This paper introduces contemporary anti-natalism, as represented by David Benatar, and seeks to establish an effective set of questions that should be considered when one evaluates anti-natalist claims. I begin by laying out the basics of anti-natalism, including the main arguments favored by contemporary anti-natalists. Next, I explain why Benatar’s asymmetry argument is not essential for answering the question of anti-natalism, and why we should instead attend primarily to arguments concerning quality of life. Then, I explore two issues relevant to quality of life-based arguments: Perceived quality of life, and meaningfulness in our lives. Taking these issues into consideration, I then conclude that quality of life is quite low for humans, and that as a result, anti-natalism is correct. However, I assert that because of the many non-moral reasons that exist in favor of procreation, we should not view procreation as morally forbidden, but rather as a moderate moral mistake.