A pro-choice medical student witnesses an abortion

DAS B00T x2 · April 22, 2015, 06:58:42 PM

Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on April 22, 2015, 06:49:06 PM

Oh my God he's back.

gOD's not real, stop shitting up this thread.

Verbatim · April 22, 2015, 07:00:27 PM

Quote from: the boat ECKS two on April 22, 2015, 06:58:42 PM

Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on April 22, 2015, 06:49:06 PM
Oh my God he's back.
gOD's not real, stop shitting up this thread.

happy birthday m8

DAS B00T x2 · April 22, 2015, 07:06:31 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 22, 2015, 07:00:27 PM

Quote from: the boat ECKS two on April 22, 2015, 06:58:42 PM
Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on April 22, 2015, 06:49:06 PM
Oh my God he's back.
gOD's not real, stop shitting up this thread.
happy birthday m8

thanks dude.

Verbatim · April 22, 2015, 07:13:42 PM

Quote from: Sandtrap on April 20, 2015, 06:01:26 PM

Because simply looking at the hardship and stopping, saying, "Fuck this I quit" is against our nature.

That isn't the anti-natalist statement, really. The statement being made is not surrender, but taking responsibility. It is not the coward's decision to "give up"--it is the ethical and logical statement of, "Life is an imposition, and we have no right to impose it on future generations." It's definitely not about surrender. Arguments can be made to say that evolution is a fundamentally broken game that breeds nothing but consuming machines to torture and kill and eat other consuming machines, simply to say, "I win" at the end. I disagree with your assessment that it would all be worth it in the end, but that's sort of a given.

Quote

We're here. So why don't we be stubborn and do our absolute best to make things the best?

That's all well and good, but I'm not talking about the people who are here. We can make life better for ourselves without having children. That's just a given. What I'm concerned about is bringing future people here, for no reason other than, "It's in our nature to reproduce."

Quote

It would be like... a selfish and spoiled child throwing away a gift he got from his parents without realizing how much he had, right there in his hands.

See, I knew you were going to use some sort of "life is a gift" metaphor.

Like I said earlier--it doesn't function as a metaphor, because life is the scummiest gift anyone could possibly ever give.

Quote

That's about the best justification I can try to sum up. If you want a real world example Verb, not to get all weepy and shit.

But I'm on fucking Chemo. You got one of my previous messages. If I said "Fuck it I quit." Then I'd be a selfish for abusing and ignoring what I still have.

And that's it, then.

I respect your decision to push on.

Verbatim · April 22, 2015, 07:30:46 PM

Quote from: Sandtrap on April 20, 2015, 07:26:31 PM

Wouldn't you agree that because those soldiers did what they did in WWII, that we're in a better way now? They did a lot of terrible things. Both sides did. But the conflict, eventually ended. It stopped.

Yeah. I would argue that the voluntary human extinction movement is just that, however. We fight wars to end them.

Okay, that's not true at all.

But let's pretend it was. Anti-natalism is another war, essentially. It's a war against the human condition--a war to end all wars. And you know that, that's what this whole discussion has basically been about. Ending all conflict. If there are no sentient beings to suffer, there are no sentient beings to be responsible for. No sentient beings to be accountable for.

Quote

So if we or anything else stands a chance to reach an end to conflict, or in your case, an end to misery, should they not try their absolute hardes to get there? To succeed?

Am I not?

This idea that anti-natalism is about being a quitter is simply a misunderstanding. An understandable one, but one nonetheless.

Verbatim · April 22, 2015, 07:32:41 PM

I'm not ignoring the rest of your post. I just feel like it's predicated mostly under the notion that anti-natalism is a defeatist philosophy, and that's what I'm arguing against right now.

Verbatim · April 22, 2015, 07:40:46 PM

Quote from: Ushan on April 21, 2015, 01:46:04 AM

First off, I honestly don't feel that life is imposed on me.

I mean, it is, just by definition.

Quote

Perhaps yes, my initial conception wasn't formed of my own volition, but that occurred before I had a will of my own.

Well, then I'd just make the argument that your will was imposed upon you. If sentience wasn't a thing, procreation wouldn't really be a problem, in my opinion.

Quote

But now that I am capable of rational thought, I have opted to continue my existence. If I truly had no wish to continue living, I could literally walk down stairs, take a knife from the kitchen, go back upstairs and draw the knife vertically down my wrists and be dead long before anyone would even know about it. Secondly, if it's good enough for me, why question it?

Because the universe doesn't revolve around you.

I mean, that's literally the answer to that question. You like your life? You're okay with existing? Fine.
That doesn't give you the right to impose it on others, though.

Quote

What need is there for a grand purpose? If you enjoy life, live it, if you don't, you're free to off yourself, for the most part.

No, you're not. Euthanasia is illegal in most countries. Maybe I want to make sure my death is

1. painless
2. peaceful
3. quiet
4. organized
5. humane
6. successful

etc. etc. etc.

Maybe driving a kitchen knife down my wrist doesn't seem like a very pleasant way to go.

And either way, it doesn't solve the problem of procreation. Suicide does not undo your birth, which is the root of the problem. Instead of having people painfully commit suicide if they don't want to be here, why not make the rational decision to not impose life on people in the first place?

Oh, and give us the legal precedent to administer euthanasia. That too.

Sandtrap · April 22, 2015, 10:03:44 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 22, 2015, 07:32:41 PM

I'm not ignoring the rest of your post. I just feel like it's predicated mostly under the notion that anti-natalism is a defeatist philosophy, and that's what I'm arguing against right now.

I never particularily said defeatist and didn't neccessarily imply that. Because frankly, if we look at the end results of our respective stances, they embody the two existing fundaments of the universe. Creation and Destruction. They're just two sides of a same coin.

On one hand, everybody is dead, which to be fair would be just as hard to accomplish as its opposing counterpart.
On the other hand, technology in conjunction with evolution has made it so that there are no more torubles.

Now. Lets say for a second here, that we've evolved so far down the line that we have no worries, no issues, no misery. Let's say we can even outsmart the pain of death.

What if somebody doesn't neccesseraily feel like hanging around for eternity? Then by rights, there should be the option to choose. Choose, to die.

So, therefore, let's say that life keeps on imposing itself, which, on thinking about it, is rather an oxymoron because you can't impose anything upon something that's not alive and doesn't exist yet.

But anyway. Would it not equalize things if everybody had said option of choosing to make themselves deceased? Born or otherwise?

And, last note. The parents giving a kid a present thing.

I wasn't equating it to being pretty. I know life isn't pretty Verb. I've been smacked around enough to know that it has ugly sides too. You're preaching to the quoir here.

But the point I was trying to make, is the ignoring of something. Focusing solely on the negative aspect. Because, even though life isn't cheerful all the time, it is cheerful when you find such aspects.

When you have so much ability in your hands to do something, when you have the ability to create and enjoy things, it seems like not thinking clearly if you'd rather a black void of nothing over what you can do here.

And, like I said. That little neice of mine. If she was not part of the equation of things I'd've been dead a long time ago. Like it or no Verb, kids change things for people. And of course, not all people. Some people make blatently terrible parents who only help to make things more difficult for their kid(s).

And, real last note. I'd wager, yes, anti nationalism is rather defeatest in an aspect. Because it imposes death. It imposes non existence. If life can supposedly impose itself upon nothingness that doesn't exist yet, because in reality, if we're assuming there is nothing beyond that, then life is actually imposing upon nothing. It's only after you're born that you're actually imposed to misery.

And while you could say, that letting everybody die off of old age isn't imposing shit since it would happen naturally in itself, it is making a decision for the as of yet unborn.

If life can supposedly infringe on the unborn by making them alive, then by rights, death can infringe upon the unborn by denying them any chance at all.

So, to that I say, let's do our best to remove misery shall we? In a constructive way.

Sandtrap · April 23, 2015, 12:58:02 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 22, 2015, 07:32:41 PM

I'm not ignoring the rest of your post. I just feel like it's predicated mostly under the notion that anti-natalism is a defeatist philosophy, and that's what I'm arguing against right now.

Again, more thinking.As best I can understand and remember at the moment, anti-nationalism isn't fond of making a decision that imposes life upon somebody and therefore subjects them to exposure to misery.

And, now this requires some thought. Because really, by nurturing life, you aren't imposing on it and life isn't imposing on it. Because how the fuck can life even impose itself on anybody unless they're born?

This is difficult for me to say correctly. They aren't born. They don't exist. They're nothing. "They," aren't even they.

