/lit/ - Literature

>>16202846
the difference is one pertains to an already existent human, and the other pertains to starting a human life that need not be. there is no downside for the potential child to not be born (he is not deprived of the good in life, as he doesn't exist yet). Once already born, raised, encultured within a society etc, your only options are to gamble/risk suffering. you are condemned to choose and act.

according to antinatalists this is a bad thing, and could be avoided entirely if the parent-to-be realizes that "gambling" when the losses fall on someone else, and winning involves a life of struggle, work, aging and death - that this is not a good moral choice to make.

He's so consumed about his love for Star Wars that he teared up to a teaser. I wish I could feel the same way about anything.

>>13407321
He's right though

>tfw going to be a wagecuck soon
Should I treat everyone at my workplace like subhumans and do my best to get fired?

Is g/acc just a fetishistic ideology around destroying humanity to get laid?

Any books for this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ug2DOoxJ1g