The community is called childfree, you’d think everyone here would be at least somewhat opposed to the concept of having children.

    • TheDarkQuark
      32·
      3 days ago

      Not sure what you mean by that. Neither I nor antinatalism advocates for ending existent life. It is just about not causing additional suffering by bringing new beings into existence.

      If anything, I believe that we should acknowledge that we are all in this suffering together, and be compassionate to fellow living beings.

      • acosmichippoEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        It’s the logical conclusion of antinatalism. All life “suffers”. If you stop bringing new beings into the world that can experience suffering then you’re advocating for no life at all after this current generation.

        And yes I fully support compassion and empathy, but you can do that while also sustaining the human race and life as we know it.

        • TheDarkQuark
          1·
          2 days ago

          Got it. Thanks for clearing that up. I thought you were talking about antinatalists ending existent life.

          Yes, in the ideal scenario, I think it is best to “end” all life, via gradually phasing out of existence. I think that would cause minimal suffering. I do not realistically think that it could happen in the next generation (or in any generation owing to how extreme and controversial it is perceived by the general population).

          Sure, you can be compassionate and empathetic to existing beings, but I see not bringing new beings out of empathy (due to the potentiality of their guaranteed suffering) to be more moral and a purer form of the trait.