Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 20:57:49 GMT
Does the fact that you constantly have to invent things that people didn't say and then pretend they said them not indicate to you that something is wrong with your argument somewhere? You've been trying to remove birth from the causal chain that leads to suffering (even though birth is a pre-requisite of suffering in 100% of cases, and even though the parents themselves know that suffering in the new person will be a consequence of their choice), in order to appease yourself that life is worth living. If a Christian said that God couldn't be blamed for evil or suffering because the beings that were going to commit evil or experience suffering did not exist prior to the creation being made, then you would not accept that. But yet you'll say that when humans deliberately and with full knowledge of their actions bring into being another life form that they know will suffer, then the intentions have no causal or moral connection to the consequences of the action. Well, apparently it doesn't. If it ever occurs to you to wonder why you lose arguments all the time, this is probably one of the main reasons. Just FYI.
|
|
|
Post by goz on May 17, 2018 23:40:27 GMT
Not relevant. it is a bigger issue and not about you or me. If you are depressed, then professional help from medical professionals. Otherwise man up and leave the rest of the world alone when they assert their OWN right to reproductive choice as it is NOT YOUR BUSINESS. So you're saying that everyone who doesn't like life (which was created without purpose, through unintelligent means rather than by a competent creator) for any reason at all is pathological and ought to be locked up somewhere. If you can't come up with any reasoning for your action, then it's best to have anyone who challenges the reasoning locked away in a mental hospital.I have the right to express my views on choices that people make which will affect other vulnerable people who can't speak for themselves. Sweet Baby Jeebus, Mic! from Graham to you... Para 2. Yes you have the right to express your views. You also neither have the 'right' to expect them to listen, take them seriously nor MORE especially act on them, when they are NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. You are hypocritically 'imposing' (your word) views to curtail other's rights where these views have nno credibility, logic nor agency.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 0:42:12 GMT
I'm beginning to think mic has a golden career before him as an interviewer for Channel 4 news in the UK.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 1:00:31 GMT
You've been trying to remove birth from the causal chain that leads to suffering (even though birth is a pre-requisite of suffering in 100% of cases, and even though the parents themselves know that suffering in the new person will be a consequence of their choice), in order to appease yourself that life is worth living. If a Christian said that God couldn't be blamed for evil or suffering because the beings that were going to commit evil or experience suffering did not exist prior to the creation being made, then you would not accept that. But yet you'll say that when humans deliberately and with full knowledge of their actions bring into being another life form that they know will suffer, then the intentions have no causal or moral connection to the consequences of the action. Well, apparently it doesn't. If it ever occurs to you to wonder why you lose arguments all the time, this is probably one of the main reasons. Just FYI. "Losing debates" according to what scoreboard? If I've reduced you to denying that being caused to exist is the root source of suffering, then I'm happy with my performance in the 'debate'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 1:04:23 GMT
So you're saying that everyone who doesn't like life (which was created without purpose, through unintelligent means rather than by a competent creator) for any reason at all is pathological and ought to be locked up somewhere. If you can't come up with any reasoning for your action, then it's best to have anyone who challenges the reasoning locked away in a mental hospital.I have the right to express my views on choices that people make which will affect other vulnerable people who can't speak for themselves. Sweet Baby Jeebus, Mic! from Graham to you... Para 2. Yes you have the right to express your views. You also neither have the 'right' to expect them to listen, take them seriously nor MORE especially act on them, when they are NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. You are hypocritically 'imposing' (your word) views to curtail other's rights where these views have nno credibility, logic nor agency. The "depression" thing was just an ad hominem, and it's fairly common for opponents of antinatalism to resort to personally insulting antinatalists, including casting aspersions on the mental hygiene of the antinatalist because they don't think that life is a good enough game to risk throwing other lives into it. There is no imposition of opinion that isn't matched by some kind of legal obligation to act a certain way (such as the way that your kind impose your belief that life is worthwhile by legally restricting the right to suicide). I've already covered the definition of 'right'. An expectation is not a right, nor is there a right to induce a particular mental state in another brain. But I will continue to make the case that procreation is a selfish imposition against someone else.
|
|
|
Post by goz on May 18, 2018 1:05:50 GMT
I'm beginning to think mic has a golden career before him as an interviewer for Channel 4 news in the UK. LOL ...even though I am a feminist, that was priceless!
|
|
|
Post by goz on May 18, 2018 1:13:25 GMT
Well, apparently it doesn't. If it ever occurs to you to wonder why you lose arguments all the time, this is probably one of the main reasons. Just FYI. "Losing debates" according to what scoreboard? If I've reduced you to denying that being caused to exist is the root source of suffering, then I'm happy with my performance in the 'debate'. Mic, for what it is worth, I don't actually think that anyone expressing their 'opinion' loses a debate. That is not really the point, especially as this is a message board and not a formal debate. The point here is whether your opinion is logical. Sorry, yours is not. Another aspect is whether what you advocate in your debate is moral ( yes I get the objective/subjective thing) or legal or even achievable. On all levels, in MY opinion and I venture to say the majority of world citizens especially women, is none of those things.
