LMAO ? ??! He's serious about suing his parents for bringing him into the world without his consent...
He actually has a point.
I think kids that are born into over crowded families should file lawsuits.
It's irresponsible and criminal to have more children than you can prevent yourself from neglecting.
Mormons and Catholics need to learn that it's a vagina, not a fucking clown car.
This is an interesting question and it is difficult to talk about because a lot of people get either precious or indignant. My opinion is that life is certainly not worth living so I have a lot of sympathy for the philosophy called antinatalism. However it makes no sense for me to get strident about my parents (or anyone else's!) because they hold a different view. I used to subscribe to an Antinatalist site but I left it because too many of the people with whom I agreed philosophically were ... how can i put it? dickheads.
I'm sure the lawsuit will be thrown out, but it is interesting. It is provoking conversation about procreation. Making babies is a primal urge, but we have the ability to consider what we choose to do and our reasons for these decisions. Many people assume that the children they produce will be grateful and will enrich their parents lives. There is no guarantee that offspring will be either grateful or happy that they exist. There are no guarantees that they will be born healthy or have long lives. With the size of human population and the challenges our environment is facing, there is a good possibility that those born today will be experiencing an increasingly difficult and challenging world. Joy, peace and a long happy life, might be the parents hope when having children, but life holds no such guarantees. Offspring have as much right to their feelings about existence as the parents had to their feelings about creating them.
Life is a gift. Parents make decision for their children, as they have since before primates existed.
Every animal has the will to survive. It's the ultimate purpose of life, to live and reproduce.
Everything else is opinion, and not part of science.
To rule in favor of the plaintiff would mean that everyone having children would be liable for damages, threatening civilization itself and the legal system that it's built upon. Good luck with that! I've known of much more just claims that courts will never rule in favor of because "that's just the way it is".
I was not capable of conscious decision-making at that point, but I am very grateful that my parents did what they did which resulted in me. I might have my moments of stress or unhappiness, but it is up to me to rectify the situation and get happy again.
If I was so unhappy with my life that suing my parents was my reaction, well, I suppose the best recourse might be some serious counseling. Wowzers...
I call this the Stanhope argument. Though in his case, it was only a thought experiment.
Stanhope does have an interesting take on the whole modern concept of parenting, however. The whole "once your 18, your not my problem anymore!" thing, particularly related to so called Camp 1 crazies. The notion that you make a seemingly long term commitment with society, but only have to uphold it for 20 years or so.
Bullshit! Pay up for what you brought to the table motherfucker!
Yes, it is somewhat amusing, using a comedy routine as an argument. None the less, good ideas come in many shapes and forms.
I think the capacity to ask why I have been born and why I was not first consulted about it arrives not earlier than three years old. So the question is always retrospective. The only way i have ever managed to deal with this question is to reframe it as, Given that am alive without having chosen to exist how can i maximise the beauties and unique opportunities that this brief and transitory life in this vast universe offers me?
my life itself