>>734173742 Title: Why to choose a life of stability, fiscal responsibility, and possibility instead of being tied down to an accident simply because moralfags and religious nutjobs can't see past their own stuck up noses.
Eat a dick, OP. Pro-life bullshit. What a fucked up way of even saying it "pro-life" like if you don't agree with it you are anti-life. I'm not about to let a broken condom or a psycho crazy bitch who lies about being on the pill ruin my life simply out of fear of angering a vengeful, wrathful god. You people need to stop shoving your shit down everybody's throats.
Deal with your own god damn life before you go preachin' to others about how they should live theirs. I can't believe you think 4chan is going to give you pro-life shit. Oldfag my ass.
This is now an aborted fetus thread, like it fucking should be.
>>734177704 No, but it's sort of silly those that typically are pro-life think you should have a child, regardless of circumstance, then would rather not help, when the circumstance means they would need help to raise said the child.
>>734180625 Ahhhhh, but you see, according to Einstein's theory of relativity, the future has already happened. So that tadpole is already an unperceived frog, and that fetus, a yet in perceivable adult.
>>734175536 Ignoring the victim-blaming here, you don't think a baby born into the lives of people who can't afford to care for it doesn't suffer?
The adoption and foster care system in this country sucks. I recently read an article by the director of an adoption agency who said his experiences with the system and what kids in it go through made him an even more vociferous advocate for access to abortion.
>>734183832 I was planned and came into a loving family and while I have certainly had my share of difficulties throughout life, those difficulties are nothing compare to those faced with a life of constant poverty or illness or both. Suicide rates are substantially higher among lower-class citizens; knowing the math, why would you condemn a child to such a fate?
then go into how hippo-critical the left is about the sanctity of life. and you should use the texas commissions data about life and abortion it was done very recently and has the most extensive data on the matter
>>734184918 Condoms suck. It isn't alive if it can't draw its own breath. It has no self awareness. It's basically a parasite for the first trimester. Get laid some time and maybe you'll know what being alive truly is.
>>734185458 And I say give people who are actually, already alive in the "have cognition, aren't just a bundle of cells/organs with no perception or consciousness" the ability to live their lives as they please.
But again I ask, why does anyone "deserve" a chance at life? Who are you to tell a woman that the unwanted organism in her body, that she may not have willingly consented to host, is now her emotional, physical, and fiscal responsibility? Does an insane person really have a choice in the matter if they kill themselves because a voice in their head told them to do so?
Just as murdering someone is ok in some situations, like self defense, abortion is ok in some situations, like life threatening pregnacy or rape.
Shit, if you don't want a child, you could get an abortion. Being forced to raise a child doesn't sound like you're free.
>but you decided to have sex!
Lots of people who fuck are kids who have no understanding of how to raise a child, or even have a decent idea of how babies are made. Making someone have a child because the death of a small cluster of cells offends you is fucked up.
>>734185109 >It isn't alive if it can't draw its own breath. so you can just kill old people, newborns that are ill, people that get knocked the fucked out, many such cases! >>734185083 why kill the innocent child and not the rapist instead?
>>734185940 -Some of our differences lie in perception. -Where you see a cocoon, I see a butterfly. -Where you see a bundle of cells/organs with no perception of consciousness, I see a baby.
-How far will you go to live the live that you please? -Surely in your life you have encounter instances where if someone where to die it would make your life easier, so why did you not kill that person other than legality? -Would you if it was legal?
Why does anyone deserve a chance at life? That's a question that goes beyond the concept of abortion. Whole new thread for that one.
There are instances where I'll compromise on the issue of abortion, if the mothers life is "clearly, statistically" at stake, then she has a choice, it is her life, she should have a say.
If she did not consent and becomes pregnant then she also has a say, because she didn't at the beginning.
The insane thing is in the minority and we should not invalidate my points based on the exceptions.
>>734187323 >If she did not consent and becomes pregnant then she also has a say, because she didn't at the beginning. neiither does the child, just kill the rapist to settle blood lust and keep the kid or give it to adoption
>>734186985 Because the rapist can be reformed, or at least be put to the benefit of society in some way while incarcerated. Also, the rapist is a living person, while a fetus is not, making his death murder from the perspective of one who opposes capital punishment (as I do). If you're suggesting that killing a rapist would be an acceptable alternative to abortion, then you've accepted the premise that death is sometimes a necessary outcome for the crime of rape and we simply disagree on whose existence termination best serves the ends of society.
