Would you rather have a happy or meaningful life: La uren Sou thern
Posted by freya
Most of it is the same breederific gibberish but found a few hidden gems within the wrongs and silliness:
She said parenting is deeper purpose and meaning versus (being childfree) being okay and having extra pocket change. Hmmm....never heard it put that way. Next time the cashier gives you pocket change be sure to think about how lucky you are that you didn't have kids so you can afford to buy a DVD every couple of months.
And whatever you do, you are only allowed to be okay doing it, not happy, good or bad. If you feel anything other than okay then you have to be a parent.
She is also 23 and therefore knows all this from her many years of wisdom. Just who told her having kids amounts to extra pocket change at a cost of over $250K per kid without including college? Is she so wealthy that $250K is extra pocket change to her? And "being okay" as childfree, does this mean she thinks we just exist without joy and feel okay every day? Anyone familiar with the term "some things in life you have to do, whether you like it or not" will know the childfree are less susceptible to this than parents are.
But she also asks if the viewer would rather have a happy or a meaningful life? Wait a minute....thought for the childfree that life was okay not happy. World of difference in being happy versus being okay.
Being happy and having a meaningful life are mutually exclusive according to our armchair expert.
Has she ever looked around her to see how happy the single parents who didn't acquire a trade before breeding are? How many were positively affected by loss of a spouse and no job skills with one or more kids? And they all say they'd do it again, too right? Of course she can't lament about reality, it is against her political party. I'm not sure if she is lying about all this (as she really knows it isn't true and has perversely twisted the argument to fit her agenda) or if she is this dumb.
The title of the video is "ACCORDING TO "SCIENCE" - Don't Have Kids?" but she is very breederific:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxgW4HfMos4
She said parenting is deeper purpose and meaning versus (being childfree) being okay and having extra pocket change. Hmmm....never heard it put that way. Next time the cashier gives you pocket change be sure to think about how lucky you are that you didn't have kids so you can afford to buy a DVD every couple of months.
And whatever you do, you are only allowed to be okay doing it, not happy, good or bad. If you feel anything other than okay then you have to be a parent.
She is also 23 and therefore knows all this from her many years of wisdom. Just who told her having kids amounts to extra pocket change at a cost of over $250K per kid without including college? Is she so wealthy that $250K is extra pocket change to her? And "being okay" as childfree, does this mean she thinks we just exist without joy and feel okay every day? Anyone familiar with the term "some things in life you have to do, whether you like it or not" will know the childfree are less susceptible to this than parents are.
But she also asks if the viewer would rather have a happy or a meaningful life? Wait a minute....thought for the childfree that life was okay not happy. World of difference in being happy versus being okay.
Being happy and having a meaningful life are mutually exclusive according to our armchair expert.
Has she ever looked around her to see how happy the single parents who didn't acquire a trade before breeding are? How many were positively affected by loss of a spouse and no job skills with one or more kids? And they all say they'd do it again, too right? Of course she can't lament about reality, it is against her political party. I'm not sure if she is lying about all this (as she really knows it isn't true and has perversely twisted the argument to fit her agenda) or if she is this dumb.
The title of the video is "ACCORDING TO "SCIENCE" - Don't Have Kids?" but she is very breederific:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxgW4HfMos4
Just what is meaningful about bringing an innocent life into this dying world? Between the ice caps melting, antibiotic resistance & 2,000-year-old African trees crumbling in a few short years, humanity is on its way out. There may be life but there will be no quality of life for future generations. It will revert to survival rather than a true life. That's not even considering our crazed political system & the rise of automation which is projected to claim a whopping 40% of all jobs in the next 20 years. Yeah, super "meaningful".
These smug breeders are so self-satisfied. Such martyrs for sacrificing their happiness to bring an unwilling soul into this rat race called life. Or maybe it is they who are selfish, considering there are already so many existing kids who need loving homes while they blow hundreds of thousands on IVF & other means of creating a DNA replicant.
Also, I choose "happy" since we have to pick one.
These smug breeders are so self-satisfied. Such martyrs for sacrificing their happiness to bring an unwilling soul into this rat race called life. Or maybe it is they who are selfish, considering there are already so many existing kids who need loving homes while they blow hundreds of thousands on IVF & other means of creating a DNA replicant.
Also, I choose "happy" since we have to pick one.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.