Acting upon a perceived moral imperative to prevent others from procreation demonstrates a lack of interpersonal boundaries. Mentally fit people don’t kill themselves in fertility clinic explosions.
Well obviously that individual was mentally unwell. But the sentiment that one shouldn’t have a child by their own choice due to environmental circumstances by itself isn’t mentally unwell.
I don’t believe people should make that choice for others, but it shouldn’t be seem so abnormal if one does feel that way because, well, *gestures around wildly *
I think you were talking about people who believe in not having kids, and the other commenter was talking about people who want to blow themselves up to prevent others from having kids.
It would be a whole lot better if more people took care of their mental health, and we didn’t elect psychopathic narcissists into the highest office in the US.
I believe anyone who is capable of processing our current reality and the course we are heading down, who still chooses to create a life, is knowingly performing a selfish and immoral act.
I think it’s ethical to shame them for prioritizing their own desires over the life of their child.
I don’t think it’s ethical for laws to decide who can have children, but I also think letting anyone have children is not sustainable for our species. So ideally a solution to overpopulation is an educated population that makes their own individual responsible decisions.
If i were given total control I would probably force aspiring parents to adopt until there are no unwanted children left. Then we can think about making more
Humans are mostly sentient biological machines at the end of the day, hard wired for an instinctual need to reproduce. Without children, everything falls apart. South Korea, Japan, China, Germany, US, etc etc all have declining birth rates. Fortunately for many Western countries, we’ve had immigrants to provide a buffer against the inverted age demographic pyramid crisis. South Korea, on the other hand, is looking at essentially a full economic collapse by 2060 because their birth rates have continually declined for so long and right now is at 0.76.
So tell me, when millions of old people are dying from neglect and no access to healthcare, food, etc. from lack of workers in 2070, will you be sitting there with such a mighty, holier than thou attitude? Probably, because you likely just have an edgy hot take that humans are garbage and deserve to go extinct. Such deep moral philosophy, you should teach in college.
One doesn’t have to think that all humans are trash and deserve to die in order to think that it’s not cool to bring a whole ass human into a shitty situation so that the labor pool stays stable.
Again, that’s missing that point of what I’m saying. Without kids, humans go extinct. So yes, if you say, “stop having kids altogether,” you’re saying humans should go extinct. And my other point is highlighting how idiotic it is to call that the more moral position.
Boomers will be long, long dead by 2070, so that statement is idiotic. You’ll be the old boomer needing their ass wiped by then. And I’m not saying that children are only useful for that, I’m saying new generations of children keep civilization going altogether. But you don’t like civilization and think it all sucks and want it all to die, so your views are simple and two-dimensional, lacking any compassion or empathy to those currently alive and sparing it all for those who don’t even exist.
Acting upon a perceived moral imperative to prevent others from procreation demonstrates a lack of interpersonal boundaries. Mentally fit people don’t kill themselves in fertility clinic explosions.
Well obviously that individual was mentally unwell. But the sentiment that one shouldn’t have a child by their own choice due to environmental circumstances by itself isn’t mentally unwell.
I don’t believe people should make that choice for others, but it shouldn’t be seem so abnormal if one does feel that way because, well, *gestures around wildly *
I think you were talking about people who believe in not having kids, and the other commenter was talking about people who want to blow themselves up to prevent others from having kids.
You are correct 🫡
Agreed. This place is a nightmare. Lol
It would be a whole lot better if more people took care of their mental health, and we didn’t elect psychopathic narcissists into the highest office in the US.
One could argue forcing a child to be born into a dying world “demonstrates a lack of interpersonal boundaries.”
Ah, you’re also an ecofash doomer anti-natalist, that’s why you’re defending this guy.
Not ecofash
Not a doomer
Not an antinatalist
Sorry
Do you believe someone other than the parents should be empowered to make that determination?
I believe anyone who is capable of processing our current reality and the course we are heading down, who still chooses to create a life, is knowingly performing a selfish and immoral act.
That’s fair, but I was asking if you believe it’s ethical to enforce that opinion on others.
I think it’s ethical to shame them for prioritizing their own desires over the life of their child.
I don’t think it’s ethical for laws to decide who can have children, but I also think letting anyone have children is not sustainable for our species. So ideally a solution to overpopulation is an educated population that makes their own individual responsible decisions.
If i were given total control I would probably force aspiring parents to adopt until there are no unwanted children left. Then we can think about making more
Such deep moral philosophy over here.
Humans are mostly sentient biological machines at the end of the day, hard wired for an instinctual need to reproduce. Without children, everything falls apart. South Korea, Japan, China, Germany, US, etc etc all have declining birth rates. Fortunately for many Western countries, we’ve had immigrants to provide a buffer against the inverted age demographic pyramid crisis. South Korea, on the other hand, is looking at essentially a full economic collapse by 2060 because their birth rates have continually declined for so long and right now is at 0.76.
So tell me, when millions of old people are dying from neglect and no access to healthcare, food, etc. from lack of workers in 2070, will you be sitting there with such a mighty, holier than thou attitude? Probably, because you likely just have an edgy hot take that humans are garbage and deserve to go extinct. Such deep moral philosophy, you should teach in college.
One doesn’t have to think that all humans are trash and deserve to die in order to think that it’s not cool to bring a whole ass human into a shitty situation so that the labor pool stays stable.
Jesus Christ
Again, that’s missing that point of what I’m saying. Without kids, humans go extinct. So yes, if you say, “stop having kids altogether,” you’re saying humans should go extinct. And my other point is highlighting how idiotic it is to call that the more moral position.
Why is the purpose of me being alive to wipe boomers’ asses after they threw the world in the trash?
It’s not my problem, if they want a sustainable system where the old are supported they had their whole lives to make it happen.
Alternatively they can fucking quit their positions of power so younger people can fix their mess.
Boomers will be long, long dead by 2070, so that statement is idiotic. You’ll be the old boomer needing their ass wiped by then. And I’m not saying that children are only useful for that, I’m saying new generations of children keep civilization going altogether. But you don’t like civilization and think it all sucks and want it all to die, so your views are simple and two-dimensional, lacking any compassion or empathy to those currently alive and sparing it all for those who don’t even exist.
If you think this current system will last long enough for me to reach retirement age, then you really are privileged.
You can’t even type this shit in good faith, you have to ignore everything i said to assume these things about me.
Fuck off boomer looser