I tax my children. I just loan them pieces of paper that they have to earn by working for me, then they use their debt to pay for the things they need to stay alive, but at the end of each year I make them pay it back to me with interest. This way they stay in perpetual debt to me, and my kids always a have a job.
Instead of an argument on taxing children, perhaps we should just not give families with kids so many advantages over the rest of us who don’t get married and have kids. It’s crazy that normal healthy people get advantages like tax breaks for being married but disabled people on benefits are treated the opposite way and penalized if they get married.
The guy sounds like Exdeath from Final Fantasy 4 or any other final fantasy villain. "Existence brings suffering so therefore existence is bad and therefore I will kill everyone". It's dumb life existential bullshit that doesnt make any sense
Marcus O., This dude doesn't understand that, given his reasoning, his parents could have been convinced that they shouldn't have kids because of x,y,z. Then he's wouldn't be here to offer his opinion.
@@synchronium24 I read around a little after seeing this comment. It seems like Iceland offers voluntary pre-natal testing, and would-be parents make an informed decision on whether or not to terminate pregnancy. Same way parents can choose to terminate a pregnancy if they see a debilitating deformity from an ultrasound. Children with Down’s are still born (albeit, very few. About 2 to 3) every year in Iceland. Your reply seems to be defending eugenics (which involves government enforcement), but Iceland isn’t doing eugenics.
@@thatdarnskag5043 You are correct about the Iceland policy. I thought screening was mandatory, while abortion was voluntary. Turns out they are voluntary. As for eugenics: " In recent years, the term has seen a revival in bioethical discussions on the usage of new technologies such as CRISPR and genetic screening, with a heated debate on whether these technologies should be called eugenics or not." Which was the main thrust of my comment. Anything vaguely associated with eugenics, no matter how reasonable, is linked to Nazism.
@@shady8045 No, no. You misunderstand I think. Christian fundamentalists also believe the world is only suffering. They just believe that people *deserve* the suffering because this world is a punishment for us all due to the original sin of Adam and Eve. With a deal of "If you follow God's laws, you get to enjoy eternal bliss after you die"
The fact that he mentions Sickle Cell Anemia is a major red flag to me because I'm pretty sure that affects African Americans way more than most people
A fun fact. People with cicle cell can't get malaria. It's an evolutionary phenomenon to make sure the human race survives in an environment where malaria was prominent. Diseases and genetic issues have reasons. In the right environment and conditions they are life saving. In the wrong one they are deniabiliting
@@noah5291 Yeah, the caller is antinatalist. The difference is, I thought antinatalism was philosophical, rather than actually calling for government action to restrict births.
Caller: I don't believe in Eugenics bs, I just believe in preventing people who are predisposed to genetic diffects/disorders I deem undesirable from reproducing.
Well i think there are certainly genetic disorders that are objectively bad. But I think it's up to the individual to weigh the risk of passing that on. The government should never have a say in that
He explained it in one of the worst ways possible (and confused the issue by making it a eugenics thing, probably as an attempt to make anti-natalism more "marketable" but almost certainly just alienating even more people in the process), but the point is a question of consent. People who are alive can consent to stuff, because they are people who are alive. People who aren't alive can't consent to anything, because they don't exist. Thus if you're giving birth to people you are necessarily subjecting them to things without their consent in a way that is fundamentally different to just going around murdering people. I don't blame Sam and the others for not understanding how their counterargument didn't really work since the dude did such a poor job of even setting up the conversation, and in any case this definitely isn't the show to try to argue extreme philosophical positions on anyway.
@@TheSquareOnesare you claiming people consent to having cancer or diseases? He explained it poorly because it is stupid way to look at it. You can't have babies because you might have one with an issue and they didn't consent to that, but adults don't consent to disease either. No one consents to have disease.
@@robingalbraith323 No. I'm saying the unborn can't consent to anything and you're forcing them into a situation where negative experiences are highly likely if not certain to happen. Whether or not adults can consent to disease is irrelevant, I'm not sure where you got that from and if anything it just supports my argument. Yes, people who exist will experience horrible things they didn't want, what a great reason to stop forcing people to exist.
@@TheSquareOnes "people who are alive can consent to stuff, because they are people who are alive." so since this entire discussion you are adding your opinion on, was specifically about disease and illness, i dont know why it would be a shock that i applied your comment to the literal topic at hand, ie illness and disease. then this gem "people who exist will experience horrible things" but yet earlier you said "if you're giving birth to people you are necessarily subjecting them to things without their consent in a way the is fundamentally different to just going around murdering people" people dont consent to murder. so wouldnt that be exactly the same, ie subjecting someone to horrible things without their consent. to be honest, you make even less sense than the guy in the video.
I paraphrase... "Do you think that the government should create a master race?" - Eugenics Fascist "No, I do not agree with that" - Emma, Sam and Normal People
@Ruthless Minion If you can’t understand the difference between individual choice-what the pro-choice movement is all about-and restricting reproductive rights-Margaret Sanger and the pro-life movement-I don’t know how to help you. Sorry bro
@Ruthless Minion WTF is your point? '...Post-modern...blah blah...woke projection...blah blah...comfortable discussing eugenics so brazenly''? You must barely be passing your philosophy classes. Articulate your point better
@Ruthless Minion You arer right, this segment is about someone who fails at logic, and struggles with day to day life. They have presupposed their life has more value than that of a person in a wheelchair or has an overbite. This segment is about a type of person that presumes to know and have the ability to know the "value" of a life, while naturally holding their own to the highest level. You are right, this segment is about idiots thinking nothing should exist. A nihilist - aka the biggest waste of time ever.
Deep down, the right knows that it has lost the battle of the ideas. Hence, the effort to rebrand all of their awful ideas. (Yes, both sides liked eugenics 100 years ago, but something changed that about 80-90 years ago. Gee, I wonder what or whom.) That's why "white supremacist" became white nationalist, then ethnostate and alt-right.
My great-uncle had Huntington's disease. None of his children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren developed it. WTF? Actually, some of his great-grandchildren still have time so I edited this comment to allow for future development of disease. I don't want the IRS to get mad.
