@Smartskull0

5 months ago

Antinatalism is the ethical position that views the birth of sentient beings as morally wrong. The justifications are: harm/suffering prevention, the questionable nature of gambling with another life, & the impossibility of consent to be born. - No one has the moral right to inflict serious, preventable harms upon others without their consent. Existence brings preventable, guaranteed harm & is imposed without consent. Because a child cannot consent to being born, the default should be to assume that consent doesn’t exist and that no action should be taken on the child’s behalf. Just like how it’s not okay to r@pe an unconscious person just because they can’t consent to or refuse to participate in the act. - Everyone experiences at least some suffering, and some people experience disproportionately more suffering than others. Creating a life is inherently unfair & inconsiderate. - Everyone has the rights to eternal peace & the freedom from all harm, both of which can only result from never coming into existence. Therefore, every human being has the right to NOT be born so long as they can’t waive their rights by providing informed consent to being born. Procreation is the biggest violation of a being’s autonomy there is. - An opinion being “negative” doesn’t make it untrue. On the contrary, it’s realistic as suffering is inevitable, & it’s impossible for someone to consent to life. - Procreation is simply not anyone’s risk to take because they won’t be the ones suffering any negative consequences of their decision to procreate—their children will. - By procreating, you are intentionally harming your “loved ones” for your own selfish desires to attain a sense of control, purpose, fulfillment, pride, achievement, or superior social status. - There’s no reason to create a child that’s for the child’s sake. For a potential child, birth doesn’t solve any problem that it doesn’t first create. All positives in life, such as love, happiness, or good food are based on fulfilling needs, which get created by birth. Creating a life is creating a host of needs for no need. - A nonexistent “person” cannot miss out on anything good since they don’t exist & the nonexistent have no needs or desires, including the desire for life itself or any of its pleasures. - For the betterment of humans, the environment, & other sentient beings, humans need to go extinct. No one is being harmed by the extinction of humans since no one will exist to experience said harm. Who will care that humanity is ending if no one is around to care? - On the point directly above: Just because an outcome may be unwanted doesn't mean that the arguments are wrong. Even if you believe extinction is inherently bad, this does not justify the undeniable truth that reproduction violates the child’s consent to being born. This is an appeal to consequences, a logical fallacy. - Just because procreation is natural & societally accepted doesn’t mean it’s morally good. Diseases, natural disasters, & famine are all natural too, but that doesn’t mean they’re good. This is an appeal to nature, a logical fallacy. Slavery has been around for over 13,000 years. That doesn’t make it moral or ethical. - None of the nonexistent can wish to be born, but plenty of the living wish they had never existed.

|