This is the question inmy mind: an unborn/un conceived child has not experienced any suffering. Is it morally just to expose someone to suffering, even if the alternative is non-existence (or whatever state they are in prior to life)? I did not consent to exist, to think/feel/hurt, but two idiots made that choice for me 37 years ago and now I have to deal with it.
For me it is illuminating to meditate on some underlying assumptions here.
E.g. “I did not consent”
This type of statement assumes you have a will. If one decides that they have a free will to make decisions, it is useful to note that this is a supernatural belief (because the laws of physics have no room for free will in a stochastic universe).
If there is no free will, and nothing matters, not only did you not consent, but the entire chain of events since the creation of the universe also lacked consent.
The morality of gift giving is a good starting point.
Intention matters.
Is it good to give a gift for selfish reasons? no.
Is it good to give a gift to make others jealous? no.
Is it good to give a gift to help force your will on others? no. (this is the one closest to your consent question)
Is it good to give a gift out of a genuine desire to share the joy you received from said gift? yes.
E.g. the decision to have a child is not a trivial moral decision. It is not necessarily a good to decide to bring a child into the world. We see this clearly play out in the data of NYC for example, where less than half of conceived children in some communities make it to term.
Self examination is required to see where the true motivation comes from. If one feels that their life was more a burden than a gift, that person is probably not in a great state to decide to morally have a child.
Unfortunately, many people think that having a child will fix their issues.
Humans have moral worth; to remove suffering of humans, make sure they don’t exist to experience suffering.