Sickle cell is also rare to pass on and only will when both parents have the gene. My fiancé was the only one out of 4 kids to have it with the same parents. If you have sickle cell you can literally find others without it in their genes. Even if two people with it have children the children have low odds of having it.
Exactly, it’s a personal choice. Now, we have genetic testing to determine the risk and odds of inheriting the disease; and while still highly controversial, the option for IVF and pre-genetic diagnosis to eliminate or minimize that risk altogether.
@@HoudiniFontmeister do you know the difference between homozygous and heterozygous genes? cause i'm pretty sure you can have one parent with one copy of sickle cell, the other parent with no sickle cell, and half of their kids will have one copy and the other half will have none.
I have a child with bones that are brittle. Over 50 breaks in his lifetime so far. I can assure you, he is thrilled that he gets to live. He has told me. We had the option to abort early on and we decline. Almost made me cry the day he thanked me for that!! Ughhhhh 😢
@@andredunbar3773They believe that because humans have the capacity to suffer it's better to never have been born. So they advocate for voluntarily ending human procreation. Tho this guy includes animals which I've never heard before haha. But they still think life is worth living if you're already born so they don't advocate for like suicide or genocide.
@@hermanisaza67 Correction, a ridiculous arbitrary attempt to decide who has worth and who doesn't. Which self-implodes on itself. Its a SELF PROCLAIMED Ethical take, lol. It's not ethical to assess for someone else, whether their life has merit and whether their living out weighs or doesn't out weigh the suffering they may experience or impose. Its like, 9th grade just learned about philosophy level thinking lol.
One of my aunts was born with Spina bifida, shes almost 59 years old, that age is well past the average life expectancy for someone with that condition. She's lived a good life and I cant imagine not of had her in my life, shes been an inspiration to others.
The guys a Antinatalist, he doesn't think "anyone" should be making babies. I do think he's coming at this more from a "severe" genetic disorder, which I don't think Spina Bifida is. Something along the lines of Cystic fibrosis, often would see people dying in their teens / 20's. Which might not even be correct, as I think they just had a break through drug last couple years. Edit to be clear, not defending his stance, I do think people wanting to have kids should get checked on their own. I do think it's selfish to knowingly pass on a severe disorder to a child.
@@spencers4121 For the CF thing you’re correct, there is medicine that’s makes the symptoms of CF go away but a person still has it (it’s a good medication but not everyone can take it)
@@spencers4121 Their position is fundementally flawed, and mostly arrogant. They presume to know what the limits of medical treatments are. This person's attempt to use medical Dxs as a crutch for their ultimate goal, no babies aka no life, while also arbitrarily determining what is suffering. See how they just straight said "Animals shouldn't be here either, too much suffering" as if nature has any sense of this when it comes to the process of life. Its absurd. Assume this stance back in the early days of medicine. How many people would have been prevented from living / killed off because they felt certain traits passed on from parent to child couldn't be addressed to provide a good life. Not only that, where do we draw the line? Is living wheelchair bound suffering? Is having half your teeth suffering? It stems from poor thinking, and failing to be able to globalize a position and understand the impact. Basically, its how you get a Libertarian.
triknives It's beyond things like diseases and illness though it also has to do with the fact that life itself can just become too overwhelming at any point in time for some people who don't want to be bothered with non stop responsibilities of keeping up with payments and interacting with people and being in need of necessities all the time to even be comfortable in life. It's also no secret that the environment is taking a quick turn for the worst it just has hasn't kicked into full gear yet but soon enough the effects will be noticed and it will be too late for all of us and the best thing to do would prevent more people from having to deal with those consequences from the mindless mistakes of other generations.
My fiancé died after living with sickle cell all her life. Her child does not have sickle cell and none of her siblings have it. This caller has no idea what he’s talking about.
If you think life isn't worth living and there's no joy in this world that is worth the suffering that comes with life then there's a good chance you're suffering from clinical depression. These callers don't contemplate the possibility their own difficulties in finding joy and meaning in their lives are a subjective matter rather than an objective truth about the universe. Instead of recognizing pathology they turn it into a philosophy.
@@Opheliakami I looked him up seems like a sad sack loser and he is a white South African so he’s probably just sad he doesn’t have state enforced supremacy anymore
@@oo0O08 Yeah, basically. Like, I respect not wanting to have kids in todays world. It's wild, a lot of things are up in the air and I personally (not an anti-natalist) don't know if I can make that decision morally. But... my dude, you don't get to impose that choice on other people through taxation. Least of which is because having children creates MORE problem solvers. Dude was straight up like "Yeah, everyone would be better off if they died because that would end their suffering." But like, people don't want to either die nor suffer, generally speaking. >w< I mean, I joke about "We need someone to cast meteor." all the time, but this guy was down to clown for real! xD
This is *PERFECTION!* My side hurts from the hilarity!🤣 TYSM for keepin him on for 9 mins, Sam! I severely needed the levity! "Animal IRS..."!😹😹 Keep up the STELLAR work, Team Seder!👏🙌 😷💉✌♥️🌎
I see it as not so much about the wellbeing of the child... I see it as an issue for the well being of the society... WE NEED TO SLOW THE FUCK DOWN ON POPULATING THIS PLANET
It's amazing that how people disregard the Golden rule when it comes to interpreting it consequencionalistic of treating them the exact same way they want to treat others.
There shouldn't be a law on it, but if you have genetic diseases and choose to have children who are also born with your disease, you are a selfish piece of shit. Adoption is the way to go.
@@sullen2420 where do you draw the line? what about people with family histories of breast cancer or prostate cancer? in other words, how genetically perfect does one have to be in order to have children and not be called a selfish piece of shit?
@@benselander1482 Having children includes adoption, so not sure what the issue is here. If you have a disease likely to be passed down genetically, try adoption.
@@sullen2420 strike one! my question was where do you draw the line? Are people who procreate and produce children “pieces of shit” if they have family history of (for example) breast cancer or prostate cancer?
@@benselander1482 A lot of people get cancer. I'll give you an example. My brother in law has a terrible intestinal disease, if he eats ANY fiber he'll die. It's really serious. He had a kid with his wife, now that kid has, you guessed it, the same thing for life. He's a piece of shit for procreating because he KNEW it would very very likely have the same disease. So HE is a piece of shit for that. Adoption should be WAY more common than it is, but people are morons and they think direct genetic relation supersedes being a good parent.
