>Implying I give a shit
Let them do it, don't let them do it, I'm not involved with them so it's not my concern.

>fetus
>baby
lol no

You should support abortion because it keeps the black and mexican populations down

>>34394036
then stop being a slut

>>34394036
HEY
YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT BABY EVEN IF YOURE NOT FINANCIALLY OR EMOTIONALLY READY FOR IT BECAUSE I SAID SO

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

(I won't give a shit about the kid after he/she's born tho XDDDDDDD)

File: Confused felix.jpg (393KB, 950x720px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 950x720px

>>34394200
So basiclly its racist to support abortion?

>>34394150
>>34394200
>unironically thinking women should be able to murder children at will
Why don't we just call them God while we're at it?

>tfw Idgaf about dead fetuses
If only we could get Africa onboard with abortions

>>34394214
No, racist would be saying "only blacks and mexicans should be able to abort"

which I wouldn't be against

>>34394215
>fetuses
>children
lol no

frankly, we should extend fetal abortiveness to within a year of birth

we humans used to throw the defects to the wolves and were better for it

>>34394278
What's the distinction, my man? Fetus is just a Latin word for child or offspring, and in contemporary use just refers to an earlier stage in the development of a child.

Literally noone remembers anything till theyre 2 years old.
Besides, I don't see anyone giving a fuck about displaced animals from unnessessary land development who end up dying from destroyed habitats.
And I don't see anyone offering to adopt these babies.
And I don't see anyone who advocates prolife advocating better sexual education and better access to birth control, which is PROVEN to lower birth rates better than teaching abstinence.
And all these prolifers argue from an appeal to emotion, literally no science to back up why we shouldn't abort a baby.
Who gives a fuck, it's the woman's body, it's the woman's choice.

>>34394036
Hey look, a moralfag. Looks like you got lost. You're looking for www.facebook.com. Go be a whiny pussy ass cocksucker there.

abortion should be legal everywhere

why do you want to force normies to have kids that they dont want, so more and more robots grow up tortured by stacey and chad?

fuck off back to /pol/ op. abortion should be legal whether its the mom or dad, if one parent doesnt want the baby they should be able to physically abort (or financially stop paying for it).

>>34394435
Roasties need to know the consequence of their whore ways.

>>34394036
>Vegan will abort fetus because it's not a human and not alive.
>Won't eat an egg because it's immoral.

NANI??????????

>>34394458
roasties end up with free welfare money to buy shit with while they neglect their kid and raise more robots

good job punishing the wrong person retard

File: 1484553091235-1.jpg (50KB, 625x420px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 625x420px

>>34394036
Go ahead, soy-goy, I ain't gonna stop ya.

>>34394296
The time period should be until the baby turns into a conscious being, since there's no way to objectively measure this 1-2 years seems pretty fair IMO. But a better alternative would be for nobody to ever have children again so we can all die out and nobody has to suffer.

>>34394458
>anyone wants more niggers or robots
Stop being stupid and bring in more niggers and robots into the world is dumb you double nigger.

If you're pro-life you have to be pro-welfare otherwise I don't even understand the amount of mental gymnastics necessary to be anything else.

>>34394389
You don't remember things on certain substances as well. This does not mean it's open season to kill people under the influence of them.

>And I don't see anyone who advocates prolife advocating better sexual education and better access to birth control, which is PROVEN to lower birth rates better than teaching abstinence.
That's because I don't want to lower birth rates. That's a bad thing, we need more people.

Kill as many babies as your black roastie heart desires, just DON'T MAKE ME PAY FOR IT.

You made the mistake that led to some Chadspawn brewing in your filthy cunt, you deal with the consequences yourself. End of story.

>>34394489
Get rid of welfare too nigger. I don't give a fuck

>>34394435
If the world as majority robot it would be a better place.

>>34394036
Who is paying for the abortion shilling?

>>34394498
>The time period should be until the baby turns into a conscious being
This is retarded.

There's no way to verify that anyone besides yourself is actually a conscious being. If we're being "objective" on this logic we may as well extend that period indefinitely and start aborting adults.

>>34394036
>caring at all

I want to be left alone to do my thing. As long as no one else gets in my way or bothers me, they can do their thing too.

>caring about the life of a barely conscious fetus

Please, the only one who should even give a shit are the parents, close family, and doctor who carries it out.

>>34394586
Well as you can see from the rest of my post I think nobody should ever be born anymore and the human race can die out peacefully without bringing about any more suffering. And I know that nobody is a conscious being, even my own consciousness is an illusion, but the majority of people do not agree with this. When I said "until the baby turns into a conscious being" I mean exhibiting the signs of mental reasoning as opposed to pure reflex.

The fact that abortion is even a debate is proof that nihilism has already won.

Just burn the Earth, senpai. Maybe when this godforsaken society is gone something better can be.

File: 1481981021801.jpg (46KB, 542x535px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 542x535px

>>34394389
You won't remember anything after you're dead, that doesn't make the experiences that you had while alive worthless. If you tortured someone for a million years but then wiped their memory so that it was if it never happened, it still wouldn't be ethical. You would just be "killing" the consciousness that experienced that million years of torture.

Adoption is an option for abortion and I've primarily seen Catholics advocate helping children and so on after birth. After all, it is Catholics who run like almost half the private healthcare services in the States or whatever.

You cannot use "science" as an ethical guideline on its own. There is no scientific measurement of the value of human life. There is no observable moral guidelines for conscious action. Science informs us of the nature of our reality, it does not dictate what we should and shouldn't do. Ultimately, in your view, any moral opinion is reduced to an "appeal to emotion" including your statement that it must be a woman's choice because it is a woman's body, since that rests on an emotional assumption that its a woman who "should" have that "right" - nonscientific concepts, by the way.

>>34394150
>roasties
>human

>>34394647
>aiming to minimize suffering
wew lad. Nice utilitarianism.

>When I said "until the baby turns into a conscious being" I mean exhibiting the signs of mental reasoning as opposed to pure reflex.
How do you distinguish reasoning from pure reflex?
Are you implying that free will exists? Because it doesn't.

>>34394586
Exactly. Don't these libtards know that Jesus puts your consciousness in you at birth? Brain "science" is a commie atheist hoax desu

>>34394608
But anon, how will I impose my subjective abrahamic morals that I parrot from the 5,000 people town I was indoctrinated in?

The more roasties bitch about their reproductive rights, the more I hate them for being whores.

WHAT, the DOZENS of ways you can prevent and end a pregnancy before and after unprotected sex require being too responsible?

TOO FUCKING BAD, ROASTIE. MAYBE YOU SHOULD RESPECT YOUR BODY MORE.

>>34394210
Not being ready for a child doesn't justify murder

>>34394693
>Science can prove consciousness
If anything science has proven the exact opposite and made it clear that sentience is an illusion.

>>34394036
"I just called the police on my neighbor for weed" threads and anti abortion threads always out the normies browsing /r9k/

>>34394722
>Murder
>On a being that doesn't "exist" yet
KeK
I'm not even talking late-term abortion. Pretty sure the norm is they don't do abortions after the second trimester.

And I hope you're pro-welfare, famalam. Otherwise you're a massive hypocrite.

>>34394722
Children are now capitalistic enterprises, the parents are now the owners of property rather than the recipients of the divine-gift of life. Offspring can now be killed by their property-owners according to their prospective use-value; if the property owner discerns that the child is an unprofitable investment then it can terminate the property.

>>34394784
>defending women on /r9k/
>>>/soc/

I get autismbux. I'm pro welfare.

>>34394666
>You cannot use "science" as an ethical guideline on its own. There is no scientific measurement of the value of human life.
Now if only we could drill that sentiment into insurance companies.

File: certificates-of-authenticity5.png (59KB, 370x168px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 370x168px

>>34394798
truth bomb of the thread award to you

>>34394691
Yeah I know free will doesn't exist. However I know that I am under the illusion of having a consciousness and in good faith I assume that other people have the same experience as "me" even though obviously it's impossible to know. Even though we are along for the deterministic ride that is set out for us, there is still an illusion of consciousness and aspects of this such as qualia.

>>34394309
The distinction is it's closer to a sperm than an actual baby. If you classify sperm as a human then masturbation should be considered genocide lmao

If those who write the laws decide that killing is legal, than it is a right, but only to some, or those who have the power to conceal records of it ever happening with money and power.

How many republican politicians do you think are pro-life on TV but their daughter got an abortion anyway? Sarah Palin was the only person to take it seriously enough to let her kid have a downs baby so she could virtue signal.

File: 1467531099220.png (811KB, 708x576px) Image search: [Google]

811KB, 708x576px

>giving a shit about what women do with a non-sentient clump of cells in their gut

>>34394809
>defending women
No I'm defending the right to stop people from growing up with shitty lives because their parents were not ready.

I'm pretty anti-natalist, I'm trying to help future robots by wanting it to be possible for them to never exist.

File: 1485309630760.jpg (38KB, 480x562px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 480x562px

THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE SHITLORDS

>>34394871
t. roastie

originaleyuyuhjjjjjjjjjj

>Roastie is making me pay child support
REEEEEE

>Roastie wants to have an abortion
REEEEEE

There's no pleasing you people.

>>34394853
No, there is an important distinction. Sperm are material used in the creation of a human being, but not a "human being" itself. Sperm itself will never become a human being, just as the egg doesn't become a human being, these are both things that are used in the process of creating the initial fetus. The fetus will then, unless interrupted by an act of violence or by naturally occurring miscarriage, develop into an adult human.

>>34394911
"This person is correct and I cannot counter them therefore the only solution is to insult them. This is correct!"

>>34394933
Its as if people can have differing opinions.

>>34394516
>Unplanned preignencies are better than planned ones
People arent gonna stop having babies, theyll just be having babies when they can raise thei kids properly

>>34394666
All those words and yet you still couldn't provide a worthwhile reason for anti abortion, satan

>>34394897
If the founding fathers didn't want their shit changed they would have made the constitution unamendable.

They were intelligent enough to know times change.

>>34394837
>However I know that I am under the illusion of having a consciousness and in good faith I assume that other people have the same experience as "me" even though obviously it's impossible to know. Even though we are along for the deterministic ride that is set out for us, there is still an illusion of consciousness and aspects of this such as qualia.
You're implicitly admitting that your protecting humans after birth whilst supporting abortion is a double standard for basically no good reason.

If we accept that the universe is deterministic we also need to cease assigning importance to our perceived consciousness and react in one of two ways. Either life is important is important for it's own sake because we subjectively appreciate it in which case abortion isn't justifiable as the fetus is just as "alive" as an adult, or simply resign yourself to total nihilism. In which case abortion isn't justifiable (because nothing is justifiable) but nonetheless should be permitted, as should every other possible action regardless of it's current legality.

>>34394911
No, I'm just not a stupid faggot.

>live in a house
>have a friend over
>he brings a retarded invalid you didn't invite with him
>invited friend departs but retarded invalid decides to stay for nine months
>retarded invalid starts wrecking your house
>throw retard out
>rightards start pissing and moaning and calling you a child murderer
What gives

>>34394962
You've said it yourself anon. "will then develop into an adult human." Exactly! It's not a human yet, it's just a clump of cells which will take months to develop into something even resembling a human. Early stage abortion is WASTING resources which could turn into a human, just like masturbating is WASTING resources which could be used to make a human.

>>34394586
Just because it's not scientifically verifiable doesn't mean you can't make a common sense guess.

>>34394933
Don't support the child or the woman, just let them both die as the betas uprise. We will ressurect chad through blood sacrifice so he can die over and over again for eternity.

>>34394036
>implying women enjoy abortion

Woman allowed to kill her baby: Men are off the hook. Taxpayers' money not spent on bullshit single moms raising unwanted babies who later commit crimes. Woman can't take half your shit and force you to pay alimony.

Woman not allowed to kill her baby: Woman divorces you and takes half your shit, blames you for everything. Becomes single mom. Taxpayer has to pay for her mistakes.

>>34394150
/thread
originalelalio

>>34395076
What if men were allowed to kill the baby?

>>34395041
No, it's literally, medically a human being by then. Just because a human child has not completed its growth and will "develop into an adult human", doesn't mean it's not actually a human being yet.

Whether or not its a human being you consider it worthwhile or moral to keep alive or not (because of sentience, etc.) is another issue.

>>34395041
We need to convert semen into fuel

Nofap then, numalecows

>>34394995
>Unplanned preignencies are better than planned ones
I unironically believe this.
Bastards are always more interesting people than regular kids.

>People arent gonna stop having babies, theyll just be having babies when they can raise thei kids properly
And if our current birth rates are any indication that is never. Or when they're old enough that having a kid will give them mental disorders far more damaging than growing up with parents that aren't ready.

People have already stopped having babies. This is not something to be prevented, it's something that's already plainly observable that needs to be rectified.

>>34395052
>common sense guess
mmmm real reliable

>>34395052
That has about as much substance as saying
>dude, just turn off your brain lmao

File: 1484181584194.jpg (70KB, 763x779px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 763x779px

Abortion is murder. That being said, murder is justified in some situations. If she doesn't want the baby, why force her to keep it? Why would I give a fuck?

File: gugg.gif (25KB, 472x232px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 472x232px

>>34395097
You ever wonder why it looks more like a fish, or turtle, or horse, or any other animal at that life stage?

Learn to question your environment instead of how others' subjectivities align with your own.

>>34394933
Child support is hella gay though and part of what's keeping the patriarchy in place by encouraging other roasties to get away with achieving less than men.

As a roastie, you should be against it.

>>34395019
Yes I'm being hypocritical. I know that the universe is deterministic, free will is a myth, consciousness is an illusion, and nothing has any meaning. And I believe that no humans should be born into the world. However I still am biased by my emotions, I enjoy my life and some of the people in it and would prefer it if they weren't killed. It matters to me subjectively even though I know the truth.
Also I don't give a shit about any people who don't affect my own life, they can all get killed as far as I'm concerned. But I am trying to make a compromise towards something that people might actually agree to.
Sorry if my posts sound retarded but it's 2AM where I am and I'm about to go to bed.

>non-sentient clusterfuck of cells
>baby
lmao

>>34395038
>invite friend over who you KNOW will have a 50-90% chance of bringing an invalid with him and who said "if I come over it is likely you will have to take care of this guy for 9 months"
>still invite him anyway on the off chance that he doesn't bring the invalid and you just get to have some fun
>he actually brings it over
>get pissed off and throw the invalid outside to die while he's away
>comes back and goes "WTF why did you kill the fucking kid I thought you accepted your responsibility to look after him"
What gives

>>34395158
That doesn't mean anything retard.
>UM IT ROOK RIKE NON-HUMAN ANIMAL UM SO I GUESS IT NOT HUMAN DUHH???
monkey thinking

>>34395019
>Either life is important is important for it's own sake because we subjectively appreciate it in which case abortion isn't justifiable

Different anon here but that's exactly why abortion is justifiable

The only observably "inherent" meaning to life is the experience of it. Which means we should all strive to make the existences of our fellow humans as good and comfy as possible. Not getting an abortion when your doctor tells you your child is gonna come out with downs for example is in direct opposition to that.

>>34395097
Whatever you classify it as the fact is that they're both just clumps of cells which aren't humans yet. I could classify a banana as a human since genetically its quite close to being a human.

>>34394853
You fucking idiot.

Sperm by itself will not become a baby. During the impregnation phase millions of sperm will die except the one that penetrates the egg. A fetus will become a human life eventually though, if left alone.

Furthermore, the placenta is in place specifically to separate the baby from the mother's body so it doesn't get fucked up by her immune system, among other things. Her rights end where the placenta begins.

>>34395197
>ignoring the argument
>misquoting
>insulting
Nice

>>34394036

Please do, I'm not stopping you. Abortions should be mandatory, t b h w y f

File: 1475422905613.jpg (12KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 258x245px

>>34395225
Let's ban BANANABORTION!

I'm pro-abortion but people are hypocrites about it.

Tell someone who had a miscarriage they're dumb to be upset about, it's just a bunch of cells lol.

Got cancer? It's only a lump of cells.

Someone cut off your arm with a chainsaw? Your arm was just a bunch of cells, faggot

>>34395229
>A fetus will become a human life eventually though, if left alone.
No. If left alone it will die, because it's dependant on the mother's body.

>>34395234
What was your argument meant to be? All animals on Earth have similar features at all developmental stages. I do not understand what the implication of this visual information is for your ethical argument.

>>34395229
If it can survive by itself then tell it to get out of the woman and get a job instead of being a parasite for 16-18 years LOL

>>34395225
>Whatever you classify it as the fact is that they're both just clumps of cells which aren't humans yet.
No, if you're going to classify something you have to decide what characteristics make it part of that classification. That "clump of cells" is human. It is a human body. It will always become an adult human unless interrupted. It has its own unique DNA.

You seem to be trying to reach for the definition of "person" moreso than "human", which you don't seem to have a coherent definition for.

>>34394150
What is it then?
It's an undeveloped human child. You will never get around this fact no matter how you want to word the person in question. And killing a person is murder.

>>34395207
>Which means we should all strive to make the existences of our fellow humans as good and comfy as possible
But that's totally wrong.

The best part of experience is the suffering, that's what makes life good. If we're to aim to be as comfortable constantly as possible we may as well just annihilate the human race right now.

