The real taboo question nobody wants to touch isn't abortion or suicide but birth itself, because all the other moral dramas start the moment someone is dragged into existence without consent, into a life that is terminal from day one, structurally hostile, filled with pain, discouragement, and moral compromise, and only made bearable through coping mechanisms, illusions, art, religion, distractions, and self-deception. We pretend life is some intrinsic good, that procreation is generous, that motherhood is sacred, and that suicide is the ultimate sin, but flip the picture upside down and it's obvious that life is a slow deterioration embedded with death, that having kids is a way to dump this burden onto someone else to give meaning to your own anxiety, and that morality itself is sabotaged by scarcity, competition, and decay, forcing everyone to become callous just to survive. If being born is already a harm and a manipulation, then continuing to live at any cost isn't automatically noble, and deciding to leave when dignity, autonomy, or ethical agency collapses is a perfectly intelligible response to a rigged condition, especially since most people only endure life by numbing themselves with habits, neuroses, meds, entertainment, and lies until death does the job for them anyway. The "enigma" isn't suicide but why anyone keeps going under extreme misery, and the answer is usually folly, instinct, fear, or illusion, not reason. Suicide doesn't destroy some sacred order, it's already written into being itself as a constant possibility, and the only sane position isn't demanding everyone die now or forbidding it forever, but refusing procreation, living minimally, resisting harm where possible, and staying willing to die if moral or personal dignity demands it, because there is no unconditional duty to stay alive, only a stubborn cultural panic about admitting that life doesn't love us back, even though we desperately love it and wish it could have lasted forever.
That "debate" only holds in afterlife exists.Because if death is just inexistance, then one can just return to it whenever they want if they don't like it, and being born is just having more options to choose between.
>>18253438True
>have a retarded premise>come to retarded conclusions “Consent” is neither necessary or sufficient to make things ethical, libtard.
Oh yeah well I birthed a huge shit on your moms chest last night
>>18253438You'd like Buddhism. Specifically anything focused on the early Pali Canon and virtuous behavior.
>>18253438There is a non-zero chance of life evolving into sentience again and again regardless of how many retarded Jews write an emo book about their phenotype inhibiting their self-worth, both on Earth and around the Universe. It's better to ensure civilization as a guardrail against natural suffering rather than allow the cycle to repeat itself. There, I debunked Benatard.
>>18254683Buddhism is antinatalist?
>>18253438Something > nothing. This is a fact you cannot deny. So it is a fallacy to say things better if nothing exists.
>>18255320https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/KN/Ud/ud8_8.html>As she was sitting there the Blessed One said to her: “Why have you come here, Visākhā–your clothes wet, your hair wet–in the middle of the day?”>When this was said, she said to the Blessed One, “My dear and beloved grandson has died. This is why I have come here–my clothes wet, my hair wet–in the middle of the day.”>“Visākhā, would you like to have as many children & grandchildren as there are people in Sāvatthī?”>“Yes, lord, I would like to have as many children & grandchildren as there are people in Sāvatthī.”>“But how many people in Sāvatthī die in the course of a day?”>“Sometimes ten people die in Sāvatthī in the course of a day, sometimes nine… eight… seven… six… five… four… three… two… Sometimes one person dies in Sāvatthī in the course of a day. Sāvatthī is never free from people dying.”>“So what do you think, Visākhā? Would you ever be free of wet clothes & wet hair?”>“No, lord. Enough of my having so many children & grandchildren.”>“Visākhā, those who have a hundred dear ones have a hundred sufferings. Those who have ninety dear ones have ninety sufferings. Those who have eighty… seventy… sixty… fifty… forty… thirty… twenty… ten… nine… eight… seven… six… five… four… three… two… Those who have one dear one have one suffering. Those who have no dear ones have no sufferings. They are free from sorrow, free from stain, free from lamentation, I tell you.”
>>18253438Death doesnt exist.
Kinda crazy to base a whole school of thought on being a weak fag.Life is suffering and joy and struggle and it's beautiful. Even if you suffer you're gonna die anyway and you can always kill yourself, nobody is stopping you.
You could just say you don't want children you know, don't have to write a cope book with pseudo philosophy.
>>18255336Assuming the conclusion retard
>>18255926He's stating a fact (of how we universally judge things), he's not making a case for the fact.
>>18255926How is 0>1? Explain
>>18254250Consent is one of least important parts of the argument, cowardly retard