So how can life impose itself, on anybody who isn't born when technically they don't even exist yet? It's almost as if its a light switch. Boom you don't exist, boom you do.

And, now that I think about it, if anti-nationalists don't believe that life should be imposed, then what jurisdiction gives them the authority to deem and impose death? Or, in this case, not being born?

If anything, rather than focus on life itself, why not narrow the view down to merely misery?

Maybe I'm missing something here. But you've a semblance of the point I'm trying to make, no?

Sandtrap · April 23, 2015, 01:18:54 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 22, 2015, 07:32:41 PM

I'm not ignoring the rest of your post. I just feel like it's predicated mostly under the notion that anti-natalism is a defeatist philosophy, and that's what I'm arguing against right now.

And one, last thing. One very last thing here. If you're going to be an anti-nationalist, then you do it right. That means, EVERY SINGLE LIVING THING is made sterile.

I want you to imagine that scale. I want you to imagine, how on such a scale, of that size, how durable life is. How utterly indominatble it is.

If our planet was smashed into by an asteroid and 95% of life was killed, the shit at the very bottom of the oceans would survive. If our planet was chucked out of its orbit and it froze solid, life at the bottom of the oceans would survive.

I argue this because anything alive feels pain. Anything alive is subject to decay, and death.

And second. There has to be other sapient life out there. With how durable and adaptable lifeforms can be, with the huge, raw numbers and percentages on a universal scale, it is physically impossible for us to not be singularly unique.

So therefore, I ask this. If your entire species offed itself by not breeding, then what the fuck happens to all the others? They go about their business.

Which therefore means your species commited suicide while ignoring all the others out there.

As such, if anti-nationalism doesn't want every single thing sterilized until life dies out, then it's an inherently selfish movement. A human centered, point of view that only includes human beings in the movement would be considered selfish.

Just, even considering the numbers here Verb, an Anti-nationalist scenario where all life is sterilized, has even less chances of occurring even to just our planet alone over human beings augmenting and evolving themselves artificially to a point where misery doesn't exist.

As such, I would say it here and now, that at its core, anti-nationalism is founded on a self defeating purpose.

Ever try to move something too heavy for you that you know you couldn't possibly move? That's it, right there.

And if you're going to argue that we don't include every lifeform that is capable of feeling disease or pain or any of that fun stuff, then the movement is inherently human centered, and therefore blind and selfish.

And fuck selfish people, Verb.

Mr. Psychologist · April 23, 2015, 08:09:01 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 22, 2015, 06:41:35 PM

Quote from: Mr Psychologist on April 20, 2015, 05:02:44 PM
A logical statement by tenuous means, sure.
You've yet to demonstrate how it is tenuous. Just like literally everyone I've ever discussed this subject with.

"Humans need to exist because _________________."

Fill in the blank.

Because we haven't created a successor race yet, evolution is about achieving greater and greater forms so for the human race - one of the most promising results of evolution so far, you know with sentience and all that - to wipe itself out without at least leaving a positive legacy in the universe is selfish to the other beings that live in it. Hell just Earth as an example, what kind of species rapes the bejeesus out of the planet and then decides to wipe itself out without cleaning up it's mess.

I've said for a while now, if humanity can create a race of sentient machines to look after planets in a far better manner than we do then we can all die out and I wouldn't really care. Completing that goal isn't likely to happen anytime soon, so prematurely encouraging extinction is wrong.

Quote

Quote
Make whatever analogies you please but choosing absurd ones or incomparable ones doesn't help your argument as much as you think it does.
The analogy was neither absurd, nor was it incomparable. They were perfectly equatable.

In your mind, sure.

Quote

Quote
That fact that you think that's what I'm getting at is rather amusing, my point was that you drew a silly analogy when a more suitable one would have sufficed instead of something that's bordering on an appeal to emotions.
>a more suitable one

Like what. What better example could I have possibly given other than slavery. One of the biggest progressive movements in history compared with an even more ambitious progressive movement (the voluntary extinction of the human race). There is nothing quite like a movement like that, so I went with the closest possible thing. But apparently you have more suitable examples.

Alright that's actually a fair enough point, conceded.