What we should do is make humans as free to experience life for themselves in such a way that their actions won't infringe on the freedom of others. E.g abortion is bad because it infringes on the life of the fetus despite coming at the expense of the mother's freedom. Likewise murder is bad for the exact same reason, fundamentally it does infringe on the freedom of someone but it's not unjustified in doing so.

>>34395259
>All animals on Earth have similar features at all developmental stages.
Yes, because I looked so similar to a fucking sponge at my 5th month of gestation, retard

A bunch of non-sentient cells is a bunch of non-sentient cells, human embryos are not humans yet because a human is not only a bunch of non-sentient cells, from my point of view it's ethical to kill human embryos as it's ethical to kill an ant or a pig or whatever

>>34395323
Bunch of non-sentient cells, literally the same shit as a turtle, dog, fish during the same developement stage

>law tells me im able to terminate the life of an inferior being who burdens my life
>law protects me from my enraged husband who wants to kill me because i cheated on him, stole 50% of everything he has and took the children from him.

Uh?

>>34395310
Yes, because a person is what matters in this discussion. The small clump of cells will just grow into a LARGER clump of cells, the difference is that the larger clump of cells has consciousness. Its fine to destroy the small clump of cells as it's not conscious.

File: 1481710319154.png (98KB, 612x491px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 612x491px

>>34395347
>human embryos are not humans yet

>from my point of view it's ethical to kill human embryos as it's ethical to kill an ant or a pig or whatever
typical meat eater fag :^)

File: 1411527134164.gif (462KB, 500x351px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 500x351px

>>34395225
Are you actually retarded?
A banana is comparable a human fetus?
Baby murderers seem to be getting dumber and dumber every time I see one of them speak or write something.

I support abortion for those who will grow up into abortion-supporters. You guys actually seem to be non-human.

>>34395258
>>34395288
You hairsplitting faggots, that was implicit. I mean left alone as in if the mother doesn't murder it.

Both of you are acknowledging that it is a life dependent on the mother to mature into a baby. Instead of treating it like a burden, how about treating it like a future person?

>>34395448
Future doesn't exist until it does, faggot

>>34395391
Well, it would have been helpful if you had clarified that earlier in the discussion anon.

Now let me pose you a question. A comatose person is not conscious, correct? He has the potential to be conscious. Now, lets say the doctors say it is likely he will awaken from his coma within a certain period of time. Remember, he is not experiencing anything currently but has the potential to. Is it ethical to kill him? - for any reason, either that he will be inconvenient, or that you predict that he will not have a good life when he wakes up.

>>34395421
Can someone actually educated in biology give a rough figure of how genetically similar humans are to bananas?

>>34395460
He was conscious before, therefore human. The comparison is not valid.

>>34394933
stopping both seems like a good start

Just admit it, you are not smart enough to play on the unborn baby field so you just agreed that is nothing before an arbitrary set of time

Thats called intellectual dishonesty.

A jew is not human, therefore not eligible to be a person so we can dispose of it

Same could apply to the beta, the robot, the nigger, the mexican or the white

Wake up

>>34395448
Treat it like a burden because it is unwanted you utter retard. That's why it is to be aborted in the first place.

>>34395458
Nothing stops time. The future will always happen, so you keep it in mind in everyday life. Insipid queer.

>>34394036
Wanna know how I can tell how many spics and other shitskins have access to 4chan these days?

>>34395498
The events in the future don't happen until they do

>>34395474
Why does him being conscious before matter? He is not conscious now. The reason we care about his life in an ethical sense is because he has the potential to be conscious.
You would not care about the rights of a dead body just because it used to be conscious. What matters is whether or not he is conscious or has the potential to be conscious in the future.

>>34395386
Actually no, it's not, you muttering insipid feeble-minded elementary dropout. A human fetus contains 100% HUMAN genetic material, everything to grow through the various stages of HUMAN development. It won't grow into a fucking tree or a pig or anything else. It is also not "literally the same" visually either, considering you can easily distinguish which one is a human and which is another species once you learn what it looks like.
So a non-sentient person who got a brain injury in a car accident is suddenly no longer human because he doesn't have cognitive function? This is your absolutely retarded argument.
Baby killers are the dumbest shits around.

>>34395124
>>34395137
>common sense doesn't real
What do you think morality is based on in the first place?

>>34395494
If it was unwanted, how about the woman exercise the powerful reproductive rights she has by forcing the man to wear a condom before sex, using birth control, or just closing her fucking legs.

>>34395514
Again, he was conscious before. A bunch of non-sentient cells was not. The comparison makes no sense.
A dead body is dead. The comparison makes no sense.

File: 1413919737307.gif (298KB, 300x199px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 300x199px

>>34395474
A fetus will be conscious in the future, therefore human.
Your argument is so stupid. Get the fuck out and kill yourself. The biggest argument for abortion you have is your own existence.

>>34395512
So if I assault you, I don't have to worry about going to prison. After all, I won't be going to prison until the future, right?

File: 1447465495639.gif (371KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 500x375px

>>34395494
>burdens have to be killed
what kind of jew logic is this

>>34395493
In a society that takes humanity away from those who break the law, this is justifiable.

Either let everyone live even if they cause irreversible trouble (Which happens anyway) or kill off undesirables.

All people are equal in merit from birth, there is no original sin except shitting yourself, crying whenever you don't get your way and puking on people. Which we consider unacceptable or vile when adults/old people do it.

>>34395531
Nobody said we should keep braindead vegetables around. Stop straw manning you retard

>>34395563
A sperm cell has the possibility of becoming conscious, therefore all sperm is sacred life

>>34395546
Because condoms break and birth control can be used late sometimes. Theres also the argument for rape.

File: 1413912059635.jpg (4KB, 221x134px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 221x134px

>>34395601
NO IT DOESN'T you stupid fucking mongoloid. Is this what our public education system produces?

>>34395549
Why does him being conscious before matter, anon? You haven't qualified that facts relevance to the ethical validity of killing him as an unconscious being now. It seems you are more concerned with the sentimental value of killing someone who was once conscious, rather than this having any concrete relevance to the morality of the action now. What is morally important is that he will be conscious in the future. If he weren't then it would be ethical, after a time, to take him off life support. But because we know that this particular one will be conscious in the future, we do not want to kill him.

File: 1441582835319.jpg (29KB, 600x453px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 600x453px

>>34395511
Oh god, I was against build wall.

Kill me with the other nucatholics, post haste

File: 1466141708673.jpg (878KB, 2165x2095px) Image search: [Google]

878KB, 2165x2095px

>>34395601
>A sperm cell has the possibility of becoming conscious
what the fuck am i reading

>>34395531
>Actually no, it's not, you muttering insipid feeble-minded elementary dropout. A human fetus contains 100% HUMAN genetic material, everything to grow through the various stages of HUMAN development.
Still not a human, never was. The only way it can actually become a human and aquire human rights is if the bunch of non-sentient cells is allowed to become a human.
>So a non-sentient person who got a brain injury in a car accident is suddenly no longer human because he doesn't have cognitive function?
The person was actually a person before, unlike the bunch of non-sentient cells. The comparison is not valid.
>>34395563
>Past=future
lol
>>34395627
>What is morally important is that he will be conscious in the future.
Nice opinion

>>34394210
If she's not financially or emotionally ready then she should've used protection/kept her legs closed. Have the baby and give it up for adoption.

>>34395625
What the fuck are you on about you utter braindead retard? Sperm has the potential to become life when it fertilises an egg. Ironic how you call other people stupid when you're the biggest retard in the thread hsahaha

>>34395587
The argument isn't whether we should keep them around, he said a fetus was non-sentient and therefore non-human. Do you consider a comatose person non-human? What about a sleeping person? Is a sleeping person the same as any animal, like he said? Is it okay to "abort" someone who is sleeping? Is a dead person not a human?
Fuck off and die.

>>34395639
wow I never thought this would ever be relevant to post because its fucking 30 years old


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsWxkU0g9Z4

>>34395609
Condoms rarely break. Even in that case, the woman can just not have penetrative sex.

The only time abortion is condoneable is in the instance of rape or when it threatens the mother's life, with the latter being very rare.

>>34395563
Past and future
>thinks they're the same
>not complete opposites at all

>>34395644
>The person was actually a person before, unlike the bunch of non-sentient cells. The comparison is not valid.
You still have yet to explain why this matters, retard. It has no bearing on the fact that he is NOT conscious now. If he died now his "life" would practically have ended at the last moment of him being conscious.

>>34395676
Again with the "Human" shit. It's about being a person, not a human. A sleeping person is still a person. A clump of unconscious cells is not a person.

