Abortion doesn't make you unpregnant. It makes you the parent

>>36233165
Sure, if you insist friendo

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_1492060525797.jpg (54KB, 990x649px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 990x649px

>>36233165
>Abortion doesn't make you unpregnant. It makes you the parent of a dead child.
Ok, OP.

>>36233165
The World has enough people, IDC, so what, too much suffering in the world anyway, blah blah blah it's been said millions of times.
> inb4 "muh fetus"

>>36233214
>internet explorer
kys

>>36233257
is that what causes those filenames? holy hell I didn't know people used IE

>>36233257
>>internet explorer kys
Ok

But OP you can't abort a child, only a fetus.

Wrong

It makes you unpregnant AND a parent of a dead child AND a murderer.

>>36233328
ok? i mean its legal. if you could legally kill a thing thats just gonna leech your money and time for 18 years would you?

I wish your parent was the 'parent of a dead child' anon.

File: 1481307888903.jpg (103KB, 600x800px)

103KB, 600x800px

>>36233165
Abortion wouldn't even be an issue if roasties weren't such whores.

File: ∕̴ℓδђƸϞ.jpg (31KB, 247x333px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 247x333px

>>36233386
The libcucks already are which is absofuckinglutely ridiculous that 1st worlders in this day and age have to resort to fucking murderous abortion when there are so many steps before that.

>>36233413
a fertilized egg is not a person

>>36233328
Wrong.
The doctor who carries out the procedure is a murderer.
You would be guilty of conspiracy.

Life is suffering, abortion is a mercy.

>>36233387
>bazinga
Good one anon

>>36233458
I'm pretty sure if you got caught hiring a hitman it would be attempted murder.

>>36233413
Are you for or against state or individual rights? As in, do you like the government to interfere in your personal matters?

File: IMG_1297.jpg (415KB, 1600x1071px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 1600x1071px

>speciesists actually believe this
Have you ever compared embryonic stages between species? You realise they all start the same and slowly diverge. The question is not "is it a human", but "can it suffer". Do you look back on your years as an embryo fondly, OP? Or were you completely unconcious and unaware of reality?

>>36233486
>conspiracy to commit murder

>>36233373
NO. Murder is wrong dude.
And you created that problem yourself.

>>36233504
>what are chromosomes

Not the same.

>>36233165
So? Is that supposed to be some poignant statement?

File: 1491630906616.jpg (13KB, 259x206px)

13KB, 259x206px

Anyone who gets an Abortion should also be sterilized.

There, that's an equal trade-off

>>36233458
You hiring someone to do it isn't better. You are still considered a murderer to ppl.
A BABY murderer.
You OWN BABY murderer.

>>36233531
>gets raped
>you created that problem for you dude
Lad....

>>36233504
>can it suffer

That definition does not help whatsoever, since even if you could objectively define suffering (which is a whole different can of worms you're not even considering) and even if you could somehow measure the capability of suffering in unborn children (which you probably can't), you would still have to draw an arbitrary line at where the acceptable level of capability for suffering ends.

>Or were you completely unconcious and unaware of reality?

Shitty argument. By that logic killing sleeping people is fine, because they are unconscious.

File: 1480961945644.jpg (99KB, 540x376px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 540x376px

>>36233495
Depends. NETbux, protection and health and flouride in my water is good.

Surveillance is bad.

File: 1491361544288.png (120KB, 486x417px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 486x417px

>>36233565
Rape pregnancies are rare, and wouldn't taking the morning after pill be the first thing Rape Victims do after getting treated by doctors?

>>36233560
Murder isn't wrong it's just social construct.

>>36233580
Sure, but victims of incest don't always have that opportunity. Not to mention unreported rapes.

>>36233565
If you just got raped go to the police and report it. They will take you to a hospital to get you checked out, get evidence. At that time they can give you this pill that prevents you from Getting pregnant from your rapist.

Do you know the statistics on abortions for rape vs. Just Because? And do you know how many of those "rapes" are false?

>>36233566
A more correct team would be nonconcious, as in never having or exhibiting consciousness

>>36233581
Its wrong you psychopath.

FBI,NSA watch that guy. His mind is warped.

>>36233631
That doesn't change the fact that they killed their own child.

>>36233165
>he doesn't want as many women as possible to get abortions so scientists can do some crazy shit with them
fuck you OP, your worldview is unscientific and retards progress.

>>36233654
And do you know how many rapes go unreported? Or how many women are victims of incest? Keep paddling.

>>36233678
How is it wrong to murder someone who is about to murder someone or a group of someones?

Not that guy but it is all social construct and completely subjective between who's pulling the trigger and who's taking the bullet

>>36233165
Masturbation makes you the parent of a dead child.

>>36233695
>that doesn't change the fact that they're killing their own babies
>in my opinion
Try starting statements like that with "in my opinion". Otherwise you look like a twat.

>>36233723
I asked you first. Do you know?
Keep deflecting.

>>36233695
depends on what you deem a "child", most people would exclude a nonconscious embryo from that group

>>36233736
Because it still is wrong. Yes its good you saved those ppl but they didn't kill those ppl in actuality. You did kill someone and should feel bad about it.

