Maybe for those of us who agree with you maybe the natalists view is a source of hope. The example I will use is the parole system in prison. The function of parole hearings for repeat violent offenders is to improve the behavior of inmates. Once hope is lost life becomes meaningless. Even if it's a 3% chance I hoping to be proven wrong? Besides, isn't it possible to create a good life for one's self within this self destructive world?
@mphello I don't go to a church. I am an atheist, hence my venom for you lot for promoting such a terrible atheistic ideology. You make decent atheists look bad. If the owner of this vid doesn't like it when people criticize the beliefs of his video, then he can disable the fucking comments. He hasn't, so I'll say what I fucking please. And at least I don't accuse people of espousing beliefs that they clearly have not, as you did to me.
@TheLockon00 If YOU are an atheist, but you hate the antinatalist philosophy so much, and the antinatalist philosophy has NOTHING to do with whether one believes in gods or not, then WHY did you attach "atheistic ideology" to your criticism of antinatalism?
You breeding anti-socialist let-banks-and-corporate-welfarists-steal-all-our-money atheists make atheists look bad. WTF are YOU to decide who/what makes atheists "look bad"?
@mphello If it has nothing to do with with whether one believes in gods or not, how come so many of its supporters want to start calling it "Atheism 2.0"? Pretty fucking shady if you ask me. Again, stop putting fucking words in my mouth and accusing me of supporting things I don't.
There's a few things that can be said about antinatalism being futile.
Whether it's ultimate end is likely to be accomplished (I actually don't think it is) says nothing about the validity of antinatalism and the defence it deserves as being true.
However the main point which is usually ignored is that antinatalism is not an all or nothing affair.....
.....Even if the extinction of (sentient) life is not attained, life/suffering is not just one big unit of it, it's individual entities of it, thus each sentient life prevented is still a win. This can also be applied to most, if not all, other ethical issues.
btw, there's something that shouldn't be in that list of antinatalist books...you should also do what it says.
I thought the idea of "Atheism 2.0" would be really useful for marketing this thought, just like the label "antinatalism" has helped it catch on. But then I googled it. Apparently it is already in use to denote the exact opposite -- some kind of spiritual atheism. Let's go with 3.0 then? Or -1.0? Or 1.0 + 1.0i?
This video was amazing. A really well structured showcase of why anti-natalism finally is atheism in a mature state. I liked that one a lot. I wish more people would be given the chance to see your videos, it's a true shame you're not getting more publicity.
@RawBurrito When did I say life is nothing but suffering? Oh, that's right... I fucking didn't. Suffering (and trying to avoid it) is a huge part of life, so is death, and people like you impose those things on others, and what if my life is hell... do you contend that my parents bestowed this gift of hell on me, or does it resemble more of an imposition? Fact is, my life's far more comfortable and privileged than most. It's the suffering of others equal to me that ruins life for me, personally.
@RawBurrito "It is not your right to impose death on humanity just because you cannot deal with the fact that there is suffering in the world"
I suppose it's humanity's right to impose life, suffering, and death on the future of all sentient life just because you cunts can't deal with the fact that it's destined for extinction, one way or the other. Saying "it's not your right", and using genocide as a smear tactic doesn't demonstrate my hypothetical actions to be wrong. In short, you failed.
What about the military? They need babies to grow up and be soldiers
the "rules" in the bible supply them with plenty of meat puppets, but how are they going to trick people into making soldiers once most people see through the charade?
Life is far from perfect, it's brutal, yet we are the first and only that can change things. To give up now would make all life pointless. Why would we do that when the only real option is a sterile universe? A pointless activity. I say we continue to strive for better, forget perfect, just better.
@RawBurrito You are essentially using genocide as a slur, knowing it has *very* negative connotations, because it's founded in bigotry and getting rid of things that you, personally see as detrimental (or inferior) to youself. If you want to call it sentiocide, or something similar, I'm fine with that.
@RawBurrito If an animal was dying in front of me writhing, twitching, crying and suffering, I would put the poor thing out of it's misery. If there was a green button in front of me, that would sterilize all sentient creatures, I would press it. If there was a red button in front of me that would blow up the planet, I would press that one also. I sincerely doubt you can give me a *good* reason to not do these things, I can think of a billion reasons why pressing would be a *good* thing to do...