Quote

Quote
No fucking shit, talk about preaching to the choir there. People who make the decision to end their lives are either A) Mentally Ill or B) Have a set of life circumstances that causes them to make said decision, either to escape shame or debt or whatever myriad cause it can be.
Or because they don't want to live anymore. You forgot that really basic part that no one else would have ever missed.

Which falls under mental illness.

Quote

Quote
My point there was that no person of sound mind is going to want to kill themselves simply because they hate the fact that they were born, if they do then there is something wrong with their psychology and they need treatment.
Why? Why must you force people to continue living if they don't want to?

Because it is immoral to let someone die when they can be treated, forcing people to continue living is exactly what A&E do for attempted suicides or what sectioning does to the severely disturbed who frequently make attempts on their own life. A treatable mental illness causes them to wish to die/kill themselves, so just standing idly by and letting people jump/overdose/slice down the road rather than getting them the therapy that treats that mindset is wrong.

Quote

Quote
People who wish to end their lives must be of a sound mind and not afflicted with delusions or mental illness.
Again, why? Who cares?

Someone who has a mental illness is not in the right state of mind to be making decisions over their own mortality, this is a long established principle and you can see it in effect with current euthanasia laws. People are not allowed to kill themselves/be euthanised if their wish to be euthanised is attributable to a damaged mindset caused by a mental illness.

The illness can be treated and then the wish to die has disappeared/receded, mental illness is not a terminal disease and people should not be dying because of it.

The families of the patient care, their friends and wider social circles. Their doctors and shrinks care too, letting someone kill themselves because you didn't give them the necessary treatment is one of the worst possible failings of a medical professional.

Quote

Quote
Hating the idea that they were born without consent isn't sufficient grounds to end your life unless they have another affliction that is tainting their mind.
Totalitarian. Fascist.

Thank you.

Quote

No, if I want to die, it shouldn't matter what my circumstances are. They're my business. If someone doesn't like it, tough. It's my life. I didn't choose to be born, and it's completely rational for someone to be upset about that. So if they want to kill themselves, give them the legal precedent to do so.

Wrong, it does matter. It's the responsibility of MHC workers to make sure that people afflicted with something like depression don't simply kill themselves, the same as it is the responsibility of a doctor to make sure a patient with traumatic injuries doesn't bleed out infront of them.

Quote

By the way, you look extremely disingenuous when you say stuff like this when just earlier, you were saying shit like, "If you want to kill yourself, go right ahead." But when it comes to giving people a fair chance to do that legally, you're against it. Hypocrite. Liar.

Twisting my words, nice.

Quote

Imposing something that can be taken away easily is hardly that great of an imposition, if someone grows up to find themselves wishing they were never born and that said thoughts aren't simply the result of mental illness then they can always find a way to exit this plane of existence.

Quote

aren't simply the result of mental illness

Which in my book covers 99.99% of people with that sort of mindset, leaving room for the abnormals as always but people who want to die are either mentally ill or are trying to escape something like shame/restoring their honour etc. Someone who wishes they were never born and genuinely wants to die is mentally ill.

Quote

Quote
Nice to see your reading comprehension goes down as your blood pressure goes up. To spell it out, read the above again.
I did.

Nothing changed.

It's not a matter of my reading comprehension. It's a matter of you being inarticulate.

At times, sure. I'm not a perfect linguistic genius, but I'd say it's better than spamming cUNT whenever you run into an argument.

Quote

Quote
Oh, and I'd just like to thank you, Sandtrap, for not only having the patience to take a discussion like this seriously, but for presenting a wonderful example of how to converse with me. Not through slander or insults, but through rational insight. Thank you for that.

The irony is delicious

There is nothing ironic about it.

You insulted me, so I insulted you back. That's how it works.
Sandtrap did not ever insult me, so I never insulted him.[/quote]

lol

Quote

Quote
You act like there is something I need to get over here
There very much is.

Like what exactly?

Quote

Again with the platinum mad, this is really rather tiresome.

I meant every last thing that I said.
So you were actually butthurt over this? Nice.

Quote

Quote
Once again getting too wound up over some simple questions, the purpose isn't to determine whether you believe what you spout which you clearly do, but to follow through with the logic of whether you question your own beliefs, which thankfully you claim to do so.
I don't question my beliefs. I question other people about my beliefs. Again, I wouldn't subscribe to a philosophy that I didn't personally feel was logically sound. Even a little bit. The instant it starts seeming like bullshit, the instant I drop it from my mind, or at least, make some subtle alteration/variation of it. And thus far, no people have convinced me that having children isn't wrong. Zero.

