I’m suggesting that having a kid is a totally normal choice, one that humans have made in horrible situations far more dire than living in todays imperial core or even facing the future of our current world, and in many of those situations both parent and child were happy to come out of it alive.
If you think it’s so dire that no one should be procreating then why is it not dire enough for us to perform euthanasia on each other? Like this is a dumb conversation that’s apocalyptic, and I am sorry that’s just not what’s going to happen.
If you really think the world will get so bleak, then what of recent historical times.
Every kid born in the eastern europe from 1900-1945 should not have been born? Every child in Vietnam from 1930-1975? Are we calling those parents evil?
This entire debate is not leftist. Claiming having children is morally wrong is lib virtue signaling.
"People in the Congo should not have kids because their kids are going to slave away mining cobalt. It's the parents' fault that their kids have to do back-breaking labor when the parents could just choose to not have kids." - Average anti-natalist
also it's piss easy to point at discussion about whether it's good or bad for someone to make some choice and say "well, you haven't considered that some people DON'T HAVE THAT CHOICE, ableistly" like that has any bearing on the conversation at all good god
no, you can't look at the history of the struggle for womens' liberation and say having kids was "a choice" for people who could become pregnant. especially not in "horrible situations".
so you're saying that the ultimate goal of the liberation of women and of people in general is species-suicide? it's directly self-contradictory. you can't argue for women's rights on the basis of their humanity unless you value humanity in itself.
I’m suggesting that having a kid is a totally normal choice, one that humans have made in horrible situations far more dire than living in todays imperial core or even facing the future of our current world, and in many of those situations both parent and child were happy to come out of it alive.
If you think it’s so dire that no one should be procreating then why is it not dire enough for us to perform euthanasia on each other? Like this is a dumb conversation that’s apocalyptic, and I am sorry that’s just not what’s going to happen.
If you really think the world will get so bleak, then what of recent historical times. Every kid born in the eastern europe from 1900-1945 should not have been born? Every child in Vietnam from 1930-1975? Are we calling those parents evil?
This entire debate is not leftist. Claiming having children is morally wrong is lib virtue signaling.
"People in the Congo should not have kids because their kids are going to slave away mining cobalt. It's the parents' fault that their kids have to do back-breaking labor when the parents could just choose to not have kids." - Average anti-natalist
deleted by creator
I’m replying to a person who says we should all not have kids and have sex parties until the world ends.
I’m saying that the above opinion is a dumb, and having a family doesn’t make a human immoral, nothing more or less.
that was literally the alternative proposed in RedMantis' comment
also it's piss easy to point at discussion about whether it's good or bad for someone to make some choice and say "well, you haven't considered that some people DON'T HAVE THAT CHOICE, ableistly" like that has any bearing on the conversation at all good god
deleted by creator
I'm not in your family. I'm not your mom or dad or whoever you're mad at. This isn't my problem.
oh that it was always a choice and bold of you to think that people had a choice in those situations.
you're just imagining arguments to get mad about at this point
no, you can't look at the history of the struggle for womens' liberation and say having kids was "a choice" for people who could become pregnant. especially not in "horrible situations".
so you're saying that the ultimate goal of the liberation of women and of people in general is species-suicide? it's directly self-contradictory. you can't argue for women's rights on the basis of their humanity unless you value humanity in itself.