We shouldn't force people not to have children, but we SHOULD force adults who knowingly bring a disabled child into the world to be financially responsible for them from cradle to grave. OBVIOUSLY we need a better social safety net but disabled kids like me *my parents were told I would have lifelong problems* get thrown away at 18. Disability checks don't cover enough for survival and definitely isn't enough to make you a contributing partner. I just feel like a victim and I don't know how to ever feel better about the fact people KNEW they were giving these lifelong conditions to me. It really haunts me, especially when I'm sitting alone in the hospital during some of my worst episodes and really suffering. It just gets stuck in my head, how did they do this to me?
Totally get what you're saying. So sorry about your life's situation. There have been "Wrongful Birth" lawsuits filed in the past by parents or guardians of a disabled child (and a case of a young adult in Israel.) Another controversy is being created just for the purpose of being a biological medical donor for a diseased sibling. Being born so the parents can use that child's biological tissues to medically treat the sick child. Talk about eugenics.
On the flip side, my sister was born with deficiencies such that she can never care for herself in any capacity. My mother still takes dutiful care of her 41 years later. Changing diapers her whole life. Shackled to a strict schedule. How is that fair? Obviously we need assisted care for certain individuals. Too bad people like Manchin inhibit programs and funding for that. And letting people get put into homes doesn't work; those people live miserable barely-cared-for lives
You would have a completely different opinion on your life if the government was doing what it was supposed to with supporting you. You shouldn't have never been born, we should have eliminated conservativism from polite society
Genetic culling is wrong BUT there are to many humans on this planet. So taxing people for with kids sure but better would be to give people who don't reproduce extra cash for not having kids.
How do you execute this policy? Sam laid it out, and that's just not what we're going to be doing. You can't involve government at that level, you will regret it SO Deeply. Every time.
Me, as I read the title: "You mean, like, taxing people with 18 kids? Hot take. I'm listening." 9 seconds in: *Eugenics Mode: Activated* Me, 9.0001 seconds in: "K, bye."
I’m a single payer and I live in less than $13,000 a year. My life is difficult and a bit strange. I’m a dad to a 13 year old I rarely get to see. I pay a bit for him. I’ve never claimed him on taxes and I’ve always been a single payer as long as I can remember. Maybe instead of asking for more taxes on children , you should want leas taxes for single payers.
Testing for inheritable diseases, and debilitating conditions should be widely available and people trying to conceive should have access to a doctor who can inform them if they are at particularly high risk. But there should be no incentives/disincentives outside of the knowledge itself and there absolutely should never be a mandate for testing or for termination.
Neonatalism is a serious philosophical position.It's not practical, or desireable, or any way realistic. I mean as a technical philosophical line of thought; it's serious.
"You dont have a right to impose life on another person" is literally just a politics, 4Chan version of an emo teenager saying "ugh, I didn't ask to be born, mom!" The fact that he unironically believe this stuff is hilariously childish, but also lowkey terrifying.
Not a eugenicist. He's a Antinatalist. People who believe that humanity should stop procreating because their bringing life into a world full of suffering
This guy from the 1300s or something? Animals don't have moral agency we decided that a long time ago. Lets give animals a tax credit if they don't have children too.
Well when I heard the guys voice, and Sam asked him what conditions he meant, my brain was like "I bet he says 'dark skin' lol".. But then Sickle Cell was one of his only two examples.
And Huntington's is much more specific to Europeans. You are being really bad faith and making a lot of assumptions. Pretty sad that this is what the comment section turns into
@@noah5291 as a self-proclaimed steward and curator of the comment section, shouldn't you be less-inclined to copy/paste the same response over and over? i would suggest that this is bad etiquette, but you do you mr. goodfaith.
😆😆😆 I'm fucking dying right now! "I'm not in favor of killing anyone......I just want to end ALL LIFE ON THE EARTH." Seriously???🤣🤣🤣 and then Sam was just priceless with that call back to Tim Pool! "Not sure if you're familiar...with the Marvel Cinematic Universe but um...!" That was hilarious! "Frankly, Tim...that's just silly!" Was the most perfect response he could ever get to put him in his place!
Look, I agree with the guy on principle. I do think it is morally wrong to reproduce. Why? Because that child does not get to decide if they want to exist and at some point they WILL have to do labor to survive, pay taxes, handle bills, etc. And they don't ever get the option for a humane end to their own life that they didn't even choose to have. So morally? I agree. I personally wish that I had not been born(I'm a 38 year old transgender person whose family has disowned me). But, is this a discussion that is reasonable to have when it comes to imposing those moral beliefs on other people? Fuck no. While I believe the choice to have children is for the benefit of the parents and not the child(if you wanted to do something good for a child's benefit you could adopt someone in need), I also live in reality. The majority of people disagree with the notion that it is immoral and want to have children and raise families. And the existence of our species requires that. So...yeah. I disagree and I am making the CHOICE not to have children of my own. If I someday choose to, I will adopt or foster in order to help out someone in need. But I don't think it is up to me to decide what another person can or cannot do with their body. If they want to have a child? Great. If they want to have an abortion? Fine. This caller needs to understand that his personal moral convictions are just that. Personal. And he doesn't get to dictate to anyone else how they must live because of his opinion.
What the caller doesn't realize is that disability is defined into existence by society, by placing unreasonable demands on people to perform at a certain level under capitalism, or by failing to accommodate people who have certain conditions. Anyone who is nearsighted would literally be disabled were it not for corrective lenses being widely available, and society collectively deciding to accommodate those who are visually impaired. Instead of what he's suggesting, it would be far easier, and cheaper, to accommodate people of different ability levels, as such policies would improve the quality of life for everyone.
