All ethical goods are autonomously defined by selves (i.e.
Self-love, therefore, is no part of morality.
His assertion that, "every rational being exists as an end in himself and not merely as a means to be arbitrarily used by this or that will" [Beck, p.46] -- jedes vernünftige Wesen als Zweck an sich selbst, zum beliebigen Gebrauche fur diesen order jenen Willen" [p.428] -- is, I think, true; and it adds another feature, the concepts of means and ends, to the idea of a rational being.
Indeed it is exactly its counterpart.
Furthermore, if there are goods-in-themselves entirely beyond even rational and sentient beings, which are owed their own forms of respect, we may see how Kant beginning his inquiry merely with can have been a .
That makes the "end" a good-in-itself.
Straw man. This is the fallacy of refutinga caricatured or extreme version of somebody's argument, rather than theactual argument they've made. Often this fallacy involves putting wordsinto somebody's mouth by saying they've made arguments they haven't actuallymade, in which case the straw man argument is a veiled version of . One example of a straw man argument would be to say,"Mr. Jones thinks that capitalism is good because everybody earns whateverwealth they have, but this is clearly false because many people just inherittheir fortunes," when in fact Mr. Jones had not made the "earnings" argumentand had instead argued, say, that capitalism gives most people an incentiveto work and save. The fact that some arguments made for a policy are wrongdoes not imply that the policy itself is wrong.
That complements the version of moral duty given above.
Since children for some time really are incompetent and helpless, it is a good question to what extent the parental relationship is a contractual duty of commission or a non-contractual one: but if there is no to bring children into existence (which does not seem right outside of moralistic religious systems), then the act by the parents must be either supererogatory or in the parents' self-interest.