@RawBurrito If I were you I'd be embarrassed by your inability to come up with a better response than that, and taking over an hour to do so. Wiki: Genocide is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group". Which ethnic, racial, religious, or national group am I advocating destroying, oh wait... that's right, I'm not. I'm saying that it's possible to end life, you're disagreeing. Let's stop stop having babies, eh?
@RawBurrito It's not genocide not to create new life, genocide is when you wipe out already existing life, if not creating new life was genocide then we'd all be commiting it daily by not implanting our sperm in eggs, see how ludicrous it is?
Antinatalism is entirely humane, does no harm and actually prevents suffering.
If you can put forward just one objective reason as to how sentience justifies itself when weighed against the suffering it endures in this universe overall, please do.
@RawBurrito If we did manage to rid the world of sentience for, say, a million years, would that not reduce net suffering a great deal... and would that not be a good thing to do (or think about doing)? You people are so lame it's embarrassing.
@RawBurrito Even if you wanted to, I don't think it would be possible to extinguish all life. And if you did, it would probably just pop back up. So what would be the point?
@HigherPlanes "I don't think it would be possible to extinguish all life"
We have entire organizations and regulations set up purely with the intent of trying to avoid (accidentally) making this planet unlivable, so yeah.
"it would probably just pop back up"
If it was done right, it DEFINITELY wouldn't. This planet could be made unlivable for 2 billion years (until the sun consumes the planet), and the problem is sentient life, not all life, the welfare of bacteria doesn't concern me at all.
@graytaich0 We have organizations and regulations set up purely with the intent on trying to avoid making this planet unlivable? Narrow un-enlightened self-interest doesn't impress me. The nerve of some fucking people eh?
This planet could be made unlivable for 2 billions years? How did you come up with this amazing number, guy? You seem to know something I don't.
@HigherPlanes In two billion years the sun will consume this planet, and all the life on it will be extinguished. If you honestly don't think we (could someday rather soon) have the technology and resources to make the Earth unlivable for sentient creatures, if we tried our very best to do so, then I think you underestimate the (destructive) capabilities of humanity, and our passion for striving towards more and more powerful weaponry.
@graytaich0 This planet has been battered like a red-headed step child by ecological havoc in the four billion years that it's been here, species have come and gone, and life has withstood this ordeal. And you think lil ol humans are a threat to all life on earth? Sentient life rises out of the muck. If we manage to make the climate so toxic that all sentient life goes extinct, the earth will regulate itself very quickly. A couple of nuclear bombs ain't doing shit.
@HigherPlanes " If we manage to make the climate so toxic that all sentient life goes extinct, the earth will regulate itself very quickly. A couple of nuclear bombs ain't doing shit."
The Earth will 'regulate itself' and create more sentient beings from non-sentient beings, so sayeth you, rather dogmatically, I might add. I notice how you didn't answer my question, so I'll pose it again: Could we reduce suffering by way of antinatalism (or way of destroying all life for a few yrs)? Yes or no?
@graytaich0 I'm honestly not trying to be dogmatic. To answer your questions, yes destroying life would end suffering for a few years or whatever, but I really don't understand the point of the exercise if life will find a way back. I think ultimately it is beyond our control to say whether or not life happens. There has got to be a better way to end minimize suffering on this planet. We need a new paradigm. I think that's a more reasonable answer.
@HigherPlanes Okay, fair enough. I was just gonna be snarky with you and say "you seem to know something I don't", in response to "the Earth will regulate itself".
"I really don't understand the point of the exercise if life will find a way back"
By this rationality, there's no point in reducing suffering at all, no point in ethics, laws, Vegetarianism, being a good person etc. This attitude comes pretty close to nihilism, in my opinion. Not having kids is a good place to start, I reckon...
@HigherPlanes Please, making this planet uninhabitable is not that difficult with our potential resources, redirect a few asteroids into us and perterb our orbit (aside from the massive devastation that would cause anyway) and I'll show you a planet that isn't going to harbour anything alive bigger than a microbe, if that.
@graytaich0 "I don't see any dinosaurs running around."
Are we talking about dinosaurs or are we talking about life?
"Not having kids is a good place to start, I reckon..."