>>34395680
>The only time abortion is condoneable is in the instance of rape

This makes no sense, except if you think because a woman consented, the genetic material is automatically worthy of being
passed on which is orbiter levels of retarded.

>>34395699
But it -will be- if you don't stop it before it has the chance to maturate.

>>34395699
Sleeping people are conscious.
Unconscious """people""" though are not sentient and therefore not people, we should abort them... people only care about their life for sentimental reasons because they resemble people.

>>34395685
>If he died now his "life" would practically have ended at the last moment of him being conscious.
If a fetus died in the womb, following your logic, it would have never lived, as it would have never perceived life, unlike the brain-dead dude. Humans are, by definition, alive.

File: 1412146592523.gif (2MB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 240x180px

>>34395666
>satanic trips
Pretty revealing.
Go to fucking school, there is no point in wasting time conversing with someone as stupid as you. I rarely say that considering we're on /r9k/ and it's full of retards, but you are genuinely so stupid and uneducated and immature it's utterly pointless to have a conversation with you.

If you want to convince people in favor of abortion, simply say "Hey, I wasn't aborted!" That's a much better argument than anything else your sub-50 IQ simian brain can formulate.

File: 1480528863560.jpg (324KB, 1053x1070px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1053x1070px

>>34394309

you know the distinction u fuckin retard, ones a compilation of cells with no self consciousness,

the other an entity living independently outside of the body

a fetus cannot fee pain until the third trimester

>>34395699
If they found a clump of "conscious" self replicating cells on another planet what would the scientific community say? "We found life on planet X!" So explain to me why the standard is different on this planet.

>>34395747
Nice arguments
Originalelilio

>>34395737
Yes... and does that make it ethical to kill it? This is the problem. Also people who are comatose are not fucking braindead dummy.
>Humans are, by definition, alive.
What is a "dead human"?
Also please refer to this post >>34395699 stop using the word human when you mean person.

>>34395323
>>34395531

we judge things by what they are, not what they will be

>100% scientifically verified post

>>34395747
> numbers meme
> not being able to come up with a good argument so you just insult me
> implying iq is actually reflects intelligence and not the capability for learning

ho boy this might be a nominee for the most retarded post of the thread

>>34395718
It's not about being "worthy", a woman just probably wouldn't want to raise and nurture a product of a horrific event.

>>34395718
>This makes no sense, except if you think because a woman consented, the genetic material is automatically worthy of being
passed on which is orbiter levels of retarded.

Yes, if the material survives, it should pass on. The woman consented to having to support a baby when having consensual sex. How about women act like fucking adults for once in their life and take responsibility for the consequences of their actions?

Rape is different because she did not consent to support the child of the rapist. It is still a potential life, but one that must be somberly terminated because of the circumstances of its conception.

>>34395777
Go jack off and wait for your jizz puddle to become sentient. Other than that I have nothing more to say.
>checked AGAIN

>>34395781
I can use whatever the fuck words I like, but sorry if it triggers you
Is it ethical to kill a non-sentient bunch of cells that never experienced life? Yes pretty much

File: 1473441259551.jpg (39KB, 600x489px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x489px

Honk honk! Everyone in this thread is retarded. You're missing the entire point of the discussion - when it becomes a human or not doesn't matter. What matters is is it ethical to kill a human if statistically its going to be a drain on society and resources?

File: 1451327546882.jpg (81KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 680x680px

>>34395762
Are independence and ability to feel pain qualifiers for having value as life? Also I think you mean 'consciousness' in general, not self-consciousness.

>>34395834
>I can use whatever the fuck words I like, but sorry if it triggers you
Words are used for communication, so you should probably use words properly so that other people can understand what you're saying, especially in an argument heavily reliant on definitions and classifications.
>Is it ethical to kill a non-sentient bunch of cells that never experienced life? Yes pretty much
You haven't given an explanation except for muh feels, ironically. Why does "never experienced life" matter ethically? Isn't the point that you're terminating potential life? If you kill a comatose person no one cares that you're affecting their previous life, they care that you're preventing them from existing in the future.

>>34395889
>is it ethical to kill a human
No.
>What matters is is it ethical to kill a ~~non-sentient bunch of cells~~ if statistically its going to be a drain on society and resources?
Of course.

Why is it that people who are against abortion are people you wouldn't wanna fuck in the first place?

>4chan is now unironically conservative

this place is a fucking joke

>>34395908
>Isn't the point that you're terminating potential life?
No, not really. See>>34395799
Is your argument really only "It's bad to kill embryos because I think it's bad to kill comatose peeople!!1"? That's pretty muh fells

>>34395964
No I don't really care, my opinion on what's acceptable to kill doesn't matter. I'm talking about moral consensus based on ethical arguments here.
>We judge things by what they are, not by what they will be
And yet, you're major qualification for "human" (person) is consciousness, right? An unconscious person is not conscious right now. So therefore, why does it matter what they were or what they will be? They are not conscious and therefore not human in the current moment.

>>34395956
No it isn't, its pretty mixed, and that's perfectly fine and good. Discussion is important and I'm glad this thread exists, even if it makes me a little mad.

File: image.jpg (19KB, 250x209px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 250x209px

>Like anyone in this thread would give a shit about the thing after it comes out the dark vag cave.

>>34395956
>le conservative le liberal le le politics le
I hate this so much. Grouping a whole shitload of different beliefs into one of two parties.. as in "if you believe y you must also believe in x because you belong to political party z." Then both sides use it to ad hominem each other. Kills discussion.

>>34396020
Any place that isn't 100% people that agree with him is "conservative"
lol rude of me to shit on that anon in particular, but this is the kind of thinking that I've witnessed. To some, if it's acceptable to voice an opinion of one kind someone, then that place must implicitly accept that ideology.

>>34394036
>implying sparing a baby from a cruel existence is a bad thing
It is the best thing you can do.

>>34395956
>WHY ISNT THIS JUST LIKE MY LIBERAL ECHOCHAMBER WAAAH WHY ISNT ANYBODY ON BOARD WITH BASH THE FASH WAAAAAAH

File: 1414094426199.jpg (49KB, 444x444px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 444x444px

>>34396036
As long as it doesn't turn into a roastie.

>>34396011
Is a sleeping person and an unconscious bunch of cells that have never experienced life OR consciousness the same by your logic?

File: 22456342563.jpg (44KB, 900x599px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 900x599px

>>34395956
pls go
oreganiggernegano

>>34395889
It's ethical to kill the human in order to spare it from the barrage of constant suffering that is modern life.

>>34396069
No, because I intentionally didn't use "sleeping people" in my argument. Sleeping people are not technically unconscious, sleeping people are just in a different, depressed state of consciousness. When you're dreaming, you are not unconscious, you are experiencing something. This is different to someone getting knocked out and then suddenly have the sensation of waking up in hospital, as if all that time inbetween didn't exist.

Also, my logic is not saying that they are "the same", because clearly they are different objects. What I'm talking about is that the act of killing both seems to be, given that what you value about life is its consciousness, ethically indistinct.

File: shuffering.jpg (58KB, 396x385px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 396x385px

>>34396064
This. Breeders are scum.

File: 550.png (173KB, 680x584px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 680x584px

>>34395229

so are we calling, say, 20 week old pregnancy in utero as having an awareness and consciousness as yet unseen on this planet?

last i checked all the evidence points to it as still being in gestation stage and is yet to form essential things required to be aptly termed 'living' and capable of perceived feeling

not only are you wrong on the facts, but 20 weeks is me being generous, most abortions take place before that

>hurr durr it has the potentiality to become life tho

autismo pls go away

>>34396121
>This is different to someone getting knocked out and then suddenly have the sensation of waking up in hospital, as if all that time inbetween didn't exist.
Then, is a knocked out dude and an unconscious bunch of cells that have never experienced life OR consciousness "ethically" the same by your logic?
>What I'm talking about is that the act of killing both seems to be, given that what you value about life is its consciousness, ethically indistinct.
>seems to be
Not really. A knocked out dude actually experienced life. An embryo, let it be from an apple, a sponge, a fly, a human, a dog, or a lizard, never experienced life.
If you killed a knocked out dude, you will be terminating the most valuable thing I can think of: the conscious human perception of the universe. If you kill an embryo, let it let it be from an apple, a sponge, a fly, a human, a dog, or a lizard, you're killing an irrelevant bunch of cells.

File: 1482808551121.jpg (87KB, 882x640px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 882x640px

>>34394666

you must be a vegetarian like me then, anon. if suffering of living beings and the act/process of death is so horrific,

you wouldn't be a hypocrite now, would you?