>>36233560
by the very definition of murder legal abortions can not be murder

>>36233673
> never having or exhibiting consciousness

So you went from a difficult problem of defining suffering to the currently unsolvable problem of measuring and defining consciousness.

If you accept that human life is intrinsically valuable, then there is no way you can dismiss destroying a zygote as consistent with your worldview. You could make make a decent argument against the idea that birth-control methods are immoral, however a zygote is the best binary state change which defines a human life.

If you forfeit the idea of intrinsic value of human life, then the argument becomes more of utilitarianism, which is perfectly valid, but in that case you might want to reconsider some other values you hold which are in accordance of your assumptions for the value of human life.

>>36233744
No its not just in my opinion. You literally terminate a life when you have an abortion. That's what an abortion is anon ....that's not JUST my opinion

File: 3222c944bb0e54d6.png (54KB, 500x534px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x534px

>>36233165
Wow, you made a meaningless linguistic distinction. So what? Are you trying to invoke an emotional response in using the word human? Because that isn't an argument.

>>36233753
No most ppl wouldn't. Once they are pregnant all woman consider it their child. From day 1.

Ask any mom when they consider it their child.

Do you think they consider it their child from when its born?

>>36233778
We can call them baby killers instead of baby murderers if it makes your autismn OK with it.

>>36233817

Nope, that is a decent argument.

1. Destruction of human life is immoral.
2. Human embryos are human.
3. Therefore destruction of human embryos is immoral.

Clearly the argument rests on you being able to prove statement 2, which I think OP does well enough.

>>36233845
The difference between a killing and a murder is immense so keep my tism out of it.

>>36233975
OK tell me when its OK to kill your baby....when it inconvenients you?

>>36233858
Premise two is incorrect. Sure it has the propensity to become a human but you couldn't call a human embryo a human anymore than you could call a fertilized chicken egg a chicken.

>>36233752
>The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy, the majority occurred among adolescents and resulted from assault by a known, often related perpetrator. Only 11.7% of these victims received immediate medical attention after the assault, and 47.1% received no medical attention related to the rape. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester; 32.2% opted to keep the infant whereas 50% underwent abortion and 5.9% placed the infant for adoption; an additional 11.8% had spontaneous abortion.
>32000 pregnancies result from rape
Is that precise enough or do you need an infographic?

>>36233975
And how immense. Please elaborate.

>>36233991
You see you keep moving the goal posts, first we are talking about zygotes now it's suddenly children and babies. I think you need to brush up on your terminology before we continue this discussion

>>36233798
You terminate a life the same way an amputation terminates a life. A clump of unsustainable cells doesn't equal a life.

>>36233858
No the argument rests on people agreeing with premise one. People have colloquial definitions of these terms, and you are preying on their emotional response.

>>36234009
Murder is a legal term involving the premeditated killing of a human by another human

I can kill an ant without being charged.

Unfortunately for you zygotes are no deemed to be human so it is impossible to murder one

>>36233678
Everyone will die eventually.

File: single mothers.jpg (540KB, 1300x1414px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1300x1414px

>>36233165

hell of a lot better than a single mother

>>36234002
Why do you suppose that half had those babies? Because they felt it wrong to kill their own babies.

And only 5 percent? Really anon? So your argument is only for that 5 percent.

OK fine the other 95 percent should be illegal. But they still are ALL Baby killers

>>36233997

If you don't accept the almost binary state change between an unfertilised egg to zygote as the moment when the egg becomes human, then the humanity of the fetus becomes a sliding scale where you can only pick arbitrary points at which you deem the fetus "not human enough" to warrant an abortion.

>>36234037

I mean if you don't agree with premise one then abortion becomes a non-argument, which is perfectly valid and defensible position to assume, but it's not that interesting in the context of this thread, so I was just addressing people who are okay with premise 1 and then attempt to categorise and define various "degrees of life"

>>36234082
it aint a baby till it's born

>>36234093

You could make that argument, but I'm not sure if you'd like the actual consequences.

Third semester abortions aren't pretty.

>>36234090
I deem the first sign of brain activity as the moment a fetus becomes human

>>36234014
A zygote is a baby. Just because a dozen ppl said its not a human doesn't mean it isn't. Your playing semantics anon and its silly.

>>36234082
>why do you think they kept them
Social pressure, religious pressure, familiar pressure, guilt, unable to afford proceedure, unable to find facility to perform proceedure. There's alot of reason ls why someone would or wouldn't do something. To pin it to one hypothetical reason is just dense.
>only 5%
>only 32000
Chappie.....

>>36234017
You are twisted sister if you thing those things are comparable.

>>36234137
A zygote is a baby.

We are going to have to disagree on this one. A zygote contains all the genetic material to become a baby but it itself is not one. At this stage there is no life to kill

>>36234090
No, it doesn't become a non-argument. Similarly I could ask you if you agree with the premise that killing any lifeform whatsoever is immoral, including viruses and shit. You disagreeing with them doesn't mean that you are for killing all lifeforms. This is a dishonest discussion tactic.
I for one am against late term abortions.
None of this however changes the fact that OPs and your argument is bullshit. You expect people to agree with your premise based on their emotional gut reaction when hearing the word human and then do some word acrobatics to define it to mean something they didn't intend. Words have usages, not inherent meanings.

