How dare anyone abort babies. Abortion is fucking murder and

>>34772473
yea kill usef bubby

>>34772473
>lump of cells
>baby
pick one

>>34772528
Well he picked baby...that's the point

>>34772473
>whores don't wanna take responsibility for their actions

what's new?

>>34772536
no one will perform an abortion on a woman who is in such an advanced stage of her pregnancy.

>>34772473
Baww, cry more cuckservative baby
Its a fundamental human right for women to choose what happens with THEIR bodies, not your choice for them

>>34772473
I'm pro choice because if you were aborted I wouldn't have to see this shitty thread

File: High Power Level Pepe.jpg (106KB, 637x634px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 637x634px

>>34772473
It's ok if they abort non-white babies though, since they're barely human.
But aborting white babies is wrong!

If they can't give a good life to the child, it's better not to go through with it. Granted, in this case, they shouldn't have had it in the first place, but mistakes happen and you shouldn't compound your errors by making new ones.

>>34772566
is it a fundamental human right for women to murder other people?

>>34772566
shut the fuck up if woman cant handle the burden of a baby then they dont deserve to have a sexual relationship end of

>>34772566
>I want to fuck but without any of the possible repercussions

So you're telling me women are fucking children?

File: 1447030782273.jpg (17KB, 287x277px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 287x277px

>>34772589
>people

oergonalo

>>34772589
If that person isnt a person yet, just a parasitic collection of cells taking up free rent in her body, absolutely
>>34772600
You can't handle the burden of improving yourself enough to maintain a relationship, you shouldn't be allowed to lose your virginity, beta cuck

>>34772473
I wish I had been aborted tbqh. This is all just suffering.

>>34772635
>>34772633

I mean it has a heartbeat and a nervous system and a brain, what else do you want?

File: delet this in spanish.jpg (13KB, 480x358px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x358px

>>34772635
>You can't handle the burden of improving yourself enough to maintain a relationship, you shouldn't be allowed to lose your virginity, beta cuck

>>34772566
That has nothing to do with a woman's body.

They're literally just terminating their own child's body that is attached to them via umbilical cord

While the cord may arguably be a part of the female, the baby / fetus' body is not.

And because it's the female's fault (unless rape, which is excusable) that the fetus exists, it's their moral duty to bear the burden of their actions, because the fetus being in that helpless situtation is literally her fault and the result of her actions.

>>34772654
Consciousness.
>org

>>34772621
>pregnancy is a repercussion of sex
>not an option for the end result
Yeah she got pregnant
Yeah she wants to not be pregnant
If you view pregnancy as a repercussion then why do you have a problem with fixing said repercussion?
You're not going to raise the baby, she doesn't want to raise the baby, and the government doesn't want to pay for the baby to grow up
If nobody wants this child, why subject it to life?

>>34772654
The ability to exist outside the womb
Can you call it a distinct and separate life if it dies without it's mother?

>>34772688
>implying rape is not the female's fault
found the nu-male cuck

>>34772696
>If you view pregnancy as a repercussion then why do you have a problem with fixing said repercussion?

Basic morality dictates it as so.

>If nobody wants this child, why subject it to life?

Are you not concerned what the child may want? Have you had the chance to ask them? How incredibly selfish.

>>34772688
>baby / fetus
What if it's an embryo?
If you can look at a pregnancy as a consequence of poor actions, why would you want that person to be a mother?

>>34772473
>all the problems in the world
>you choose the one that is just two steps removed from wearing a condom during sex

the bigger crime is drinking during pregnancy or being poor in general. your classification of murder also includes shit like not paying taxes or cyber bullying.

>>34772726
>Can you call it a distinct and separate life if it dies without it's mother?

Can you call someone surviving through a ventilator a distinct and separate life if it dies without it?

