You’re not shoving any opinions down someone’s throat by giving birth to them. Giving birth is just giving birth. Parents affect a child’s development, sure, but in the end everybody forms their own opinions about the world. You can say “that’s assault in my book”, but it’s not assault. Life is what it is.

How am I ignoring unhappy people? I just said in my last comment that there are more unhappy people than happy people in my country. Literally in the line you quoted I was talking about happy people and unhappy people. I wasn’t making a value statement there claiming that happy people are more important, I was responding to your incorrect claim that “for every happy person, there’s an unhappy person”.

Humans and all other forms of life have a built in biological imperative that tells them to create more life. It’s just a part of life. It’s the reason life continues to exist. If that imperative wasn’t there, life on Earth would have already ceased to exist.

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but your argument seems to be that since some people are unhappy, nobody should be able to exist? That doesn’t really seem like a justifiable position. If everyone (including you) was happy, would you consider natalism acceptable? Because if that’s the case, it seems like a better argument might be one in favor of social justice, equality, an end to wars, etc etc. Trying to get rid of the societal problems that lead, in large part, to people being unhappy.