0 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Is there any actual argument against antinatalism
No, I'm not contracting myself. If it is wrong to make a decision for a non-existent person, you're making a decision for a non-existent person whether you decide to have children or not.
Ok, but it's not wrong to make the decision for them because they're non-existent, it's wrong because they're non-existent *and because* the consequence of the decision will cause them to exist and experience guaranteed but unknown suffering as a result.
Anti-natalists are free to draw whatever lines for themselves, but they insist on drawing those lines for everyone else. I'm not trying to claim that anti-natalists are wrong to not have children, but I do claim that they are wrong in insisting that it is wrong to have children.
"I'm not trying to claim that advocates against corporal punishment are wrong to not beat their children, but I do claim that they are wrong in insisting that it is wrong to beat children." You're engaging in a fallacious framing of the issue where things you already agree with are acceptable to tout as moral values and condemn people who don't adhere to them, while things you don't agree with must be relegated to personal choice and advocates thereof are not allowed to condemn others for failing to adhere to them. This is and has always been the refrain of conservatives and is worth little consideration. Your argument is nothing more than a recreation of the prevailing social views in the environment you occupy.
Comment by wolacouska at 15/07/2024 at 19:51 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
And you are doing the reverse. If not by society, then by what authority are you determining what is moral and what is not?