URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Questions & Debates
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 31922--------------------------------------------------
       Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: Aucontraire
       Date: January 10, 2026, 1:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You don't want to be killed because you've grown attached to
       life and afraid of death. Innocence means babies have not. They
       don't consent to life or death. They have no discernable
       preference. They grow and survive because they are programmed
       to. Not because they will it — because nature wills it.
       Aryanists understand life means they will have a body. That they
       will suffer and decay. They believe this outweighs any supposed
       "advantages". That life isn't a gift but a curse. Yet Aryanists
       advocate letting nature impose this curse on unborn babies, on
       top of having state authorities coerce people to carry through
       unwanted pregnancies. They also advocate exploiting children by
       selectively conceiving them to further their political aims.
       What say you in your defense?
       #Post#: 31923--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: January 10, 2026, 4:19 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "They don't consent to life or death."
       I agree. This is why we eventually want an end to conceptions:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/re-childcare-issues/
       "Aryanists advocate letting nature impose this curse on unborn
       babies"
       We do not. We are looking for the path that will lead to the end
       of this.
       "on top of having state authorities coerce people to carry
       through unwanted pregnancies"
       If you are referring to our advocacy for state control over
       reproduction, I have stated previously that no one will be
       coerced to conceive. Instead, we will incentivize the racially
       superior to conceive by offering the prevention of a larger
       number of conceptions by the racially inferior in exchange.
       Recall from the main site:
       --- Quote ---
       > The one and only ethical way to motivate Aryans to reproduce
       is to set up a system such that the more they reproduce, the
       fewer the total number of children being born. For example, the
       state could set an initial maximum limit of total births for
       each year. But then the state could add a rule that, for each
       one birth by the pre-designated Aryan subset within the
       population, it will lower the limit for the following year by
       two births. This would mean that each Aryan birth produces a net
       effect of preventing one child from being born. Hence the more
       enthusiastic we are about depopulation, the more we would
       reproduce. (The incentive can be amplified by increasing the
       arithmetic gradient as required e.g. each Aryan birth could
       prevent 10, 100, 1000, etc. children from being born.)
       --- End Quote ---
       "They also advocate exploiting children by selectively
       conceiving them to further their political aims."
       If you are advocating instead that the state should directly
       prevent all conceptions simultaneously, I agree that this would
       be more ideal, but fear that it would be impractical and lead to
       the state running out of staffers (and hence losing control over
       the population) before mission completion, following which the
       remainder who outlasted us will just go back to their old
       habits.
       If you wish to propose an alternative antinatalist plan, I would
       be happy to read it.
       #Post#: 31927--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: Aucontraire
       Date: January 11, 2026, 5:20 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: 90sRetroFan link ---
       >
       > If you are referring to our advocacy for state control over
       reproduction, I have stated previously that no one will be
       coerced to conceive.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The topic was abortion. I'm going to give you the benefit of the
       doubt that you accidentally glanced over that.
       #Post#: 31929--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: January 11, 2026, 7:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "The topic was abortion."
       So you want me to answer:
       --- Quote ---
       > Abortion = Kindness?
       --- End Quote ---
       Kindness is about actively helping others in achieving their
       aims. I would agree that abortion is kindness towards those who
       regret conceiving. (Whether they deserve it is another matter.)
       Abortion is however not kindness towards the conceived, since
       they have not expressed a preference either way, as you yourself
       note:
       --- Quote ---
       > They don't consent to life or death. They have no discernable
       preference.
       --- End Quote ---
       It would be kinder to the conceived to keep them safe until they
       have expressed a preference one way or another, and only
       thereafter help them on whichever path they prefer. So,
       logically, the only people who could consistently believe
       abortion=kindness overall would be those who deem that kindness
       towards conceivers should take priority over kindness towards
       the conceived.
       #Post#: 31935--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: Aucontraire
       Date: January 13, 2026, 12:44 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: 90sRetroFan link ---
       >
       > It would be kinder to the conceived to keep them safe until
       they have expressed a preference one way or another, and only
       thereafter help them on whichever path they prefer.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Exposing them to life's cruelty is hardly "keeping them safe",
       is it? Do you listen when a newborn cries, or do think that's
       not a clear enough expression of preference?
       #Post#: 31936--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: January 13, 2026, 1:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Do you listen when a newborn cries, or do think that's not a
       clear enough expression of preference?"
       Also you:
       --- Quote ---
       > They have no discernable preference.
       --- End Quote ---
       Pick one.
       #Post#: 31937--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: Aucontraire
       Date: January 13, 2026, 3:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: 90sRetroFan link ---
       >
       > Pick one.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       You're deflecting. Answer the questions.
       Or don't. I don't care. It's clear babies don't want to suffer.
       If they don't prefer life or death, there's no need to let that
       question delay intervention.
       #Post#: 31938--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: 90sRetroFan
       Date: January 13, 2026, 5:17 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "If they don't prefer life or death, there's no need to let that
       question delay intervention."
       If they have no preference, intervention is neither kindness nor
       unkindness towards them. It is initiated violence, though, since
       you have not been given permission by them to choose on their
       behalf.
       Do you understand the difference between a signed contract with
       a declaration that the signer has no preference in a given
       matter (therefore passing the choice to others) and a similar
       contract without a signature? You are arguing in effect that the
       latter entitles you to choose on behalf of everyone who didn't
       sign.
       #Post#: 31939--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: Aucontraire
       Date: January 14, 2026, 2:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: 90sRetroFan link ---
       >
       > If they have no preference, intervention is neither kindness
       nor unkindness towards them. It is initiated violence, though,
       since you have not been given permission by them to choose on
       their behalf.
       >
       > Do you understand the difference between a signed contract
       with a declaration that the signer has no preference in a given
       matter (therefore passing the choice to others) and a similar
       contract without a signature? You are arguing in effect that the
       latter entitles you to choose on behalf of everyone who didn't
       sign.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I was referring to intervention in their suffering. The end
       (non-suffering) is their clear preference, they just can't
       answer which means they'd prefer. Just like if you were to
       choose "on their behalf" between non-lethal treatments, like
       different kinds of analgesic, or a warm bath or some milk and a
       cuddle.
       But, besides (apparently) attacking an argument I didn't make,
       your reasoning has a major flaw: Babies have no "choice" they
       can "pass to others" in the first place. Nature is already
       choosing on their behalf, without their consent. Any
       intervention would be in violence which is already being
       committed — not in an individual's agency over whether they live
       or die.
       #Post#: 31943--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Abortion = Kindness?
   DIR By: christianbethel
       Date: January 14, 2026, 12:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Aucontraire link ---
       >
       > You don't want to be killed because you've grown attached to
       life and afraid of death.
       --- End Quote ---
       We hate life. We only live to complete our mission.
       --- Quote from: Aucontraire link ---
       > Innocence means babies have not. They don't consent to life or
       death. They have no discernable preference. They grow and
       survive because they are programmed to. Not because they will it
       — because nature wills it.
       --- End Quote ---
       The only way to stop this cycle of torture is to prevent them
       from being conceived in the first place.
       --- Quote from: Aucontraire link ---
       > Aryanists understand life means they will have a body. That
       they will suffer and decay. They believe this outweighs any
       supposed "advantages". That life isn't a gift but a curse. Yet
       Aryanists advocate letting nature impose this curse on unborn
       babies, on top of having state authorities coerce people to
       carry through unwanted pregnancies. They also advocate
       exploiting children by selectively conceiving them to further
       their political aims.
       >
       > What say you in your defense?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Everything you just said is the opposite of what we believe in.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 4
   DIR Next Page