I wonder why that is then, because I've seen plenty of people present sound arguments to you in the past and they all got the same dismissals. It doesn't convince you so you don't accept it as valid, that doesn't mean it's invalid at all just that you perceive it as such.

Quote

Quote
Anyway, good lord you get so emotional over a simple discussion on a forum.
The question of whether or not we should continue to exist is kinda the most important question EVER. You can't afford to be wrong. And if you are wrong, you should be treated harshly.

And with people who live in the real world, existential angst tends to rank pretty low on their list of priorities. I'm pretty sure people can afford to be wrong over that, because when it's compared to things like securing a future for their families or their own success in life people will not really give a shit about whether their own existence is morally justifiable or if having children and grandchildren is an affront to one particular type of philosophy.

Quote

Quote
Once more for highlighting it
Hypocrisy stage 1
Quote from: Verbatim on April 20, 2015, 01:37:58 PM
Quote from: Mr Psychologist on April 20, 2015, 11:43:19 AM
by the way, way to blame me for bringing the subject up when it actually wasn't me at all

i stated my opinion on the subject, which indeed was rooted in my philosophy, because why the fuck wouldn't it be
and then people started asking me questions about it

so i answered them
which sort of requires that i bring up anti-natalism

you're basically telling me that i should have never stated my opinion in this thread
to which i say, go fuck yourself, you totalitarian piece of shit
Hypocrisy stage 2
Quote from: Verbatim on April 20, 2015, 02:45:40 PM
Oh, and I'd just like to thank you, Sandtrap, for not only having the patience to take a discussion like this seriously, but for presenting a wonderful example of how to converse with me. Not through slander or insults, but through rational insight. Thank you for that.
Zero hypocrisy.

lol, sure.

Quote

Quote
My original query with you was regarding your apparently dour view of the lives of the disabled to which you of course started on about anti-natalism, hence this little chitchat.
Yeah, because recognizing that having a disability would suck is such a dour outlook.

Except that's not what you said.

Quote

20% people in the US have some type of disability. That's one out of every five people.
And you think it's okay to take that risk and impose that on somebody.

That sort of thinking is exactly what leads people to abort disabled children. Taking the 'risk' of a child coming out with some sort of handicap is a disgusting way to look at it. I get that you'd love to see all children every aborted, or never even conceived, but why highlight the disabled to make your point? Justifying your ideology by using the infirm as a reason not to 'risk' having children is just downright scummy.

Jester · April 23, 2015, 03:24:00 PM

He shouldn't have let it change his stance.

A salt rifle · April 23, 2015, 03:58:23 PM

Quote from: Sandtrap on April 23, 2015, 01:18:54 AM

-snip-

*anti-natalist

<_<

Though that's an interesting point of view. But this question is itching me....

Do you care if your hear about some random dude in Russia, in Japan, in Australia or anywhere on the world commiting suicide? Do you care about every person's life ending on a global scale?

If so... I hope you won't get crushed under this emotional stress.

If not; then why should another species care about the end of a completely different species they never had any contact and relationship with at all? Asumming you as member of your own species didn't even care about the death of another member of your own species.

Wouldn't they care more about the survival and well-being of their own species and immediate neighbors or even acknowledge the decision of this particular species that eradicated itself?

Spoiler

Well, I hope you enter this thread once more to see my question. If not: I guess that this is an open question then.

Sandtrap · April 23, 2015, 09:16:40 PM

Quote from: Atticus on April 23, 2015, 03:58:23 PM

Quote from: Sandtrap on April 23, 2015, 01:18:54 AM
-snip-
*anti-natalist

<_<

Though that's an interesting point of view. But this question is itching me....

Do you care if your hear about some random dude in Russia, in Japan, in Australia or anywhere on the world commiting suicide? Do you care about every person's life ending on a global scale?

If so... I hope you won't get crushed under this emotional stress.

If not; then why should another species care about the end of a completely different species they never had any contact and relationship with at all? Asumming you as member of your own species didn't even care about the death of another member of your own species.