>>34396250
>Then, is a knocked out dude and an unconscious bunch of cells that have never experienced life OR consciousness "ethically" the same by your logic?
Yes, but this is not "my" logic. This is me trying to undermine your argument for why abortion is ethical. You are making an appeal to incredulity, not actually making any arguments for why "previously conscious" matters, you are simply reacting to my proposition as inherently ridiculous.
>Not really. A knocked out dude actually experienced life. An embryo, let it be from an apple, a sponge, a fly, a human, a dog, or a lizard, never experienced life.
Yes, but a dead person has experienced life too. That is not what gives a person value, otherwise we would give corpses the same amount of moral respect as the living. What makes us respect life is that it either IS conscious, or WILL BE conscious.
>If you killed a knocked out dude, you will be terminating the most valuable thing I can think of: the conscious human perception of the universe.
He is not currently engaging in that faculty. An unconscious person is not perceiving the universe. He is capable of doing so in the future, but so is a human fetus.

>>34396304
I am a vegetarian, yes.

>>34394586

unequivocally wrong, we have found a point of reference to where life begins, it's called sentience , the ability to feel complex emotions such as pain etc.

>>34396357
That is not a biological reference anon. That is a philosophical one. We value sentience because we are sentient, which is legitimate. However, that does not dictate the beginning of "life" in the contemporary definition, which includes bacteria.
If you mean "life" as in, the valued consciously experienced life, then you are fine in having that opinion, but is that really a reference point that has been discovered or is it a retroactive application of value to a certain kind of existence?

>>34394691

utilitarianism as a moral philosophy is god-tier

>>34396331
>Yes, but a dead person has experienced life too. That is not what gives a person value, otherwise we would give corpses the same amount of moral respect as the living.
Then let human value be a combination of past, and future.
A knocked out dude had a conscious past and a potential conscious future, check, it's not ethical to kill him.
An embryo might have a potential conscious future if nothing is done to interrupt this, but it has no conscious past, therefore, it's ethical to kill him as doing so will not be terminating with a once-existing conscious human perception of the universe.
A corpse had a conscious past, but it's dead. You can't kill something that's dead, now can you? Is it ethical to do so if you can't?
>What makes us respect life is that it either IS conscious, or WILL BE conscious.
Again, nice opinion.
>He is not currently engaging in that faculty.
But he did, Anon. An embryo never did. The past existed. The future doesn't yet.
>I am a vegetarian, yes
LOL

>>34395834
So since you believe it's ethical to kill a non-sentient bunch of cells you think it logically follows that killing a sentient human being is also ethical?

That's fucked up.

>>34395812

Rape is not horrific. The child isn't the one who raped her anyway. Why should the child be punished? It would make more sense to punish the 'victim' than the child in such a case, at least she played a role in the 'crime'.

>>34396492
>Then let human value be a combination of past, and future.
>A knocked out dude had a conscious past and a potential conscious future, check, it's not ethical to kill him.
ok but why?
>But he did, Anon. An embryo never did.
so? you can't kill someone in the past. you can only stop them from being conscious now or stop them from being conscious in the future.

If there was an adult human who was comatose since birth and thus had never had conscious experience but had developed into an adult human, and then the doctors said he will wake up in a week, would it be morally wrong for me to kill him?

>wanting more normie babies to be born

>>34396540
>ok but why?
That's my opinion, really.
>so? you can't kill someone in the past. you can only stop them from being conscious now or stop them from being conscious in the future.
You can kill anyone, really. What we're discussing here if it's right or bad to do so.
>If there was an adult human who was comatose since birth and thus had never had conscious experience but had developed into an adult human, and then the doctors said he will wake up in a week, would it be morally wrong for me to kill him?
If you could somehow withstand the psychological implications of killing a morphologically complete and mature Homo sapiens and assuming you had a reason to do so and not just doing it for the lulz? Then sure. I ain't no Neuroscience major, but I'm sure a "human" brain that "developed" without any external influence during, let's say, 30 years (and had no earlier experiences) could never achieve "humanhood" by my definition. Could never comprehend. Could never speak. Could never love. He or she may feel pain or sexual pleasure, of course, but it would be no different from an animal.

ITT

christcucks, pro life fags;

>science doesn't agree with me, muh feels
> *autistic screeching*

>>34396730
What science is contradicting the pro-life position, anon? Science doesn't have an ethical opinion. What is important is how we respond to the facts that science presents us.

According to some of the pro choice in this thread sperm can be conscious

>>34396764
>According to some of the pro choice in this thread sperm can be conscious
Quote 1 (one) post

File: 1484022198350.jpg (585KB, 2592x1728px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 2592x1728px

>>34394036
I know they argue about whether or not it's right, whether or not the baby is alive at this point or that point in its growth inside the womb. This wasn't about that. It wasn't what the lawyers did. It wasn't what the doctors did, it wasn't what the woman did. It was what the mother and father did together.

>>34396730

Nice fedora, don't you think it's about time to outgrow your edgy atheism phase though?

>>34396791
ok, here's 1 (one) post
>>34395601

>>34396909
Thanks for quoting that 1 (one) post but
>has the possibility of becoming conscious
This is true if the sperm cell is from a human and reaches a human egg cell and the resulting product goes through 9 months of gestation without any problems and then is born

File: Nice.png (408KB, 604x613px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 604x613px

>>34394036
>Wanting more human trash to be born into the world

What the actual fuck bro....

>>34396946
True, but the fetus is not the successor to the sperm, it is the *product* of the sperm and the egg. I'm not very well-read with biology but as far as I'm aware the sperm does not "become" the fetus, right? Rather, genetic material from both the sperm and the egg are used to create it.

>>34394200
And whites below replacement. Not that it matters since virtually every white western country is below.

>>34396992
The sperm is needed for the fetus to form, right?

>>34395956
No, 4chan is contrarian. It's like when a bunch of people here started roleplaying as righteous Christian crusaders right around the time it became "cool" to be an atheist. Stick around until the peak of Trump's presidency and see how conservative these faggots are then.

>>34395094
HER body
HER choice

Get to the back of the bus with the rest of your sex shitlord

>>34397020
yes, but so is the egg right?

>>34397053
When was the last time 4chan actively aided a presidential campaign?

>>34394210
Shut the fuck up, women have had kids in much worse conditions and been fine. It's just a capitalist meme that you have to be a rich 35 year old to have a child. Women are not supposed to have careers anyways.

File: theres-a-petition-for-nike-to-rerelease-the-air-yeezy-2_1.jpg (90KB, 690x430px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 690x430px

>>34394210
I don't care about abortion but really I don't want my taxes to go abortions cause it's your fuckup.

>baby is a bunch of cells
>Fuck off libtard you're enabling murder you beta cuck you might as well be calling these roastie GOD
>Baby ages into a normie/roastie
>Wow, god these "people" should die

>>34397201
your a hypocrite though. you dont want to pay for abortion but you also don't want to pay for the child support. witch is it??

>>34397254

I'm not sure what you're trying to do but you must have done it wrong. Try rereading that know your meme article and try again.

>>34397266
Women should be forced to deal with the consequences of their actions. No child support and no abortions, and you'll see how women suddenly stop slutting it with Chad.

>>34395494
There's a lot of people that more than likely deem you unwanted as well. You don't see them readily prepared to stab you in the face for it, do you? No.

>>34394203

Not just a slut.

But a fucking dumb slut.
Lazy too.

>>34394210
>you should be allowed to make bad life decisions and then have a state funded get-out-of-jail-free card (that goes against nature and is morally reprehensible to boot)
>making bad life decisions should be normalized and no one should experience natural consequences
>being dead is better than growing up poor

>>34396527
I hope some big dick convict bangs you up the ass real good and hard.

File: 1366076882023.jpg (489KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1920x1080px

>>34395531
Don't know why I laughed so hard at this butthurt rant

Why are normies okay with abortion but not suicide? The state should fund and give out exit bags to those who them. My body my choice, after all.

>>34394036
I don't understand the anti-abortion people. So you'd rather children be born in shitty conditions? Probably grow up in a poor, single mother household and statistically have a higher chance to commit crime? Or be put in some foster home? I don't understand what you're fighting for by being anti-abortion
>b-but whores shouldne be allowed to fuck anyone they want and have no consequences
very childish way of thinking which results in shitty lives for children who would probably not want to be born into such awful circumstances

>/r9k/ suddenly has morals

What happened?

>>34397615

Well fuck you too then. I hope your mother dies.

>>34394036
>human right
exactly having control over your body as long as it doesnt infringe on anbody elses rights should always be granted
but human rights are obtained with birth and not with conception so a fetus has no human right

>>34397825
>but human rights are obtained with birth
That seems kind of arbitrary

>>34397940
I agree.

Not him, but look at it from a non moral point of view. Babies lack sentience, they're fucking worthless, they're basically just parasites. Babies shouldn't even be classified as human until like 2 years old. Also we don't kill fetus past a certain point, so he's technically wrong.

