You may recall that I’m trying to blow up materialism by reductio ad absurdum. The argument against utilitarianism is here. You may note that utilitarianism is not the only moral code permissible under materialism, but it is the morality most commonly held by materialists, and I want to push these people down a slippery slope.
Okay, jack-arcalon linked to this lovely post about the Congo. The whole thing is lots of fun, but pretty long too. Anyway, the punchline is that most reasonable K-selected folks will consider Congolese women irresponsible for having so many kids in a country where it is common practice to gang rape 5-year-old girls (and boys!) and cause fistulas on purpose, as a weapon of terror. If you have a few kids in that wonderfully vibrant country, you can expect at least one of them to be kidnapped, tortured for fun, and gang-raped to death.
Rather than leaving the country, these R-selected moms just have more kids. Can’t win ’em all!
Anyway, I’m pointing out this abysmal reality to show that such people are tacitly admitting that anti-natalism makes sense in at least one context. That is, they have surrendered the categorical imperative. After that, we’re merely talking practicalities and boundary values, and well on our way down the slippery slope to anti-materialism.