I’ll never forget at 9 years old when my mom took me to the eye doctor and after finding out I need glasses to see, turning to me and saying “it was cruel that I brought you into this world son. I wish I could’ve prevented you from ever being born” 😂
As a 21 year old disabled from rheumatoid arthritis and a heart issue I inherited, which I've fought for years to have a somewhat normal life again, I love how often random people try to say I should be legally banned from reproducing or have a family how I and my spouse would see fit 😍 Also, even with illnesses that are genetic/inheritable, that does not GUARANTEE the child will develop those illnesses. The illnesses that I mentioned above, were dormant, asymptomatic, and completely unknown about until I was 14. One of my brothers inherited the heart illness but no rheumatoid arthritis or any autoimmune disorders, and my other brother has neither illness. And, while I can't speak for anyone and their view of bringing a child with illness into the world, I've suffered a lot, but I sure as hell don't wish I was never born, even when I was at my lowest and nearly passed away. Its absolutely gross that this guy and so many others think they can speak for those of us who grew up with disabilities while ALSO trying to take away our rights.
Soon to be former NYS trooper Kingston, NY Zone 3 barracks Chris Baldner in so many words "I had to pepper spray the family I was profile harassing when dad got mouthy about the ticket. I had to pit maneuver the car knowing there were children in it because my ego wouldn't allow my $173,533 a year CEO pay level ass to just follow from a safe distance knowing there was no way for their crappy old beater to escape my muscle car, or the radio or the helicopter. We had to have that collar in Kingston and Ulster County, not Orange. I had to have that collar. I couldn't just follow from a safe distance until they ran out of gas. I knew I could do it and get away with it because just three or for years ago I did the same thing and was allowed to get away with it"
How does anyone have these kind of thoughts often enough to form an opinion. And then they feel so confident enough in this terrible opinion that they would call THIS SHOW to try to debate it. Like what are you thinking??
It's not clear to me that anti-natalism is a terrible opinion. He shouldn't have called the show though, it's totally orthogonal to any topic of relevance to MR.
@@gerontion1011 Anti-natalism isn't the problem, what this caller was going for in his motte and bailey argument was primarily focused on disabilities and deformities. They only fell back to their bailey of anti-natalism when it was shown how idiotic their argument regarding centralized control of reproduction was.
@@steik6414 I wasn't certain about if that was what he was really going for but it's certainly extremely weird to start with what happens to be a very common eugenics trope.
When I clicked on this, I thought this was a literal tax that children would pay.
That's the deficit.
I tax my children. I just loan them pieces of paper that they have to earn by working for me, then they use their debt to pay for the things they need to stay alive, but at the end of each year I make them pay it back to me with interest. This way they stay in perpetual debt to me, and my kids always a have a job.
Instead of an argument on taxing children, perhaps we should just not give families with kids so many advantages over the rest of us who don’t get married and have kids. It’s crazy that normal healthy people get advantages like tax breaks for being married but disabled people on benefits are treated the opposite way and penalized if they get married.
Same
I was expecting a tax on people that have children to pay for Climate Change efforts. This was so not what I was expecting.
Caller: “I don’t think anything should exist.”
Sam: “Tell me more.”
😂😂😂
Antinatalism is the only philosophy that protects children from harm.
The guy sounds like Exdeath from Final Fantasy 4 or any other final fantasy villain. "Existence brings suffering so therefore existence is bad and therefore I will kill everyone". It's dumb life existential bullshit that doesnt make any sense
You’re laughing now but you won’t be when this guy calls back after collecting all the infinity stones.
He's inevitable
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Little one, it's a simple calculus. Life needs to be corrected.
😂
Thanos calls in... and Tim Pool is like, the utilitarian is usually the bad guy in superhero movies.
This guy read The Giver and thought, “Yes! This is a brilliant idea”
Apparently he didn't finish the book, or even read past the world building
Emma's face in the beginning perfectly reflected my reaction
You can see it from them both. That was The Moment of the whole video
Surprised she's not a little more jaded
Same.
Her "Well that's a relief!" response at 1:15 was priceless. I love how she's able to deliver a great line with a straight face.
Me: This guy can't be that bad
This guy 10 seconds in: I don't think certain people should be allowed to reproduce
Me: Oh
Marcus O., This dude doesn't understand that, given his reasoning, his parents could have been convinced that they shouldn't have kids because of x,y,z. Then he's wouldn't be here to offer his opinion.
Iceland's lack of Down Syndrome is more important than your feelings. The caller was way too fucking vague to make a proper humanistic case, however.
@@synchronium24 I read around a little after seeing this comment. It seems like Iceland offers voluntary pre-natal testing, and would-be parents make an informed decision on whether or not to terminate pregnancy. Same way parents can choose to terminate a pregnancy if they see a debilitating deformity from an ultrasound. Children with Down’s are still born (albeit, very few. About 2 to 3) every year in Iceland. Your reply seems to be defending eugenics (which involves government enforcement), but Iceland isn’t doing eugenics.
And he goes to 'the entire experience of the animal kingdom is suffering and should end'
@@thatdarnskag5043 You are correct about the Iceland policy. I thought screening was mandatory, while abortion was voluntary. Turns out they are voluntary.
As for eugenics: " In recent years, the term has seen a revival in bioethical discussions on the usage of new technologies such as CRISPR and genetic screening, with a heated debate on whether these technologies should be called eugenics or not."
Which was the main thrust of my comment. Anything vaguely associated with eugenics, no matter how reasonable, is linked to Nazism.
"It's not evil because I'm saying it's not evil."
Some Christian fundamentalist tool could and probably would say the same thing about gay sex, this means nothing
'What you call genocide, I call compassion'
@@shady8045 No, no. You misunderstand I think.
Christian fundamentalists also believe the world is only suffering. They just believe that people *deserve* the suffering because this world is a punishment for us all due to the original sin of Adam and Eve. With a deal of "If you follow God's laws, you get to enjoy eternal bliss after you die"
The fact that he mentions Sickle Cell Anemia is a major red flag to me because I'm pretty sure that affects African Americans way more than most people
Sickle cell is insanely rare.
I think they just came out with a treatment for that.
That popped out to me, as well.
A fun fact. People with cicle cell can't get malaria.
It's an evolutionary phenomenon to make sure the human race survives in an environment where malaria was prominent.
Diseases and genetic issues have reasons. In the right environment and conditions they are life saving. In the wrong one they are deniabiliting
@@katherineminor3402
It would be fine if this adaptation didn’t have any negative consequences.
Debilitating pain and fatigue.
Caller, seriously: "I think we should criminalize the nervous system."
Or how about "don't make everyone pay for kids they didn't have a decision in making"?
