Birth as a Grave Misfortune

Birth as a Grave Misfortune: The Traditional Doctrine of Hell and Christian Salvific Exclusivism is an article by American philosopher and academic written in 2009 and appearing in the 2010 publication The Problem of Hell: A Philosophical Anthology by Joel Buenting. In this paper, Himma (who is a Christian) argues convincingly that the doctrine of Hell — and the idea that many people will end up there — makes it morally wrong to have children. The article's abstract summarises the argument very well:

In this argument, Himma skewers the tendency of Hell-believing religious people to breed at higher rates than non-believers, which they seemingly do without any qualms about subjecting their newborn children to the risk of being eternally tortured.

The Bible promotes both Hell (throughout the New Testament) and procreation (through verses such as ). Surprisingly, Himma's paper appears to be the first time that the repugnant moral corollaries of this combination have been acknowledged in academia, although he does build partly on the antinatalist philosophy of and the writings of  on procreative responsibility. While Benatar holds the strong position that procreation causes unjustified harm based on earthly consequences alone, Himma only finds this conclusion justified when the prospect of Hell is taken into account:

Himma's article initiated an academic discussion, including a back-and-forth between him and a respondent in the journal Faith and Philosophy. Numerous other authors have come to the same conclusion as Himma, including similar comparisons to Benatar in a religious context.

When Pope Benedict XVI reinstated the doctrine of a real Hell for all non-Catholics to burn in forever, and when the Southern Baptist Convention made a similar statement effectively consigning millions to the Lake of Fire, they showed absolutely no sign of telling believers that the only certain way to protect their children from Hell is to not conceive them in the first place, suggesting a widespread cognitive dissonance that could be interpreted as cluelessness at best, and extremely callous recklessness at worst. As philosopher and author Francois Tremblay expressed it:

Although Himma intended his thesis as a reductio ad absurdum to expose beliefs about people going to Hell as fallacious, diehard Hell-believers may choose instead to see it as a modus ponens argument for being childfree. It's also been noted that Himma's argument becomes even more damning in the face of the Augustininan doctrine holding that some individuals are predestined for Hell; the question remains as to whether their prospective parents could still save them from this infinitely horrible fate by using contraception.