Fuck antinatalists

[blackacidlizzard]

In practical terms a voluntary antinatalist plan of action is a practice in dysgenics - as those most concerned about the human condition are the ones who cease to breed by their own choice. Fuck, even Ted Kazynzki understood this when he urged those who opposed continued growth of the human population to breed as much as practical.

PS that Ted Danson looking youtuber who is into this shit is one of the most retarded semi-intelligent people on the planet; right up there with the run-of-the-mill post-objectivists.

[nobody]

You are right. But is there a problem? Even though anti-natalists are indeed a dying breed, I don't see this as a contradiction. Anti-natalists see making babies as an ethical failure. One can hold this position, and refrain from making babies, even though he expects others to continue making babies, anyway. Let them.

Anti-natalism can only be a purely personal choice and we should never expect to see widescale adoption of anti-natalism to cause population density to decrease. As more efficient methods of using energy rise, population density (and energy use) will continue to grow.

I don't think this is a problem for anti-natalists, however.

[zero]

the higher the population the more likley species continues isn't it?

Perhaps we are having a population growth spurt in preparation for the next disease, meteor stricke, war or period of drought and starvation which will kill off ninety percent of humans.

[blackacidlizzard]

Sure, it depends whether one is more concerned about following codes or getting results, and if the latter, exactly what type of results one is concerned with.

As I am concerned with the future of the human species, I say fuck all those who act in ways that will cause future generations to be less intelligent and humanitarian (admittedly, this includes me as well)

"As more efficient methods of using energy rise, population density (and energy use) will continue to grow."

I don't think that's a sure bet. Societies with a greater variety of options for time and energy expenditure often divert people from the pursuit of reproduction. I do, however, think that to spread this dynamic there needs to be not only more universal access to these options, but also a more universal set of incentives.

[Brad Reddekopp]

the higher the population the more likley species continues isn't it?

Probably. However, as I see it, the future of the species isn't my problem.

[Hierophant]

HAHAHA what? You do realize ideologies nowadays are propagated by communication much more than by breeding, right? By definition none of US WHO ARE ANTINATALISTS NOW are antinatalists by breeding, you idiot. So every single of us disprove your point.

Furthermore, my attempt at a forum has failed, no one else comes to it, so why are people whining? You should all be happy that I failed.

Fuck you for trying to create more suffering in this world, you jerk.

[blackacidlizzard]

HAHAHA what? You do realize ideologies nowadays are propagated by communication much more than by breeding, right?

The two aren't completely separable - most people have received a great deal of communication from those who bred them. Look into how many people leave the religion they were brought up in, see how many people over thirty have political views similar to their parents.

By definition none of US WHO ARE ANTINATALISTS NOW are antinatalists by breeding, you idiot. So every single of us disprove your point.

If my position was something retarded like "children always adopt the worldview of their parents." Why do you persist in arguing against positions not held by mentally competent teenagers?

Furthermore, my attempt at a forum has failed, no one else comes to it, so why are people whining? You should all be happy that I failed.

I spend most of my time flailing at tyrannosaurs. I took a break to kick a chihuahua.

Fuck you for trying to create more suffering in this world, you jerk.

Fuck you for depriving future generations the intelligence and thoughtfulness of your genes and perspectives.

[Brad Reddekopp]

Fuck you for depriving future generations the intelligence and thoughtfulness of your genes and perspectives.

Future generations aren't his problem. Nor are they mine.

[Hierophant]

I didn't think there was any reason to reply, but thank you Brad for pointing out the error.

I find it bizarre that someone who utterly doesn't understand what I am saying praises my perspective for being intelligent and thoughtful. I think he's just trying to butter me up to make the argument that I am somehow depriving the world. As if my children are gonna be anything like me anyway... What bizarre reasoning. This is very much like the strange belief about perpetuating bloodlines or family names. They seem to believe there is something magical about blood, personality or family name that transmits through the generations.

No, you moron, a child is an individual human being with eir own intelligence, thoughtfulness, blood, and name.

Furthermore, because of my genetic makeup, there is a good probability that any child I produce would live in great, constant suffering and die in eir twenties. So much for helping the world.

[Hierophant]

blackacidlizzard, after thinking further about what you said, I have come to the conclusion that it is hands down the stupidest thing anyone has ever said on this board.

[zero]

well, short of eugenics (which that even couldnt match mother nature for selective culling) i see no other logical answer than screwing like rabbits and reproducing. to have the best breeding lines and most perfect population. The insane overpopulation and then the harsh natural selection. it gives nature more choices on who to keep. Clearly the best way to decide the "fittest".

[Brad Reddekopp]

Another logical answer is to recognize that the future of the species is not my problem, nor is it yours.

[Hierophant]

well, short of eugenics (which that even couldnt match mother nature for selective culling) i see no other logical answer than screwing like rabbits and reproducing. to have the best breeding lines and most perfect population. The insane overpopulation and then the harsh natural selection. it gives nature more choices on who to keep. Clearly the best way to decide the "fittest".

And that's the second stupidest thing ever said on this board.

[zero]

well, short of eugenics (which that even couldnt match mother nature for selective culling) i see no other logical answer than screwing like rabbits and reproducing. to have the best breeding lines and most perfect population. The insane overpopulation and then the harsh natural selection. it gives nature more choices on who to keep. Clearly the best way to decide the "fittest".

And that's the second stupidest thing ever said on this board.

only way you can't find that amusing is if you're afraid you are part of the culling.

[Hierophant]

It's not amusing, just stupid.