>>36234124

In which case your ability to accurately detect brain activity becomes the limiting factor on your ability to detect whether a fetus is an inanimate object or a human.

I suppose that would be enough for practical purposes of implementing some sort of policy, but personally I would not be okay with that much room for error, if I accepted that human life is intrinsically valuable.

>>36233165
sorry, pal
although it enables the sin of premarital sex, it also happens to be effective at preventing crime by pre-euthanizing potential niggers

>>36234161
It's just tissue.

>>36234050
Its not deemed by law because of a very few ppl said so. You are going by law and that's not the thing you should be going by because the law can be flawed.
Back in the day
You would think slavery is OK because its not against the law. That doesn't make it right.

>>36234184
Well, we can agree that azygote doesn't have brain activity, right? Of course there is some grey area where brain activity may or may not occur, but that isn't right after conception (or even a week after). So if you wanna make sure that there's no room for error, you just don't allow abortion when that grey area is approached.

File: 1480950761144.png (22KB, 245x305px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 245x305px

>>36234206
>implying sheboons get abortions
>implying they would kill a potential extra NEETbux cheque

>>36234256
>never read Freakonomics

>>36234173
>Similarly I could ask you if you agree with the premise that killing any lifeform whatsoever is immoral, including viruses and shit. You disagreeing with them doesn't mean that you are for killing all lifeforms.

I disagree that killing any lifeforms whatsoever is immoral. I think that value of life is arbitrary and subjective, therefore there are conditions where the practical value of killing may exceed the value of life e.g. eating meat or abortion.

Why is that dishonest?

>You expect people to agree with your premise based on their emotional gut reaction when hearing the word human and then do some word acrobatics to define it to mean something they didn't intend. Words have usages, not inherent meanings.

The problem of abortion is clearly a problem of classification, which is why the definition of "human" is so important. Since, obviously the that definition is not concrete that definition becomes an interesting point of argument, which is the point of this thread, no?

I'm not sure why you need to bring emotion into the argument. I have no skin in the game, I don't care about pushing an agenda, I'm just testing my own ideas by arguing with people with differing opinions.

>>36234244

You still need an arbitrary cut-off point for the grey area.

I wish I was aborted

You have been muted for 65 seconds, because your comment was not original.

File: 1.jpg (121KB, 900x507px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 900x507px

>>36234292
>lifeform
>viruses

>>36234305
>stages of human development
>arbitrary
Words are fun.

>>36233165
Dead children cause no trouble and no expenses so it's all good

>>36234148
Bloke then that other 95 percent are aborting their babies for reason that aren't acceptable by you and your own argument.

>>36234329

How are they not arbitrary? Wouldn't you agree that human development is a sliding scale?

>believe abortion is murder, no other definition
>also believe most people being aborted would have been raised by the piece of shit that killed them
>they would have been a shit person if they grew up

Not sure where I stand in this issue

>>36234326

I'm not sure if I understand your point, could you elaborate?

>>36234292
>Why is that dishonest?
You clearly didn't understand what I was getting at. It was an analogy. You disagreeing with my premise doesn't mean that you that are for killing all lifeforms.
The reason I talked about emotion is because that's what you're preying on. People have preconcieved notions when they hear the word human. If you ask them about humans, making clear that this definition includes zygotes one second after conception, their propably wouldn't be so fast to agree with your premise - thus it is you are engaging in sophistry.

>>36234383
I was helping you BTFO that other guy. Viruses aren't alive.

>>36234353
>>gets raped
>>you created that problem for you dude
That's my original comment. I fail to see how 32000 rape related pregnancies (pregnancies that weren't created by choice and without consent) makes my "arguement" "unacceptable by" me.

>>36234241
Which brings me back to my original point that it is all social construct. What is "right" and what is "wrong" is purely subjective and up to the individual or group of individuals

>>36234396
>You disagreeing with my premise doesn't mean that you that are for killing all lifeforms.

Why not? I already admitted that by disagreeing with your premise I am okay with killing any life form for personal gain.

>If you ask them about humans, making clear that this definition includes zygotes one second after conception

I'm completely open to anyone challenging this definition.


How would you word the problem without the use of the word "human", if you feel like it's too loaded?

File: filename.jpg (6KB, 366x277px)

6KB, 366x277px

>>36234305
let A be the timeframe where one can be absolutely sure that there is no brain activity
and b the point where one can be absolutely sure that there is brain activity

this isquite the opposite of arbitrary

>>36234369
It's a sliding scale in a broad sense, but on a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month basis it's damn accurate. Stages of pregnancy and gestation are pretty well documented.

How could any robot disagree with OP? Women already get away with so much in society. Why give them free rein to murder too?

>>36233214
Is this picture of kkk or Spanish people.

