What is a positive argument for why white people, (or anyone else) should have children?

What is a positive argument for why white people, (or anyone else) should have children?

Being a parent is the most magical thing you can ever do in your life. Seeing your child's smile is the greatest feeling you will ever experience. Also muh bloodline.

1. So they can have people to take care of them when they're older who actually give a shit about them.
2. Evolution makes kids look fucking adorable.
3. The world would collapse in 10 to 15 years if nobody had kids.

pic unrelated

lel as if your white women want to have children with you, pure fucking fantasy white boy

people often use the argument that if you bring a child into existence you are the cause of every ill and pain that will befall it and that the world is an awful place and it wouldnt be fair for the child.

The opposite is indeed true where not having children deprives those potential people of the chance for every pleasure and the chance for every potential success they will have to improve humanity and create a better world. It is the duty of the moral, caring or intelligent to create life that will uphold, maintain and advance civilization because the alternative is death, the alternative is nothingness. Which is worse even than the worst society. Nothingness is less preferable than hell itself, because even in Hell there is HOPE. Even in hell there is a chance of heaven.

NASA HATES WHITE PPL

...

Thanks, user! I'll remember this in the future.

Okay, and what do you say to the anti-natalists, who say that bringing a baby into the world without their consent is subjecting them to pain and suffering that could otherwise be avoided if they didn't have kids?
See, the first argument is a non-issue, because people who don't have kids can afford long term care, and there are tons of people who's kids don't give a shit about them. Having kids is not a guarantee that they will give two fucks about you, or that they even be in a financial position to take care of you. Number three is true though. So is the main reason to have kids to continue the economy?
Fuck off 56%, the adults are talking

>Okay, and what do you say to the anti-natalists, who say that bringing a baby into the world without their consent is subjecting them to pain and suffering that could otherwise be avoided if they didn't have kids?
see

...

At least fulffill your biological imperative, you lazy fuck.

And take out the trash.

So there's more of us than there are of them when the collapse finally comes

Thanks m8. So if I'm understanding this correctly, the main reason to have children is self-preservation?

Naturalistic fallacy is still a fallacy you dumb half-breed. The argument has also been made that being homosexual is natural, and therefore should be encouraged and accepted, but everyone recognizes that that is retarded, as it also justifies rape and cannibalism.

If you're not buying into the fantasy of immortality just what are you buying into?

Something to ask yourself.

But that is dumb, I asked for positive reasons to have children, not just throwing the question back onto the questioner like a fucking Brazillian nigger
> huehuehuehuehue
> if you don't do things my way what are you going to do instead?
I don't know, and that doesn't matter, because that isn't the question right now.

Things might get better one day. If we go extinct, well never know.

>The argument has also been made that being homosexual is natural,
the difference being that evolution selects for one and not the other. incentivizes one and not the other.

Fpbp. As much as I dislike kids, I'm not going to let my bloodline cease to exist because I fell for the MGTOW or DINK meme.

Worst comes to worst, and I'll simply pull a DJT by getting a mail-order bride that isn't cucked like most western white women are.

moar of the girl

So then the argument doesn't take its justification from the fact that it is natural, and instead about what is evolutionarily preferable. Okay, so the gist that I'm getting is that white people should have children because
a) it is necessary to have children so that society may continue
b) if we do not, white people will be replaced with non-white people who will not be able to maintain society as we know it
c) having children means you might have loving caretakers when you are older
d) it is personally fulfilling


Fuck off gypsy, white people are talking.

you missed the fact that existence always preferable to nothingness.

Well, clearly not, because some people commit suicide, so (at the very least) they believed that existence was preferable to nothingness, and you could make the argument that if you haven't committed suicide, then you are tacitly acknowledging that existence is preferable to nothingness, and therefore would be inconsistent to affirm the value of life for yourself, but when it comes to kids, say that it is not.

So what is it that makes existence preferable to nothingness??