>>34772759
yes because ventilators aren't alive

>>34772736
>Basic morality
nice sp00ks

>>34772736
>Basic morality dictates it as so
The definition of an abortion is not the termination of a life, but the termination of a pregnancy
Basic morality says that if the embryo isn't developed enough, it's totally cool to end gestation

>Are you not concerned what the child may want?
No
The only reason other babies/children exist is because their parents want them to
If their parents don't want them to exist, and they haven't been born, why give birth to them?

>>34772759
>Can you call someone surviving through a ventilator a distinct and separate life if it dies without it?
Using medical devices is separate and distinct from literally being attached to someone
Women aren't objects

If the ventilator was alive and sentient, would you force it to take care of people simply because it was able to?
And if so, what's to stop you from forcing other people to do other things?

>abortion is wrong because life is precious
>*proceeds to live a wasteful life*

>>34772819
To follow up, would you force someone to donate organs, against their will, to save a life?
Why or why not

>>34772819
>Women aren't objects

nice meme

>>34772749
Because they've put another living organism into a helpless state with their irresponsibility, so they are indebted to said organism to at least let it survive

But that debt is between those two parties

I'm not implying human life or even being human in itself is worth anything. The market value of human beings is at an all time low, in fact most people have negative value, in that if we bottlenecked the human population we would gain in economy, collective intelligence, prosperity, quality of life and in biodiversity.

Despite the collective need for genocide there must still exist morality between the individuals, regardless of whether they deserve to live from a outside perspective or not.

>>34772528
>implying every human isn't lump of cells
kys uneducated male feminist

>>34772736
>what the child may want
depending on the stage, that child has as much capacity or potential to want as any of the millions of sperm cells you toss into your mouth nightly. the distinction you make for an individual life is simply shit if you're qualifying it by "wanting something." how do you measure that in an embryo? we could come up with an arbitrary scheme and still choose to abort.

>>34772854
>But that debt is between those two parties
So you shouldn't force any specific mandates between the two
And it should be up to the party that can make a decision to make a decision
Yeah, it would be nice to let it survive, but what's the point of life and living if nobody wants you alive?
Who is going to take care of the baby?
There are certainly still kids in the foster system who need adoption, so it's not as if there is some massive amount of people looking to adopt

Why can't we compromise?
Make abortion illegal at 1 month after conception.

There, everyone wins.

>>34772788
Fuck off, Stirnerfag.

>>34772794
>but the termination of a pregnancy

Pregnancy is destined life.

>Basic morality says that if the embryo isn't developed enough, it's totally cool to end gestation

This seems mighty flawed.

>If their parents don't want them to exist, and they haven't been born, why give birth to them?

Maybe they should have thought about that before taking proper precautions to avoid pregnancy.

>>34772819
>If the ventilator was alive and sentient, would you force it to take care of people simply because it was able to?

It would be only right.

>And if so, what's to stop you from forcing other people to do other things?

I'm not aware of any person with the same capabilities of a ventilator.

>>34772835
>To follow up, would you force someone to donate organs, against their will, to save a life?

Only if the persons requirement of those organs was their doing. Otherwise, they're not responsible like parents are.

>>34772693

dude a fucking newborn baby doesnt even have conciousness. It reacts to world no differently than an animal does. Would you be ok with killing babies until they show some level of self-awareness? Perhaps until they can pass the mirror test?

>>34772894
Why not 3 months?

>>34772915
>The fifth week of pregnancy, or the third week after conception, marks the beginning of the embryonic period. This is when the baby's brain, spinal cord, heart and other organs begin to form

Before a month, it's not a babby. After a month it begins to be babby.

Therefore, abortion in the first month is a ok. After that, it isn't.

>>34772891
A sperm and an embryo are not one in the same.

>how do you measure that in an embryo?

You don't, but the decision is not yours alone

>>34772894

conservatives believe that contraception is when life begins. To those people, it doesn't matter if the abortion is at 1 month or 8 months, you are murdering a human being. Any abortion at all is simply unacceptable for them.

