Consent, Justice, and Antinatalism
posted by Lucifer on July 25th, 2023 at 11:38PM
posted by Lucifer on July 25th, 2023 at 11:38PM
Response to: https://thewaywardaxolotl....6879885527567258
> You should care, if you claim to care about consent and justice.
And if you truly cared about consent, then you would be an Anti-natalist since there are millions of people who never consented to being born. If consent truly mattered in this world, then parents should never be authorized to create new sentient life.
> "Objective morality"
"Objective morality" is an oxymoron. Blithering Genius already explained why in his essay "What is Morality?". There is no such thing as a universal good or a universal evil.
> So ... what should people be involuntarily violently forced to do?
It is okay to have children, even if they never asked nor wanted to be born.
> It might feel liberating in the short-term, but the cost will be an inability to love and be loved, a loss of meaning and purpose, etc. We're moral animals anyways, so I'm sure this will just be a fad for you.
Nah, it's actually really empowering to have a consistent moral philosophy. Life is intrinsically selfish and violent, and I would rather be honest about myself (and everyone else) instead of pretending that I have moral high ground over everybody else.
If I'm on a deserted island with 20 other humans, but there's only enough food for 10 humans, then I will shamelessly do what I must to survive. You've said that you wouldn't kill other humans if you were struggling to survive in the Amazon Rainforest, but you claimed that BG didn't know what it was like to get mugged (even though he has), so it's fair game for me to counter-argue that you don't know what it's like to be hungry. If you're hungry enough, you'll probably kill your competitors too.
> What about chopping off a newborn's head with a rusty butter knife?
If that newborn baby would've grown up to be Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, Elliot Rodgers, or a notorious criminal, then I don't believe that it would be evil to kill the baby. We don't know if the baby is going to grow up to be "good" or "evil".
> Those people you mentioned are objectively evil.
How many times do we have to say it??? Literally nothing is objectively evil. Some examples:
- Hitler's wife and comrades did not believe that Hitler is evil. Millions of contemporary Germans and Nazis thought that Hitler was a really great man who cared for his people. Hitler was widely seen as the leader who moved Germany out of the Great Depression and rightfully sought vengeance against the Jews and the Allies who stabbed Germany in the back during the Treaty of Versailles.
- The eldest daughter of the Golden State Killer has written a lengthy letter to the Judge saying that she loves her dad and that he's the best father she ever could've had.
- Trump supporters think that Donald Trump is good. Never-Trumpers think that he's bad.
- Some people are pro-Israel. Others are pro-Palestine. And other people are neutral.
- The professor who gave me a failing grade since he didn't know how to teach science at all is subjectively evil because I think he's unfair and that he wasted my tuition money. On the other hand, his wife and kids would say that he's not evil and that he's a really "good" guy.
The bottom line is that morality depends on perspective. Blithering Genius has already explained this in far fewer words than any of your favorite authors. You could read BG's essay "What is Morality?" in less than half an hour, whereas it would take hours and hours to read all your suggested books. How about you give me the cliff-notes version of what you think I should read?
> What do you think about your natural-born British citizen ancestors who disobeyed the British Rule of Law?
I don't have any British ancestors. And even if I did, I wouldn't care if they wanted to obey or disobey British Law since it depends on both the context, the perspective, the time period, and moral values. The only reason why I obey the Law is because I don't have any strong incentives to break the Law, given the circumstances.
> You should care, if you claim to care about consent and justice.
And if you truly cared about consent, then you would be an Anti-natalist since there are millions of people who never consented to being born. If consent truly mattered in this world, then parents should never be authorized to create new sentient life.
> "Objective morality"
"Objective morality" is an oxymoron. Blithering Genius already explained why in his essay "What is Morality?". There is no such thing as a universal good or a universal evil.
> So ... what should people be involuntarily violently forced to do?
It is okay to have children, even if they never asked nor wanted to be born.
> It might feel liberating in the short-term, but the cost will be an inability to love and be loved, a loss of meaning and purpose, etc. We're moral animals anyways, so I'm sure this will just be a fad for you.
Nah, it's actually really empowering to have a consistent moral philosophy. Life is intrinsically selfish and violent, and I would rather be honest about myself (and everyone else) instead of pretending that I have moral high ground over everybody else.
If I'm on a deserted island with 20 other humans, but there's only enough food for 10 humans, then I will shamelessly do what I must to survive. You've said that you wouldn't kill other humans if you were struggling to survive in the Amazon Rainforest, but you claimed that BG didn't know what it was like to get mugged (even though he has), so it's fair game for me to counter-argue that you don't know what it's like to be hungry. If you're hungry enough, you'll probably kill your competitors too.
> What about chopping off a newborn's head with a rusty butter knife?
If that newborn baby would've grown up to be Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, Elliot Rodgers, or a notorious criminal, then I don't believe that it would be evil to kill the baby. We don't know if the baby is going to grow up to be "good" or "evil".
> Those people you mentioned are objectively evil.
How many times do we have to say it??? Literally nothing is objectively evil. Some examples:
- Hitler's wife and comrades did not believe that Hitler is evil. Millions of contemporary Germans and Nazis thought that Hitler was a really great man who cared for his people. Hitler was widely seen as the leader who moved Germany out of the Great Depression and rightfully sought vengeance against the Jews and the Allies who stabbed Germany in the back during the Treaty of Versailles.
- The eldest daughter of the Golden State Killer has written a lengthy letter to the Judge saying that she loves her dad and that he's the best father she ever could've had.
- Trump supporters think that Donald Trump is good. Never-Trumpers think that he's bad.
- Some people are pro-Israel. Others are pro-Palestine. And other people are neutral.
- The professor who gave me a failing grade since he didn't know how to teach science at all is subjectively evil because I think he's unfair and that he wasted my tuition money. On the other hand, his wife and kids would say that he's not evil and that he's a really "good" guy.
The bottom line is that morality depends on perspective. Blithering Genius has already explained this in far fewer words than any of your favorite authors. You could read BG's essay "What is Morality?" in less than half an hour, whereas it would take hours and hours to read all your suggested books. How about you give me the cliff-notes version of what you think I should read?
> What do you think about your natural-born British citizen ancestors who disobeyed the British Rule of Law?
I don't have any British ancestors. And even if I did, I wouldn't care if they wanted to obey or disobey British Law since it depends on both the context, the perspective, the time period, and moral values. The only reason why I obey the Law is because I don't have any strong incentives to break the Law, given the circumstances.
|
posted by Dumb nigger on August 18th, 2023 at 2:33PM
"I don't have any strong incentives to break the Law, given the circumstances."
Which law? I’m gonna insert my lightsaber in your ass so you can cum like the faggot you are and can finally think straight. |
|
posted by Dumb nigger on August 18th, 2023 at 2:27PM
Hitler and Trump are decent people (Trump being less decent since he didn’t free Ross or Assange).
Cucks like you have gotten too comfortable and used to people feeding you superior semen and pretending that you’re worthy to be part of society. The norm today is fat fucks with coloured hair whose genders you can’t tell. You’re lucky you’re alive in this day and age, because your gay ass would’ve been terminated by the Führer. The Nazis were manly and cool and courageous, smarter and better looking than you tranny ass cucks who hide behind the state(whatever the state believes in, you pretend to believe in). This kind of degeneracy should be crushed and it will be. It’s not for no reason that you don’t have a gf and that no woman will procreate with you. All the LGBT poison is gonna die and so will you lol. |
