So you say... where are you getting that from though?

There is every reason to believe that. Every reason. There is NO reason to believe anything contrary to that.

Well, then, we totally disagree in this matter. No use arguing endlessly.

Oblivion. The negation of everything you know.

What does any of this mean? You've experienced the negation of everything you know?

OK, but can you please at least state your reasons for believing that "there is no reason to believe that by not having children we are sparing people from existence"?

I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that by not having children, we prevent people from existing... It seems to me like a mathematical certainty.

What are your reasons for disagreeing with that?

Simply, we dont know what is beyond our perception. As we dont know, there is no evidence of, that, for example, not having children will mean less minds in the universe, thus there is no reason to believe so.

Its like god. Some people believe god doesnt exists, but, in reality, there is no evidence of that it doesnt exists, and thus no reason to believe that it doesnt exists.

Even so, there IS a reason to believe that not having children will mean less minds in the universe; when was the last time you witnessed any evidence for the existence of an immaterial mind?

Or, if you want to look at that from another angle, what you're saying is that a mere lack of positive proof against something gives a positive reason to believe the opposite. You have no proof that I am not a cat; do you believe me to be one on that same basis?

2] I have always wondered what other philosophers would say about the following idea:

"It is a defacto truth that all the world's citizens who lived and died, during the time span of, let us say, for illustration sake, 1,000 BCE until 1800 CE---all those people met with there own destiny or IOW, they all lived out there destiny" Is this a correct statement?