Looking over that argument, in the second link, I notice that those same premises would appear to support the conclusion that the most morally correct action possible would be to find some way to sterilize every vertabrate (possibly through some sort of genetically engineered virus). If there is no next generation—of anything, from horses to cows to tigers to humans to chickens—then there will be no pain and suffering experienced by that next generation. The same premises would also appear to support the conclusion that, having sterilised every vertabrate on the planet, the next thing to do is to find some painless way of killing every vertebrate on the planet, lest they suffer a moment of unnecessary pain or suffering.
I find both of these potential conclusions repugnant; I recognise this as a mental safety net, warning me that I will likely regret actions taken in support of these conclusions in the long term.
Looking over that argument, in the second link, I notice that those same premises would appear to support the conclusion that the most morally correct action possible would be to find some way to sterilize every vertabrate (possibly through some sort of genetically engineered virus). If there is no next generation—of anything, from horses to cows to tigers to humans to chickens—then there will be no pain and suffering experienced by that next generation. The same premises would also appear to support the conclusion that, having sterilised every vertabrate on the planet, the next thing to do is to find some painless way of killing every vertebrate on the planet, lest they suffer a moment of unnecessary pain or suffering.
I find both of these potential conclusions repugnant; I recognise this as a mental safety net, warning me that I will likely regret actions taken in support of these conclusions in the long term.