jwb

It really depends.

If the parents are being overtly reckless and ignoring something like some genetic defect they have or some other reason not to have a kid, maybe. But if they were just otherwise normal people who for whatever reason got an unlucky roll of the dice it doesn't seem very reasonable to hold that against them.

The Batlord

"Overtly reckless" could conceivably apply to anyone having children.

__________________

jwb

Yeh but that's not how I meant it. I mean to me it's overly reckless to knowingly have kids you can't support or like I said if there's an abnormally high likelihood of some illness/defect that will severely **** the kid's life up.

If nobody had kids there would be no people. I think it's worth it to risk some pain just to keep the whole phenomenon of consciousness going. Like i said, to someone who values the cessation of suffering above everything else, the moon is a utopia. To me it's a big boring worthless rock. I value life.

Frownland

Very innovative of you.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

jwb

In this case I'd rather be conventional.

The Batlord

You mean in all cases (bestiality aside of course)?

__________________

jwb

Nah. I also think robots should replace humans.

The Batlord

At work at least.

__________________

jwb

No. In general. If they are smarter than us than if we go extinct nothing is lost

But if we drive ourselves extinct for some other dumb reason the smartest being on earth just got nixed

The Batlord

As far as I'm concerned if there's a point to all this it should be to achieve immortality and then stop having children.

__________________