It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Beach Bum
a reply to: lakenheath24
Hillarious needed a good laugh today, I'm sure his young mind was fully capable of saying he didn't want to be born (before being born). I'm also sure I'm the King of England and should be adored always with my face decorating Big Ben.
originally posted by: lakenheath24
a reply to: Peeple
Wtf peeps!? Lol. How would you know if you gave permission? Give me one single memory of your life at 6 months old? You cant..
Idiot does not realise that it's his own damn fault for being born. His sperm won over all the other ones. Consent is implicitly implied.
I think traversing the birth canal is consent.
originally posted by: elysiumfire
jadedANDcynical:
Idiot does not realise that it's his own damn fault for being born. His sperm won over all the other ones. Consent is implicitly implied.
...and not to be out done...
UncleTomahawk:
I think traversing the birth canal is consent.
Where the hell do you two get your logic from? Either you are both taking the piss, or you both have deep mental issues you are not aware of. You two are succinct examples of why I despair for our species, I should sue you both for the mental anguish you are causing me. So flawed are you both in your thinking.
Clearly, you are both educated to a level where you can operate a computer and string some words together, but you both are entirely lacking any kind of logical sense. I shouldn't have to ask this of either of you, but how can it be 'his' sperm? How can 'traversing the birth canal' be considered as consent to be born?
Clearly, for him to win his case, he has to prove that he existed prior to being both conceived and born. The fact that he may 'believe' he pre-existed cannot be enough, he has to prove 'his' pre-existence beyond all doubt. His parents could counter-sue him for not being the son they wanted. Oh my, what a can of worms.
In philosophical terms, I too, am an Antinatalist, because its logic cannot be argued with. You can only argue against it by being unreasonable, ergo, you have no opposing stance that can be taken seriously.
originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Am going to guess that this isn't serious.
Feels to me more like its a academic thought exercise, a bit of a legal experiment if you like, I would assume its not a serious law suit and there is probably more to this story.