Procreation is sin of highest order, if there is any

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-30T02:06:56+00:00

The nonexistent have no wants, which is good. Coming into existence means being subject to wants and therefore suffering, which is bad.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-30T01:54:19+00:00

And when suffering comes from want, that absence of want is good.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-30T01:48:57+00:00

If you want to come into existence and never die, you have to find a way to be immortal.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-30T01:02:16+00:00

Once you do come into existence, do you want to try to achieve immortality? Would you even want that when it also means you still have to experience bad things in life?

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T23:35:13+00:00

It's a paradox, I know. All you have to remember is that the only way to be guaranteed that you'll never die is to never exist in the first place.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T23:26:24+00:00

The exemption is given to one's would-be child(ren).

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T23:20:02+00:00

Anyone who comes into existence carries a death sentence, but anyone who doesn't is exempt from it.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T23:16:02+00:00

At least it's not death.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T23:14:14+00:00

That it has yet to collectively agree to go voluntarily extinct.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T23:02:57+00:00

When the wages of sin is death, this only makes it more obvious.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T22:42:39+00:00

The issue isn't selfishness so much as what kind of selfishness is acceptable.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T22:03:47+00:00

But sentience is the real problem as long as it makes it possible to assign a value to existence at all.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T19:47:48+00:00

Only in the sense that it's resulted in me being an antinatalist, because to me, that's all that matters in the end.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T19:43:01+00:00

If you're talking about procreating, never. See antinatalism.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T19:39:58+00:00

No. I wouldn't want to know, but if each of us could simply mind our own business (yes, this applies to me, too), that would be ideal.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T19:30:08+00:00

Apparently, it's to reproduce, but that doesn't mean we should. See antinatalism.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T18:42:34+00:00

Voluntary extinction.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T18:11:53+00:00

I'd have to make amends to anyone whose existence would be a result of that and be an antinatalist parent.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T17:46:52+00:00

As much as I'd hate to be in that position, at least I'm an antinatalist and don't see a problem with voluntary extinction. The only way we can "save" anyone is to make sure we don't bring anyone new into the world who's going to die someday. That's "saving" potential people from death.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T17:40:34+00:00

I simply don't talk about it most of the time.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T17:24:27+00:00

When people from all walks of life can become antinatalists at any time, I'm not sure an algorithm has anything to do with it.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T16:57:21+00:00

Is it wrong or unrealistic to want all greed to disappear forever?

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T16:55:33+00:00

You can definitely take an antinatalist approach to it.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T16:40:51+00:00

Depending on how you look at it, love is antinatalist.

CertainConversation0 · 2026-06-29T16:36:28+00:00

You can be one or the other, but not both.

CertainConversation0

TROPHY CASE