>>36234414
I always thought that was stupid
They move and do things and shit
How can they not be considered alive unless they're infecting something

>>36234479
reverse google you fuck, Hermandad La Borriquita in Sevilla, Spain

>>36234471
Maybe some anons don't want the government meddling in our personal lives.

>>36234433
32000 is only the 5 percent from the statistics you gave. What's your reasoning for the rest? And n other words you say rape is good reason for abortion. What's your argument for the rest.

>>36234471
Because it's better that these whores become baby killers than actual mothers
Incompetent bad people raising children do more damage than one abortion

>>36234467
I think his point is that different fetus' will develop at different speeds so that cut off point isn't universal

>>36234467

The line from A to B would still be a gradient of certainty.

So is your cutoff where the possibility for error is 0%? In which case you could only abort at the point A, no?

>>36234470

So you are saying there would be no time frame where there would be contest in deciding whether the fetus is conscious?

>>36234464
>Why not? I already admitted that by disagreeing with your premise I am okay with killing any life form for personal gain.
this isn't how logic works. the first doesn't imply the second.
I'm beginning to suspect that your whole shtick is utterly dishonest.

>How would you word the problem without the use of the word "human", if you feel like it's too loaded?
How about the question: to what do we ascribe personhood? I think that actually gets to the root of the argument and it circumvents sophist attempts of word twisting.

Which would you prefer, /r9k/?

Dead before you had the capacity for thought or raised by the kind of mother who had to be pressured/forced to not abort her child?

Note that I didn't mention a father.

>>36234526
A is a timeframe, not a point. The cutoff is at the point where A ends and "grey area" (this is where a gradient of certainty would begin to happen) begins. Essentially the last point at which you could be 100% certain that there is no brain activity.

My favourite thing about this website is you can make a shitty argument based on nothing, go take a shit, and when you come back some idiot is championing your argument for you

>>36234489
A good reason for abortion aside from rape? Not having the resources/support to raise the kid, not being emotionally or mentally fit to raise the kid. Unable to carry to term because of various health issues. Those are three "good" ones. So is being a phase of your life where having a child would be detrimental to your path/goals.
Most reasons ppl have abortions are A-OK with me.
My original point, though, was some people have no choice in the matter of getting pregnant, and to insinuate that their situation is a part of their own doing is dishonest.

>>36234462
That's just using semantics and word play to morph things into what you want. Its delusion. You are grasping at straws.

We use emotion because humans are emotional beings. We live by them, we are them. There are not any hamans without feelings.

And none of what you have said makes its change tje fact that these woman and or men choose to kill their child.

>>36234537

There is no need to mistake my incompetence for malice. I'm not a philosopher, just trying to be rational as best as I can.

>How about the question: to what do we ascribe personhood?

Okay that sounds reasonable.

How would you define personhood then?

In terms of personhood
>How would you classify a newborn baby?
>How would you classify a zygote
>How would you classify the intermediate stages?

>>36234526
>So you are saying there would be no time frame where there would be contest in deciding whether the fetus is conscious?
No, I'm saying development is pretty well mapped out.

>>36234597
Mine too, anon. Mine, too. This apparently wasn't an original sentiment.

>>36234578

That sounds reasonable, but still would you not agree that the last point at which you could be 100% certain depends on your capability to accurately measure brain activity?

In which case your cut-off point of abortion would depend on the current state of detection technology?

>>36234622

Wouldn't "pretty well mapped out" imply that there are still areas of uncertainty?

>>36234601
Well my main point is having an abortion is still killing your child.
Zygote, rape or whatever.

You can justify it any way you want but you can't escape that fact.

I'm pro-choice and I've dated a few pro-life girls in my life. The pro life girls always seem to take the issue of abortion personally, like pro choices want mandatory abortions. It's all feeling without empathy for any other persons situation.

>>36234615
My point wasn't primarily to answer that question but to point out it's usefulness. It cuts to the meat of the discussion and is much more honest than OPs non-argument. We have heard different points of view on that topic in this thread alone (while not using the word personhood specifically, but you get the point). I'm still struggling with my position but I think a good point to start would be sentience (ie posessing a rudimentary nervous system, further maybe consciousness if we actually were to understand it's workings at some point.

>>36234622
The thing with maps are, for everyone who makes one, they are going to be all different.

>>36234668
A zygote/embryo isn't a baby/child. That's the fact that you are unable to grasp.
It's perfectly fine to be pro-life, but to charge your feelings as fact is ridiculous.

>>36234667
You mean the gray area in the image that this anon >>36234467 posted?

>>36234706
>every map of human development are all different
Sure thing lad.

>>36234654
Yes. I'm not saying that this is as easy to assess irl al it is in my little drawing, but if you were to try to implement this type of policy, you could still set the cutoff a bit more conservatively, just to make sure.

>>36234710
As any mom anon. They will tell you that a zygote is their child.

That zygote is life. You seem too deattached and emotionally distant to get that.

I firmly believe that society should hold women accountable for their reproductive fuck ups. Any woman who gets an abortion for trivial reasons should also sterilized. Women can literally throw their babies in trash cans and are STILL seen as victims.

