Most Based Comments

Basedness: 🔥🔥🔥🔘🔘

I think you're taking a pretty narrow view of "force" here. Force isn't just a government thing. Society is just as capable of oppressing you as the government is. A society that "expects" you to have children and shuns you for not doing so is not a free society. So while your tactics may not even involve government (and I don't say "may" rhetorically; I don't know what exactly your preferred tactics for achieving your goals wrt natalism are), that doesn't necessarily absolve them. (9)

Expecting is not forcing. Arguing is not forcing. Advocating is not forcing. Using force is forcing. (-5)

Basedness: 🔥🔥🔘🔘🔘

🙄. Deeper? Having children is a wonderful experience, but it does not make you special or your lifestyle any more valid than someone who chooses not to have children. People having concerns about being forced into child rearing is a valid concern. In the US we have politicians forcing their beliefs onto a population of people who don't agree with anti choice policies. In the process they are damaging an already fragile medical system. So people do have the right to be concerned and express their views. (-1)

Basedness: 🔥🔥🔘🔘🔘

I never said anything about morality. (4)

Then why the frick would you call yourself an antinatalist? It's like you all wanna make up your own definitions of the word. (-4)

Angriest Comments

Angriness: 😡😡😡😡😡

So an unconscious person in a coma... They can be killed? An infant or elderly person who can't express their will. Killing is fine?Do you think it's morally justified to kill suicidal people, because in that moment it's their will? (2)

Unless they have said you can kill them, no. You are usurping their established will. Again, you are usurping their established will. To clarify, I assume that someone who continues to live their life is establishing their will even if they aren't expressly saying " I want to live"No, I would say that would be similar to letting someone on a psychedelic kill themselves. İt may be their will now, but I don't think they are sane enough to actually make that decision. I am assuming that they are suicidal because of depression though. İf they are suicidal because they have some tangible reason then sure. (2)

Angriness: 😡😡😡😡😡

Killing is justified in war only when it's in defense. Just because it's on the scale of a war that doesn't mean murder is justified. I don't believe the state has the right to kill for justice. They aren't God.Plenty of people cannot "assert their will" for life. Infants, some elderly, people in a coma... Their life should still be protected. I'm also in favor of saving suicidal people, even if it's against their immediate will. They have succumbed to darkness and need to be helped out of it.It's knowledge I've gained through lived experience. (0)

I agree, it doesn't make murder justifiable.The state gets its power from the people. If the people decide the state has the right to kill someone then they have that right. God doesn't play into our justice system, only people. I would say those in a coma and the elderly have previously asserted their will, so you would be violating that if you killed them. Infants are able to assert their will. They can tell you what they do and do not like. They can't comprehend death, but I think it's fair to assume that something that has experienced life would want to continue living. So you would rather someone suffer through late stage terminal cancer that will result in their death than end their suffering early? What harm is done? It's anecdotal and rather cyclical. Look, I think life has some meaning, but I accept that I have projected that meaning onto my reality. Other people have other meanings that are just as valid as there is no way to prove my POV is better than another person's as... (3)

Angriness: 😡😡😡😡😡

You didn't explain why it would be irrelevant. You merely asserted that people who are already alive know other people, and those people might be harmed by someone's death. But that is, again, something you don't know in the question I asked. Everyone might hate this person and they might hate being alive; you might even be stopping a suicide attempt. But you are certain it's the right thing to do.So it appears you are fine forcing people who are already alive to continue living (because of their connections to other people), but not OK with forcing unborn people to come into existence. The interesting thing about this position is that you don't really afford anyone with agency or dignity: "Whether or not they want to live is less important than the negative effect them dying would have on those around them. They must be forced to live."Do you really believe this? (0)

Your question is stupid from the very beginning. The person you save could be revealed as Hitler or Jesus depending on the point you're trying to make. Of course I can't know who the person I'm saving is, but it's a fair bet that someone will be sad when they die. I never said that's guaranteed, just more likely than not. There are zero inconsistencies here. It's about the reduction of pain, and suicide creates more pain than it alleviates. And it's not me who gives these people no agency because I didn't create them. It all comes back to the parents forcing them to exist.Edit: oh just realized they deleted their account, perfect (2)

Biggest Lolcow: /u/weedbeads

Score: 🐮🐮🔘🔘🔘

Number of comments: 24

Average angriness: 🔘🔘🔘🔘🔘

Maximum angriness: 😡😡😡😡😡

Minimum angriness: 🔘🔘🔘🔘🔘

NEW: Subscribe to /h/miners to see untapped drama veins, ripe for mining!

autodrama: automating away the jobs of dramneurodivergents. Ping HeyMoon if there are any problems or you have a suggestion