It's hard to maintain your rationality when discussing such issues, at least for me it is. But I very much agree that not having kids or at least a one-kid-per-household rule is a good place to start. I have made the choice not to have kids a very long time ago. I'm in my 30s and have kept my promise up to this point.
Are we talking about dinosaurs or are we talking about life?
"Not having kids is a good place to start, I reckon..."
It's hard to maintain your rationality when discussing such issues, at least for me it is. But I very much agree that not having kids or at least a one-kid-per-household rule is a good place to start. I have made the choice not to have kids a very long time ago. I'm in my 30s and have kept my promise.
@HigherPlanes I did say a few asteroids, the one that killed the dinosaurs wasn't big enough to get the job done, there's plenty bigger out there we can use.
@BeardedBill86 I'm no astrophysicist, but I doubt there are asteroids big enough in our solar system to knock the Earth from it's axis. I'm purely speculating, but yea, I don't think they exist. Do you have any idea how big of an asteroid you would need to move the earth? I mean, could you move a basketball by throwing a grain of sand at it?
@HigherPlanes "Narrow un-enlightened self-interest doesn't impress me. The nerve of some fucking people eh?"
I'm saying environmentalists are doing all they can to AVOID making this planet unlivable, their fears of extinction are rational in the sense that we are heading there, and we'll get there even faster, and uglier, if we keep heading in the same direction. Also, if we ended sentient life for even a thousand years, would that be entirely pointless? Or would it reduce net suffering a lot?
@RawBurrito ...when I say "think about all life", what I don't mean is jump straight to the overused hyperbole copout rhetoric of 'destroy all life', simply because you're lacking an adequate response to the fact that nobody asks to be born, and that sentient creatures DO suffer thanks to the ignorance of those who drag them out of nonexistence and onto this flying cosmic dirtball inhabited by selfish, psychotic apes. Antinatalism is about whether CHILDBIRTH is ethically problematic or not...
@RawBurrito You personally see (your) life as a gift, but if you suffered enough, you might share the point of view. I'm sure you'll concede that there's no way to determine if your child will be one of the unlucky one who is destined to suffer horribly or not before conception. You're basically saying it's your opinion that life is, or may be, an imposition, at least for those who suffer 'enough'. All booboo's asking is that you look outside of your subjective reality, and think about all life.
Didn't even need to watch the video. I knew from the title it was a great video!
mphello 1 week ago
I completely agree with you. As much as I love my son and daughter I find myself sometimes wishing I hadn't brought them into this thing.
carrboygirl 1 week ago
Maybe for those of us who agree with you maybe the natalists view is a source of hope. The example I will use is the parole system in prison. The function of parole hearings for repeat violent offenders is to improve the behavior of inmates. Once hope is lost life becomes meaningless. Even if it's a 3% chance I hoping to be proven wrong? Besides, isn't it possible to create a good life for one's self within this self destructive world?
superjtrdr 1 month ago
Well, congrats guys. You've embraced an atheistic ideology more sickly and repulsive than virtually any religion in the world.
TheLockon00 1 month ago
@TheLockon00 And you're sick for wanting to arrest and kill people for holding and expressing different beliefs than your own.
mphello 1 week ago
@mphello I beg your pardon, douchebag.
TheLockon00 1 week ago
@TheLockon00 Get the fuck off this channel, if you don't like it.
It's clearly an ANTI-NATALIST channel. WTF do you expect?
How about I come to your fucking church and start expressing my opinions in favor of abortion and belief that there are no such things as gods?
mphello 1 week ago
@mphello I don't go to a church. I am an atheist, hence my venom for you lot for promoting such a terrible atheistic ideology. You make decent atheists look bad. If the owner of this vid doesn't like it when people criticize the beliefs of his video, then he can disable the fucking comments. He hasn't, so I'll say what I fucking please. And at least I don't accuse people of espousing beliefs that they clearly have not, as you did to me.
TheLockon00 1 week ago
@TheLockon00 If YOU are an atheist, but you hate the antinatalist philosophy so much, and the antinatalist philosophy has NOTHING to do with whether one believes in gods or not, then WHY did you attach "atheistic ideology" to your criticism of antinatalism?