>>734187852 >then you've accepted the premise that death is sometimes a necessary outcome for the crime of rape and we simply disagree on whose existence termination best serves the ends of society. well no shit my dude of course certain crimes justify capital punishment. >while a fetus is not youre reductionist view would also then suggest that anyone who can not stop someone from killing them can then be killed no? >Because the rapist can be reformed, or at least be put to the benefit of society in some way while incarcerated. the future child has a way better chance then some rapist >Also, the rapist is a living person, while a fetus is not if you murder a pregnant women its a double homicide even if its manslaughter you are getting two counts, explain that, it has a heart beat
>>734187811 which is why its brash/incorrect to punish the child for no reason. i agree on if that mother will have a good chance of not surving but lets be real that is super rare and even rape babies are really rare both those combined are not even a quarter of all abortions
>>734187323 >Difference of perception If you're going to try to get flowery and emotional about the subject (as all pro-life arguments are invariably fated to at some point or another), at least get the fucking analogy right. It's not "cocoon = ball of unconscious cell/organs", it's "eggs laid by a butterfly = ball of unconscious cells/organs".
>How far would I go? Again, killing a living person for the sake of my own convenience is =/= to aborting a pregnancy. The former is illegal and immoral from a sociological cost/benefit analysis.
I didn't bring up the issue of insanity, you did. Think through your talking points before introducing them.
And finally, if you are going to make the claim that anything "deserves a chance at living" before it is conscious or is capable of perception, you need to STOP DEFLECTING AND DEFEND A CLAIM THAT IS SO CENTRAL TO YOUR ARGUMENT.
>>734180625 The argument goes like this: up to a certain point in brain development the fatty sheathes which allow neurons to communicate have not developed, thus there is no thought, no thinking, no consciousness. its a wad of cells. will it be a person? of course. is it a person? no. will my jerkin spooge be a person? under the right conditions. am i obloigated to find a foster home for every sperm? NO. no thought. no person. abort away, anons.
>>734188476 My original analogy was correct, you just didn't understand it. Basically, once the "event" starts, the outcome is "inevitable". -When a caterpillar makes its cocoon, it'll turn into a butterfly most of the time.(hurr durr moths also blah blah) -When a sperm meets the egg, it will turn into a baby, generally...most of the time.
>killing a living person for the sake of my own convenience is =/= to aborting a pregnancy THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS
>The former is illegal and immoral So is the latter. Refer to my analogy.
>>734188139 >Certain crimes justify capital punishment This claim is incidental to a particular legal philosophy and is not supported by evidence, i.e. there are countries where capital punishment is illegal that have extremely low rates of recidivism for the most severe crimes. The economics of successfully carrying out a death sentence also bear enormous costs to society that may significantly outweigh the benefits of execution.
Your use of the term "reductionist" here indicates that you do not understand what it means, since my distinction between a living person's cognition and a fetus's lack of one is not a fundamentally reductionist distinction but rather a philosophically holistic one. Also, obviously anyone who cannot stop themselves from being killed CAN be killed, the question is "SHOULD they be killed?" which is a moral judgment rather than situational.
>Future child has a better chance than some rapist. Speculation not borne out by facts; the comforting lie that your unwanted child might be the next Einstein or Michael Jordan or whatever is one of the most dangerous talking points of the pro-life crowd, as is...
>the double homicide thing This just rings of the "if there is no god then how did the universe come from nothing explain THAT atheists HAHA CHRISTIANS:1 ATHEISTS: 0 lololol" doesn't it? So obviously a woman could be pregnant and decide to abort the pregnancy without telling friends/family for fear of the social stigma and anxiety that might cause her, then get knifed on the way to the abortion clinic for a consultation. If no one knows of her intention to abort, then statistically-speaking it is more rational to assume she intended to keep the baby and thus prosecute as a double-homicide. Also, abortion is an invasive medical procedure and should be carried out by a licensed physician who can consult with their patients prior to performing the operation, thus the physician has the legal authority to carry out the procedure.
>>734190060 No, I got that, it was just a stupid analogy considering that a cocoon is part of the natural, post-birth lifecycle of a butterfly/moth more akin to puberty in humans than childbirth. If you start using the "inevitability" argument, please refer to >>734189250 and their comments on masturbation/nocturnal emissions and shut up.
