Perhaps, having had no say in their own conception, it's reasonable to allow them as much a chance of a life as anyone else? Overpopulation is clearly a proble

Perhaps, having had no say in their own conception, it's reasonable to allow them as much a chance of a life as anyone else? Overpopulation is clearly a problem, probably the problem, but you don't solve it by guilt induced suicide, mandated death or shipping people off to camps (not in the "civilised" world anyway). You discourage excess procreation. Tax after the first child, free birth control, and advertising campaigns should reduce numbers. After all many nations did all that in reverse to encourage more children, but they didn't make breeding compulsory. There is no hypocrisy in the stance. I'm sure there's other non-dystopian possible approaches that stay safely away from holocaust and eugenics. The hypocrisy is pretending a finite planet has infinite space for expansion where we keep expanding until there is a catastrophic crash. Perhaps some wildlife will remain, perhaps not. Far better to have a controlled stop and seek to find a sustainable population - where earth can regenerate what we use, and we still have sustainable wildlife, insect, sea and plant populations and some wilderness. Humanity keeps on demonstrating they can't do self-controlled, so your worldview wins. Future crash it will be then.