|
|
|
Post by goz on May 18, 2018 1:22:38 GMT
Sweet Baby Jeebus, Mic! from Graham to you... Para 2. Yes you have the right to express your views. You also neither have the 'right' to expect them to listen, take them seriously nor MORE especially act on them, when they are NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. You are hypocritically 'imposing' (your word) views to curtail other's rights where these views have nno credibility, logic nor agency. The "depression" thing was just an ad hominem, and it's fairly common for opponents of antinatalism to resort to personally insulting antinatalists, including casting aspersions on the mental hygiene of the antinatalist because they don't think that life is a good enough game to risk throwing other lives into it. There is no imposition of opinion that isn't matched by some kind of legal obligation to act a certain way (such as the way that your kind impose your belief that life is worthwhile by legally restricting the right to suicide). I've already covered the definition of 'right'. An expectation is not a right, nor is there a right to induce a particular mental state in another brain. But I will continue to make the case that procreation is a selfish imposition against someone else.My ascribing your self admitted 'depression' was NOT used as ad hominem. It was a genuine plea to you to seek professional help. IMHO the adoption of anti-natalism COULD be seen as a symptom of mental illness, or at least the more acceptable ( IN MY WORLD VIEW ANYWAY ) eccentricity. I sometimes subscribe to that myself as I can't stand mediocrity of the herd's thought and lowest common denominator thinking. HOWEVER you are supremely guilty, unequivocally of trying to guide other people's thoughts and actions much in the way than fundamentalist Christians do. You should consider this, as you can clearly be considered an extremist in your own right. Again IMHO - it doesn't become you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 2:13:12 GMT
"Losing debates" according to what scoreboard? If I've reduced you to denying that being caused to exist is the root source of suffering, then I'm happy with my performance in the 'debate'. Mic, for what it is worth, I don't actually think that anyone expressing their 'opinion' loses a debate. That is not really the point, especially as this is a message board and not a formal debate. The point here is whether your opinion is logical. Sorry, yours is not. Another aspect is whether what you advocate in your debate is moral ( yes I get the objective/subjective thing) or legal or even achievable. On all levels, in MY opinion and I venture to say the majority of world citizens especially women, is none of those things. So to say that there aren't any unborn entities that need or desire to be born, and that only conscious entities can suffer or feel deprivation is not "logical"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 2:13:39 GMT
The "depression" thing was just an ad hominem, and it's fairly common for opponents of antinatalism to resort to personally insulting antinatalists, including casting aspersions on the mental hygiene of the antinatalist because they don't think that life is a good enough game to risk throwing other lives into it. There is no imposition of opinion that isn't matched by some kind of legal obligation to act a certain way (such as the way that your kind impose your belief that life is worthwhile by legally restricting the right to suicide). I've already covered the definition of 'right'. An expectation is not a right, nor is there a right to induce a particular mental state in another brain. But I will continue to make the case that procreation is a selfish imposition against someone else.My ascribing your self admitted 'depression' was NOT used as ad hominem. It was a genuine plea to you to seek professional help. IMHO the adoption of anti-natalism COULD be seen as a symptom of mental illness, or at least the more acceptable ( IN MY WORLD VIEW ANYWAY ) eccentricity. I sometimes subscribe to that myself as I can't stand mediocrity of the herd's thought and lowest common denominator thinking. HOWEVER you are supremely guilty, unequivocally of trying to guide other people's thoughts and actions much in the way than fundamentalist Christians do. You should consider this, as you can clearly be considered an extremist in your own right. Again IMHO - it doesn't become you. When did I admit to "depression"? Link it. There are plenty of people who are happy with their lives who are antinatalists (not that I'm claiming to be one); they simply realise that they have been privileged by luck, and that there are others who are suffering greatly who were no more deserving of suffering.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2018 2:14:09 GMT
"So to say..."
|
|
|
Post by goz on May 18, 2018 2:20:02 GMT
Mic, for what it is worth, I don't actually think that anyone expressing their 'opinion' loses a debate. That is not really the point, especially as this is a message board and not a formal debate. The point here is whether your opinion is logical. Sorry, yours is not. Another aspect is whether what you advocate in your debate is moral ( yes I get the objective/subjective thing) or legal or even achievable. On all levels, in MY opinion and I venture to say the majority of world citizens especially women, is none of those things. So to say that there aren't any unborn entities that need or desire to be born, and that only conscious entities can suffer or feel deprivation is not "logical"? You don't 'get' it, do you?
|
|