>>34397682
So it is better to kill someone than let them live if we predict that they will have a less happy life? The anti-abortion argument here is that we can't judge the value of life like that. Many people live through tremendous suffering and unhappiness but would not rather be dead, because they consider the life they have lived to be fulfilling and to have had value.

>>34398018
When was the last time you spent time around a child who was younger than two years old? By 1.5 years they're considerably intelligent and will already be starting to speak.

Abortion is fine if there is a reasonable reason for it.
"I got impregnated because I'm a irresponsible whore" is not a reasonable reason and you should be forced to face your bad judgement, hell in a perfect world irresponsible (aka Stacy whores) single mothers would go to jail where they will be enslaved and the state takes their son.

>>34397714
this place has been invaded by normies who like to roleplay as robots until you hurt their feelings

>>34394036
t. teenager
Your brain hasn't fully developed yet, I'll give you a pass.

>>34398054
>someone
They're not a someone though. They're a fetus with no sentience.
>Many people live through tremendous suffering and unhappiness but would not rather be dead,
Sure, but you don't understand the difference of 'I wish I wasn't born' and 'I wish I was dead'. You're also condemning both the mother and father into taking care of a child they did not want and possibly cannot support. You're literally ruining lives and excusing it with two arguments
>People shouldn't be allowed to have sex
And
>You cant decide if a fetusshould live or die
Both are awful arguments and just appeal to emotion.

I think the funniest part is that no one but the white race would be stupid enough to viciously argue over whether or not it was a really good thing to destroy your offspring.

>>34398150
People who are not in the position to deal with the possibilities should not have sex.
One side. Leads to divine being of some sort
Anyone should have sex whenever cause why not.
Other side. Leads to nihilism.
Any questions?

>>34398204
>no one but the white race
your ignorance is showing

Anyone who supports abortion should be shot on the spot. They shouldn't complain about it either, since they seem to enjoy murder.

File: xp7eax.png (259KB, 663x770px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 663x770px

>>34397266
IMO b8ing is fun and I'm happy you got a good thread for it. I have a hard time doing it on 4chan. You oversold the "witch" in "witch is it.'" Also you made too much of a non argument for it to seem plausible.

File: 78e.jpg (26KB, 358x361px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 358x361px

IT'S THE ABORTION EPISODE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAK108u2xAs

>>34397714

Natural progression of counter-culture in the mass public rise of degeneracy.

>>34397940
before birth they are completely dependent on the mother and its impossible for the state to guarantee any of the human rights
after birth its easy for the state to guarantee the human rights
thats why you shouldnt bother with it before birth

>>34398232
Yeah probly. But Margaret Sanger and co tricked black culture to accept it. White people just run with whatever the cultural marxists say. Even as they commit demographic suicide.

>>34394036
>mother kills baby
she's so strong
>other person kills baby
in jail for life

>>34398150
If you're going to condemn people of "appealing to emotion", don't use emotionally charged and amorphous statements like "you're literally ruining two lives".
A more concrete explanation of your opinion would be this.
>Living fetus is not conscious
>parents are conscious
>parents expectations and quality of life may decline if they have an unwanted child
>the child, once it develops enough to attain consciousness, may also have poor quality of life
>therefore, it is more morally desirable for the parents to terminate the pregnancy if they wish than to be forced to give birth to and raise the child
Keep in mind that I use the word "may", since obviously even someone advocating abortion would recognise that the parents and child may not necessarily consider their quality of life to be decreased.
I also think your perspective relies on the assumption of a Western capitalistic and individualistic society, where unexpected children are viewed as impediments to careers, financial success and certain lifestyles which are considered more personally fulfilling. In other societies, or among religious communities like Jews and Catholics this would likely not be the case.
More or less I'm less concerned with abortion as an individual act of "murder" - since I am not religious myself - and more of a reflection of a sick, misanthropic society which devalues life and which is destined to failure.

>>34394036


Abortion moralfags are the biggest hypocrites on this planet.
It is apparently no problem to force some stupid cunt to have her child, which she is absolutely unable to care for and starting a cycle of repeated failure as a human through generations, creating a perpetual drain on society and generally make two humans miserable (even more through the "collateral damage" this whole thing inevitably sets up as a consequence) , because a fetus dying somewhere hurts your christfag feelings.
I get making them pay for it with their own money and making it clear that they fucked up, maybe they will even learn from it. But I will never understand this rabid witch-hunt around abortion, like this shit is your personal concern. Especially the opinion of the visitors of this board should have no weight in this, because most of you are retarded manchildren who do not know shit about the sacrifices and challenges which come with raising a kid.

>>34398318
Do we judge who lives and who dies by dependence? Why is it only this state of physical dependence that allows the woman to abort and not the kind which requires the woman to breastfeed and earn an income to provide for the baby?

File: 1481849530489.jpg (23KB, 439x290px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 439x290px

>>34394435
Agreed. Most abortions are niggers, so it's a net positive on society. Only christcucks will disagree with this

how do u know it's a baby?

>>34396304
Plants feel pain though anon.

The best thing you could do is just off yourself.

>>34398511
Plants react to negative stimulus not the same as pain
Are white blood cells conscious

>>34394435
They ruin their lives the moment they have that baby. The kids will hopefully learn from their shit parents and do everything in their power to not be like them, though that is probably an unrealistic idea. They're born with retard genes. But I dont know, I think the sacrifice is worth it. Stacy needs to feel pain.

>>34398493
No. Blacks abort a higher percentage, but whites a higher actual number of aborted offspring.

>>34397254
You are literally compiled of "a bunch of cells" fucktard. Nothing more, nothing less. You're not as special as you think.

>>34397681
They kind of are. They called that 12 year old kid that offed herself a hero. Hell, almost every kid that kills themselves is an hero to them. They fucking love when kids kill themselves because they somehow think that will make less kids kill themselves. I don't know..I have a hard time understanding lib logic.

>>34397714
Its not really about morality. Some of us just dont want Stacy to get cummed in by every Chad around her without having to face real world consequences (i.e. a child/responsibilities)

BUT the problem is, either way, Stacy will put the burden on everybody but herself. Her parents, Chad, or some poor robotic schmuck will take care of the kid.

FUCK STACY FUCKING DIE YOU WHORE YOU STUPID FUCKING CUNT JUST FUCKING DIE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>34398560
Animals react to negative stimulus, it's all just neurons firing.

Define "pain".

>>34398704
I think it comes from the same impulse that makes caregivers say "you're really brave" to a kid who's getting an injection or stitches. You want to reassure the kid and compliment them on facing a painful situation.
I think its the idea of a kid going through severe enough depression or abuse to kill themselves, so people have the narrative of the archetypical underdog battling against their circumstances, in a heroic way. It's also meant to offer some degree of sympathy to people going through the same thing, though I don't know how effective that is when you start calling the suicides heroic and giving them lots of positive, sympathetic attention which other kids might feel deprived of and see suicide as a way to get it.

>>34398817
We dislike pain in an ethical sense because it's consciously unpleasant. It fulfills the same end as the plant reaction in a much more sophisticated way, but it's mentally experienced by a conscious being.

>>34394036
>mfw you guys are the same people who taught women that kids aren't a big deal
>mfw you will all regret it

>>34398817
>>34398844
Also here are the two definitions of pain given by Google which I think distinguish it from plant phenomena
>highly unpleasant physical sensation caused by illness or injury
>mental suffering or distress.

>>34398847
Who are you talking to, anon?
Muteblox

>>34398821
It scares me that people would think a 12 year old is completely mentally capable of making a logical decision to kill themselves instead of calling it what it really is, which is a dumbass kid that is really fucking confused and thinks the only way to escape the confusion is hanging themselves or putting a bullet through their heads. If you're going through abuse and nobody else is listening, there are so many options to escape it then suicide, but children are too dumb to see it and they only know suicide is an option because of their peers and especially media romanticising it like a fashion.

Next thing you know they'll be completely mentally capable to accept sexual advances from adults.

>>34398847
>taught women that kids aren't a big deal
That was the feminist movement that told them they can do whatever they want and they'll be happy, despite showing that women's happiness has gone down at the same rate they've stopped having kids and families.

>>34398844
>>34398899
You lads are defining pain as requiring a relatively advanced being in order to comprehend it. As pain as in anguish/suffering is genuinely more involved than a simple organism registering a fault in one of it's systems.

A human feels "pain" due to the fear of greater injury, the unknown extent of the injury, etc, which the actual physical stimuli is akin to a plant/simpme animal, it's just feedback to let you know something is wrong.
The way your brain registers and reacts to it is what makes it bad.

Hence if you wanted to avoid causing organisms to react in ways that mimic pain (biological feedback of a systems issue).

