Watashi ga 15-sai de wa Nakunatte mo. - Vol. 2 Ch. 16

[MangaDex]

 

[-Ombrax-]

From "Oh wow what a nice volume cover I don't remember following that!" to "oh yeah that was this thing..."

See you next year (maybe ???) For the last chapter.

 

[ScarecrowB]

I mean he's right. It's not about having the moral high ground but about owning your own fuck ups. He has a wife and a kid that didn't ask for any of that so he gotta see that obligation to its end. He now has an additional obligation so that sucks for him but that doesn't cancel the previous one.

She should get an abortion tho. Nobody asks to be born and nobody should be born to such shitty parents and have to live such a shitty life. Better end that kid pain now than having them endure 80 years of real life (some might want the adoption route but that can also backfire terribly).

 

[danbellucci]

I mean he's right. It's not about having the moral high ground but about owning your own fuck ups. He has a wife and a kid that didn't ask for any of that so he gotta see that obligation to its end. He now has an additional obligation so that sucks for him but that doesn't cancel the previous one.

She should get an abortion tho. Nobody asks to be born and nobody should be born to such shitty parents and have to live such a shitty life. Better end that kid pain now than having them endure 80 years of real life (some might want the adoption route but that can also backfire terribly).

The vast majority of unwanted children consider their lives worth living, so the claim that it's better for the children to kill them before they become conscious in order to save them from a life that is so bad it is not worth living is false.
The idea that it's good to kill unborn children to end their pain before they have to endure life is just as invalid as saying that it would be good to kill children or adults instantaneously while they're asleep to end their pain rather than having them endure the rest of their life.

 

[flxsemi]

One more chapter to go. I'm curious as to how this story ends.

 

[danbellucci]

Shiina protecting her child is the most noble and moral behaviour we have seen from her in the whole manga. It's literally her redemption from being vindictive and trouble-making.
It's very sad to see her try to rationalise away her drive to protect her own child in response to being her baby's father declaring his intention to abandon her.

 

[Antinomy]

Wow, 1 to go.

---

She got dealt a shitty hand ontop of making the wrong decisions. Watch it end with her dying. Especially with that Tragedy tag right there.

---

Thanks for the TL

 

[nodamnbrakes]

I mean he's right. It's not about having the moral high ground but about owning your own fuck ups. He has a wife and a kid that didn't ask for any of that so he gotta see that obligation to its end. He now has an additional obligation so that sucks for him but that doesn't cancel the previous one.

She should get an abortion tho. Nobody asks to be born and nobody should be born to such shitty parents and have to live such a shitty life. Better end that kid pain now than having them endure 80 years of real life (some might want the adoption route but that can also backfire terribly).

but he’s already failed that previous obligation pretty completely and what he’s doing now is running from his current obligations by hiding behind some impossible condition. Like she said, if what he said were true, he wouldn’t be hiding out under a bridge, doing nothing. He’s just running away from all obligation.

 

[ScarecrowB]

The vast majority of unwanted children consider their lives worth living, so the claim that it's better for the children to kill them before they become conscious in order to save them from a life that is so bad it is not worth living is false.
The idea that it's good to kill unborn children to end their pain before they have to endure life is just as invalid as saying that it would be good to kill children or adults instantaneously while they're asleep to end their pain rather than having them endure the rest of their life.

For an adult there has already been a considerably investment in them so that'd be a waste, regardless of their feelings in the matter. For an unborn child the investment is minimal and so will be the losses.
Also I'm not saying she gets a free pass to have as many abortions as she wants to, it could be argued her life circunstancies led her to this situation but if she makes the same mistake again then it's neutering time. For her and the guy.

 

[ScarecrowB]

but he’s already failed that previous obligation pretty completely and what he’s doing now is running from his current obligations by hiding behind some impossible condition. Like she said, if what he said were true, he wouldn’t be hiding out under a bridge, doing nothing. He’s just running away from all obligation.

Yes, what he said is right, "he has to keep supporting his previous family". He just said it but so far hasn't done it, that's also true. That's when the authorities should step in and make him follow through.

 

[danbellucci]

For an adult there has already been a considerably investment in them so that'd be a waste, regardless of their feelings in the matter. For an unborn child the investment is minimal and so will be the losses.
Also I'm not saying she gets a free pass to have as many abortions as she wants to, it could be argued her life circunstancies led her to this situation but if she makes the same mistake again then it's neutering time. For her and the guy.

