Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Take two Librium

and call your psycho analysts in the morning.

Seems someone at the other Grey Lady is having birthing issues, to give birth or to obliterate all births in order to, yup you got it, save the world. This place is just tooo awful and painful  a place to justify birthing more. Of course it is awful and ugly place at times, human beings have the capacity for monumental cruelty that they don't hesitate to perpetuate upon their fellows, but your answer dude is silly and beyond comprehension, egads some folks take themselves waaaaay too seriously and they hope you do too.

Peter singer asks the hard questions over at the Times. Should this be the last generation? have a full stomach before you wade into this cess pool of self hatred and of all humanoids.

"Is a world with people in it better than one without? Put aside what we do to other species — that’s a different issue. Let’s assume that the choice is between a world like ours and one with no sentient beings in it at all....No one’s rights will be violated — at least, not the rights of any existing people. Can non-existent people have a right to come into existence?"

"Few of us would think it right to inflict severe suffering on an innocent child, even if that were the only way in which we could bring many other children into the world. Yet everyone will suffer to some extent, and if our species continues to reproduce, we can be sure that some future children will suffer severely."

"Even if we take a less pessimistic view of human existence than Benatar, we could still defend it, because it makes us better off — for one thing, we can get rid of all that guilt about what we are doing to future generations — and it doesn’t make anyone worse off, because there won’t be anyone else to be worse off..."

"Is life worth living? Are the interests of a future child a reason for bringing that child into existence? And is the continuance of our species justifiable in the face of our knowledge that it will certainly bring suffering to innocent future human beings?"


Oh boy, Peter the meaning of life is not to go about without suffering during your existence. How could you go about even the MOST self absorbed life and NOT get that? (God the sixties really went awry didn't they?) How could you miss something so big and so basic and still  have two brain cells left over to rub together?

Peter? Lighten up dude it's all attitude don't cha know?



H/T SDA

2 comments:

KGould said...

It seems to me that people today dont really pay attention in history class. Sure there are people on this planet who make things harsh for everyone else, but we have also extended our life spans greatly (I remember learning when a 35 year old woman was considered old), far fewer people die in wars these days compared to only a century ago or less, it's considered horrific to lose any member of your family at any age when in the not-so-distant past it was just something that happened and everyone had to move on. There are human rights, laws, medicines, welfare systems, labour laws, etc etc that did not exist not so long ago. It seems to me that humans are actually getting BETTER, not worse. But whatever eh?

The Grey Lady said...

This guy reminds of those old women who have to hold onto and feel obliged to tell every pregnant woman they meet about their special trials and tribulations, the hours of pain, the suffering, the crazy complications. No birth before or since could ever hold a candle to it and their suffering was special. Pay no never mind to the fact that they had 8 other children with out a hitch or everyone else they know got by just fine, but their advice would be Don't have more kids because it could hurt you and you or the babies could die.....

While I can have empathy and sometimes even be moved with a passion to end the suffering of others, I can not imagine such a state of mind that would hope to urge others to stop giving birth because the author has a bad case of myopic blues.