Wouldn't they care more about the survival and well-being of their own species and immediate neighbors or even acknowledge the decision of this particular species that eradicated itself?
Spoiler
Well, I hope you enter this thread once more to see my question. If not: I guess that this is an open question then.

I can only ever show up here in the evenings for short bits. But yes, I check on it. It's an interesting conversation and a concept that makes me ask questions out of curiousity. And, yes. Anti-natalist. Memory problems right now. Sue me.

Anywho. Here's the thing. While no, it is hard to find empathy for somebody you don't know, or have never seen, across the world, and it's a biological fact that a human being's upper limit and capacity to care about people wavers and burns out past 100 in their personal lives, I was thinking of this on a sort of personal level.

I know myself. I know I'm compassionate, regardless of who, or what, I encounter. I don't step on bugs after I see them, on purpose. I move them out of the way so somebody else won't step on them.

So, I was thinking, if an anti-natalist is so opposed to misery, then why focus on being so self centered?

Because we, as living organisims, are not the only things that feel pain, or stress, or succumb to disease. To me it seems woefully self centered, and in fact, yet again, a glaring flaw in human stupidty shining through.

It's always about us.

Say what you will of survival instincts and built in natural functions and such, but I believe that with intelligence, there should come greater understanding, greater capacity for empathy, and a conscious choice to be aware of one's surroundings and be respectful of them.

Even going so far as, to help them.

Now, even if we exclude other life forms beyond our planet. It's inherently impossible to even consider being capable of wiping out every last thing on this planet save for throwing the entire planet into the sun. And, even more so.

It's against human nature.

There has never been a point in our history of 400,000 years, were we as a species, were totally unified in a singular goal. There has always been opposing sides, there has always been, resistance.

The concept of anti-natalism is founded on two key things.

The idea that every human would come to the logical choice and accept it, when we can safely say that's a no no.

And it plays on human negative selfishness. Now, I would say no doubt that me and Verb are parallels, save for us sitting on opposite sides of the scales in regards to our beliefs respectively.

I'm for the progression of people. Advancement. Moving past our simple primal and basic instincts, moving beyond our self desctructive and in general, destructive influence. Seeing the world around us, and maybe, reaching a point were we can even alter things beyond ourselves.

Essentially, make everything really fucking peachy.

Now, this is grounded somewhat because we invent things. We make tools to help us beyond our limits. And we're just now getting into prosthetics and robotics. In a way, while my stance still plays on human nature and selfishness, when you ask a guy "Hey, if we inject you with this it will permanently double all of your natural abilities," most people will accept.

And through that, there's a chance that people can progress to something better. Now, on paper, a lot like communisim, Verb's belief makes a shade of sense. If you've been following, Verb's belief is just the opposite side of a coin in regards to misery. It's, one way of dealing with the removal of it.

But in reality, the more I think about it, the movement, the idea, and the mindset, seems truly self defeatest.

It has no traction, nor will it ever. And if it did, there would always be human beings who rejected.

And if, by a slim miracle, the movement succeeded?

Then the so called horrid imposing prison of life would continue oppressing countless others. In fact, given enough time, another sentient species might even replace us on our planet.

Which would render every effort we had ever made, null, void, and pointless. Life would continue while we happily offed ourselves with a smug, self centered grin and a fuck you to everybody else.

To me, you couldn't get much more self defeatest than that.

Respectively, Verb, since you'll likely read this, it honestly seems more like a pleasing, daydream fantasy over a tangible reality. And I think, for now, my questions and curiousity for your particular aspect of life are now answered.

Pleasure talking, and a pleasure thinking, as always.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 24, 2015, 10:29:47 AM

Tl;dr sadists have the most happy lives in existence

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 24, 2015, 10:34:15 AM

Also being so horrified by the abortion that you become pro-life entails one of two things:

1) You are weak minded and easily persuaded to change your views. In which case, I'd argue his pro-choice view was tenuous at best.

2) He didn't know how an abortion happens, in which case he didn't even research the topic before picking a side. So he's intentionally ignorant of his own views, and is an idiot.

Cindy · April 24, 2015, 10:37:09 AM

How did I know this would turn into an argument on Furby's weird anti-birth standpoint thing

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 24, 2015, 10:40:10 AM

Quote from: Saerveyn on April 24, 2015, 10:37:09 AM

How did I know this would turn into an argument on Furby's weird anti-birth standpoint thing

It's tangentially related, so of course it will. It's like Godwin's Law, but anti-natalism instead of Hitler and Nazis.

