Are we morally obligated to not reproduce? 

short answer - depends on how serious the defect is.

WE ARE LOOKING AT a disaster every soon esp on water availability ,food security .1.4 billion people . Everyone who did not follow family planning across generations should be held accountable.Public policy expers should be held responsible

Life is full of suffering... - Bhudha

Advanced tests can detect some birth defects early in fetus stsge(3-4 weeks) In case of Early abnormalities detection we should abort the fetus. We shouldn't be emotional as down the line the baby the parents will suffer more raising the baby

Very well thought out answer 👍

In search of objectivity when the problem is subjective

Unable to edit comment here in this section and it’s malfunctioning. Leaving it for now. Exasperating

What do you think about appeal to emotion fallacy ?

In some sense yes, but if we take it too extreme it will turn onto eugenics

aLSO BROTHER WE LOVE YOUR VIDEOS

please make one video on atheist ideology people like osho marx,buddha,and first compare between them and after with current gurus

Meri bhi 1st ladki ko autism hai lekin 2nd child normal hai

Not at all convinced with the rationale discussed. Here is why - 1. Condition' s cure may be found in future - we can't predict that. there is no data for or against it 2. New born could turn out to be individual with lot of value - the probability of that would be astronomically low when we look at the birth rate and people who turn out have an impact on this world 3. You have 'right to reproduce' - technically correct but is every legal thing morally correct. And is every morally correct thing always remains morally correct? 4. Answer depends on how big probability is - How will you decide what should be the exact percent. E. G. why is 50% ok but not 49% 5. Future generations should decide whether they want to procreate after they have sufficient info - that is just plain escapism. Future gens can also completely ignore the risks and go ahead with baby when they are not ready to handle the consequences. But by leaving the onus with them, you just became an enabler or atleast you didn't take the responsible decision 6. if you are ready to take the responsibility of caring and supporting the child born with the condition, then it's fine - wait what? What abt the child and whether they are ready to have a lead a life with this condition? How can you take a decision about your child's life knowing that they will suffer. Lastly, I want to give you a scenario, even if there is a small chance that going to a particular school on a particular day will harm your kid for life, will you send your kid to school? I guess the answer to the original question lies somewhere around "to each his own" but I expected a better logical discussion around things

Sir ek video natalism pe bhi bani chahiye hindi me

Stephen Hawking example is not right, how many with his condition went onto become great acheivers or contributors? I think the decision to procreate knowing the existence of such condition is entirely upto that individual (most of the times its an emotional decision) one cannot predict how things unfold after the child is born as it involves many factors that influence the growth primarily social, financial and cultural aspects.

I request you to sir plz use Hindi so that it is easy to understand

having children is seen as a blessing and a natural part of life. It's encouraged as it fulfills one of the main purposes of marriage, which is to build a family. However, this comes with responsibilities, like ensuring the well-being of children. While there might be practical considerations, like financial stability, there's no moral obligation to avoid reproduction.