even if there were no obstacles, why is not having children deemed selfishness? there’s a degree of unnecessary judgement in that position.
a person can take an informed decision to not add to the population of the most invasive form of life that this planet has ever seen. if anything, there is no more selfless choice.
I usually hear it from one of two camps (or both at the same time).
The world (read capitalist economy) can’t continue to grow without ever-growing population.
The (Christian) Bible says that sex is for making babies. Getting married implies having sex. So, if you’re getting married you’d better be making babies.
Because they think that wageslaves are inherently uneducated, impulsive, and driven by their emotions.(“facts don’t care about your feelings”)
This lead to the conclusion that in order to make more wage slaves, you should instill a guilt into those perceived uneducated, impulsive, emotional individuals to compel them to breed.
That is why they attack the antinatalist train of thought with emotionally charged, often factless, ideas. Because they, once again, think that we arrived at antinatalist not by a combination of observations of the world and foresight, but merely via emotion. So they manipulate that emotion. Also, there’s no real arguing against the antinatalist position. It’s observably verifiably the objectively better decision for us a society, at least for now.
even if there were no obstacles, why is not having children deemed selfishness? there’s a degree of unnecessary judgement in that position.
a person can take an informed decision to not add to the population of the most invasive form of life that this planet has ever seen. if anything, there is no more selfless choice.
I usually hear it from one of two camps (or both at the same time).
Because they think that wageslaves are inherently uneducated, impulsive, and driven by their emotions.(“facts don’t care about your feelings”)
This lead to the conclusion that in order to make more wage slaves, you should instill a guilt into those perceived uneducated, impulsive, emotional individuals to compel them to breed.
That is why they attack the antinatalist train of thought with emotionally charged, often factless, ideas. Because they, once again, think that we arrived at antinatalist not by a combination of observations of the world and foresight, but merely via emotion. So they manipulate that emotion. Also, there’s no real arguing against the antinatalist position. It’s observably verifiably the objectively better decision for us a society, at least for now.