You breeding anti-socialist let-banks-and-corporate-welfarists-steal-all-our-money atheists make atheists look bad. WTF are YOU to decide who/what makes atheists "look bad"?
mphello 1 week ago
@mphello If it has nothing to do with with whether one believes in gods or not, how come so many of its supporters want to start calling it "Atheism 2.0"? Pretty fucking shady if you ask me. Again, stop putting fucking words in my mouth and accusing me of supporting things I don't.
TheLockon00 1 week ago
@TheLockon00 Who? How many supporters of antinatalism call it "Atheism 2.0"?
Sounds like a bunch of fucking pronatalist breeders who call antinatalism that.
mphello 1 week ago
@mphello Just watch more videos on here. There's motherfuckers who want to call it that.
TheLockon00 6 days ago
There's a few things that can be said about antinatalism being futile.
Whether it's ultimate end is likely to be accomplished (I actually don't think it is) says nothing about the validity of antinatalism and the defence it deserves as being true.
However the main point which is usually ignored is that antinatalism is not an all or nothing affair.....
JustAnotherMaleHuman 4 months ago
.....Even if the extinction of (sentient) life is not attained, life/suffering is not just one big unit of it, it's individual entities of it, thus each sentient life prevented is still a win. This can also be applied to most, if not all, other ethical issues.
btw, there's something that shouldn't be in that list of antinatalist books...you should also do what it says.
JustAnotherMaleHuman 4 months ago
I thought the idea of "Atheism 2.0" would be really useful for marketing this thought, just like the label "antinatalism" has helped it catch on. But then I googled it. Apparently it is already in use to denote the exact opposite -- some kind of spiritual atheism. Let's go with 3.0 then? Or -1.0? Or 1.0 + 1.0i?
koningrobot 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Good depressing. Also, check your email!!
WannabeKiwiBoy 4 months ago
This video was amazing. A really well structured showcase of why anti-natalism finally is atheism in a mature state. I liked that one a lot. I wish more people would be given the chance to see your videos, it's a true shame you're not getting more publicity.
Steelfossil 4 months ago
@RawBurrito When did I say life is nothing but suffering? Oh, that's right... I fucking didn't. Suffering (and trying to avoid it) is a huge part of life, so is death, and people like you impose those things on others, and what if my life is hell... do you contend that my parents bestowed this gift of hell on me, or does it resemble more of an imposition? Fact is, my life's far more comfortable and privileged than most. It's the suffering of others equal to me that ruins life for me, personally.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@graytaich0 Then you should give to the slaves. After all I/m sure that you have too much.
AEVautomatic 4 months ago
@AEVautomatic This discussion isn't about me; or at least it shouldn't be.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@RawBurrito You're a cunt because you're fine with imposing the 'gift' of suffering and death on others, among other reasons.
graytaich0 4 months ago
If mother earth was real, I'd slap that bitch to pieces.
theantigaia 4 months ago
@RawBurrito "It is not your right to impose death on humanity just because you cannot deal with the fact that there is suffering in the world"
I suppose it's humanity's right to impose life, suffering, and death on the future of all sentient life just because you cunts can't deal with the fact that it's destined for extinction, one way or the other. Saying "it's not your right", and using genocide as a smear tactic doesn't demonstrate my hypothetical actions to be wrong. In short, you failed.
graytaich0 4 months ago
I'm likely gonna take clips from this video and make one of my own.
graytaich0 4 months ago
What about the military? They need babies to grow up and be soldiers
the "rules" in the bible supply them with plenty of meat puppets, but how are they going to trick people into making soldiers once most people see through the charade?
wideosvatcher 4 months ago 4
Life is far from perfect, it's brutal, yet we are the first and only that can change things. To give up now would make all life pointless. Why would we do that when the only real option is a sterile universe? A pointless activity. I say we continue to strive for better, forget perfect, just better.
edgewayround 4 months ago
@edgewayround
You can't change the basics of life and life itself is purposeless to being with, what would we even be giving up? Purposeless suffering?
DistinctiveBlend 4 months ago
Comment removed
DistinctiveBlend 4 months ago
"all this crap" is the human condition, rising above it would be denying what it is to be human.
suddenuprising 4 months ago
@suddenuprising Basically, yeah.