I am EXTREMELY pro choice myself (I would be ok with killing babies even after they are born), but a lot of liberal retards seem to make a strawman out of conservatives that their motive is simply to deny women choice and control them. In their mind, their motive is to save human lives.

>>34772950
>conservatives believe that contraception is when life begins. To those people, it doesn't matter if the abortion is at 1 month or 8 months, you are murdering a human being. Any abortion at all is simply unacceptable for them.

Surprisingly enough, you don't speak for all conservatives. It does in fact, make a large difference when the abortion takes place.

>>34772906
>Pregnancy is destined life.
And it's wrong to prematurely terminate life
So all wars should end

>Maybe they should have thought about that before taking proper precautions to avoid pregnancy.
1. If they did take proper precautions and still ended up pregnant, does that make their abortion moral?
2. Why would you want someone who is irresponsible to bring a child into the world

>It would be only right to force a sentient ventilator to take care of a person, even though that ventilator isn't responsible for whatever person's wellbeing

>>34772912
>dude a fucking newborn baby doesnt even have conciousness
yes it does
And you can't bring children that are already born into the argument because abortion is specifically the termination of a pregnancy

>>34772854
if the fetus is separate then so is her own body. if she takes abortion pills and her body decides to terminate the pregnancy, not her fault.

>>34772940
you're right, the decision is the parents'.

>not one in the same
you mean 'not the same'

and i didn't say they were the same. nice try though.

>>34772473
90% of the people on this board wish they were aborted

File: 1471708063110.jpg (102KB, 718x718px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 718x718px

>young people being sorry for a mindless sack of meat

I know that LARPing as a cuckservative is trendy but stop acting like a massive faggot.

>>34772933
It's never not a baby
What we should be concerned with is the level of dependency of which said baby relies on it's mother because that's when it becomes a distinct and separate life
If it can't survive out of the womb, then it's fine
If it can survive out of the womb, no

File: 1485781499067.png (186KB, 477x353px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 477x353px

>wanting to subject yet another sentient being to suffering

I wish I was aborted desu or at the very least got absorbed by my twin while it wasn't too late.

>>34773014
also an even higher percentage than that probably have zero compassion for human life. your post op, and the thinking behind it, is so fucking convoluted and backwards if you zoom out for one second

>>34772950
>their motive is to save human lives
But once the baby is born, who takes care of it?
Hopefully not the irresponsible mother who didn't want the child in the first place
Hopefully not the government, because that means everyone is taking care of a child they had not part in making

>>34772979
>And it's wrong to prematurely terminate life
>So all wars should end

Unfortunately, war is unavoidable. Collateral damage of innocent civilians is also unavoidable but obviously not preferable. The soldiers however, not exactly what they're getting into.

>If they did take proper precautions and still ended up pregnant, does that make their abortion moral?

If you choose to have any form of vaginal intercourse you should be prepared for possible pregnancy, no way around it. Have anal if you're that scared of bringing a child into the world.

>Why would you want someone who is irresponsible to bring a child into the world

I don't but that doesn't make it acceptable to terminate future life.

>>34773012
>you're right, the decision is the parents'.

You're right, and the parents should be chastised as such.

>you mean 'not the same'

I meant exactly what I said.

>>34773078
*know exactly what they're getting into.

>>34773031
>mfw people don't recognize the agony and endless defeat that becomes the life of an unwanted kid or kid in any number of desperate circumstances when they argue about this shit
>mfw despite having no logical foundation for asking other people to avoid aborting, many of these people don't even adopt kids

>>34773078
>Unfortunately, war is unavoidable
>Collateral damage of innocent civilians is also unavoidable
It's avoidable if you don't wage war

>If you choose to have any form of vaginal intercourse you should be prepared for possible pregnancy
And why shouldn't abortion be an option for those who are prepared?

>I don't but that doesn't make it acceptable to terminate future life.
But who is going to take care of the life once it's born and why aren't you worried about that?

