You
have been, yourself, obliged to exist. Does this obligatory life
gives you the right to compel someone else to exist?
To
procreate, it is to make in blind an existence. This existence gains
his body and intellect in the lottery, and there are other raffles
for parents, culture, society, the era, the environment, education,
suffering, misery, and so on. But not for death, it is mandatory, no
lottery.
To
procreate, it is to manufacture an existence for its service, its
personal service, that of the manufacturer.
You
dare make a life because you know from experience, thus for
thousands, even millions of years, that the manufactured person will
not even have the presence of mind to curse at you, to exist, even if
it lives in horrible conditions of body and environment.
In
fact more the conditions of existence are terrible, least she will
have the opportunity and especially the elements of reflection for
claiming.
Your
hold over that person, your child, is such that you can be assured to
almost one hundred percent that it will do you no remarks throughout
your life. It's very easy for you since you nourish the child, and
make him believe insidiously that it is indebted to you that you are
so thoughtful with him.
Rather
easy to achieve this indoctrination, since we are born virgin of
cultural meaning. You indoctrinate, as you have been indoctrinated,
unknowingly, foolishly.
The
society, through culture, has almost all bridled, clogged all the
breaches to call into question the production of absurd existences,
without mastery, and no other reason than the sustainability of its
existence absurd, even more absurd that it is constantly evolving,
this misty society, and is thus never the same one.
The
manufactured people, newcomers in social life, are led to the death
in an almost perfectly oiled routine. The society has gradually
placed, during millennia, safeguards, prohibiting its questioning,
and it continues to finick them. Most of us were deceived until their
last breath.
All
the religious tales or ideological fairy tales are there to help you
to fool this poor innocent which did not require to exist, but will
have to exist for the parental and social service. If one leaves him
time to think, because, to enter in society, it is necessary to be
specialized, which requires a keen work. You had better to live
passionately, they sing.
You
want to be free to use your body as you wish. And you want to be free
to procreate because it is part of the opportunities that Mother
Nature has offered to you.
She
even gave you, Mother Nature, the ability to make hundreds of
thousands of people, because you have the necessary ovules. And all
those people who are not you, you would call them my children. To say
"my child", it's convenient, it gives you the impression to
have owner rights.
Thus
you want to be completely free to impose, “free to impose” Life
to a person! Don't you notice an unquestionable contradiction?
This
contradiction does not stop there.
You
have absolutely no control on uterine work, the work your belly, when
it manufactures in blind (in an even more sadistic manner than Dr.
Frankenstein, which he, however, was remorseful after the first try)
so when your uterus manufactures in blind your child or children,
since it can generate twins or septuplets without you ask him.
It
may also engage in the manufacture of handicapped, this is very usual
for him, it must be a kind of joke on its part, human teratology
offers an imposing catalogue.
Your
freedom stops where that of the uterus starts, who is not at your
orders. “Your” uterus is a maverick, a great funny one.
So
your dear little handicapped, this dear child, will now be a man or a
free woman, with the same freedom as you, but not before adulthood
and if given the emancipation, out of your tutoring, depending on the
disability.
These
are the Rights of the human being who praise it, and our laws, coming
from those same rights. He is free to run without legs, free to strum
without hands, free to chat speechless, free to be a Nobel Prize
without intellect or simply a teacher with an IQ of 60, free to
compete at Miss Universe microcephalic ... So wills the law.
Who
are we kidding? Who are you mocking? What are we free if we do not
have adequate assets? Does your freedom to procreate give you the
right not to give the same advantages to another person (your child)?
Does
your freedom to procreate give you the right to deprive one or more
people of these freedoms which you have, and to which you hold more
than all? Moreover, is this you or this other person who decides the
quality of assets and types of freedoms necessary to a life imposed
without agreement, without contract, without precautions?
Each
one would he not want, should he not, at least, exist by having same
freedoms as the others, since we all have been constrained to exist
to serve mom, dad, and the society?