Who's investment? A waste of what? a loss of what? Are you saying that it's ok to kill innocent people who aren't valuable in an economic sense? Like it would be ok to murder homeless people or hermits living on their own in the wilderness because there isn't a loss to society's GDP?
It's wrong to murder innocent human beings whether or not they're a valuable investment.

 

[ScarecrowB]

Who's investment? A waste of what? a loss of what? Are you saying that it's ok to kill innocent people who aren't valuable in an economic sense? Like it would be ok to murder homeless people or hermits living on their own in the wilderness because there isn't a loss to society's GDP?
It's wrong to murder innocent human beings whether or not they're a valuable investment.

Investment for the parents and the state (mostly the state if there's free health care), yes. Hermits aren't bothering anyone so there is no harm there (might need to check on a case by case basis). Homeless is a mixed, bag, you either invest in a state wide-mandatory-compulsory reformation program or do an holocaust. Heartless? Yes, but running a nation shouldn't be done based on emotions.

 

[danbellucci]

Investment for the parents and the state (mostly the state if there's free health care), yes. Hermits aren't bothering anyone so there is no harm there (might need to check on a case by case basis). Homeless is a mixed, bag, you either invest in a state wide-mandatory-compulsory reformation program or do an holocaust. Heartless? Yes, but running a nation shouldn't be done based on emotions.

There's no harm in murdering a hermit? This is the kind of bloodthirsty, psychotic view you're having to endorse to be consistent in saying that it's ok to kill unborn children.
Why not instead of saying that it is ok to murder innocent hermits you just admit that it's wrong to murder innocent human beings whether or not they're a valuable investment?

 

[ScarecrowB]

There's no harm in murdering a hermit? This is the kind of bloodthirsty, psychotic view you're having to endorse to be consistent in saying that it's ok to kill unborn children.
Why not instead of saying that it is ok to murder innocent hermits you just admit that it's wrong to murder innocent human beings whether or not they're a valuable investment?

You got it backwards, I meant you can leave hermits be because they aren't hurting the economy nor the ecosystem. But, as anything in life, there can be exceptions, if there's a hermit that is somehow causing a measurable damage then it must be dealt with.

 

[gronkle]

Investment for the parents and the state (mostly the state if there's free health care), yes. Hermits aren't bothering anyone so there is no harm there (might need to check on a case by case basis). Homeless is a mixed, bag, you either invest in a state wide-mandatory-compulsory reformation program or do an holocaust. Heartless? Yes, but running a nation shouldn't be done based on emotions.

Utilitarianism, materialism, and consent-based morality and their consequences have been disasters for the human race.

I get that you're just trying to remain internally consistent based on a frankly arbitrary standard you have set for your edgy little self, but you must see that this is inhuman and would lead to society bearing the moral cost of atrocities?

 

[ScarecrowB]

Utilitarianism, materialism, and consent-based morality and their consequences have been disasters for the human race.

I get that you're just trying to remain internally consistent based on a frankly arbitrary standard you have set for your edgy little self, but you must see that this is inhuman and would lead to society bearing the moral cost of atrocities?

I get your point, but the current state of europe and their immigration problem begs to differ. Gotta be a little more objective and less emotional as a state when it comes to safeguarding the wellbeing of your citizens.

 

[eviljackspicer]

Can we please tune the channel BACK to this manga? Please?

 

[ninkek]

Can we please tune the channel BACK to this manga? Please?

Nah, ethics is fun.

 

[Naian]

She should get an abortion tho. Nobody asks to be born and nobody should be born to such shitty parents and have to live such a shitty life. Better end that kid pain now than having them endure 80 years of real life (some might want the adoption route but that can also backfire terribly).

Life back in dark times in human history, living was harsh yet human didn't just die. Just because potentially newborn may have a more difficult life than the average modern one.

It's funny you want the guy to own up to his responsibility when you make him run from the current one. The baby didn't happen by itself, it was made by the actions of two, the man included. Killing the baby is just running from what he has done. The baby's life worth isn't for the man to decide, unless you are morally bankrupt guy that is, only caring about yourself rather than the baby.

 

[gronkle]

I get your point, but the current state of europe and their immigration problem begs to differ. Gotta be a little more objective and less emotional as a state when it comes to safeguarding the wellbeing of your citizens.

There are ample solutions to immigration to Europe (and promoting remigration from it) that do not rely on homeless genocides or mass abortion. Yeesh. I say again: utilitarianism, materialism, and consent-based morality were a mistake.