>>734190207 im going to reply by topic bc you touch several different aspects to to the main points I made, which i appreciated >capital punishment I do not care about recidivism rates I think capital punishment is good for society at large bc I have the opinion that certain ideas cannot be allowed to hang around in jail, and I dont mean honor killings so dont think i am saying its revenge only but i think capital punishment more good then bad, but i do feel reform is needed which speaks to your point made about it being an economic burden. I think their should be a set time period to prove the arguement for capital punishment like a couple years and then if deemed "legit enough" then instant death no wait around for a decade bs. also the entire procedure should be more open >its a moral arguement not a situational one yes exactly but morals are led by or at least attempted to be enacted by principals/responsibilty/behavior so different situations can arise that would produce a different outcome while aiming to apply the same to morals/principals to various situations that are relevant. in this case "the sanctity of life". now regardless of ones opinion on what is and is not life, I think it foolish or niave to ignore the spiritual parts of humans' experience so i think then it therefor it would be messed up to stop the heart beat capable baby. whether or not it can live is irrelevant bc there are many conditions in which consciousness as you previously referred to are not so easily determined in certain states and even until a certain age/developement (and im not trying to make some hippy bs statement about animals) >Speculation not borne out by facts; the comforting lie that your unwanted child might be the next Einstein or Michael Jordan or whatever is one of the most dangerous talking points of the pro-life crowd, as is... that is not what i meant 2 say I mean fuck the rapist they made their choice to rape and violate someone physically/spiritually
>>734191404 Dude, you're forgetting about all the people put to death under capital punishment who were later exonerated by DNA evidence. It is an inhumane, hasty, costly, and immoral act. Your solution to all of the above cannot be "make it quicker and easier" given the margin for error.
>>734191769 whats your opinion about some ideas not being valid to the point where they cannot be allowed to live anymore? also i have always thought itd be interesting to know how many wrongfully convicted people for death row occured since 2000 as a % compared to the say the previous 30 years i guess that would have to be at a state level information
>>734192065 The notion that you can physically destroy hateful ideologies by killing those who propagate them is literally how the US got bogged down in two wars in two different countries for over a decade. You will never actually kill those ideas: Hitler was the biggest Grade A Nazi of all time and even after he died and Nazi Germany was defeated in WW2 and the Nuremberg trials were held there are still very public Nazis operating today. Trying to stomp out ideas with violence might be the easier, faster response but coming up with better narratives is surely more effective.
>>734192479 good point. just to be totally fair i also think rape is and death of mom are good points way more the latter, but the former doesnt sit will with me bc the kid has no choice, also i know its not doing math and writing books but things like getting used to "mom and dads voice"/ having a stable heart beat type things that babies do in the womb happen within a few months
>>734192200 I'm not saying it should never be done ever, but how many of these leftwing people deal with it is completely wrong, promoting abortion (there are fucking abortion funds, its like having assisted suicide funds) people should really bot see it as an option, they'll be thinking "i can always get an abortion and the doc will take all my responsibilities away" instead of taking precautions. It should be a last resort after not being at slut at 17 yo, using proper anticonception, keeping it and giving it up for adoption. >Maybe it's not such a bad idea Sometimes husbands abuse and ruin the lives of women and are arguably better of dead, that does not mean we should promote pro-choice of murdering your husband
>>734173742 "Here's why the new life in your uterus removes your rights over your own body and why" (A stepping stone to further laws over what individuals do with their body, like mandatory tracking/ trade/ ID implants, mandatory birth regulators, mandatory medicine dispensers to pacify the masses, required surgeries relative to individual cases, etc)
>>734178047 Dude, all we want is for the fetus to have the same rights as everyone else. It's already illegal to murder the baby's that exited the womb. That's all we want. We want murder to be illegal no matter who you're killing
>>734200312 The female had their say when they had consensual sex (I won't argue for rape babies). In order to become a felon, you have to do something wrong It's illegal to kill your children and felons You haven't made an argument
>>734173742 This is your daily reminder that all the Christfags who believe life begins at conception MUST ALSO BELIEVE THAT MISCARRIED BABIES GO STRAIGHT TO HELL. No baptism, not receiving the word == straight to hell.
Also, life at conception also means most miscarriages are manslaughter. If the "baby" fails to implant in uterus for any reason == involuntary manslaughter. If baby dies without clear reason (genetic flaw, developmental failure, etc) == involuntary manslaughter If mother eats, drinks, breathes, does anything that causes miscarriage - even unwittingly == murder.
YFW if you think life begins at conception, then most women who miscarry should be charged with manslaughter and imprisoned.
I know its hard for pro lifers to understand science and stuff. But ill explain..
Pain, and sufferign are not magic. They rely on nerves, consciousness, self awareness and certain formed brain structures.