Emma's face as soon as this caller finished his first sentence.
right, without thinking.
@@scrubjay93 i mean it was a pretty clear statement lol.
"That sounds kind of genocide-y."
Perfect example of how eugenics is basically pseudo-science for racism.
@@balvarine8709 Yeah he sounded like he was referring to my people when he brought up sickle cell anemia.
Antinatalistism is not eugenics, your comment is stupid and ignorant
@@noah5291 Yeah, the caller is antinatalist. The difference is, I thought antinatalism was philosophical, rather than actually calling for government action to restrict births.
Caller: I don't believe in Eugenics bs, I just believe in preventing people who are predisposed to genetic diffects/disorders I deem undesirable from reproducing.
Well i think there are certainly genetic disorders that are objectively bad. But I think it's up to the individual to weigh the risk of passing that on. The government should never have a say in that
@@mr.dirtydan3338to some degree it already does, such as in the case of incest
“It’s not eugenics if I apply it to everyone!”
"I don't believe in stealing. I just believe I should be able to take someone's owned valuables without their knowledge or consent."
"Hey. This is how we hang up:" *Snaps fingers*
ROFL
Thanos has nothing on Sam since his Aamon Animations video.
"I'm not evil. I just want to make so that only the rich can afford to reproduce and have pets."
'I'm not a eugenicist, I just only want a certain type of child to be allowed to be born.'
this is why I watch MR, this is the content we are looking for
(that's a lie, but this clip is still incredibly funny)
For me, sadly it's not a lie LOL
@@Creslin321 LMAO
Emma's face at 10 seconds is like she's trying to beam the thought. "Don't engage Sam just say no." Into his head and it doesn't work.
It never does, but we love him for it. He get too much glee out of poking the proverbial bear. xDD
In a sense, we've already parked the planet in the garage and let the car run
Oh It won’t be that bad, 0:13.
Instant Regret
How dare you, Sam. How dare you apologize for these amazing minutes of fun.
Caller: No one has a right to be born or to give birth.
Also caller: We can't interfere with people who are alive.
He was extremely confused.
He explained it in one of the worst ways possible (and confused the issue by making it a eugenics thing, probably as an attempt to make anti-natalism more "marketable" but almost certainly just alienating even more people in the process), but the point is a question of consent. People who are alive can consent to stuff, because they are people who are alive. People who aren't alive can't consent to anything, because they don't exist. Thus if you're giving birth to people you are necessarily subjecting them to things without their consent in a way that is fundamentally different to just going around murdering people.
I don't blame Sam and the others for not understanding how their counterargument didn't really work since the dude did such a poor job of even setting up the conversation, and in any case this definitely isn't the show to try to argue extreme philosophical positions on anyway.
@@TheSquareOnesare you claiming people consent to having cancer or diseases? He explained it poorly because it is stupid way to look at it. You can't have babies because you might have one with an issue and they didn't consent to that, but adults don't consent to disease either. No one consents to have disease.
@@robingalbraith323 No. I'm saying the unborn can't consent to anything and you're forcing them into a situation where negative experiences are highly likely if not certain to happen.
Whether or not adults can consent to disease is irrelevant, I'm not sure where you got that from and if anything it just supports my argument. Yes, people who exist will experience horrible things they didn't want, what a great reason to stop forcing people to exist.
@@TheSquareOnes "people who are alive can consent to stuff, because they are people who are alive." so since this entire discussion you are adding your opinion on, was specifically about disease and illness, i dont know why it would be a shock that i applied your comment to the literal topic at hand, ie illness and disease. then this gem "people who exist will experience horrible things" but yet earlier you said "if you're giving birth to people you are necessarily subjecting them to things without their consent in a way the is fundamentally different to just going around murdering people" people dont consent to murder. so wouldnt that be exactly the same, ie subjecting someone to horrible things without their consent. to be honest, you make even less sense than the guy in the video.
I paraphrase...
"Do you think that the government should create a master race?" - Eugenics Fascist
"No, I do not agree with that" - Emma, Sam and Normal People
@Ruthless Minion If you can’t understand the difference between individual choice-what the pro-choice movement is all about-and restricting reproductive rights-Margaret Sanger and the pro-life movement-I don’t know how to help you. Sorry bro
And don't forget about Ruthless Strawman i mean Minion
@Ruthless Minion WTF is your point? '...Post-modern...blah blah...woke projection...blah blah...comfortable discussing eugenics so brazenly''? You must barely be passing your philosophy classes. Articulate your point better
@Ruthless Minion "if you didn't understand my shit point, it's your fault, not mine for being shit at articulating my shit point."
@Ruthless Minion You arer right, this segment is about someone who fails at logic, and struggles with day to day life. They have presupposed their life has more value than that of a person in a wheelchair or has an overbite. This segment is about a type of person that presumes to know and have the ability to know the "value" of a life, while naturally holding their own to the highest level.
You are right, this segment is about idiots thinking nothing should exist. A nihilist - aka the biggest waste of time ever.
This is the same as a teen full of angst saying "I just wish the world would end" except a little more elaborate lol
The caller cites sickle-cell which overwelingly affects African Americans, but he's not talking Eugenics!? Okay, dude.
Yeah I was thinking just that. He told on himself with that HARD
Right out the gate: "Hey, just wondering, do you guys agree with eugenics? Cuz I do but I say I don't."
Wtf, dude. Get therapy.
Deep down, the right knows that it has lost the battle of the ideas. Hence, the effort to rebrand all of their awful ideas. (Yes, both sides liked eugenics 100 years ago, but something changed that about 80-90 years ago. Gee, I wonder what or whom.) That's why "white supremacist" became white nationalist, then ethnostate and alt-right.
Roses are red
I do calisthenics
Homie really tryna do
Financial eugenics
The head-caliper salesman has logged tf on!
My great-uncle had Huntington's disease. None of his children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren developed it. WTF? Actually, some of his great-grandchildren still have time so I edited this comment to allow for future development of disease. I don't want the IRS to get mad.
Sickle cell is also rare to pass on and only will when both parents have the gene. My fiancé was the only one out of 4 kids to have it with the same parents. If you have sickle cell you can literally find others without it in their genes. Even if two people with it have children the children have low odds of having it.