They can't keep getting away with this.

>>36234002
>Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy
Nice sample size you got there dickhead.

>>36234728
Bloke between nations science definitions are very much different. Google it.

>>36234705

I see what you mean, but I think that in the end even if you went with personhood as the main classificator you'd still run into the same problems.

This entire argument is clearly very rooted in emotion and I doubt we can ever avoid that.

>>36234716

Sure if you use that image as the reference, I would say that the classification of consciousness until point B is still relatively arbitrary.

>>36234750

So again, I agree that this could be sufficient form a practical point of view, but I'm more interested in the masturbatory fine details of this in order to achieve maximum consistency.

Which is why I can claim that before the formation of the zygote you can be 100% certain that there is no consciousness/life/personhood and after that all of it starts becoming murkier.

On one hand I support abortion because it's murder
On the other I'm against it because it's giving woman a choice.

>>36234774
>ask any mom
>who decides to carry to term
You don't seem to understand that there are people who don't share your beliefs.
t. a dad with a pro-choice wife

>>36234828
kek. Top bants anon.

File: 1416883873801.gif (919KB, 272x181px) Image search: [Google]

919KB, 272x181px

>>36234828

Finally a point on solid /r9k/ terms.

>>36234819
Personhood is a philosophical concept rather than a physical, so its definition can be discussed and disagreements can be had. This can happen as rational and emotional as you'd like, in the end the best argument can win.
However it is much less susceptible to pointles gotcha word twisting as definition is key here and can be discussed in its own right.

>>36234811
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248
Yeah, the nih should have totally kept tabs on all 32000 rape pregnancies. The actual sample size wasn't a part of my original arguement, dickhead, it was incidental information that I posted.

>>36234839
Who's right? The dad who wants to keep the baby or the wife who wants to abort it?

>>36234819
This is why it is called a grey area. We don't touch the grey area because we don't know - it's a black box. With more research, we might narrow it down and can move the cutoff accordingly.

>>36234828
But aren't you for it because it claims more niggers than any other race?

>>36234875

Aren't all concepts philosophical by definition?

File: AbjBtcE.jpg (402KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1000x1000px

>>36233566
The concept of suffering might be difficult to precisely measure, but it is much less arbitrary than "humans are valuable because they are human". Suffering encompasses unconscious, physical, mental, and all other type of suffering. It's an appeal to futility give up just because defining suffering to be difficult.

If we accept that being "human" is simply what makes human life value, it leads to a lot of questions which will then lead to the base assumption that "suffering is bad".
>>36233535
Two embryos will have different genetic makeup, but how does that affect their experience at the state of being an embryo? Why should one set of chromosomes be favoured above another?

>Shitty argument. By that logic killing sleeping people is fine, because they are unconscious
The point I was trying to make was that it's a bad analogy to compare regular, adult, conscious experience with that of an embryo. But I agree that unconsciousness and unawareness don't necessitate a lack of suffering.

>>36234818
With all due respect, my info is intentionally bias towards the US. Sorry m8.

The question is at what point the fetus starts to develop a consciousness. If you abort a fetus that's still just a lump of flesh, fine by me. But if it's conscious? That's straight up murder, no matter which way you look at it.

Obviously it's more or less impossible to know when this occurs. The best guess we have is when the brain starts to develop, which is at five weeks. So imo, morning after pills should be legal, but abortion shouldn't be (except for special cases like rape, underage pregnancy, threat to mother etc., but I'm less settled on the specific cases of those.)

>>36234819
You clearly didn't understand that picture, did you?
Cutoff is the last point where certainly no brain activity exists, B is the point where it certainly does. The gray area is where it may or may not exist, we don't know, which is why the cutoff happens before that stage is entered..

>>36234886
>who is right
That's subjective, m8. The better question is who has more of a right to decide, the person who will have to carry, birth, be primary caregiver, or the person who supplied the sperm.

>>36234897

Would you be okay with aborting a fetus which was classified as 100% not having any brain activity with current technology, but who would have classified as potentially having brain activity with more sophisticated technology?

>>36234937

>which is why the cutoff happens before that stage is entered..

So how do you choose how much room for error do you leave between the 100% certainty and the gray area?

>>36234960
>So how do you choose how much room for error do you leave between the 100% certainty and the gray area?
None. Which is why the cutoff happens at 100% certainty - before it can possibly drop to less. Are you really that dense?

>>36234957
You can tell you are biased by the way you said that.

The share is 50/50 with a child. Not primary care giver and sperm donor.

>>36234910

Your definition of suffering literally depends on your definition of humanity, so how can it be less arbitrary?

>>36234960
You know what 100% certainty means,right?

>>36234994
The parental investment isn't 50/50. You don't have the right to use another human being as an incubator just because you once had physical contact with them for 5 minutes. That would be slavery.

File: 1468501738387.jpg (124KB, 500x629px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 500x629px

See the problem I have with conservatives wanting to gut abortion services is that they wont put more money into Sexual education and birth control items. "Just don't have sex lol" doesn't really work when alot of kids grow up with a shitty education, living in shitty ghettos and doing all sorts of other shitty stuff it isn't surprising that they don't have the faintest idea about sex and sex protection so you just end up with a bunch of shitty kids in the same situation as their parents and it just continues the damn cycle.