Something we know for a fact fetuses most certainly do not have until long after the legal abortion cut off. They cant even "suffer" until consciousness and self awareness, which comes even after they are born.
So given the choice between never existing at all, and being born to a family that didnt want a child, a world that sucks, or a young coked out couple that cant possibly provide a good start.
Yeah id take the termination before i even have a functioning brain.
Mother feeds kid wrong food child dies Mother charged with child neglect, child abuse, and/or manslaughter.
How is it supposed to be different whether baby is a 3yo or 3month old after birth or 3mo old after conception? Remember, it becomes a baby at conception - supposedly with all rights to life from that moment on.
>>734201059 I remember a time when a doctor told me theres no need to numb a baby before butchering... I mean circumcision. Turns out that causes ptsd and I remember the screams quite clearly too. Fuck your "science". It's everyone's job to question science. It's actually all we pay scientists to do, and is a basic part of the scientific method
Differentfag but.. Thats religious rhetoric so "remember" as though youre stating a fact everyone knows doesnt work because thats exactly the debated point.
And ill tell you the difference: Because the world fucking sucks, and we've known that for eons. The writings and musings of philosophers and great writers have been talking about it since the dawn fo time.
Fetuses cannot suffer. They have not developed rhe appropriate pain nerve endings or brain processes until much later in the pregnancy.
suffering cant even really be a thing without consciousness and self awareness which develops*after* birth.
If you cannot provide that baby with all the best advantages to not have a shitty time in this already shitty world they gave no consent to be in, its a mercy kill. Not a murder..
>hurr the girl made a mistake live with it hurr her fault.
Yeah but you know who suffers the complete and full consequences of her mistakes? The baby.
A fetus is not self aware nor is it alive on it's own. Until it is born, it is little more than some internal organ and if the potential mother does not wish to give birth to it then she does not have to. Better than her trying to remove it herself or giving birth to a child she can't raise well.
>>734201308 Theyve always known that. Circumcision has always been a religious thing and its prominent in america because they thought it stopped the kids masturbating later in life and then it became an undying tradition.
The CDC is the one ignoring the science on this one and psychologists have been at them for a long time about that.
>the entire idea of: science said this now it says that
Yes. Its a self regulating process that corrects itself and refines itself based on new evidence. Thats why its the absolute best logical process we have.
Also... Its very much not hard to understand at all the idea of nerve endings. Nothing happens magically. The entire body and psychological process relies on brain functions.
You feel pain, there was a trigger at a point and a switch flipped in the brain. The necessary neurons arent formed until 28 weeks. Abortions legal until 20.
>>734202099 Good explanation. I know all of this actually and chose to ignore his points because his final statement was that to argue with him is antiscience. I want to argue with that now because I hate people that treat science like a priesthood
>>734173742 "Our national responsibility to live according to Jesus' plan for success: Maximizing the number of unwanted kids by unfit parents + minimizing their food, housing and education once their born.
>>734201599 >>734201651 The argument is for Christfags - who assume it's a baby at conception. Are you a Christfag? Can you make the assumption for logic sake? Can you make the assumption for argument sake? If you're not a Christfag and don't believe it's a baby at conception, then you don't have to deal with the consequences of that assumption, now do you? >Lrn2logic.
Now. If it becomes a baby at conception (which is what these pro-life people keep saying), then isn't it also rational to assume a baby at 4 months after conception has all the same rights to life as a baby at 2 years after birth?
If so, then wouldn't it be rational to charge women whenever they let a baby die - regardless of age? If a baby dies while in their care - and there's no obvious reason, such as heart problems, genetic defect, or disease, then shouldn't we investigate the death regardless of age? (2years after birth the same as 4 months before birth).
Look up the definition of negligent homicide. If the mother's uterine wall simply fails to accept an otherwise perfectly healthy "baby", the mother is negligent in her duties to that baby. It's not the baby's fault - it's the mothers. SHE is the one who was supposed to care for the child and failed. That's manslaughter.
I could go on and on about this and be 100% perfectly right.
Would you charge a couple for cryogenically freezing a perfectly healthy 7yo simply because they don't want to raise her right now? How about if they say they intend to thaw her out some time in the next 2 decades? Would that make it legal/moral?
Well, again - assuming the pro-life christfag argument that it's a baby at conception - that's what hundreds of thousands of couples have done to millions of "babies" at fertility clinics.
Where's the moral outrage? Where's the assassinations of fertility clinic doctors? Where's the protests? The harassment of fertility clinics? Where are they? Hypocrites - every one of these so-called "pro-lifers".
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.