>>34394210
HEY
YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO CARE FOR THIS LIFE YOU'VE JUST CREATED? KILL YOUR KIIIIIIIIIID
GO ON DO IT
KILL YOUR FUCKING KIIIIIIID
ITS TOO MUCH OF A BURDEN, YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT! ITS JUST A DUMB BABBY, KIIIIIILLLLLLL IIIIIIITTTTTT

>>34394036
>if i kill a pregnant women i get charged with 2 counts of murder
>but they can kill it and yasss you go gurl

explain this shit

>>34399011
>cont

You would simply off yourself, as then only one more organism has to react to negative stimuli.

Hence animals without higher reasoning skills (rabbits, mice, birds, some fish) along with plants, and under-developed humans, are all incapable of feeling pain in a human sense, and are all similair on a moral basis to execute at whim.

>>34394215
Because women are real

>>34394036
Why the fuck would you go against abortion, if I'm getting some normie bitch pregnant I better have an option for abortion

>>34399318
>If im getting some normie bitch pregnant
let me stop you right there. You're a normie.

File: 1485074653059.jpg (74KB, 400x387px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 400x387px

mfw men think they can control women's bodies

>>34400231
mfw women think they can do things without consequences.

>>34400231

No one is trying to control your body, you can have as many abortions as you want, just not at the expense of tax payers. Which ultimately lowers your federal taxes enough to afford abortions.

The government has never paid for male reproductive surgeries, why should the government pay for women? Thought femanism was about equality?

>killing babys is wrong.

>>34394036
Go right ahead. One less robot in the world raised by an irresponsible single mother. The grocery store line will be shorter. The traffic will be less jammed. Just don't expect the taxpayer to foot the bill for your fucking cleansing.

I've had 2 abortions.

Even if abortion was illegal like in the 20th century in the second world, people would still get them and they'd go unpunished. My aunt had ten back in the 70s in a baltic country where it's illegal - she never wanted kids.

I'm the same way. I never want kids. I don't believe some people should have kids. If your genes are bad like mine, abortions are a blessing, they are eugenics basically. Any child I have, would grow up wishing they had been aborted anyway. Why do that? I wish I hadn't been born and that my mom aborted me every day.

If I become a millionaire or something, then I will adopt kids and raise them to at least have a decent life. But why increase human suffering?

>>34394062
Exactly this. You're not going to put a kid into any women. Ever so why in fucks name do you care? Punishing women isn't going to make your pure virgin wifu manifest or make the ones already here more willing to fuck a failure.

all you're going to to do is put more of a drain on your economy as the single mother population explodes and more women end up in prison for shitting kids into dumpsters

>>34394036
The gazelle does not blame the cheetah for killing it, but must blame its own legs for not being fast enough.

Only through self-acceptance can one move forward. This is why women are perpetually steeped in childhood.

Why commit to an action if you are not willing to face the consequences? Assign agency to your own actions (CDC reports majority of pregnancies are not from rape: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/births.htm, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248).

>>34400666
>The gazelle does not blame the cheetah for killing it, but must blame its own legs for not being fast enough.
true. those fucking abortion babies should just learn to avoid the hanger. it's their own fault.

>>34400676
You do not assign moral/legal blame to the child for sitting behind the steering wheel of a car, but for the parent because they allowed it to happen.

Penis+vagina=baby. I don't whine to the taxpayer to cover the cost for my child support payments because I knew what I was getting into when I fucked her. But we bend over to women and their abortion costs because daddy's little princess never needs to learn that actions have consequences.

>>34400729
>I don't whine to the taxpayer to cover the cost for my child support payments because I knew what I was getting into when I fucked her.
you don't raise your own child? doesn't sound like you're facing the full consequences of your choice.

>>34400790
Improve your reading comprehension. I am assigning moral guilt to he who flees from his obligations and expects others to cover the cost, just as women ought to be, too.

File: 1430270049044.jpg (61KB, 344x326px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 344x326px

>>34400812
So just shift the cost onto the women. If she wants to pay to get emptied out then there should be no problem. But it's never just about them having it easy, there's always an anger and a desire to push unwanted pregnancy onto women as a form of punishment.

>>34400812
>he who flees from his obligations
like you fled from your obligation to contribute to the upbringing of your child and instead believe that begrudgingly sending money once a month constitutes "fulfilling your obligations" while the mother of the child struggles to cover "the cost" of an absentee father?

>>34400838
>>34400838
>If she wants to pay to get emptied out then there should be no problem
Yes, but that is not the case. The whole hissy fit march was about Trump taking away Planned Parenthood funding. Pay for it yourselves you pathetic leeches.

>>34400843
Oh, woe is me. Women sit on their asses and get money for free. Like a child's costs are in the thousands per month. Really, so Brandon Fraser's kid is worth 900k a year?
The male is the breadwinner, so by definition, his end of the bargain is kept up when he provides income.
Also, you still haven't read my post to get my point. I will repeat it once more, and if you continue to attack the strawman that I was criticizing, not assuming the position for, then I will cut off the (You) stream.
Men who don't pay their child support and whine to the taxpayer to do it themselves are just as bad as women who don't pay for their own abortions and whine to the taxpayer for it. Pay for your own shit if you want it. Also, don't have sex if you don't want children. The existence of virgins, monks, and eunuchs is proof that sexual intercourse, on an individual level, is not a biological necessity (different for the collective humanity, but most men who ever lived did not procreate).

pro-life people aren't actually pro life, they're pro more unwanted children being born into poor living conditions.

which, incidentally, creates poverty, and puts strain on the welfare system.

taxpayers love forking out their money so the lower-classes can endlessly procreate

>>34400892
i understand your point. you don't understand mine. you're a hypocrite whining about women who don't fulfill their obligations and instead pass the cost along to other people while you do exactly the same thing. until you're raising a child you chose to make, you have no moral authority. you can raise your point but you can't pretend to be any better than these irresponsible women because you have done (and continue to do) something equally as irresponsible. there's more to raising a child than money.
>Also, don't have sex if you don't want children
take your own advice, genius.

>>34395540
Fucking nothing, you absolute and total brainlet.

>>34396357
Except you don't actually know that anyone besides yourself is sentient. On a purely philosophical basis that holds no water at all as an objective metric.

Not to mention that's totally arbitrary anyway and doesn't at all meet contemporary definitions of life.

>>34396424
Utilitarianism is for lazy English people.

>>34394548
No. Robots are the fucking worse and that's why we sit on this shitty board in exile. Less robots is better.

>>34401199
Yeah but if there were more of us and we became the majority being robot would be the new normal so our lives wouldn't suck anymore.

>>34401057

my opinion is objectively more centered towards reality than your own

>>34401344
It isn't though.

Objectively for all anyone knows the rest of mankind may well be shambling, unthinking husks. If you don't know philosophy as basic as this you have no right to be in an argument about ethics.

>>34401396

>Except you don't actually know that anyone besides yourself is sentient

actually i do. it's why i'm here replying to you and you're answering

>On a purely philosophical basis that holds no water at all as an objective metric

life is no metric now?

it's not arbitrary, it's following a logical concusion

>>34401477
>actually i do. it's why i'm here replying to you and you're answering
Except all that tells you is that you've been replied to. It doesn't at all tell you that the reply came from a sentient source.

Read Descartes, you brainlet.

>life is no metric now?
Except your understanding of life is totally arbitrary, and shifting the goalposts of the highest order.

We're universally agreed that inanimate unconscious organic matter like plants are life despite clearly not being sentient. Life is not in any way synonymous for sentience, you simply pulled that definition out of your ass with no logic to back it up.

File: image.jpg (55KB, 625x420px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 625x420px

>>34401605
>a "shambling unthinking husk" introduced to you the idea that the world is made up of shambling unthinking husks and you seriously consider the idea

Really makes you think

>if it's accidentally born after X weeks it's a premature infant and everyone does everything to keep it alive
>if it's aborted after X weeks it's just a bunch of cells dude :^)


In all honesty though I don't give enough fucks about other people to really get upset about it, but the whole abortion deal is messed up. Whatever reasoning you use to declare that fetus non-human (or not deserving of normal human rights), it's a vague one. The only clear line as to where life begins is conception. If you draw the line later, you get into murky territory.

>it's life if it could sustain itself out of the womb
we keep people with failing organs and such alive by machines, their life isn't over just because they cant survive naturally
>it's life if it's sentient
same deal, we keep people in comas and such alive forever

The list goes. In all other cases a potential life is a life, but when women just really dont wanna be bothered for 9 months, it's suddenly just a bunch of cells or whatever.

>>34402605
>sentient
>keep people alive in comas and such forever

Bingo, and it ain't amoral or illegal to turn off the machines keeping them alive.
Humans need to be problem solving and capable of complex emotion in order to be deserving of empathy.

