XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.atheism, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
   XPost: sci.environment   
   From: abortsupremecourt@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/28/2025 2:44 PM, T. Howard Pines, Jr. wrote:   
   > Coming into existence, or "getting to experience life", is not better   
   > than never existing.  It can't be, because no such comparison can be   
   > made.  Nor can existence be worse than never existing, for the same reason.   
   >   
   > In order to say that anything is better or worse for an entity, one   
   > necessarily is talking about two different states of welfare or well-   
   > being for the entity. But an entity must exist in order to have a   
   > welfare state of well-being.  Thus, the comparison between existence and   
   > non-existence, from the perspective of the entity, cannot be made.  It   
   > is absurd.   
   I agree with you on the narrow point that existence cannot be said to be   
   better or worse *for the resulting individual*, since non-existence does not   
   constitute a welfare state.   
      
   However, my objection to reproduction does not rely on a welfare comparison   
   between existence and non-existence at all.   
      
   The claim is instead consent-based.   
      
   Bringing a person into existence is an irreversible imposition that exposes   
   them to harm, constraint, and obligation without their consent. The fact   
   that   
   the individual does not exist prior to the act does not nullify the   
   absence of   
   consent; it merely guarantees it.   
      
   We routinely regard non-consensual impositions as morally suspect even when   
   the subject cannot consent at the time (e.g., irreversible medical decisions   
   made *for* someone). In those cases, the absence of consent is treated as a   
   moral problem, not a moral permission.   
      
   So the argument is not:   
   “Existence is worse than non-existence.”   
      
   It is:   
   “Imposing existence without the possibility of consent is morally   
   unjustifiable, regardless of whether the resulting individual later judges   
   their life positively.”   
      
   That conclusion follows without invoking welfare comparisons at all.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)