Was listening to a discussion where one of the hosts stated that reproduction is not default. Especially since it requires participation of one or more beings. How many lifeforms can reproduce asexually? Most life is relatively incapacitated and incompetent at birth but as they are life forms that have evolved in an environment where there is a general support structure during that early time. I would argue that many non solitary actions can still be considered default. Including reproduction. This comes with being a more complex life-form.
With ant colonies or beehives where such a minute number reproduce it is still an action considered default in ants. Could this be similar to men or women viewing themselves as part of a shared humanity and coming to the conclusion that they need not participate in reproduction to continue the general life of the being they are a part of. The ability to reproduce life and the the drive to maintain it is default.
Defining what constitutes a quality of life worth living is not.
There are many different ways you can share your knowledge with society and improve the world, even by just doing things in a rather solitary manner. Unfortunately many that say they do not want children often seem intelligent and of a kind that could raise much better humans than those being raised by sport parents.
The argumentation that one should not have kids as you cannot guarantee lack of suffering was brought up after pointing out that even if the divorce rate is 50% being a sufficient reason to avoid marriage I don’t think the comparison is appropriate.
I do consider marriages main purpose to be that of raising children, and not the state kind of it, but if the rate was 50% should we assume the 50% that stay together are happy so that’s worth it? Anyway my suggestion is define what love is, decide if you want children and don’t get married youve done these two things.