>>34773078
>should be chastised
in equal measure to the chastise one would get for whining about abortion being wr.

>>34772893
Pragmatically? No reason.

One should simply admit that their irresponsibility has driven them to a dead end where they have to become morally evil.

While on the other hand, if one admits their lack of genetic worth and euthanizes their own child in an act of eugenics, that's acceptable, because in that case it's not the parent trying to delude themselves into thinking they're somehow "worth more" either morally or physically than the child they are killing.

It's the hypocrisy and narcissism that bothers me.

>>34773136
one could call the abortion a responsible act in response to the irresponsible sex.

>>34773123
>It's avoidable if you don't wage war

Ad-hominem. I don't recall ever waging war myself.

>And why shouldn't abortion be an option for those who are prepared?

Is this a joke? Or has this entire discussion meant nothing to you, you silly brainlet.

>But who is going to take care of the life once it's born and why aren't you worried about that?

Ideally, the parents - if not, the state.

>in equal measure to the chastise one would get for whining about abortion being wr.

Literally a non-statement.

>>34773136
>One should simply admit that their irresponsibility has driven them to a dead end where they have to become morally evil.
But it's not even particularly evil
Preventing life so it doesn't have to grow up unloved while nobody cares for it isn't evil

Nobody who is aborting thinks that they are worth more than the whatever is in their womb, they just know that they cannot take care of it in the way one would normally take care of it

You're just projecting

File: Murders.png (61KB, 928x779px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 928x779px

>>34772473
Look at the murder count done by females and the number is only getting bigger.

>>34773181
>But it's not even particularly evil

Yes it is.

>Preventing life so it doesn't have to grow up unloved while nobody cares for it isn't evil

You're implying something you have no knowledge of.

>Nobody who is aborting thinks that they are worth more than the whatever is in their womb, they just know that they cannot take care of it in the way one would normally take care of it

Or perhaps they're selfish and don't want to have to deal with their mistakes.

>>34772566
not anymore if you are going to take money out of my wallet by force with the use of the welfare state.

>>34772473
Do you guys want the ultimate redpill? Women should be able to get abortions. You guys can shriek "Shut up roastie bitch! Waahh waahh they're having sex and I'm not!" all you want. Most normal people have sex on the regular. Even if they're using protection, shit happens. I can almost guarantee you guys that if you got some girl pregnant, you wouldn't be ready to be a father and would beg for her to get an abortion. Also, it takes a lot of work to be a mother. If you were a girl and got pregnant, and you weren't financially ready to take care of a baby, you'd probably get an abortion too. I care more about the rights of full grown adults than unborn babies.
Before you call me a Chad normie, I'm a khv with barely any friends and nothing going for me. Difference is, I don't take my anger out on people who have it better than me.

>>34772473
I think women should be forced to have abortions if their kid has a disability or is undesirable to society.

>>34773212
abortion is dealing with the mistake.

>>34773179
>Ad-hominem. I don't recall ever waging war myself.
Here's an ad-hominem. Idiot
I wasn't saying that YOU wage war, I was saying that those who wage war do not have to wage war and that if the right to life is important that means war shouldn't be waged by those who hold the right to life beliefs

You said that people should take precautions as to not get pregnant
If someone wears a condom but still gets someone pregnant, why shouldn't they have the right to abort?

>Ideally, the parents
So it's not just the right to life, but the right to be raised by the parents or the state
You've already said that you wouldn't force another to take care of a human life if they weren't responsible, why would you want that state (a collection of people who have nothing to do with the pregnancy) to do so?
And why would you want the parents, who didn't even want the child, to raise the child
They wouldn't raise it well, the child would grow up unhappy, and the mandate for it's life is directly responsible for it's unhappiness
The child wouldn't be unhappy if it was never born

>>34773225
>You guys can shriek "Shut up roastie bitch! Waahh waahh they're having sex and I'm not!" all you want

You're the only one saying that, it seems.

