Assuming that one claims to have an ethical basis for their actions, bringing a child in this world might be a bit tricky. Our species is close to 8 billion with most not having food, water and shelter on a daily basis. Furthemore, a child does not ask to be brought into an existence of suffering — assuming we are taking the gross average into consideration. Couple this with our carbon footprint and you can understand how things can go to shit.

We have control over our own bodies and we can create a child if we so wish. Thing is, that child belongs to their biological father or society(?) Where does one draw the line and why? If one assumes that their child is their own then we might as well assume dominion over that individual — even to the point of enslavement. The child is a by-product of our own biology after all.

If we start taking the socio-cultural narrative and the ethos of religion or state law then our rights and obligations towards that form of life change dramatically. In some eras, the child was a product of the state — still is in someway. The general ethos of the group can determine whether or not a parent is fit to take care their own child.

Based on the current state of the world I believe that there is no point in bringing another life into existence other than the superficial satisfaction of experiencing our genes getting passed on. In other words, it is much like patriotism but on a more concentrated level.One can be proud about the random group of cells as one one can be proud about their home grown tomatoes — which, even if they suck — they are still special.

In other words the whole process is sentimental. Couple this with the fact that life is indeed mostly suffering, disease and survival — by stepping onto others so we can shine and you can understand where this is going in respect to ethics. Such is the stat of existence — from the time we take exams to the interview to find a job. There is filtering in regards to what life matters most and which one shall suffer the most even if the circumstances in regards to which one prevails or fails are entirely arbitrary. After all, we need to find meaning in the meaningless noise.

If humanity could live forever the conversation would be entirely different. We wouldn't have the biological need to pass on our genes because for the most part we could grow parts of ourselves and prolong our existence. What motivates us and what shapes the ethos of life and death are all based on we perceive our physiology and the place it has for the overall preservation of our species.