I appreciate the clarification, I'm sorry if I also came off harsher then necessary, that particular wording just really gets to me.

I think people who have the means (can afford or have access to the resources) to have children and want to have children (as in, not to fix a relationship but actually want to raise children) should have children.

I do have an issue with capitalism making it so that having children is a privilege of the rich, but that is a moral judgement on capitalism as a system, not people having children (some people being forced to by that very system as abortions or contraceptives are not available to them, nor is sex ed).

But to judge someone's morality simply for having a child is arrogant and unfair.

You're kinda getting into enviro-fascist/eco-fascist rhetoric with the "humans are a cancer" talk.

That's rhetoric often pushed by the ruling class alongside food scarcity talk -- food scarcity that is manufactured by capitalists to convince us that rampant famine and starvation (caused by capitalism) cannot be fixed (it absolutely can given current technology if we stopped spending our resources on pointless wars).

Humans are capable of co-existing with nature quite well, actually, and we did for hundreds of thousands of years. Capitalism has only existed for at most 500 years, and feudalism before it had only been around since the 8th century in the common era.

The way it is is not the way it has always been, and the way it is is not the way it has to be. We are not the cancer, unchecked power is.