> they believed that nothingness was preferable to existence
ftfm

It's basically Camus' question, why is existence preferable to nothingness??

If we don't reproduce we die off as a species?

As gay father I can greatly support this claim.
My mixed child smiles at me with his thick somalian lips reminding me of how progressive and evolved we are as humans so much so that racemixing and worshiping Obergruppen black cock is inevitable. #hEwillNOTDIVIDEOSS

existence is preferable to nothingness because it gives the CHOICE. The freedom of choosing of chance, of hope for change. From nothingness, nothing comes. From existence anything may come.

April 15th is the day if the freedom rally

...

>Fuck off gypsy, white people are talking.

:'(

But that's begging the question, in which you have already accepted the presupposition that life is a good thing, and that if we died off as a species that would be a bad thing- I'm asking for the justification of such a statement.

From my own life, I think the answer to this one is that if you do not value life, then logically, you should kill yourself. But if you kill yourself, then you removed the possibility of having transcendental experiences like love, hope, joy etc., and that it is these transcendental experiences which make life worth living. If you pull the plug on life, then no more transcendental experiences. The goal/meaning of life then is intimately connected with having transcendental experiences, and securing the conditions wherein we might have transcendental experiences. Having children is one of the most surefire ways to guarantee transcendental experiences for yourself, because children bring so much love and life into the world.

But I'm not at all convinced that an unqualified endorsement of more choice and more freedom is, in and of itself, a good thing. Consumer studies demonstrate this as well, that when you give a consumer too many options, it is actually stressful and they shut down. The desire to promote freedom and liberty stems from a more fundamental recognition that protecting freedom is one of the best ways to protect life, but we can see that there are cases when it is quite appropriate to restrict freedom in the service of life, such as not allowing individuals to carry firearms on planes. It's the same reason that parents give curfews and don't let their kids watch certain TV shows/internet sites. The difference between the relationship with parents and children and the government and citizens is that the citizens don't trust the parent to make the right choice all the time (and rightly so) hence the surest way to preserve life is to preserve liberty.

It's natural.

In fact, its our biological function.

If you think you're somehow superior to nature, you're a loon.

>But I'm not at all convinced that an unqualified endorsement of more choice and more freedom is, in and of itself, a good thing. Consumer studies demonstrate this as well, that when you give a consumer too many options, it is actually stressful and they shut down. The desire to promote freedom and liberty stems from a more fundamental recognition that protecting freedom is one of the best ways to protect life, but we can see that there are cases when it is quite appropriate to restrict freedom in the service of life, such as not allowing individuals to carry firearms on planes. It's the same reason that parents give curfews and don't let their kids watch certain TV shows/internet sites. The difference between the relationship with parents and children and the government and citizens is that the citizens don't trust the parent to make the right choice all the time (and rightly so) hence the surest way to preserve life is to preserve liberty.


What is the basis of good and bad?

Pleasure and pain.

nothingness -> no pleasure AND no pain

therefore
nothingness = 0 good and 0 bad

existence -> pleasure OR pain
existence = 1 good or 1 bad

only one of these options has good in it.

Nothingness is a battle already lost. For eternity.

The answer to Camus' question then
> why should I not kill myself
is that if you kill yourself, you remove the possibility of having transcendental experiences. It's like the cliche'd, "suicide is not the answer, it just removes the possibility of things getting better". There's a grain of truth in that, but it is so poorly articulated that it is no wonder that kids aren't offing themselves with more regularity.

Note also that choosing to continue to live is no guarantee that life will actually be pleasant. You could very well go through life without having any kind of transcendent experience (or final experience, in the parlance of Carl Jaspers). But the point is that if you off yourself, you have GUARANTEED that you will not have any more transcendent experiences in this life, and who knows what happens when you die?

