>>9164
>with exception of your pure egocentric urge to reproduce.
Try again, but better yet, don't. I purposefully set up the gates so close you can't win this argument since there is nothing more to having children than egocentric urge to reproduce with only exception - and that is this naive love for children, life and innocence in them, the potential of what they can become, I admit it. You said nothing more than "even though my genes are shit, I'm egocentric enough to think my genes are worthy enough to being passed to my children". This is, as I call it, rat mentality. Rats will do anything to survive.
You might cleverly ask, "But man, aren't you being the same egocentric shit thinking that your are above animals? There is nothing more to life than survival dude." And the answer is simply no, because I'm fully aware of being nothing more than an animal with some limited intellectual capacity, however even this low level of intelligence allows me to make decision that I don't want to throw children away to this spiral of existence (with uncertain results) just for my own need to keep my bloodline running through next decades. You are making the decision, you are the judge here and you decided to sentence your children to years of life (we don't know if good or bad) not from pure will to have children and give them life and love, not because they are the light that might brighten up the world, the untouched potential, the innocence. No, YOU decided to do it because you want to keep YOUR genes in gene pool.
As conclusion, I may write that I see it a lot in the "traditional types". They give critics to what they call lower races because of this mentality but at the same time they are driven by nothing more than egocentric idea of "no matter how good or bad my genes are, it's the gene game and my genes will remain in gene pool".