If you really want people to have less abortions, you gotta break the cycle for these people by providing them affordable birth control, proper sex education and decent living standards.

I can't say for sure how much sex education has improved in public schools but it was fucking awful around when I was young. We had to watch Old VHS tapes from the 70's talking about it and had a teacher that explained dick all to us.

>>36234994
1/4 children are being raised by single mothers. Out of the twelve million single parent households, eighty percent is single mothers.
That's not bias.

>>36234881
Many medical studies have huge error factors. List more than these 42 woman.

These woman could have lied. This study is following woman who are already abortion prone. It doesn't provided anything.

>>36234985
>>36235010

If you are using brain activity as the classification, that means that you have experimentally measure brain activity which will never produce results which are 100% certain.

Hence, the cut off point is determined entirely by your tolerances for error and will move depending on your level of accuracy.

>>36234925
Ok by your own admittance you are biased.

>>36235064
Are you aware of my original arguement or are you just flinging shit? Because it looks like you're flinging shit. Pls read the reply chain before commenting anymore, thanks.

>>36235071
We can for example be 100% certain that there is no brain activity, if there is no brain. We can also be sure there is no brain activity if the brain only consists of a couple cells. The moment uncertainty comes into play, you've entered the gray area. This isn't rocket science ffs.

>>36235081
Yeah, bias to us stats, because I live in the US. I could give two shits what Guam or the Philippines or Poland has to say in the matter. Because I don't live there. Their rules are moot to me. Or "arbitrary" as that one anon keeps saying.

>>36235032
The baby has the all the right to use you as an incubator.and the guy too, you chose to have said x, you know what could happen. And its not slavery, are you that dense? How do you even make that comparison.

File: embryos.jpg (45KB, 574x338px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 574x338px

>>36233165
Hey OP, you know that there are many other human things?
Like human nails, human semen, human shit, and many other things that contain this word. Does that make trashing any of these immoral?

Define what you call a human, and stop playing around with words. Then we will have some real talk.
As far as I remember last time you didn't said it but you meant it - new combination of DNA is human, but that's bullshit.
Human starts where human brain along with other nervous system appears and starts functioning.
And no, embryo/fetus is not a child.
Now have a comparison that will show you how similar ALL THE FETUSES ARE at the first stages.

>>36235129
>The moment uncertainty comes into play, you've entered the gray area.

I could argue that that moment is the inception of the zygote.

>>36234899
Well that's just the cherry on top.

File: Screenshot_2017-04-13-07-24-42-1.png (300KB, 652x918px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 652x918px

>>36235165
I will never be as pleased with anything as this tortoise is with his tail

>>36235178
You could argue that - and It would make you sound like a moron.

>>36235161
Sex isn't a contract to carry ones child for 9 months. The guy has no right to use your body without consent as an incubator for monts. It is LITERALLY slavery.

>>36235218
Finally something happy ITT.

>>36235063
How do you know the father isn't raising the child by choice. Many woman keep the children away from the father for selfish reasons.

These woman choose these men to sleep with knowing full well that a child could be produced from it. Then all of a sudden these men are bad? These woman should choose more wisely who they sleep with. We all know what happens with sex. These single mothers know what could happen. They are to blame.

But let's just get an abortion, let's kill my future baby, problem solved.

>>36235222

Why?

You are the one looking for 100% certainty through empirical evidence which is by definition impossible.

No abortion is the only case where 100% of the fetuses with brain activity are not destroyed.

>>36235261
You sound pretty bias anon.

>>36235245
You sleeping with him is their consent. You fully know what could happen from having sex. And if you don't you should not be having it.
When you have sex you take the responsibility that a child could be produced.

>>36235279
Ok, once again - there is no brain activity if there's no properly formed brain yet. It's simple logic.

>>36233165
Please share how much firsthand experience you have with things regarding abortion since you clearly know everything there is to know about it.

>>36235327
Implicit contracts are formed on social norms and mutual understanding of these norms, not on your personal ideology. Sex doesn't equal pregnancy anymore. Fuck off with your puritan bullshit.

Brain activity doesn't mean life. Hence single celled organisms. They ARE alive. They DO live.

>>36235330

Determine what amount of cells could be classified as a brain and what could or could not be classified as "activity" in such cells is subjective.

>>36235367
therefore killing harmful bacteria through medication is as bad as murdering someone and should be punished accordingly

>>36235374
This is why at some point you enter the GRAY AREA.
fucking hell how dense are you?

>>36235366
Obviously sex does equal pregnancy, otherwise planned parenthood wouldn't be the norm, condoms wouldn't be the norm, the pill wouldn't be invented. Do you hear yourself???

>>36235423
>sex does equal pregnancy
>hundreds of methods exist ensuring that sex doesn't equal pregnancy
Do you hear yourself???

>>36235391
You said kill. Good you agree its killing.

And no society doesn't equal killing a dog to a human.

