents (either their biological ones or an adoptive family) who are willing to undertake the task.