4 ms·
It's not at the expense of human life if this person's local sacrifice improves global survivability of the species (assuming some people still decide to procre
by jungturk 6y ago
It's not at the expense of human life if this person's local sacrifice improves global survivability of the species (assuming some people still decide to procreate).
The parent envisions a world where the commons have been destroyed because everyone decided to pursue their self interest.
I'm not sure that's cultish - seems like calculated pragmatism about a limited resource.
- spacephysics 6y agoMy concern isn’t with the local decisions - I agree, if your local sacrifice meets your moral expectations for yourself, and that involves abstaining from reproducing, then have at it. The danger I see is that, with most movements, once a “critical mass” of support is reached, there tends to be a sentiment of “us vs them”. Then it’s less about accepting other people’s different beliefs (having x children vs having y or 0 children), and more of shaming/“forcing”/coercing non-believers to your side. We see this with cancel culture today, and various other movements in recent times.