If
this is true for oneself, then how can one take the risk not to grant
this freedom to the being which one wishes to manufacture, but that
one will manufacture in blind, with immense risks on the back of that
which does not have any means of refusing to exist?
How
a being manufactured with physical or mental defects, it has
obviously not desired, could he have the same freedoms as other
humans, called normal?
How
could he register for a marathon if he has no leg, or if his heart is
weak? How could he join the army if he is not declared fit? How could
he register, simply, to university if he is mentally defective?
To
procreate, or rather manufactures in blind an existence, it's easy,
all the bisexual animals do it without asking any question.
It
appears normal to use our body to our suitability, but those who
exist are alone to decide for those who do not exist, and it is
well-known that our freedom is limited by that of the others, which
may be called freedom with social limitations and constraints.
Does
the freedom to create a life is a freedom, since the being created
has no right to give his opinion, and that precisely the freedom of
some ends where starts the freedom of others?
Mesdames,
you have certainly the freedom of your body, but the child who is
born from your body is not your body. It is a product of your body,
but he is not you. It is an entity as you whom you produce. Your
freedom stops where that of the others starts (with equality), and
your child is another.
You
cannot produce a child if it restricts the freedom of others, and
yours besides, since it takes up space, air, food that are common
property.
Bringing
a child into the world is not a natural “right”, it is a natural
“power”, as to use its muscles to move, and, since it is a power,
it must be controlled. To make a child, it is to make a person, it is
to add an associate to the nation, associate of which the others will
have to take account (life, education, health, dead).
The
power to make a child should be managed democratically by the entire
nation. Make a child is first a risk to the child himself (and
secondarily for the woman who will give birth), what right do you
push someone to take risks?
The
Human rights do not acknowledge the right to make a child, since it
is not a freedom for the child.
If
you think your freedom is important, and that another may not have
more power over you than you have over him, then you must admit than
to procreate is not freedom, but a power that you have on another
individual, whom you will call your child, but that is another
person, he is not you nor a reproduction of you.
You
must know that the creation of an existence serves only those that
already exist, and if you put that child in the world, you do that
for you, in not any case he has asked to be born.
You
want to create this existence whereas that you do not control the
procreative process, you have no idea what will come out of your
belly, you risk the life of a person for your personal needs, the
desire to procreate, that of belonging to the society, provide an
heir, pamper, etc.
Your
body belongs to you madam, and you think it allows you to create as
many lives as you want without any restrictions, only your personal
desire. Well, Madam, your freedom stops where begins that of the
other, and your child is another.
You
probably prefer to create a Hitler rather than an Elephantman, but
you do not have any choice, you play the lottery on the head of a
person, it is normal that it falls back on your head with violence.
And
yet when your child goes to prison, society does not punish you, why?
Because if it was punishing the parents she would have to go further
and ought to punish itself.
There
is a solution to all this chaos, this profusion of idiocy and sadism,
it is to admit what we are, and correct the whole according to what
we are. Yet should we seek to know the real and most truthfully!
Did
you only think, Madam, at least, i.e. to draw up a natal contract
with the Society before creating your child, or simply to ensure it,
as an actress ensures her legs? So that he lives well, under good
conditions, and that he does not go to jail if you flunk yourselves.
And especially, ultimate misery, if your child, this person, is born
with a physical or mental tare…!
This
is not to parents or society to judge the quality of the body and the
intellect of the person they wish to create. This is not to them to
judge that the risks incurred are harmless, or simple collateral
damage, and that it is an eligible risk for parental and social
service.
This
person who is about to exist has the right to have the best in all
the fields. Are you certain, Madame, to be able to grant him what it
merit, what it wishes, which is not what you think?
If
there was only one question that all those, who wish to manufacture a
new life, were to ask themselves, it should be this one:
"Now
that I have made a suffering being, how to undo suffering? "
Dead
end
E.
Berlherm (May 2016)
