SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A 27-year-old Indian man plans to sue his parents for giving birth to him without his consent. Mumbai businessman Raphael Samuel told the BBC that it's wrong to bring children into the world because they then have to put up with lifelong suffering. Mr Samuel, of course, understands that our consent can't be sought before we are born, but insists that "it was not our decision to be born". So as we didn't ask to be born, we should be paid for the rest of our lives to live, he argues.
Mr Samuel's belief is rooted in what's called anti-natalism - a philosophy that argues that life is so full of misery that people should stop procreating immediately. This, he says, would gradually phase out humanity from the Earth and that would also be so much better for the planet.
[...] In a statement, his mother Kavita Karnad Samuel explained her response to "the recent upheaval my son has created". "I must admire my son's temerity to want to take his parents to court knowing both of us are lawyers. And if Raphael could come up with a rational explanation as to how we could have sought his consent to be born, I will accept my fault," she said.
BBC:
Indian man to sue parents for giving birth to him
Mr. Samuel's argument sounds a bit entitled but there are philosophical grounds in support of anti-natalism:
Having children is not life-affirming: it's immoral
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday February 09 2019, @01:35AM (7 children)
Is this guy living a life of suffering? The summary claims he is a business executive and both parents are lawyers. That suggests to me he has and is doing fairly well and that he has received enough of an education and is doing well enough that his claims are rather spurious.
I don't necessarily disagree with his claim that the planet would be better off without humanity, and I believe that a basic income will eventually (perhaps sooner than later) be necessary for humanity to survive in decent conditions, but perhaps we need to include a law where people accept responsibility for themselves upon coming of age, and they accept the basic income and associated social, economic and cultural costs or drop out of society one way or another.
(Score: 5, Touché) by DrkShadow on Saturday February 09 2019, @02:14AM (5 children)
So, you're saying that money buys happiness and no one with any expendable income can be anything but full of joy?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @03:53AM
I'm reminded of a cartoon I saw 35 or more years ago. It was in some skin mag like Hustler or similar.
It shows a man and a (tarted-up) woman sitting at the bar and the woman says:
"Hi! I'm Phyllis Happiness. And yes, money can buy happiness!"
And so, you see, GP was absolutely correct -- as long as her name is 'Happiness' this week. ;)
(Score: 4, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday February 09 2019, @05:42AM (2 children)
Money buys security which is a prerequisite to happiness.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @07:21AM (1 child)
Only if you believe that svabhava is real. Security? In a universe in flux? Dhukka! Attachment to that which does not exist! Yes, in Capitalist American, it may seem like th goal, but see past the provenors of substance, and security! Donald Trump is not real, his assets are illusion, his hair is, well, not real.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday February 09 2019, @12:42PM
Ye ken well what I mean, lad...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Touché) by Nuke on Saturday February 09 2019, @09:53AM
This guy is saying it himself. He wants money to solve his being unhappy.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @09:14AM
You missed key piece of information, he lives in India.