753

it's that simple (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 month ago by any_memes_necessary@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml

92 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Lila_Uraraka@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

Pro-lifers do not care a single bit

[-] bruhsoulz@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

this mf spittin!

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

You still are a wage slave paying rent to a landed lord.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] lemmus@szmer.info -3 points 1 month ago

Not so funny.

[-] steel_nomad@lemmy.world -5 points 1 month ago

Well, specifically women, but yes that sign is not wrong.

load more comments (7 replies)

[+] Allero@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

One issue (and hear me out, I do support abortions, birth control and bodily autonomy!) is that, once given a choice when and how to reproduce, people don't do it as much.

Having pleasure of sex without consequences is screwing the natural incentives for reproduction.

Whether we like it or not, there should be something to support fertility if we don't want to end up in a population crisis, with a few young folks supporting the ever growing army of the elderly.

Now, this should NOT be laws prohibiting abortions, or banning any sort of contraception, but there should be some incentives for people to go, and, well, make babies. This part Republicans got right (wow), they screwed with the suggested methods.

Fixing the financial clusterfuck and letting people live in a bright and predictable world where they know their tomorrow will be good is certainly one way, but I'm afraid it's not enough. What could be the other options? I'm interested in people's opinions.

[-] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago

I'll start worrying about the "population crisis" when there are no more orphans because they've all been adopted.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 1 points 4 weeks ago

Those are unrelated, unfortunately.

An orphan, economically speaking, is still a productive member of society.

Of course, from the position of empathy, it is extremely sad people don't commonly adopt children, and I would welcome everyone to do so - along with having their own. Adoption is important to give everyone a family and save them from the horrors of orphan life. New births are important to keep human population stable and the world continuously running.

As much as I want to only come from the empathetic "adopt first" (and I consider doing so myself in a not-so-distant future), we have to have other considerations as well if we don't want to live in a dying world where everyone - from kids to seniors - faces insane, never-before-seen economic crisis, destroying life for everyone. It already gets worse, and we only dropped fertility a little. There are objective economic factors to this, not only capitalist greed (which, however, is also present).

load more comments (4 replies)

[+] chris@lem.cochrun.xyz -17 points 1 month ago

Doesn't not having sex do that a little better tho? Like i totally get the point, but also, having sex gives chance of baby right? So, don't do it unless you ready? Maybe I'm wrong.

[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

There are only two reasons any post-pubescent human isn't having sex:

They can't find anyone to fuck them.
They're legitimately asexual. (A rare thing. And no lemmy, just because you're not getting laid doesn't make you "asexual".)

[-] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 month ago

Your suggestion has at least two severe issues:

It doesn't scale. The people that can and want to "wait until they're ready" probably are doing that already. Meanwhile, the large, unwashed majority does whatever they feel like, and why would they want that to change?
It takes away personal liberty and punishes people who "cannot control themselves," giving way to social authoritarianism. To me, that's the exact opposite of what any elected government should do: to make people's lives better.