But that's wrong, pleasure and pain are not synonymous with good and bad, that is just incredibly foolish. Suffering and pain (at a certain level of analysis) can be very good things, because it is when we suffer that we increase our capacity to have transcendent experiences. The person who has had their heart broken is able to feel that much more profoundly the preciousness of love. The individual who has suffered and lost will hold their loved one's all the more tightly, because they KNOW how valuable they are. Suffering stretches you and grows you in ways that pleasure never can- we should all hope and pray for suffering in our lives, because it is only when we have learned to suffer that we will have learned to appreciate those moments of transcendence: beauty, hope, love, joy. But in the West, we have made suffering something to be avoided at all cost, and we wonder why our lives are so shallow and unfulfilling? Gorging ourselves on our own abundance, and then wondering why we're unhappy and unfulfilled.

Because niggers and shitskins are incapable of running civilization

So then the real refutation of the
> bringing kids into the world is increasing suffering
is to say: YES! They will suffer, everyone in life suffers! And it is through suffering (paradoxically) that more beauty, and love enters the world. Having children then is an act of creating more beauty and love and joy in the world, which is a very noble and desirable goal.

>But that's wrong, pleasure and pain are not synonymous with good and bad, that is just incredibly foolish. Suffering and pain (at a certain level of analysis) can be very good things, because it is when we suffer that we increase our capacity to have transcendent experiences. The person who has had their heart broken is able to feel that much more profoundly the preciousness of love. The individual who has suffered and lost will hold their loved one's all the more tightly, because they KNOW how valuable they are. Suffering stretches you and grows you in ways that pleasure never can- we should all hope and pray for suffering in our lives, because it is only when we have learned to suffer that we will have learned to appreciate those moments of transcendence: beauty, hope, love, joy. But in the West, we have made suffering something to be avoided at all cost, and we wonder why our lives are so shallow and unfulfilling? Gorging ourselves on our own abundance, and then wondering why we're unhappy and unfulfilled.

you are arguing my point for me. Pain is good when pain leads to pleasure or an environment conducive to pleasure (emotional growth or fortitude of character).

We run away from suffering because we no longer understand that suffering in the present is an investment in greater pleasure down the road. A quote, I cant remember who said it, the essence of civilization is self-sacrifice. pain in the present for pleasure in the future, and not necessarily for the self.

I've never met anyone who regretted having kids.

they are, its just not a civilization with any kind of future beyond just getting by.

Once they hit 7 or 8 you can start to force them to do chores around the house.

When there is hope, a guarantee of improvement in exchange for the price of misery, suffering is not in vain.

Otherwise, all that suffering just causes a person to die sooner (wasted experience and potential - a loss for society).

Physiologically, prolonged suffering (chronic stress) is a severe detriment to one's health. Humans dislike and try to avoid suffering for completely rational, biologically justified reasons.

I'll buy the "life is pain, and that is OK" argument when society can guarantee all suffering will be rewarded. No, not reparations (induced suffering for the "oppressors"), but unconditional survival and the option to thrive and live well in exchange for meaningful work.

lmao, no they don't

>You will never have a milf lover who will smother you with her breasts as you plow her from the front while engaging in age-play dirty talk

>middle eastern female sender
what happened there

Kids are the only purpose in life, everything else is meaningless.

You realise nothing else maters when you have kids of your own.

Yes, precisely, and I think this is the best answer to give to anyone who asks why evil exists in the world, especially things like natural disasters, hunger, etc., which are outside of our control. Natural evils offer us the opportunity to suffer. Through suffering, we increase our capacity to appreciate (and have) transcendental experiences, as well as to cultivate the virtues (which help us to survive and thrive in the world). And it is having and appreciating transcendental experiences (like love, joy, beauty, spiritual oneness) which makes life worth living.

So by having kids, (and having lots of kids) you are multiplying the amount of love, joy, and beauty in existence, and if that is not a goal worth living for, then you might as well kill yourself.