Exactly, it’s a personal choice. Now, we have genetic testing to determine the risk and odds of inheriting the disease; and while still highly controversial, the option for IVF and pre-genetic diagnosis to eliminate or minimize that risk altogether.
@@HoudiniFontmeister do you know the difference between homozygous and heterozygous genes?
cause i'm pretty sure you can have one parent with one copy of sickle cell, the other parent with no sickle cell, and half of their kids will have one copy and the other half will have none.
“I mean, uhhhhhh *sign*”
-Sam
Had me dyingggg. 😂😂😂
I have a child with bones that are brittle. Over 50 breaks in his lifetime so far. I can assure you, he is thrilled that he gets to live. He has told me. We had the option to abort early on and we decline. Almost made me cry the day he thanked me for that!! Ughhhhh 😢
I defense of the caller he's an anti-natalist not a Nazi. He just sounds like a Nazi 🤣
I was thinking eugenicist. What's an anti-natalist?
@@andredunbar3773 An ethical stand against procreation. It's inherently immoral to bring children into a life filled with pain and hardship.
@@andredunbar3773They believe that because humans have the capacity to suffer it's better to never have been born. So they advocate for voluntarily ending human procreation. Tho this guy includes animals which I've never heard before haha. But they still think life is worth living if you're already born so they don't advocate for like suicide or genocide.
@@hermanisaza67 Correction, a ridiculous arbitrary attempt to decide who has worth and who doesn't. Which self-implodes on itself. Its a SELF PROCLAIMED Ethical take, lol. It's not ethical to assess for someone else, whether their life has merit and whether their living out weighs or doesn't out weigh the suffering they may experience or impose. Its like, 9th grade just learned about philosophy level thinking lol.
They have a really cringey and unintentionally hilarious subreddit 🤣
One of my aunts was born with Spina bifida, shes almost 59 years old, that age is well past the average life expectancy for someone with that condition. She's lived a good life and I cant imagine not of had her in my life, shes been an inspiration to others.
The guys a Antinatalist, he doesn't think "anyone" should be making babies. I do think he's coming at this more from a "severe" genetic disorder, which I don't think Spina Bifida is. Something along the lines of Cystic fibrosis, often would see people dying in their teens / 20's. Which might not even be correct, as I think they just had a break through drug last couple years.
Edit to be clear, not defending his stance, I do think people wanting to have kids should get checked on their own. I do think it's selfish to knowingly pass on a severe disorder to a child.
@@spencers4121 For the CF thing you’re correct, there is medicine that’s makes the symptoms of CF go away but a person still has it (it’s a good medication but not everyone can take it)
@@spencers4121 Their position is fundementally flawed, and mostly arrogant. They presume to know what the limits of medical treatments are. This person's attempt to use medical Dxs as a crutch for their ultimate goal, no babies aka no life, while also arbitrarily determining what is suffering. See how they just straight said "Animals shouldn't be here either, too much suffering" as if nature has any sense of this when it comes to the process of life. Its absurd.
Assume this stance back in the early days of medicine. How many people would have been prevented from living / killed off because they felt certain traits passed on from parent to child couldn't be addressed to provide a good life. Not only that, where do we draw the line? Is living wheelchair bound suffering? Is having half your teeth suffering?
It stems from poor thinking, and failing to be able to globalize a position and understand the impact. Basically, its how you get a Libertarian.
Does she feel she's lived a good life?
triknives It's beyond things like diseases and illness though it also has to do with the fact that life itself can just become too overwhelming at any point in time for some people who don't want to be bothered with non stop responsibilities of keeping up with payments and interacting with people and being in need of necessities all the time to even be comfortable in life. It's also no secret that the environment is taking a quick turn for the worst it just has hasn't kicked into full gear yet but soon enough the effects will be noticed and it will be too late for all of us and the best thing to do would prevent more people from having to deal with those consequences from the mindless mistakes of other generations.
"What if we make having children *more* expensive?"
😂🤣😂Matt you killed me with "animal IRS"
My fiancé died after living with sickle cell all her life. Her child does not have sickle cell and none of her siblings have it. This caller has no idea what he’s talking about.
Also this caller: "No person has an inherent right to be alive."
Also me: -_-
This caller needs some help.
If you think life isn't worth living and there's no joy in this world that is worth the suffering that comes with life then there's a good chance you're suffering from clinical depression. These callers don't contemplate the possibility their own difficulties in finding joy and meaning in their lives are a subjective matter rather than an objective truth about the universe. Instead of recognizing pathology they turn it into a philosophy.
@@ShareefsCrewTV just genuinely curious, have you heard of David Benatar?
@@Opheliakami I looked him up seems like a sad sack loser and he is a white South African so he’s probably just sad he doesn’t have state enforced supremacy anymore
Yea, they've been enjoying too many Libertarian reddits.
@@johnjohn2570 lol, wow.
Well that opening line really set the tone...
Dude missed the whole point of FF7
🤣 hahahahaha
Sam: Who's this and where you calling from?
"Uh hey this is Sephiroth from the North Crater"
Always carry a Phoenix down so flower bae doesn't die?
@@oo0O08 Yeah, basically. Like, I respect not wanting to have kids in todays world. It's wild, a lot of things are up in the air and I personally (not an anti-natalist) don't know if I can make that decision morally. But... my dude, you don't get to impose that choice on other people through taxation. Least of which is because having children creates MORE problem solvers.
Dude was straight up like "Yeah, everyone would be better off if they died because that would end their suffering." But like, people don't want to either die nor suffer, generally speaking. >w<
I mean, I joke about "We need someone to cast meteor." all the time, but this guy was down to clown for real! xD
This is *PERFECTION!* My side hurts from the hilarity!🤣 TYSM for keepin him on for 9 mins, Sam! I severely needed the levity! "Animal IRS..."!😹😹 Keep up the STELLAR work, Team Seder!👏🙌 😷💉✌♥️🌎
It's not eugenics if you want to eliminate all children
I see it as not so much about the wellbeing of the child... I see it as an issue for the well being of the society... WE NEED TO SLOW THE FUCK DOWN ON POPULATING THIS PLANET
*CHASTITY BELTS FOR GEESE!*
Where's that damn asteroid?!
