Should This Be the Last Generation?

The author of this NYT opinion piece evaluates the most basic philosophical question: Is life worth living? However, he follows it out to the questions, “How good does life have to be to make it reasonable to bring a child into the world?” and “Is the standard of life experienced by most people in developed nations today good enough to make this decision unproblematic?”

Forgiving him the implication that anyone in an un-’developed’ nation is immoral in choosing to bring a child into the world, I think its a worthy consideration. These are the honest questions and thoughts of a society that is increasingly both convinced and dissatisfied with the humanist worldview it has wholeheartedly adopted.

Two ideas popped out at me as I read this:

1) Morality is still seen as an objective to be sought. “Would it be better?”, the author wonders, never questioning why he even has an innate desire to do what is better, rather than just survive. As he sees it, the meaning of life is simply to enjoy the comforts a ‘developed’ nation offers. If those comforts cannot be enjoyed life is not worth living. That is a harsh statement that most Westerners would disagree with in word. However, we spend our lives agreeing with in practice. He confesses his observation that, “We spend most of our lives with unfulfilled desires, and the occasional satisfactions that are all most of us can achieve are insufficient to outweigh these prolonged negative states.”

For the follower of Christ, the universal human longing for what is better is confirmation of our divine origin, purpose and destiny. As Christ taught and lived out, the comforts of this world are not the end of life and can often interfere with the true meaning of life. Solomon yearns for the readers of Ecclesiastes to know the meaninglessness that there is in a life spent doing anything but fearing the Lord God. Jesus says He not only came to give life, but to give in in abundance (Jn 10:10)

2) Love is never mentioned once in this article. Love is the transcendent ethic. Christ said it should be the identifying mark of one of His followers. Logically consistent humanism has no place or explanation for love beyond a chemical or neurological response to stimulation. Giving and/or receiving love is not reason enough to live. This is the dominant world view in our society today. That is how it has become a baby’s life is not worth protecting until after birth, that a child with a birth defect or elderly person requiring care is viewed as a waste of resources.

“Is life worth living?” is such a difficult question for our aching world. But, let me firmly remind you, the answer is Yes, an emphatic ‘Yes!’ There is such joy to be had in life, and it has very little, if anything, to do with earthly comforts.

Loving and being loved is the noblest of meanings for breath. We are able to love, and so fulfilled by loving, because He first loved us. A child born in the Kibera slum may be a long-shot for enjoying the comforts of ‘development’, but you’d have a hard time telling me the smiles on their faces, or their parent’s aren’t sincere, or the love they share isn’t reason enough for each breath. Obviously, pain and tremendous heartache abound. But, that makes the love even more brilliant and makes the promise of Restoration even more amazing. Even those who have had never been shown love by another human can spend a life loving others. In doing so they provided the most compelling reason possible for their existence, as well as the existence of their Creator.