Verbatim · April 24, 2015, 10:41:47 AM

i'll respond to psy later

finals week next week and all

challengerX · April 24, 2015, 12:42:45 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Verbatim · April 24, 2015, 12:47:47 PM

the only thing that psy raped is logic

and the english language

Mr. Psychologist · April 24, 2015, 12:47:57 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 24, 2015, 10:41:47 AM

i'll respond to psy later

finals week next week and all

That's fine really, I've got the same shit coming up. Take your time.

^lol

Not Comms Officer · April 24, 2015, 03:40:09 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 24, 2015, 10:41:47 AM

i'll respond to psy later

finals week next week and all

>pls memespond

🂿 · April 24, 2015, 09:31:32 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 19, 2015, 08:44:00 PM

what a pussy

Mattie G Indahouse · April 24, 2015, 09:36:16 PM

Quote from: the boat ECKS two on April 22, 2015, 06:58:42 PM

Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on April 22, 2015, 06:49:06 PM
Oh my God he's back.
gOD's not real, stop shitting up this thread.

Well gOD's not dead according to that movie.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 24, 2015, 09:55:22 PM

Quote from: BerzerkCommando on April 24, 2015, 09:36:16 PM

Quote from: the boat ECKS two on April 22, 2015, 06:58:42 PM
Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on April 22, 2015, 06:49:06 PM
Oh my God he's back.
gOD's not real, stop shitting up this thread.
Well gOD's not dead according to that movie.

Next you're going to tell me that Bambi wasn't based on true events.

Verbatim · April 28, 2015, 09:12:29 AM

Quote from: Mr Psychologist on April 23, 2015, 08:09:01 AM

Because we haven't created a successor race yet, evolution is about achieving greater and greater forms so for the human race - one of the most promising results of evolution so far, you know with sentience and all that - to wipe itself out without at least leaving a positive legacy in the universe is selfish to the other beings that live in it.

And you accuse me of "mental gymnastics"... Jesus Christ. How could it possibly be selfish to run out the human race voluntarily? What's selfish is to impose life for your bizarre (and futile) ideal of "creating the ultimate race". Because we're going to fail.

Quote

Hell just Earth as an example, what kind of species rapes the bejeesus out of the planet and then decides to wipe itself out without cleaning up it's mess.

That's my argument, though. Anti-natalism is the mop that will clean up the final mess on planet Earth. Really, I'm also an efilist--I don't just think humans should go extinct. I think all life should go extinct. I'm not here to tell you how we could do that--I'm just trying to spread the idea and let people know that it's a good idea. If all life goes extinct, it doesn't matter what we leave behind. There's no one left to care.

Quote

I've said for a while now, if humanity can create a race of sentient machines to look after planets in a far better manner than we do then we can all die out and I wouldn't really care. Completing that goal isn't likely to happen anytime soon, so prematurely encouraging extinction is wrong.

It's not likely to happen any time ever.

Quote

Quote
Or because they don't want to live anymore. You forgot that really basic part that no one else would have ever missed.
Which falls under mental illness.

According to...?

Whoever it is, they're wrong. And even if they're right, who cares?

Quote

M.
Quote
Why? Why must you force people to continue living if they don't want to?
Because it is immoral to let someone die when they can be treated, forcing people to continue living is exactly what A&E do for attempted suicides or what sectioning does to the severely disturbed who frequently make attempts on their own life. A treatable mental illness causes them to wish to die/kill themselves, so just standing idly by and letting people jump/overdose/slice down the road rather than getting them the therapy that treats that mindset is wrong.

Why? You just restated your shitty point. If someone wants to die, why is it wrong to let them die? Because you think living is so much cooler? Why should they give a fuck about what you think?

Quote

Someone who has a mental illness is not in the right state of mind to be making decisions over their own mortality,

Who.

Cares.

Why does that matter.

Quote

The illness can be treated and then the wish to die has disappeared/receded, mental illness is not a terminal disease and people should not be dying because of it.

You can make these bogus arguments (you're pretending as though the only people who want to die are ones who are already severely ill, which is false), but it has nothing to do with our rights. Regardless of these shitty emotional appeals you're making, you should still have the right to kill yourself.