🌍☄️🤔
We're beyond saving anyway. Better to get it over with fast.
It's amazing that how people disregard the Golden rule when it comes to interpreting it consequencionalistic of treating them the exact same way they want to treat others.
Emma has me clapping like a seal at the it "just sounds like eugenics" comment
There shouldn't be a law on it, but if you have genetic diseases and choose to have children who are also born with your disease, you are a selfish piece of shit. Adoption is the way to go.
@@sullen2420 where do you draw the line? what about people with family histories of breast cancer or prostate cancer? in other words, how genetically perfect does one have to be in order to have children and not be called a selfish piece of shit?
@@benselander1482 Having children includes adoption, so not sure what the issue is here. If you have a disease likely to be passed down genetically, try adoption.
@@sullen2420 strike one! my question was where do you draw the line? Are people who procreate and produce children “pieces of shit” if they have family history of (for example) breast cancer or prostate cancer?
@@benselander1482 A lot of people get cancer. I'll give you an example. My brother in law has a terrible intestinal disease, if he eats ANY fiber he'll die. It's really serious. He had a kid with his wife, now that kid has, you guessed it, the same thing for life. He's a piece of shit for procreating because he KNEW it would very very likely have the same disease. So HE is a piece of shit for that. Adoption should be WAY more common than it is, but people are morons and they think direct genetic relation supersedes being a good parent.
Please never apologize for hosting these people. It's thoroughly enjoyable.
That just sounds like eugenics with extra steps.
It’s 100% eugenics, no extra steps needed.
We shouldn't force people not to have children, but we SHOULD force adults who knowingly bring a disabled child into the world to be financially responsible for them from cradle to grave. OBVIOUSLY we need a better social safety net but disabled kids like me *my parents were told I would have lifelong problems* get thrown away at 18. Disability checks don't cover enough for survival and definitely isn't enough to make you a contributing partner. I just feel like a victim and I don't know how to ever feel better about the fact people KNEW they were giving these lifelong conditions to me. It really haunts me, especially when I'm sitting alone in the hospital during some of my worst episodes and really suffering. It just gets stuck in my head, how did they do this to me?
Totally get what you're saying. So sorry about your life's situation.
There have been "Wrongful Birth" lawsuits filed in the past by parents or guardians of a disabled child (and a case of a young adult in Israel.)
Another controversy is being created just for the purpose of being a biological medical donor for a diseased sibling.
Being born so the parents can use that child's biological tissues to medically treat the sick child. Talk about eugenics.
On the flip side, my sister was born with deficiencies such that she can never care for herself in any capacity. My mother still takes dutiful care of her 41 years later. Changing diapers her whole life. Shackled to a strict schedule. How is that fair? Obviously we need assisted care for certain individuals. Too bad people like Manchin inhibit programs and funding for that. And letting people get put into homes doesn't work; those people live miserable barely-cared-for lives
You would have a completely different opinion on your life if the government was doing what it was supposed to with supporting you. You shouldn't have never been born, we should have eliminated conservativism from polite society
Genetic culling is wrong BUT there are to many humans on this planet. So taxing people for with kids sure but better would be to give people who don't reproduce extra cash for not having kids.
Just tell these people: "sounds good, you go first".
This guy is literally Ultron.
More like, he who remains.
Should be noted that this guy wants to live in a world where Stephen Hawking would have never existed.
LOL, that guy had to think about if he was an adult... nuff said
He didn't sound to confident either lol
We metaphorically have parked the planet in a garage and letting the car run.
Aging is the leading cause of cancer so inadvertently Sam is right.
How do you execute this policy? Sam laid it out, and that's just not what we're going to be doing. You can't involve government at that level, you will regret it SO Deeply. Every time.
Me, as I read the title: "You mean, like, taxing people with 18 kids? Hot take. I'm listening."
9 seconds in: *Eugenics Mode: Activated*
Me, 9.0001 seconds in: "K, bye."
“Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.”
Wow I didn't know Kefka from FF6 listened to the show!
He hate hate hate hate hate hate hates children.
Someone tell this guy that humans *are* in the animal kingdom.
Caller: do you agree?
MR: No.
Caller: Well I do agree. With what I said. So. Checkmate.
"I definitely believe that."
-guy who has no fucking idea
I’m a single payer and I live in less than $13,000 a year. My life is difficult and a bit strange. I’m a dad to a 13 year old I rarely get to see. I pay a bit for him.
I’ve never claimed him on taxes and I’ve always been a single payer as long as I can remember. Maybe instead of asking for more taxes on children , you should want leas taxes for single payers.
One of the biggest ones I laughed on
It's right up there with the anarcho capitalist callers.
Testing for inheritable diseases, and debilitating conditions should be widely available and people trying to conceive should have access to a doctor who can inform them if they are at particularly high risk. But there should be no incentives/disincentives outside of the knowledge itself and there absolutely should never be a mandate for testing or for termination.
omg I kinda feel bad laughing at him. Dude's life has to be pretty miserable for him to have such a hot take, and take himself so seriously
Neonatalism is a serious philosophical position.It's not practical, or desireable, or any way realistic. I mean as a technical philosophical line of thought; it's serious.
"I'm sorry ma'am your son has the big gay, we're going to have to terminate him"
Caller is gonna look back on this moment and cringe. This is such a galaxy-brain hot take that at first I thought he was making a Feldman-esque joke.
I smell a villain origin story....may the gods be with us all lmfaooo
"You dont have a right to impose life on another person" is literally just a politics, 4Chan version of an emo teenager saying "ugh, I didn't ask to be born, mom!"
The fact that he unironically believe this stuff is hilariously childish, but also lowkey terrifying.
this guy hopped on and openly threw his support behind eugenics like it was normal. what in da hell
Not a eugenicist. He's a Antinatalist. People who believe that humanity should stop procreating because their bringing life into a world full of suffering
@Justin Time no because he wants to end all human life with the least amount of suffering possible.
@Justin Time again you should probably look into what that means before you decide to talk about this with any athority.
7:50 I couldn't stop laughing at Sams 'Yeah that might as well be the case' reply..
Just listened to the first line...
And I didn't even KNOW I had a genetic disorder UNTIL I had kids. lmfao.