>>34402660
> and it ain't amoral or illegal to turn off the machines keeping them alive.

With consent.
The unborn child can't give consent and (unless there is a terrible birth defect or something) the mother is obviously not acting in the child's interest either.

>Thousands of children die in Aleppo from Russian bombs
"LOL Putin and Assad are so based. MAGA"

>A women aborts her three month old embryo because she realises that she lacks the financial security and emotional maturity to raise a child.
"FUCKING BABY KILLER REEEEEE"

The mind of the Trump voter.

>>34394036
Forcing people to have babies violates human rights, you dolt, regardless of how you look at it

>>34394215
Because god doesn't exist and they do

>>34402605
>we keep people with failing organs and such alive by machines, their life isn't over just because they cant survive

We really shouldn't thought. But hey at least we give people the choice.

>>34402687
One of those shows a much, much more grave disregard for the value of human life.

>>34402691
Nobody is forcing anyone to get pregnant.
Forcing you to not kill another human once you do is not violating anything.

>>34402718
>Nobody is forcing anyone to get pregnant.

t. rapist.

>>34402718
>Forcing you to have a baby against your will is not violating anything
Even though it is

>>34402684
A person in a coma cannot give consent either.
We end their life because it is unlikely to be a decent one, same as a fetus. Neither are capable of rational thought or feeling pain as another human would.

The parents/those closest to them give the consent, and we kill them.

>>34402702
>modern medicine should not be used

>>34402747
In such cases, machines are only turned off if the patient has given written consent to exactly that. And otherwise next of kin are asked to act in the patient's best interest.
Like I said, I don't think we have to argue that a woman aborting a child because she can't be arsed is not acting in the child's best interest.

>>34402746
No it's not. You made your decision when you got pregnant, you don't get to kill someone just because you changed your mind.

That whole angle that it's the mother's body so she gets to do whatever she wants it bogus. It's how people used to justify slavery.
>dude they dont deserve human rights because it's my land and they're not human on my land
You don't get to take other people's fundamental rights away just because it happens to be within your property.

>>34394036
Abortion should be strictly forbidden for native Europeans and anyone involved in one should be subject to punishment by torture.

Also able men and women should be forced to have a minimum of 5 children per couple.

As for non europeans, they should be forced to live a "modern lifestyle" with all freedoms and priviledges, including abortion, contraception and divorce.

Just imagine what a parasice the world will become just 50 years after this is enforced

>>34402789
It violates freedom of choice, which is a human right

Tell me why you're really against abortion?

imo there's nothing wrong with murder

I can't believe anyone on fucking 4chan, let alone /r9k/, would care about an unborn child.

>>34402789
>I can't pay the medical bills
>I am turning off the machines
>workinginthebestinterest.png

Yeh, right.
If the child is going to be an orphan, or worse, brought up by parents who genuinely don't want it, it is not gonna do well on average.
I mean, sure I don't mind if there are more druggies, thugs, and strippers in the world, but I don't know why you would choose to allow your kin to grow up to know their pain intimiately.

>>34402824
AGOO GOO

You fucking poe

>>34402816
>It violates freedom of choice, which is a human right

No it's not.
And the right to life itself takes priority over any other right.

>>34402842
>The right to life itself takes priority over any right
There is no right to life, life isn't a choice. It's whether your parents decide to have you or not, you have no rights until then.

>>34402836
Again, the patient is the one asked first, next of kin are only asked if the patient didn't/can't answer. People not acting in his best interest is sad, but they had the option to get their affairs in order so it doesn't even come to that.

And as most children from shitty upbringings would tell you, they'd take that over you know, being dead.

>>34402830
It's about principle. What is essentially murder shouldn't get a pass because it's more convenient that way.
How the mainstream media paints everyone opposing abortion as some backwards sexist doesn't help either, just makes me more angry.

>>34402862
So you think life begins at birth and you should be able to abort at any point previous to that?
That's a pretty unique position there mate.

>>34402874
>ask the patients first
???
>take that over being dead
How about not being born?
I don't know many people who honestly wouldn't like to just stop existing.

>>34402874
We're all killing ourselves with drugs, obesity, and cancers. Even vehicular accidents rate way more than abortions. I don't see why an unborn child is held to such high regard when thousands of adult lives are wasted every single day. It's not a major issue but people sure want to make it one.

>>34402883
I never said that, I said life isn't a choice for people, some people don't even WANT to live. If they die they're not missing anything important.

I believe in euthanasia though

File: 1437589026734.png (31KB, 538x365px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 538x365px

i support abortion because i believe i should've been aborted

>>34402923
It's because they think it's god's will and people getting babies aborted are playing god. It's funny

>>34402908
Like I said, if the patient has got his shit in order, there's documentation regarding a life only sustained by machines. That takes precedence over any next of kin.

About not being born, I don't know, I don't think that's a fair point. Nobody knows what that is actually like, the people wishing for it are talking about a fantasy, who knows if that's what they really want.

>>34402923
Because other issues are not as morally clear-cut. Drugs, obesity, etc. are self-inflicted. Accidents are accidents.
Abortions are one human murdering another. In most cases, there's zero moral ambiguity.

>>34402923

In most non-christcucked countries it isn't an issue and is an issue of individual liberty.

>>34402958
>an issue of individual liberty.
But it shouldn't be. The pro-abortion crowd has done an amazing job in painting this debate in these terms, but it's ridiculous. You don't get to kill people because they happen to be on your property and you don't get to kill people because they happen to be inside your body.

If you stab a pregnant woman and she loses the baby you get tried for murder, if she does it herself it's a-okay? It's a life in there.

>>34403008

>Foetus=person

Wewlad.

>>34403072
Well, then where does life begin if not at conception?

>>34394215
Is this what this is all about? Why don't you stop taking all medicine and let your wounds fester, retard.

>>34403078

At some point between conception and birth.

>>34403078
Your life will begin when my penis squirts into your butt.

>>34403107
Could you be more vague? It's kind of important to know when it's no longer okay to kill someone.
So when exactly does it begin and more importantly, why?

>>34394509
Being an unapologetic supporter of murder and plague in the streets doesn't take mental gymnastics, just an irrational personal investment in an issue that concerns quality of life for all of society as a whole. Dead babies hurt my fee fees, why do women get to kill their children when I'm just a self-glorifying sperm bank ree

>>34394036
Is this a real thread ?
Let's say some nigger raped your mother or sister into pregnancy.
Would you not support her idea of abortion ?

>>34403140
>dude fuck morals conviencene is king lmao

>>34403149
>It's convenient to have to decide between poverty and welfare dependence and not killing your own young

>>34394036
Babies? You mean those things that poop in their pants? Are you mad that we kill things that poop in their pants? Scat fetishist faggot. Anyone who doesn't support killing babies is a scat fetishist PEDO faggot.

>>34403157
Yes it is.
Nevermind the fact that you had the choice to not get pregnant if you dont want children.

>>34403142
\thread
Origdysskxhssyeeaihxd

>>34403131

I'm not the arbiter of that decision and I'm not arrogant enough to claim my arbitrary opinion should decide that. My opinionon when abortion should be legal is in every case before 16 weeks and in most before 27.

>>34403157
>it's the "if we didn't have abortions the world would be overpopulated reeee" meme

>>34403176
But why?
What turns that clump of cells into a person deserving of not being killed by 27 weeks? And what makes it decidedly not-person before 16 weeks?

>all these cucks encouraging roasties to have unprotected sex with no consequences

>>34403170
You choose to have sex, not get pregnant. It works the same way for men. Or are you saying they have more responsibility because they are the ones to carry the baby? Because that's what THEY'RE trying to argue.

>>34403176
Not only are you the arbiter of that decision, you're the beta arbiter who helps women make the decision to abort stronger men's babies. Help raise the kid like you're meant to, cuck.

>>34403191
>dude overpopulation isn't real lmao just go live in the gobi desert haha close your eyes haha

>>34403196

I'm not saying they are a person at either of those times. They are the stages at which the gender is known and the foetus can feel pain. They are entirely arbitrary, but at least I recognise that. You seem to think your position isn't.

>>34403209
No, you chose to have unprotected/contraception-less sex. Big difference.

>>34403206
>STDs aren't consequence enough

>>34403251
It's true that lots of women have unprotected sex, but those are the ones WITH kids

You're the kind of person who thinks people get addicted to abortion

>>34403242
Because my position isn't arbitrary. If you think life begins at conception, it's clear cut - two things that wont turn into a person (sperm and egg) turn into something that will turn into a person. There is definite potential of life, a human "in the making", and thus should be protected.

>>34403274
No, I'm the kind of person that thinks people get lulled into degrading moral standards because it's more convenient for them this way.

>>34403242
suck my poenus