>Most normal people have sex on the regular

Good for them.

>I can almost guarantee you guys that if you got some girl pregnant, you wouldn't be ready to be a father and would beg for her to get an abortion

You don't know anything about me. Stop projecting your own weakness onto others.

>Also, it takes a lot of work to be a mother

Fuck off. Don't fuck then.

>Difference is, I don't take my anger out on people who have it better than me

You're right. You just provide baseless arguments on the interwebs.

But I bet OP eats animals everyday lmao

>>34773212
>Yes it is.
No it's not

>You're implying something you have no knowledge of.
>Or perhaps they're selfish and don't want to have to deal with their mistakes.
Regardless, if the parents do not want the child, who is going to take care of it
If the parents do not want the child, why not make it legal to remove the child and see if it survives without the mother?

>>34773289
it's different because they are humans!!!!

>>34772693
So you advocate killing sleeping people because they are unconscious?

>>34773320
sleeping people are still conscious
conscious =/= awake

The bigger difference is that you aren't directly responsible for whether or not an unconscious person lives or survives

There are two perks of feminism:

Sluts
Abortions

Don't question either

>>34773264
>I wasn't saying that YOU wage war, I was saying that those who wage war do not have to wage war and that if the right to life is important that means war shouldn't be waged by those who hold the right to life beliefs

You are so fucking stupid, it's unfathomable. Why the fuck should I speak on behalf of those people. You're right, people who believe in the value of human life shouldn't be waging wars but I have no place in the matter. Stop projecting your stupid fucking arguments onto me, they have no place in this discussion.

>You said that people should take precautions as to not get pregnant
If someone wears a condom but still gets someone pregnant, why shouldn't they have the right to abort?

If the possibility of pregnancy exists, even in small part than proper precautions were not taken. Jesus fucking christ.

>You've already said that you wouldn't force another to take care of a human life if they weren't responsible, why would you want that state (a collection of people who have nothing to do with the pregnancy) to do so?

It is the task of the state to take care of its citizens, at least in some part.

>And why would you want the parents, who didn't even want the child, to raise the child

They should have thought of that before.

>They wouldn't raise it well, the child would grow up unhappy, and the mandate for it's life is directly responsible for it's unhappiness
>The child wouldn't be unhappy if it was never born

You are implying a lot of things with no insight.

You are beginning to bore me. You bring no arguments to the table except "what ifs". Try formulating an original thought and maybe this conversation can move forward.

>>34773296
>No it's not
>termination of human life is not evil

>Regardless, if the parents do not want the child, who is going to take care of it
If the parents do not want the child, why not make it legal to remove the child and see if it survives without the mother?

There is a reason adoption exists.

>>34772473
The more babies die the better

>>34773157
At the expense of another living organism literally being killed that has no say in the matter.

While the sex was it's creation where it had no say in the matter either. It was the decision of the woman to mate and it is therefore her full responsibility to care for any lifeform that she creates into immediate disadvantage following the act.

It's acceptable to kill your child if your reasoning is that you feel you're too poor to provide well for them.

It's acceptable if you kill them because they represent the same as you genetically, and your genetics are bad.

But it's not acceptable to claim killing is one's inherent right.

Mercy killing can be considered a humane act. Killing for the sake of personal convenience or out of pure malice or spite is morally abhorrent.

>>34773225
that pill is weak you should take the black pill. Males have all the responsibilities in society and women don't. Women have the right not to take responsibility of a child by aborting it but you have the burden of responsibility if she decides to keep it.Males have no rights the moment they have have sex with a girl because you have no saying if you want the child or not. also child support punishes male sexuality and if you don't pay you are send to jail. Why don't males have any rights to choosing to keeping the child?

>>34773470
Having morals is a luxury. It's literally meaningless.

>>34772473
It's just really delayed ejaculation.
IMO you can kill even self-sustainable children under like 2.
Still can't think and have no identifying qualities.