TheGzeus 4 months ago
@RawBurrito You are essentially using genocide as a slur, knowing it has *very* negative connotations, because it's founded in bigotry and getting rid of things that you, personally see as detrimental (or inferior) to youself. If you want to call it sentiocide, or something similar, I'm fine with that.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@RawBurrito If an animal was dying in front of me writhing, twitching, crying and suffering, I would put the poor thing out of it's misery. If there was a green button in front of me, that would sterilize all sentient creatures, I would press it. If there was a red button in front of me that would blow up the planet, I would press that one also. I sincerely doubt you can give me a *good* reason to not do these things, I can think of a billion reasons why pressing would be a *good* thing to do...
graytaich0 4 months ago
So calm, so cool.
Document74 4 months ago
@RawBurrito If I were you I'd be embarrassed by your inability to come up with a better response than that, and taking over an hour to do so. Wiki: Genocide is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group". Which ethnic, racial, religious, or national group am I advocating destroying, oh wait... that's right, I'm not. I'm saying that it's possible to end life, you're disagreeing. Let's stop stop having babies, eh?
graytaich0 4 months ago
@RawBurrito It's not genocide not to create new life, genocide is when you wipe out already existing life, if not creating new life was genocide then we'd all be commiting it daily by not implanting our sperm in eggs, see how ludicrous it is?
Antinatalism is entirely humane, does no harm and actually prevents suffering.
If you can put forward just one objective reason as to how sentience justifies itself when weighed against the suffering it endures in this universe overall, please do.
BeardedBill86 4 months ago
@RawBurrito If we did manage to rid the world of sentience for, say, a million years, would that not reduce net suffering a great deal... and would that not be a good thing to do (or think about doing)? You people are so lame it's embarrassing.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@RawBurrito Even if you wanted to, I don't think it would be possible to extinguish all life. And if you did, it would probably just pop back up. So what would be the point?
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes "I don't think it would be possible to extinguish all life"
We have entire organizations and regulations set up purely with the intent of trying to avoid (accidentally) making this planet unlivable, so yeah.
"it would probably just pop back up"
If it was done right, it DEFINITELY wouldn't. This planet could be made unlivable for 2 billion years (until the sun consumes the planet), and the problem is sentient life, not all life, the welfare of bacteria doesn't concern me at all.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@graytaich0 We have organizations and regulations set up purely with the intent on trying to avoid making this planet unlivable? Narrow un-enlightened self-interest doesn't impress me. The nerve of some fucking people eh?
This planet could be made unlivable for 2 billions years? How did you come up with this amazing number, guy? You seem to know something I don't.
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes In two billion years the sun will consume this planet, and all the life on it will be extinguished. If you honestly don't think we (could someday rather soon) have the technology and resources to make the Earth unlivable for sentient creatures, if we tried our very best to do so, then I think you underestimate the (destructive) capabilities of humanity, and our passion for striving towards more and more powerful weaponry.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@graytaich0 This planet has been battered like a red-headed step child by ecological havoc in the four billion years that it's been here, species have come and gone, and life has withstood this ordeal. And you think lil ol humans are a threat to all life on earth? Sentient life rises out of the muck. If we manage to make the climate so toxic that all sentient life goes extinct, the earth will regulate itself very quickly. A couple of nuclear bombs ain't doing shit.
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes " If we manage to make the climate so toxic that all sentient life goes extinct, the earth will regulate itself very quickly. A couple of nuclear bombs ain't doing shit."
The Earth will 'regulate itself' and create more sentient beings from non-sentient beings, so sayeth you, rather dogmatically, I might add. I notice how you didn't answer my question, so I'll pose it again: Could we reduce suffering by way of antinatalism (or way of destroying all life for a few yrs)? Yes or no?
graytaich0 4 months ago
@graytaich0 I'm honestly not trying to be dogmatic. To answer your questions, yes destroying life would end suffering for a few years or whatever, but I really don't understand the point of the exercise if life will find a way back. I think ultimately it is beyond our control to say whether or not life happens. There has got to be a better way to end minimize suffering on this planet. We need a new paradigm. I think that's a more reasonable answer.
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes Okay, fair enough. I was just gonna be snarky with you and say "you seem to know something I don't", in response to "the Earth will regulate itself".