Quote

The families of the patient care, their friends and wider social circles. Their doctors and shrinks care too, letting someone kill themselves because you didn't give them the necessary treatment is one of the worst possible failings of a medical professional.

Unless they want to die. In which case, it's completely justified. If someone is suffering, and they don't want to live anymore, end it.

Quote

Thank you.

And you wonder why I lash out and get fucking pissed off at you.

What you're saying is evil.

E-V-I-L

Quote

Wrong, it does matter. It's the responsibility of MHC workers to make sure that people afflicted with something like depression don't simply kill themselves

Then they have an evil responsibility.

Quote

Which in my book covers 99.99% of people with that sort of mindset, leaving room for the abnormals as always but people who want to die are either mentally ill or are trying to escape something like shame/restoring their honour etc. Someone who wishes they were never born and genuinely wants to die is mentally ill.

1. No they're not.
2. Even if they are, it doesn't matter. It will never matter.

People who want to die should have the right to die. It makes perfect sense that someone might be dissatisfied with the fact that they were forced into life by two fucktards.

Quote

At times, sure. I'm not a perfect linguistic genius, but I'd say it's better than spamming cUNT whenever you run into an argument.

Good thing I haven't done that. Which leaves you being incredibly inarticulate.

Quote

lol

Nice refutation.

Quote

So you were actually butthurt over this? Nice.

Glad to know my reports of your posts have been completely justified. Piece of shit.

Quote

I wonder why that is then, because I've seen plenty of people present sound arguments to you in the past and they all got the same dismissals.

Maybe because they're FUCKING WRONG.

If someone is wrong, you argue with them. I'm not going to fucking give up my philosophy just because a group of dumbfucks think I'm wrong. No, I think you're wrong, and I don't think I've received a single sound argument yet. Not a single person has been able to adequately answer the question, "why should the human race continue"?

And you had one of the shittiest answers yet.

Quote

And with people who live in the real world, existential angst tends to rank pretty low on their list of priorities. I'm pretty sure people can afford to be wrong over that, because when it's compared to things like securing a future for their families or their own success in life people will not really give a shit about whether their own existence is morally justifiable or if having children and grandchildren is an affront to one particular type of philosophy.

Which makes them all fucktards. Yes, it does.

Quote

Quote
Zero hypocrisy.
lol, sure.

ZERO hypocrisy.

You insulted me first. You should be banned.

Quote

why highlight the disabled to make your point?

BECAUSE ONE IN FIVE PEOPLE HAS SOME TYPE OF DEBILITY.

THAT'S REALITY.

I'm obviously going to bring up examples of reality that might OFFEND you, because they're REALITY. This should DETER you from ever wanting to have children, because you shouldn't want to impose CANCER, or anything else that's going to make them either an intense sufferer, or a complete loser for the rest of their lives. You SHOULDN'T want to impose that on ANYBODY.

Quote

Justifying your ideology by using the infirm as a reason not to 'risk' having children is just downright scummy.

I really don't fucking see how. Kindly demonstrate how illustrating a concept of reality is "scummy".

PEOPLE ARE BORN WITH CRIPPLING DISEASES.

Would you appreciate being born with a crippling fucking disease? I don't fucking think so.
Let me take all of your money and gamble it away, and see how you like it.

Verbatim · April 28, 2015, 09:18:40 AM

Quote

It doesn't convince you so you don't accept it as valid, that doesn't mean it's invalid at all just that you perceive it as such.

So what the fuck am I supposed to be like? I don't KNOW too many other anti-natalists, genius, and even if I did, what am I supposed to do? Consult them? I'm not allowed to think for myself? What the FUCK are you trying to say here?
You INARTICULATE weasel.

Verbatim · April 28, 2015, 09:26:41 AM

I'll go ahead and tie the assisted suicide thing with the abortion thing.

No one actually wants to have an abortion, but you need to have the right to do it. Likewise, no one finds the act of suicide pleasant. You might even say that those who want to kill themselves are mentally ill. But you should still have the right to do it.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 28, 2015, 09:35:26 AM

I'd like to add that wanting to die isn't necessarily tied to mental instability; there are states in the US that allow euthanasia so long as the person is making the decision sound of mind.