I'm glad we agree it IS killing though.

THANK YOU

>>36235403

There is gray area around the entrance of the gray area.

And there is a gray area around that gray area.

ad infinitum.

The only place where there is no gray area is where there is no zygote.

>>36235444
With all those Methods there is a disclaimer. Its says not 100 percent preventative.

>>36235456
Well, yes. Ending life (i.e. an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction), is by definition killing.
What point do you think you've just made?

>>36233165
A teenager does not equal a grown adult.
therefor we should kill teenagers

>>36235486

I think his point is that human life is inherently more valuable than other forms of life.

>>36235476
>There is gray area around the entrance of the gray area.
Do you not understand the concept of a gray area? Are you clinically retarded?
The gray area is entered the moment uncertainty appears, this is a specific point. If you aren't certain, you are already in the gray area.
I can't explain this a hundred times dude.

File: selah.gif (336KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 200x200px

>>36233255
>He fell for the Overpopulation meme
What's next, brainlet?

>>36235502
He didn't present or argue for this point in the least though.

>>36233299
the word 'Child' refers to any non-mature human. 'Fetus' is a developmental stage that is part of childhood.
Saying
>you can't abort a child, only a fetus
is just like saying
>You can't abort a child, only a toddler
or
>you can't abort a child, only a teenager
It isn't just wrong, it makes you sound retarded

>>36233439
Ontologically, you're as much a 'fertilized egg' as you are anything else....
Are you not a "person"?

>>36235543
Yeah I remember being conscious of my self-awareness when I was in my mother's womb, and it affects my way of thinking today.

Ignorant stupid fucking retard.

>>36235524
>The gray area is entered the moment uncertainty appears

Here's a thought experiment.

There are 100 ways to measure brain activity, all of them exhibit uncertainty at different stages of development.

Which device is used to determine the beginning of the gray area?

What if there are infinite ways to measure brain activity?

>>36235568
Omfg dude. If you aren't sure, YOU ARE ALREADY IN THE GRAY AREA!!!

>>36233165
so?I don't see any problem with that

>>36235567
A mother doing drugs or smoking or drinking affects a child and the child doesn't remember that. What's your point?

>>36235607

Could you please provide the answer to my thought experiment?

If there are infinite ways of measuring brain activity and all of them produce different levels of uncertainty how do you decide where the "gray area" begins if you obviously can't obtain results from all of the measurements?

File: rdrr.gif (490KB, 500x200px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 500x200px

>>36235567
What does self-awareness have to do with anything, you giant fuckwit?
When you are in deep sleep are you no longer 'a person'?
No, you remain a human, you fuckwit.
When you're placed into an artificial coma for surgery do you magically cease being 'a person'?
No, fuckwit, you don't.
What you are trying to do is come up with some magical thinking, nebulous 'Person' bullshit to avoid the truth like the cowardly fuckwit you are.
A fetus = a living human.
Any other claim is bullshit on the level of New Age crystal fuckwittery

>>36235486
I wasn't trying to make a point. You said its killing. That's all.

>>36235391
>therefore killing harmful bacteria through medication is as bad as murdering someone
That doesn't follow.

>>36235703
Yes, so what? Killing isn't inherently bad. You are killing thousands of cells every day just by taking a dump.

>>36235712
Yes, captain obvious, that is what the comment was intended to point out. There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life.

>>36235721
I have to take dumps, I don't have to get pregnant.

>>36235366
Sex engenders the *risk* of pregnancy, however.
Just like jumping out of an airplane engenders the risk of falling to your death.
A skydiver might wear 2 parachutes, check all of his gear 5 times, etc. but his ass still signs a waiver when he jumps acknowledging there is a risk of death.
If he burns in no one is going to say
>"Who could have imagined that after jumping out of a plane he might fall to his death?!?!?!?!?!"
-Everyone above the age of 9 who isn't retarded knows where babies come from
-Claims that women can't be responsible for the natural consequences of their choice (like yours) are not just infantilizing women, they're insulting to anyone with enough education to read a comic book

>>36235741
>There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life.
That is also wrong

>>36235746
This

(Snap snap snap)

>>36235721
>category error

>>36235754
so you agree with>>36235391

>>36235796
No, fuckwit.
Like I said, that doesn't follow.
Do you need me to use single syllable words, or something?

>>36235746
No one tells the skydiver that has a parachute failure that he MUST now die. In fact everyone will try their best to rescue him.
Everyone thet goes out on the street is at the risk of getting murdered. Sex doesn't equal pregnancy any more than skydiving equals death and there is no reason to force anyont through the whole ordeal just because they chose to participate in either.
Women are responsible for their actions, this doesn't mean that they can't take measures to deal with unintended consequences of their actions as they see fit.

>>36235829
Killing germs on a kitchen counter with some bleach is totally beyond different than killing a fetus inside you. That's psycho that you think this way. You sound detached and dead inside.

>>36235829
so what moral imperative comes with recognizing something as life?

>>36235855
You said it good. Woman are responsible for their own actions.

Its just 9 most months, then they can give it away if they want. Many many woman have chosen to do that.