"I really don't understand the point of the exercise if life will find a way back"
By this rationality, there's no point in reducing suffering at all, no point in ethics, laws, Vegetarianism, being a good person etc. This attitude comes pretty close to nihilism, in my opinion. Not having kids is a good place to start, I reckon...
graytaich0 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes Please, making this planet uninhabitable is not that difficult with our potential resources, redirect a few asteroids into us and perterb our orbit (aside from the massive devastation that would cause anyway) and I'll show you a planet that isn't going to harbour anything alive bigger than a microbe, if that.
BeardedBill86 4 months ago
@BeardedBill86 Thank you, BeardedBill.
graytaich0 4 months ago
@BeardedBill86 Like the asteroid the killed the dinosaurs?
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes I don't see any dinosaurs running around.
graytaich0 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@graytaich0 "I don't see any dinosaurs running around."
Are we talking about dinosaurs or are we talking about life?
"Not having kids is a good place to start, I reckon..."
It's hard to maintain your rationality when discussing such issues, at least for me it is. But I very much agree that not having kids or at least a one-kid-per-household rule is a good place to start. I have made the choice not to have kids a very long time ago. I'm in my 30s and have kept my promise up to this point.
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@graytaich0 @graytaich0 "I don't see any dinosaurs running around."
Are we talking about dinosaurs or are we talking about life?
"Not having kids is a good place to start, I reckon..."
It's hard to maintain your rationality when discussing such issues, at least for me it is. But I very much agree that not having kids or at least a one-kid-per-household rule is a good place to start. I have made the choice not to have kids a very long time ago. I'm in my 30s and have kept my promise.
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes I did say a few asteroids, the one that killed the dinosaurs wasn't big enough to get the job done, there's plenty bigger out there we can use.
BeardedBill86 4 months ago
@BeardedBill86 I'm no astrophysicist, but I doubt there are asteroids big enough in our solar system to knock the Earth from it's axis. I'm purely speculating, but yea, I don't think they exist. Do you have any idea how big of an asteroid you would need to move the earth? I mean, could you move a basketball by throwing a grain of sand at it?
HigherPlanes 4 months ago
Comment removed
graytaich0 4 months ago
@HigherPlanes "Narrow un-enlightened self-interest doesn't impress me. The nerve of some fucking people eh?"
I'm saying environmentalists are doing all they can to AVOID making this planet unlivable, their fears of extinction are rational in the sense that we are heading there, and we'll get there even faster, and uglier, if we keep heading in the same direction. Also, if we ended sentient life for even a thousand years, would that be entirely pointless? Or would it reduce net suffering a lot?
graytaich0 4 months ago
@RawBurrito No, you stop throwing NEW creatures in this mess, that we call "civilisation".
panthera50 4 months ago
@RawBurrito ...when I say "think about all life", what I don't mean is jump straight to the overused hyperbole copout rhetoric of 'destroy all life', simply because you're lacking an adequate response to the fact that nobody asks to be born, and that sentient creatures DO suffer thanks to the ignorance of those who drag them out of nonexistence and onto this flying cosmic dirtball inhabited by selfish, psychotic apes. Antinatalism is about whether CHILDBIRTH is ethically problematic or not...
graytaich0 4 months ago
@RawBurrito You personally see (your) life as a gift, but if you suffered enough, you might share the point of view. I'm sure you'll concede that there's no way to determine if your child will be one of the unlucky one who is destined to suffer horribly or not before conception. You're basically saying it's your opinion that life is, or may be, an imposition, at least for those who suffer 'enough'. All booboo's asking is that you look outside of your subjective reality, and think about all life.
graytaich0 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheCAPTAINNEMOful ''Your right Incredibly Great, I agree!''
I find your unrestrained enthusiasm for antinatalism both touching and also amusing. AN for the win!
DerivedEnergy 4 months ago
Existentialism
AEVautomatic 4 months ago
@RawBurrito have you ever seen another living organism, or two or three? Ever looked on a map, or watched a documentary? There's stuff going on.
boobootoob 4 months ago
Nice video Gary, I think you got some very solid points across in this one.
BeardedBill86 4 months ago
Great video.
graytaich0 4 months ago 14