> What YOU, ****tard, have repeatedly failed to
> understand is that prior to existing, one has no
> well-being or welfare that can be "improved" by coming
> into existence. THEREFORE, ****tard, an entity cannot
> be "better off" merely by coming into existence: one
> must ALREADY exist to be made "better off" by some event.
>

wrooooongg !!!!!!

an animal can better off (from it's own perspective) merely by virtue of
it's existence (but only whilst it exists) - unless the animal is not
sentient (doesn't have these thoughts), in which case, i can have them for
[it] - the thoughts i have for it can be denied (you could consider it worse
off) - but that's the only thing in question - so question it !

animalkind, mankind & i, can be 'better off' because of it's existance or
non-existance (it's potential existence)