Many parents choose not bring children into this world for just that reason.  The fact that the specific future suffering a child brought into this world is unknown by the parents I'm sure plays a role in their decision to have children.

Out of curiosity, if a Christian theist was granted, by god, foreknowledge of their child's future, and that future included the child being repeatedly raped, imprisoned in a basement and tortured, do you suppose that the Christian theist would still chose to have that child?  Perhaps they would.  I suppose that one idea that might motivate them is that if the child was never born it would not have the opportunity to know and accept god.  This would at least be consistent with the idea that all child rapes are necessary and perfectly moral events since god must have a morally adequate reason for allowing them.  Otherwise he wouldn't be perfectly moral and all powerful.  That morally adequate reason seems to be the preservation of free will so everybody will have the the opportunity, free from any type of coercion, to choose to love god.

I am very comfortable discussing the no god reality.  A code of behavior could then be based on empathy and the naturally subjective human sense of fairness.  We could discuss "how do we define fairness and what code of behavior best achieves a society based on that definition of fairness.  This avoids the confusion and contradictions presented by attributing the foundation of our invented codes of behavior to a god that is perfect, loves us, but still regards brutal rape perfectly necessary.  

Most people seem to stick to their own moral codes irregardless of what their god says.  They do what they think is fair and what they think is fair is motivated, on a foundational level, by their own naturally evolved sense of empathy.  Taking the god out of the question actually clarifies "moral" philosophy by acknowledging that there is not supernatural foundation for what we consider fair.  Fairness is what we commonly agree is fair and the concept of fairness varies according to time, culture, and individual preferences experiences.  This seems a far more productive way of discussing human behavior rather than claiming that god has a perfect plan and we need to figure out what his plan is. 

Thank you.

Exactly what do you mean by "many"? And how do you distinguish between such people's concern for the existence of a child (who will never be born) and the concern of such people for their OWN happiness? 


I find the overlapping of arguments between the proponents of atheism and the pro-choice lobby ironic and disingenuous.

On the one hand you have strident, humanist demands that reproductive "rights" should have nothing to do with God - the ability and the right to decide whether to become and whether to remain pregnant.

Yet on the other hand, we have secular, pro-choice counter-apologists blaming God for the so-called "problem of pain".