This guy from the 1300s or something? Animals don't have moral agency we decided that a long time ago. Lets give animals a tax credit if they don't have children too.
David Benatar eye-rolled himself to death and Emil Cioran just kept walking.
It is callers like that who spawned late night AM talk radio in the 80's which has led us to the alt right of today
Caller: I just wanna start with some light eugenics...
That's... not the way to handle the depressed nihilistic caller. Kind of callous 😔
Well when I heard the guys voice, and Sam asked him what conditions he meant, my brain was like "I bet he says 'dark skin' lol".. But then Sickle Cell was one of his only two examples.
And Huntington's is much more specific to Europeans. You are being really bad faith and making a lot of assumptions. Pretty sad that this is what the comment section turns into
@@noah5291 you are the caller right?
@@noah5291 as a self-proclaimed steward and curator of the comment section, shouldn't you be less-inclined to copy/paste the same response over and over? i would suggest that this is bad etiquette, but you do you mr. goodfaith.
😆😆😆 I'm fucking dying right now! "I'm not in favor of killing anyone......I just want to end ALL LIFE ON THE EARTH." Seriously???🤣🤣🤣 and then Sam was just priceless with that call back to Tim Pool! "Not sure if you're familiar...with the Marvel Cinematic Universe but um...!" That was hilarious! "Frankly, Tim...that's just silly!" Was the most perfect response he could ever get to put him in his place!
No Child Left Behind 2: Kill Confirmed
This caller has an overwhelming sense of impending doom. Probably too many sulfites
One child policy isn't enough, ZERO child policy!
I wish the caller's parents had the same idea on childbirth
I'm building a play list of absurd Sam debates and this is in that list! Don't be sorry Sam. This is hilarious.
Look, I agree with the guy on principle. I do think it is morally wrong to reproduce. Why? Because that child does not get to decide if they want to exist and at some point they WILL have to do labor to survive, pay taxes, handle bills, etc. And they don't ever get the option for a humane end to their own life that they didn't even choose to have.
So morally? I agree. I personally wish that I had not been born(I'm a 38 year old transgender person whose family has disowned me).
But, is this a discussion that is reasonable to have when it comes to imposing those moral beliefs on other people? Fuck no. While I believe the choice to have children is for the benefit of the parents and not the child(if you wanted to do something good for a child's benefit you could adopt someone in need), I also live in reality. The majority of people disagree with the notion that it is immoral and want to have children and raise families. And the existence of our species requires that.
So...yeah. I disagree and I am making the CHOICE not to have children of my own. If I someday choose to, I will adopt or foster in order to help out someone in need. But I don't think it is up to me to decide what another person can or cannot do with their body. If they want to have a child? Great. If they want to have an abortion? Fine.
This caller needs to understand that his personal moral convictions are just that. Personal. And he doesn't get to dictate to anyone else how they must live because of his opinion.
I didn't know Thanos was an MR fan
Margaret Sanger called sir...she wants her eugenics program back!
This segment was hilarious! The caller was mental, but the interactions, pure comedy!
What the caller doesn't realize is that disability is defined into existence by society, by placing unreasonable demands on people to perform at a certain level under capitalism, or by failing to accommodate people who have certain conditions. Anyone who is nearsighted would literally be disabled were it not for corrective lenses being widely available, and society collectively deciding to accommodate those who are visually impaired. Instead of what he's suggesting, it would be far easier, and cheaper, to accommodate people of different ability levels, as such policies would improve the quality of life for everyone.
I’ll never forget at 9 years old when my mom took me to the eye doctor and after finding out I need glasses to see, turning to me and saying “it was cruel that I brought you into this world son. I wish I could’ve prevented you from ever being born” 😂
“I’m not talking about from a eugenics perspective.” - caller, after describing actual eugenics
As a 21 year old disabled from rheumatoid arthritis and a heart issue I inherited, which I've fought for years to have a somewhat normal life again, I love how often random people try to say I should be legally banned from reproducing or have a family how I and my spouse would see fit 😍
Also, even with illnesses that are genetic/inheritable, that does not GUARANTEE the child will develop those illnesses. The illnesses that I mentioned above, were dormant, asymptomatic, and completely unknown about until I was 14. One of my brothers inherited the heart illness but no rheumatoid arthritis or any autoimmune disorders, and my other brother has neither illness.
And, while I can't speak for anyone and their view of bringing a child with illness into the world, I've suffered a lot, but I sure as hell don't wish I was never born, even when I was at my lowest and nearly passed away. Its absolutely gross that this guy and so many others think they can speak for those of us who grew up with disabilities while ALSO trying to take away our rights.
Soon to be former NYS trooper Kingston, NY Zone 3 barracks Chris Baldner in so many words "I had to pepper spray the family I was profile harassing when dad got mouthy about the ticket. I had to pit maneuver the car knowing there were children in it because my ego wouldn't allow my $173,533 a year CEO pay level ass to just follow from a safe distance knowing there was no way for their crappy old beater to escape my muscle car, or the radio or the helicopter. We had to have that collar in Kingston and Ulster County, not Orange. I had to have that collar. I couldn't just follow from a safe distance until they ran out of gas. I knew I could do it and get away with it because just three or for years ago I did the same thing and was allowed to get away with it"
Bro watched the first season of True Detective and made it his whole personality
Sounds like that guy was smoking a joint and thought he had an epiphany.
Sound's like the case against abortion.
Prager u ad before this..lol gold
Did an evil villain just try to explain his reason for being evil and that it’s not evil
How does anyone have these kind of thoughts often enough to form an opinion. And then they feel so confident enough in this terrible opinion that they would call THIS SHOW to try to debate it. Like what are you thinking??
Sounds like a troll pretending to be genuine
It's not clear to me that anti-natalism is a terrible opinion. He shouldn't have called the show though, it's totally orthogonal to any topic of relevance to MR.
@@gerontion1011 Anti-natalism isn't the problem, what this caller was going for in his motte and bailey argument was primarily focused on disabilities and deformities. They only fell back to their bailey of anti-natalism when it was shown how idiotic their argument regarding centralized control of reproduction was.
@@steik6414 I wasn't certain about if that was what he was really going for but it's certainly extremely weird to start with what happens to be a very common eugenics trope.