As crazy as it sounds, it still is a clear choice.
It's a common trope in cartoons that the bad guys want the opposite - to destroy the world.
I think you make an important point though, and I have no good argument to it.
The best I can do is point out that having children does not fall on the responsibility of every woman. Not every woman needs to reproduce for society to continue.
So the question is, is it okay for people to judge others for their personal choices, even if it is societally necessary? I think there are countless examples where no one bats at an eye this category of discrimination - for some definition of necessary.
I mean come on, your argument is just weird and makes no sense.
We are talking about the 2nd most powerful biological drive after survival. You wouldn't say "as crazy as this sounds, continued existence is a clear choice" - even though it is, because anyone could decide to kill themselves at any time. And therefore they're choosing not to at every moment they don't.
But you don't say that because that makes no sense.
And thus I say that the notion that having children, while yes in theory a choice, also reflects the second strongest drive after survival and is less of a choice than one might think.
* also as a recent father, I'm gonna pull that card and say that you clearly aren't a parent, and Just Don't Get It.
To address your last point, my first comment was not really specific to children, none of my comments really have been.
I enjoy thinking about these things. So indulge me.
Life objectively is a choice. There is no denying that.
The question I asked above is, should it be morally okay to negatively judge/discriminate people based on their choices, even for a choice that is societally necessary in aggregate?
At first it might seem like the answer is no - but counter examples are easy to think of. Take drinking water. Producing it is societally necessary. Would it be okay to negatively judge an intelligent software developer for pivoting and becoming a pipe repairman for the local water utility? many would think so! You might think it is a waste of his potential. It would not be considered taboo to negatively judge him for making that choice.
Of course there are differences with child birth, but they aren't relevant to the question I've asked above - which is sufficiently answered. The answer is yes, it's okay to judge/discriminate even for societally necessary things.
Of course, the next step is to take the reasoning farther, and ask more questions. Perhaps I shouldn't lump judging and discrimination together. But I'm satisfied here.
Just to circle back and explain how we got here:
1. I started by pointing out that child birth is a choice and that we commonly discriminate people for their choices
2. Someone responded that it is societally necessary in aggregate and not a choice
3. I showed a simple counter example that it is okay to discriminate against people even when that choice is societally necessary in aggregate
It's a common trope in cartoons that the bad guys want the opposite - to destroy the world.
I think you make an important point though, and I have no good argument to it.
The best I can do is point out that having children does not fall on the responsibility of every woman. Not every woman needs to reproduce for society to continue.
So the question is, is it okay for people to judge others for their personal choices, even if it is societally necessary? I think there are countless examples where no one bats at an eye this category of discrimination - for some definition of necessary.