I thought rape was basically defined by lack of consent. Sex without consent is rape. It is not the sex act that is the problem but the lack of consent. — Andrew4Handel
The issue we are discussing is whether you can harm someone or behave immorally if the person is unable to consent. — Andrew4Handel
The issue we are discussing is whether you can harm someone or behave immorally if the person is unable to consent. — Andrew4Handel
I said you harm someone by creating them not be fore they exist. The act of creating them entails future harm. Creating someone is bringing them into existence
.
Some parents have been told that their child will inherit a genetic illness so they are actively creating a certainty of suffering. Are you claiming that the act of creating a person has no moral dimension even when you know full well what it will cause and what it entails. The law recognises intent to harm this way. — Andrew4Handel
You'd have a much easier time persuading me that we should be able to outright euthanize infants than you'd have of persuading me of antinatalist nonsense. — Terrapin Station
I agree with the consensus that it's okay to do things like operations on them and then wake them up, yes. — Terrapin Station
MY concern with consent is when something is done against someone's consenst — Terrapin Station
Isn't that an antinatalist opinion? — BlueBanana
I didn't mention operations, I'm talking of pain for the sake of it, just to cause them both physical and emotional pain. Hypothetical scenario, of course.
I suppose you mean without, not against? — BlueBanana
Certain assumptions of what opinions the person is going to have once they exist can be made. — BlueBanana
Not unless you have a really unusual definition of antinatalism. Maybe you do. I can't know unless you tell me. — Terrapin Station
Again, I'm not really against the idea of allowing infanticide, so . . . — Terrapin Station
No, I said against because I mean against. — Terrapin Station
If birth has negative value — BlueBanana
If birth has "negative value" to whom? — Terrapin Station
Doesn't antinatalism believe the birth to be negative to the person who is born because the life of the person who is born is suffering and mainly negative? — BlueBanana
So it's morally right to do a person in coma or sleeping anything as long as they haven't specifically forbid that? No, as long as the consequences of an action are expected to be negative or have a high risk of being that, those actions are needed a consent for to be done and without consent those things are by default not done. — BlueBanana
You are conflating my argument and Ciceronianuses response to it. — Andrew4Handel
Life is founded on and created by a lack of consent. It is not created by stopping freedom of assembly. — Andrew4Handel
It is created by a non-consensual act. — Andrew4Handel
Creating a child does not impact on their ability to assemble but it does impact on consent because it is an nonconsensual act. — Andrew4Handel
How can you justify carrying out a non consensual act that affects someone else in the long run? — Andrew4Handel
Intention matters also because you can be jailed for planning crime. If you planned to torture your child (as has happened) whilst trying to get pregnant you intend to behave immorally towards a future person who will exist. — Andrew4Handel
Hiding behind the ambiguity of "existence" is unconvincing. Planning to create a child is planning to create someone you know by experience of other children/humans will have volition and exhibit consent issues. — Andrew4Handel
But we're getting side tracked, this isn't even my opinion on subject. The reason I'm arguing against you is just that I disagree with your arguments and opinions leading to the conclusion that being born and making someone exist is a good thing. — BlueBanana
In the case of something like an infant, (a), (b) and (c) do not obtain. However, I wouldn't object to a prohibition on something like physically mutilating an infant, where we do not kill them, so that the physical effects would last well into the point of their life where (a), (b) and (c) do obtain. — Terrapin Station
An unconscious person cannot consent to sex but that does not make rape alright. — Andrew4Handel
It's reasonable to expect that there are no positive consequences for the person raped. Saving the life of a person in coma would be far more accurate. — BlueBanana
And the answer is that this is only an issue when we're actually talking about a person, which entails that they have opinions about these sorts of things, etc. — Terrapin Station
Don't get distracted. Focus on rape and suffering. Feel bad yet? — Sapientia
Firstly, you don't know that. If people are souls, and souls exist prior to birth, then it is possible they do consent to being born — John
There is no coherent way a pre existing soul could force someone to be their parent. — Andrew4Handel
Look at the first few lines. "People can't consent to being born. It creates a massive problem". These are your words, not his, and I dispute them. People can't exercise their right to assembly without first being born — Sapientia
People can't consent to being born. — John
Firstly, you don't know that. If people are souls, and souls exist prior to birth, then it is possible they do consent to being born. — John
Secondly, if people are not souls and come into existence at some moment defined as "being born" then there is no one prior to that moment that could either consent or refuse to be born; so your premise would then be incoherent. — John
How predictable. You're making my point. I know you, and other anti-natalists, want to focus on the negative aspects. You want to make out that it's the be-all and end-all. But it ain't. — Sapientia
physical effect of them physically existing — BlueBanana
Maybe the soul chooses which fertilized ovum to enter. No "forcing" is necessary since the parent's would know nothing of it. — John
The right to assemble is something that someone may want after being born but consent is an issue about personal integrity and the basis of obligation etc. Your overall response was incoherent to me. — Andrew4Handel
I deliberately did not say "we did not consent to be born" I just pointed out that it was a non consensual act. — Andrew4Handel
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.