once stopped me in my tracks by saying
It got you to shut up. So it worked. Who knows, he might even believe it too!
I think it also demonstrates the perversity of morality. His "fuck them" attitude, if real, is still probably less harmful than your "let's do it for the children" attitude. After all, those future generations will be able to do that, find their own fucking power. But if we hamstring our societies for frivolous moral reasons (which is where we're heading with climate change mitigation), we'll commit concrete harm to those future generations that merely burning a little more oil can't do.
Here's the problems I always see with this sort of moralizing:
1) No evidence that global warming or other climate change is big enough compared to other problems like overpopulation, poverty, habitat and arable land destruction, etc. There is a remarkable lack of evidence to support the claims of harm.
2) Disregard for the demonstrated dynamic that poor people have more kids and poverty leads to overpopulation which is the biggest problem facing humanity. Among other things, overpopulation is the reason that human-induced climate change is a problem in the first place.
3) Disregard for the cost and ineffectiveness of climate change mitigation. When one looks at Germany's Energiewende, the Kyoto Protocol, carbon emission markets, renewable energy public projects, etc, one sees a history of remarkably costly and useless virtue signalling, often combined with cynical exploitation. There's no regard for how to implement any sort of mitigation measures in a way that doesn't harm billions of people nor regard for the outcome of such projects.
So sure, tell us how your beliefs are going to make the world a better place. But if you really are interested in making the world a better place, then maybe you ought to pay attention to what we're doing now.