211
Antinatalism Rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

I don't believe you won this. I'm not siding with the person you're discussing this topic with, but they made better moral arguments.

Your supposition that consent can morally come from two seperate human beings, despite the potential condemnation of the new human, is inherently flawed. The same logic could be used to excuse a huge variety of cruelties. Giving someone something (even life itself), does not inherently grant the donors agency over that life.

For example, if a terrible disease that brings pain and very early death is genetically passed on by one person that decides knowingly to have a child, and the child is born with that disease, one could easily make the argument that it was immoral for that individual to have a child, instead of adopting.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

Your supposition that consent can morally come from two seperate human beings,

Not what I said.

For example, if a terrible disease that brings pain and very early death is genetically passed on by one person that decides knowingly to have a child, and the child is born with that disease, one could easily make the argument that it was immoral for that individual to have a child, instead of adopting.

... I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
211 points (100.0% liked)

196

16240 readers
2054 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS