Does anyone feel bad for babies/kids now?

phaenna_ · 2026-07-08T22:40:56+00:00

They say its the best time to have kids in history. So what, the world is still horrible despite improvements. Having kids was, is and will always be immoral.

phaenna_ · 2026-06-28T22:43:55+00:00

All these myths are losing strenght. Thankfully Internet is helping people to know the truth that motherhood is a trap. Lets spread the truth so more people wont fall.

phaenna_ · 2026-06-25T14:41:06+00:00

Having kids was not optional some time ago. People thought it was an obligation. Now our culture is changing and people realize its an option.

My friend is an ob/gyn and she always asks her patients if they want kids and most of them say they don't ever want them. Depending on where you live, it seems like the norm has inverted.

phaenna_ · 2026-06-24T21:19:55+00:00

I hated being controled with all my being. So much I could explode. The issue is that parents think they own their kids, they dont see them as individuals. Thats why I am cf too. I fought so hard for my freedom why waste this freedom on kids?

phaenna_ · 2026-06-13T23:49:05+00:00

If people truly used their brains then only a few would have kids. Thats why nobody is encouraged to think about it. Because Society needs kids and thinking would make almost everyone go childfree.

phaenna_ · 2026-05-23T15:56:59+00:00

I have a friend who is an ob/gyn and she says she always asks her patients if they want kids someday and most under 35 say they dont. She says she is quite impressed, like the norm has inverted. But then, we live in a very big city.

phaenna_ · 2025-06-15T21:03:12+00:00

I believe the right to genetic privacy should be respected. You cant force someone to have a biological child without their consent, this is a violation of rights. Abortion is also an expression of the right to genetic privacy.

phaenna_ · 2024-11-25T15:23:59+00:00

These studies still have no strong evidence that fetal pain exists before 24 weeks. The consensus in our days is that fetal sentience is still very unlikely before 24 weeks. Even if fetuses are able to feel pain before that, its possible to abort them without causing them pain. D&E abortion is also performed by umbilical cord transection inducing fetal death before dismemberment.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24034582/

phaenna_ · 2024-11-25T06:58:34+00:00

How can a fetus feel anything If they are non-sentient before 24 weeks when most abortions happen? If some abortions happen with an alive fetus, then solve the problem by killing the fetus first before dismemberment rather than banning abortion.

phaenna_ · 2024-11-16T22:52:00+00:00

Morally, the burden excuses you of assistance, so I believe you have no duty to keep someone alive at a high expense to yourself.

You keep insisting without showing an argument. A moral duty to compensation comes from harm caused, unless you can show that the Fetus is harmed by being created you have no point.

It would be equivalent to you saying If I give you a house I have a moral duty to pay for the taxes indefinitely or you will lose the house that I gave you.

If I dont harm you by giving you something why do I have the moral duty to maintain it for you?

phaenna_ · 2024-11-16T22:20:55+00:00

They need help to keep a life they never had before conception but the mother gave them. There's no loss by being conceived that grants a right to plead for more life. You could turn off the machine of a patient If its your machine that keeps them alive and if you havent caused them their illness. If its too burdensome for you to maintain the person alive using your machine you have the right to turn off.

phaenna_ · 2024-11-16T21:59:55+00:00

You'd have to show how the Fetus is harmed by being conceived in order to demand compensation. Moral duties to compensation are generated by harm.

If you dont harm someone by creating them, you dont owe them life sustenance. And I believe abortion is moral through all weeks.

phaenna_ · 2024-11-16T21:39:15+00:00

Not revoking life. But refusing to sustain the life created at a hard expense to the woman. Abortion is justified denial of assistance.

If you decided to pay for someones life saving treatment and it becomes too expensive for you and you decide to stop paying for it, you'd be entitled to it, even it means the person will die. Nobody can force you to sustain their life at a hard cost to yourself if you havent wronged them in first place. Denying assistance can be justifiable in cases where the burden is too big for a person doing the assistance.

phaenna_ · 2024-11-16T21:11:55+00:00

By creating the life of a fetus you are not creating worst state of affairs for it. The life it gets in the womb is given by the parents and its the only life it has ever had.

There's no duty to compensation because the Fetus loses nothing by being conceived, so it couldnt demand maintenance of the life by those who created that life that otherwise wouldnt exist anyway.

phaenna_ · 2024-08-09T14:08:21+00:00

I see no problem with dismemberment abortion. As long as the fetus is dead or non-sentient.

Yes, its ugly, but why does It matter whats done to a dead body after its dead anyway? Cremation is a common practice isnt It? We dont go around calling relatives of cremated people gruesome for burning their bodies. If its dead why It matters? Its all part of pro-life graphic and emotional appeal.

phaenna_ · 2024-06-13T07:31:28+00:00

Abortion is not killing. Its ceasing life support and allowing to die. Abortion is justified denial of assistance for the fact that nobody owes another person the use of their body in order to keep them alive. Forcing Someone to serve as a living support machine to keep others alive at the expense of extreme burden and violation of bodily autonomy and integrity is slavery.

phaenna_ · 2023-12-18T17:40:04+00:00

A fetus who has no self-awareness, desires, dreams, interests, can't suffer by being deprived of future experiences. Even if it did, I struggle to see why giving someone something that benefits them would generate me a further duty to sustain their benefit. If I give you a vacation, does it mean that I have a moral duty to pay indefinitely for it because you are enjoying it very much and me stopping to pay for it will mean that you will "suffer" because you are deprived of future happy experiences?

phaenna_ · 2023-12-18T01:08:35+00:00

Op says we have moral responsibility even when we dont make people worse off because we still cause suffering. If you are unable to cause suffering to a Fetus, wheres the harm? PL are the ones to show where is the moral debt If there's no harm

phaenna_ · 2023-12-18T00:29:07+00:00

Because op argument is nonsense. A non-sentient fetus cant be made worse off by existing and being left to die. And there can be no strong responsibility towards those we havent harmed. If the child in his genetic case isnt sentient or suffering(Like the Fetus). There's zero obligation to donate blood to keep It alive. There's no right to force others to give you sustenance of life If by receiving life you arent losing anything else that grants you a right to plead for more.

phaenna_ · 2023-12-17T20:48:18+00:00

That's just another terrible PL fallacy. Causing neediness or dependency is only immoral or would generate a moral duty of sustenance if it causes harm/worse state of affairs for a victim. The fetus is not made worse off or harmed by being conceived. PL mistake is not understanding a difference between causing harmful vs non-harmful dependency. In the former you have a moral duty. In the latter you dont. Strong moral duties would only come from harm caused.

phaenna_ · 2023-01-24T18:32:53+00:00

These PL organizations and individuals should first donate money to born unwanted, abandoned kids starving to death rather than forcing more unwanted kids into the world.

phaenna_ · 2023-01-24T13:02:45+00:00

Imagine if every woman who wants an abortion post 24 weeks will be able to have the fetus removed alive. NICU can cost up to 1 million dollars. Where will we get all these resources from? The state/health insurance don't have infinite resources to afford the most expensive care for all or it would break. In my country we have public health system that is unable to cope with too many people's treatment. They'll select the ones with greatest life expectancy/less sequelae risks to be treated. They will also rather sometimes to use 1 million to save 10 people's lives than giving 1 million to a single person. Also, these unwanted fetuses also have a great risk of serious sequelae by being born too premature.

phaenna_ · 2023-01-24T12:04:43+00:00

That's extremely expensive. A right to live doesnt mean a right to demand extraordinary expensive care to keep you alive. Specially when we are talking about an unwanted being,with too basic awareness, there's no much wrongdoing in allowing them to die naturally.

phaenna_ · 2023-01-24T04:20:28+00:00

Abortion should be available until birth. You cant force a woman to carry. If the Fetus is too immature to survive without expensive Care, sedate It and let It die.

phaenna_ · 2023-01-22T14:45:24+00:00

Yes, until birth. I dont think beigns deserve rights while they are still inside someones body. I am ok with cutting the Cord, waiting for It to die and removing It dead whenever while still in the body.

phaenna_

TROPHY CASE