• Ranger
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    6 months ago

    Then you’re leaving the future to them.

        • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          If noone is cultivating and passing on positive culture, it’s not making the chances of reducing suffering any better is my point.

          ETA: I am not, to be clear, trying to say that having children is, in itself, a morally/ethically good thing. Generally, it is neutral but may be otherwise depending on one’s situation. Choosing whether or not to have children is a personal choice - what’s right for one might not be for another. Declaring others morally/ethically wrong for having children is myopic and likely a result of projecting one’s experience into others.

          In addition, antinatalism is bordering on eco-fascism, which is not ok. It seems most commonly expressed to make one feel superior while not putting in effort to effect positive change, like anti-electoralism/accelerationism.

    • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Adoption. Community building. Helping the disenfranchised.

      These are all methods of bettering the future without pumping another child into this world. And arguably, they’re morally better than having a child.

      • Ranger
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I didn’t know these where mutually exclusive.

        • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          You were the one who implied that, by saying that not having children leaves it up to those who will.

          • Ranger
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Have you or are you planning to adopt a child?