>>34772585
>If they can't give a good life to the child, it's better not to go through with it. Granted, in this case, they shouldn't have had it in the first place, but mistakes happen and you shouldn't compound your errors by making new ones.
This. Think of it as Euthanasia.

File: 1572629692.jpg (18KB, 376x374px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 376x374px

Can someone explain this to me?
I don't care if abortion is legal or not, but why do people act like its morally ok to have an abortion as long as its before a certain time?
>Ok we have to kill this baby before the 27th or else it's WRONG
Why would be any different killing the child at 9 months or a year if the parents decided they didn't want it?

>>34773442
>I have no place in the matter
You can give your opinion on the matter.
You also don't perform or have abortions, yet you have an opinion on the matter.
I brought up this logic because I wanted to point out a flaw in your personal opinion. You say that war is unavoidable, but you also believe that people have a right to live. That's contradictory.
And if you have no place in the matter, then why even argue about abortions when you can't even have one NOR would you ever perform one?
You can ask that people not perform abortions in exactly the same way that you can ask that people not wage war.

>If the possibility of pregnancy exists, even in small part than proper precautions were not taken
But there's never a 100% guarantee of anything. You can't stop people from having sex and you can't stop people from accidentally becoming pregnant so abortion is a solution to pregnancy

>It is the task of the state to take care of its citizens, at least in some part.
Unborn humans aren't citizens

>They should have thought of that before.
They did. Which is why abortion was their solution

>You are implying a lot of things with no insight.
Seeing as how you cannot force a parent to take care of it's child, only fine and imprison them if they do, it's no implication that the child wouldn't properly be raised by the parent.

>Try formulating an original thought
Your mother.
You aren't actually debating these topics, you're just denying the efficacy and refusing to engage.

>There is a reason adoption exists.
And there are still plenty of kids in the foster system awaiting adoption. Clearly adoption isn't the best solution, particularly when there are more kids with parents who don't want them than parents who want kids but don't have them and are willing to adopt.

>>34773551
There are multiple different reasons that people consider timelines
Whether or not the fetus has achieved some level of consciousness
Whether or not the embryo can survive outside of the mother
The development of the baby and what we can consider life
etc etc
Many people don't see embryos/fetuses as children/babies simply because they haven't been born yet or don't resemble babies

>>34772473
I wish you'd been aborted, OP.

>>34773622
Even if the baby would reach those stages in like 1 or 2 days would it still be considered ok? Seems like a lousy way to justify killing something.

>>34773693
Saying it could eventually become something isn't really an argument. It's literally the slippery slope fallacy.
The fact is that if we have specific stages for something to be considered not alive and stages where we consider it alive, it almost being at the alive stage means that it's still not actually alive

Having a B+ isn't having an A, even if you are at 88%.
Running a mile in 21 minutes and 10 seconds isn't running a mile under 20 minutes.
The reason those stages exist is to chart development. Saying a heart will exist isn't the same as the heart existing

>Republicans want less abortion
>They end up causing more abortions
Really makes you think.

>>34772473
I dunno. Some lives aren't really worth living.

>>34772473
I'd have rather been aborted then born, tbqh

File: 1486445050551.png (126KB, 816x754px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 816x754px

>>34772473
>caring
I barely care about the millions of people in great suffering who are alive today, every second hundreds of people die in the most horrific ways imaginable and I don't sleep a day less for it.
Why would I give a shit about people who aren't even born yet?

>>34772736
>what the child may want?
the 'child' doesn't want anything, because it isn't born yet and if we abort it it will have never wanted anything at all

You know, I come to the chon for the maymays, so these threads really give me a hardcore maymingest boner like no other.

File: 1484724001730.png (339KB, 670x503px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 670x503px

i wish i was aborted originally

Fuck you, I wish I was aborted. These kids are lucky that they get someone to kill them for free while I have to suffer in this shit existence.