1) Those who have the above objection but still choose to have children (which is probably a great majority of them) clearly believe that the world is not too cruel and unjust and too full of suffering to bring children into. If they thought that, on balance, the world was good enough, purposeful enough and interesting enough to bring new life into the world, knowing this new life would be subjected to everything the world throws at them, they perhaps shouldn’t be so sure that God didn’t feel the same about creation as a whole.
2)
Suppose you were offered the chance to push a
button, after which you get 5 seconds of awful pain, misery and suffering, and
then the rest of your life consists of a continuous state of blissful, heavenly
joy and contentment. I think most people would push the button. Now, consider a
life span of 80 years on earth, comprising the entirety of human experiences,
both positive and negative, as a ratio to the timescale of eternal heavenly
bliss with God for those who choose it. Even though 5 seconds is but a mere
blip in an 80 year timescale, as a ratio, 5 seconds compared with 80 years is
an astronomically higher ratio than 80 years of earth compared with eternal
bliss in Heaven.
Those grains of truth are, I contend, both indicative and evocative. And, sure, I can already anticipate what some objections might be, as they ought to be considered. I’d say the primary challenge to number 1 would be; yes, but there are many other factors (both conscious and subconscious) that drive the desire to have children (biological, psychological emotional, selfish, socio-cultural), and couples may rationally choose to do so in spite of believing the world is not the creation of an all-loving God. To which, I say, true – but a) It still doesn’t stack up well alongside your contention that God shouldn’t have created such a world; and b) Some of the psychological, emotional, selfish and socio-cultural factors driving your desire to have children in spite of your view about God’s creation are likely to be some of the same factors driving your belief that it feels convenient in the short-term if those desires influence your argument against God being the Creator.
And if we move to number 2, it may cross your mind that the primary objection to 2 actually seems like an ironic supporting statement of number 1. That is, the biggest challenge to number 2 seems to be that, even if you accept the proposition that the world is too cruel and unjust and too full of suffering, there is, at least, a great deal of goodness, purpose and interest that works alongside it. This shows me that they think life is sufficiently worth living that they would willingly allow their own children into the world to experience it. Once they do that, it becomes hard to accept that they really do believe that there is too much badness and suffering in the world for them to believe in God. If the world is sufficiently worth living in (in their view) that they'd happily bring new life into it, then it's not such a big step to accept that God feels the same about the world and all the lives in it. After all, life on earth is both hard and easy, it's both joyous and dreadful, it's both simple and complex, and it's both pleasing and frustrating - but it never fails to be interesting, exhilarating and enriching for those who want to throw themselves into the adventure.
The Christian, of course, would add that those challenges and struggles are a necessary part of the journey of growth, progress and fulfilment, and therefore hold deep inherent value in the creation story – which is the same line of thinking that seems to make it worthwhile bringing new life into the world, in spite of those challenges and struggles.
