Indian man to sue his parents for giving birth to him ‘without his consent’, wants to be paid fo

smh

All I can think of is a scene from Ladyhawke.

getyarn.io...

That there, provided it's not a hoax of some sort, is world-class entitlement issues...

Good...ness.

Past life regressions would be the only way to prove it...and I doubt, quite strongly, that that would be admissible.

Idiot.

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: 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.

He obviously learned the American way of handling this

Next thing he will sue his dog because of the dog pissing on the front door and he having a bad anxiety episode due to having to clean up the mess

I mean, the path to success is so obvious!

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..

I can.

I remember yummy boobs.

a reply to: lakenheath24

I actually agree with him. I also saw a Syrian movie if I'm not mistaken that is about the same theme. A child sues his parents for bringing him into this world, I don't remmeber the title of the movie, but it was great.

7 billion + human beings on this earth, and the number keeps increasing. How will this planet support so many human beings? is drinkable water infinite? Food? What about pollution? lack of jobs? The enormous harm Mankind has caused to planet earth? Global warming? The hole in the ozone? the melting of the icecaps? Millions and millions of people killed in wars, millions murdered, millions made to be sex slaves and personal incubators by stone age religions?

They complain that my generation, the millennials, are not having babies, that we're selfish and immature. But really? What right do I have to become a parent? Am I a member of the Aristocracy; do I have hereditary titles to pass on?

No.

Am I rich; do I have wealth for unborn children to inherit?

No.

Do I have the aesthetics of Brad Pitt, and thus have something worthwile to give to a son or a daughter?

No.

So why the heck are billions of men and women making babies by the dozens of millions every year, everyday?

Because they are genetically selfish. They believe they have the right to have children. But siring children isn't a right, is a luxury that should only be reserved for a handful of human beings(Rich or handsome and muscular and tall, or perfectly healthy without any physical flaw, mental etc)

My suggestion is that if he wins then the state should immediately carry out a post natal abortion as a form of reparation. It's only fair.

Upon his death, any payments he received from his parents should be passed to his nearest relatives. There's no way this nutter is married, so his parents would likely be the beneficiaries.

Job jobbed.

The problem is that a newborn cannot speak or give consent or even knows what the hell is going on!

However, I see where the dude is coming from. All these folk from poor countries just having children who grow into adults wishing they'd never been born. Lol

With all the news of choosing your gender identitiy & such we now get this 'news' story which is absurd, bonkers & brilliant!

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: 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.

Regardless of these philosophical quandaries, the fact of the matter is that a foetus or whatever could not give consent anyway...

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.

Quite and sadly, foetuses can't consent.

If the parents wanted to terminate a pregnancy before the legal limit (in whichever country there were in), the foetus would have no say on it for example...