But that's wrong; life is suffering, and that's okay EVEN IF not all suffering will be rewarded. No one can guarantee that all suffering will be rewarded except maybe if there really is a God and a heaven and a hell and all that, and I'm not 100% sure of that. But life is suffering and that's still okay because suffering still increases our capacity to have transcendental experiences, and continuing to live ensures the possibility that we might have them. I guess that's what hope is. It's like, if having a truly transcendent experience of love is like rain; suffering is like being given extra jars and pots and pans in which to catch the rain. And what if the rain never comes, and you're left in a dry, dusty desert with a bunch of empty jars? I don't know, but the odds of it never raining on anyone is pretty low, and killing yourself and accepting the proposition that life is suffering and that non-existence is preferable to existence only guarantees that no rain will ever fall on you.

>Being high is the most magical thing you can ever do in your life. Shooting heroine is the greatest feeling you will ever experience. Also muh bloodline.

Arguments that it feels good are silly because whatever benefit you get comes at extreme cost, in both time, effort and money, as well as huge lost opportunity costs. And that dopamine kick you get from the whole experience wears off very fast, as with pleasure from anything.

Jesus man

Just shut the fuck up

Tell me

Do you have a hot canadian sister for me?I need that canadian card mang

It means that if their family or community didn't ostracise or inflict violence on their women they would be massive cock gobblers. Pic related could be your Arab waifu if it wasn't for Islam.

Pain is part of life you stupid pussy, if you don't want to feel it just kill yourself

>So by having kids, (and having lots of kids) you are multiplying the amount of love, joy, and beauty in existence, and if that is not a goal worth living for, then you might as well kill yourself.

and there you get into the conditionals, having children is good only if you raise them correctly (largest reason why non white civilization sucks so hard is because they treat their children like shit)

white male is least likely to respond to a female sender. interesting

You are, and always will be, a subhuman Roma gypsy nigger.
Fuck off Achmed al-Karim bar-jabar
Well, that and the fact that they are evolutionarily adapted for life outside of Western civilization. (IQ, aggression, etc.) But you're right. It is incumbent upon parents to raise their children correctly, otherwise they will not be increasing the amount of love, joy, and beauty in the world. And at the same time, to raise children correctly is not to never have them suffer- that's where you get helicopter parents and the whole shit show of people trying to bubble wrap their kids so that they never feel any amount of discomfort. This is also a blow against the people who think that if they can't give their kids a gold-plated Mercedes for their sixteenth birthday, then they shouldn't have kids (or some other bullshit like that).

so what you're trying to say that if I get an arab waifu I get a qt waifu AND cuck islamists?

>Okay, and what do you say to the anti-natalists, who say that bringing a baby into the world without their consent is subjecting them to pain and suffering that could otherwise be avoided if they didn't have kids?

That they are retarded for thinking that existence is guaranteed misery and if it's as bad as they say they should commit suicide.

Id call the anti natalist fucking pussies that cant deal with life

YES!

don't racemix
its degenerate

fucking swedes

I cant tell if your a cuckold toronto treatment liberal, an anti child Sup Forumsack or just a shitposter

This man knows

>wanting racially confused children
shigdug

Not advocating, just saying...
Also,
>Arab-Eropean mix
at wurst your kid would look like an Italian. Also, mind over matter. If you raise your kid with Judeo-Christian or any other moral values beside shit ones he/she'll be fine.

> A fucking gyp-
Oh, you're not the other guy.
If you didn't notice dumbfuck, people (and especially white people) are being swayed by propaganda that essentially discourages them from having kids, even people who have otherwise desirable genes are contributing to white displacement because they have bought into the anti-natalist/childfree memes. Most Sup Forumsacks didn't start out redpilled from the womb, we were won over by the superior arguments. Nowadays most people on this board are just shitposters.
No. Race-mixing leads to physical, mental and identity problems.

Is that fuckin NutnFancy?

life is a zero sum game and more whites means less undesirables.

>your 90 IQ halfmud child will totally be ok if you raise it w/ the proper values, goyim

people who use those online services are usually sex addicts looking for something novel and whats more novel than sticking your dick into brown woman who's forced to wear a bag on her head in public