|
|
|
|
|
|
by thomasahle
1805 days ago
|
|
|
> there are all sorts of examples of people who clearly value human life but choose not to have children. Or are all nuns terrible people? OP was specifically referring to people (including in this thread)
who choose not to have children on moral grounds: >> several of my friends (millenial like myself) think that bringing children into this world is a bad thing to do- with global warming and other social problems So it seems fair to assume that they consider the value of the new person to be none or negative overall. |
|
|
...and?
There's nothing at all logically inconsistent about two following two propositions:
P1. All human life has value.
P2. Intentionally creating new human life is unethical.
FWIW, I am not an anti-natalist, and I do not believe P2. However, I do believe it's unethical to purposefully have children you cannot support (financially, emotionally, intellectually, etc.). But that doesn't meant that I think that the children created by people who cannot support a child are worthless or have negative value! Just because "creating X is bad" does not mean "X has no value".
> So it seems fair to assume...
No, it isn't fair to assume that people who believe "creating X in situation S is bad" implies that those same people believe "X has no value". Those are two very, very distinct and different value judgements.
More importantly, I very much doubt people who hold to above position would agree with this characterization of their view of the value of human life.