>>36235861
You are agreeing with me, retard.
saying
>therefore killing harmful bacteria through medication is as bad as murdering someone
is nonsensical.
That is what
>it doesn't follow
*means*
>fucking morons

>>36235887
>this doesn't mean that they can't take measures to deal with unintended consequences of their actions as they see fit.

>>36235895
Not when you are treating babies like those germs. Which you are. You that that those babies are no better than germs.

>>36235862
Have you ever been to a school? Don't they teach you ethics where you're from?
It depends upon what the living creature is.
Since humans are or have the potential to be moral actors they have an inherent dignity that separates them from other animals. Thus there is a moral imperative to treat living humans as ends in and of themselves, not means.

>>36235895
>>There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life.
>That is also wrong

>That is what
>>it doesn't follow
>*means*
which one is it now?

>>36235926
So therefore, there comes no moral imperative with simply recognizing something as life.

>>36235910
Unintended or not it still happened because of them. Like you said. They need to take responsibility.

>>36235954
Responsibility doesn't mean having to suffer arbitrary consequences that someone else came up with even though they aren't necessary.

If the argument is that a fetus isn't a person, then if a man punches a pregnant woman and causes a miscarry is he not charged as a murderer?

If the argument is body autonomy, then does D have the right to remove the sentient symbiote in his left hand even if it means killing it?

I'm for abortion as a practical necessary evil, but the way pro-choicers try to present as some moral good to have an abortion is sickening.

File: IMG_0305.jpg (44KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 420x420px

>fooling around with a whore who had an abortion
>get a whiff of her pussy
>say, "eww, what died in there?"

who /devilish/ here?

File: removing-treasure.jpg (98KB, 500x760px)

98KB, 500x760px

>>36235855
>No one tells the skydiver that has a parachute failure that he MUST now die.
What people *say* has absolutely nothing to do with the risks voluntarily accepted by the skydiver when he took all the steps required to jump.
>In fact everyone will try their best to rescue him
That is to avoid the death of a human, not to cause one.
>Everyone thet goes out on the street is at the risk of getting murdered
And? That is a passive risk as opposed to an active risk. A man going to the bank faces a passive risk of being held hostage. A man charging into a bank with a gun shouting he is robbing the place faces an active risk of being shot by a cop.
This is why some people believe abortion in the case of rape is morally acceptable - in the lack of consent the woman accepted no risk.
>Sex doesn't equal pregnancy any more than skydiving equals death
So you can't read?
Sex equals the RISK of pregnancy just as skydiving accepts the RISK of death.
>there is no reason to force anyont through the whole ordeal
That is not a logical conclusion. A skydiver is *morally culpable* for their own death, meaning the responsibility for their own death is accepted by them as a risk.
A woman and man who consent to sex are *morally culpable* for the responsibility of raising any child that results from pregnancy. They explicitly accepted this responsibility as they went through the steps required to have sex.
Don't like it?
Too fucking bad; that is how responsibility works.

>>36235923
You're confusing me with a different poster.

>>36235991
No one came up with carrying a baby for a few most moths as a punishment. They aren't putting her in prison for 9 months.....if she feels like carrying her baby is prison, well that says loads about her....naw I'm JP I understand it can feel like prison, but its NOT. Just carry it and give it away. It won't be hard to give away, Its just a fetus right?

>>36235927
try to keep up

>>36235942
Correct - the moral imperative is associated with *human* life.
>>36235926

>>36236010
Just fucking combine the two arguments, fuckwit.
It is bodily autonomy until the fetus gains sentience at which point it's rights are more important then the womans convenience and therefore abortion at that point shouldn't be legal. This is the way most reasonable people see the issue.

>>36235991
>arbitrary consequences
Do you know where babies come from?
Of course you do!
If you have sex pregnancy is not 'arbitrary', is it?
Of course not; it is the logical, natural consequence as proven by SCIENCE! of heterosexual intercourse.
If that surprises you, read a book

>>36236077
>until the fetus gains sentience
Magical thinking

>>36236026
>What people *say* has absolutely nothing to do with the risks
now you're just playing stupid, no one *forces* him to go through with the ordeal, no one thinks he *should* now die.
>A woman and man who consent to sex are *morally culpable* for the responsibility of raising any child that results from pregnancy
Nope, she is *morally culpable* for getting pregnant - all else is your retarded moralism and doesn't necessarily follow.
Don't like it?
Too fucking bad; that is how responsibility works.

>>36236077
Whoa whoa whoa. Please calm down. No need for name calling. Please act respectfull. we are just having a discussion here.

>>36236064
>>There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life.
>That is also wrong

>So therefore, there comes no moral imperative with simply recognizing something as life.
>Correct - the moral imperative is associated with *human* life.

>>36236077
so then we admit forcibly causing a miscarry isn't murder until a certain point in development?

>>36236096
The consequences are not necessary. It doesn't follow that just because someone's pregnant that they must now go through with it. Why not force them to raise the child til 18 years while you're at it?
It is an arbitrarily set standard of outwardly imposed consequences.

>>36236160
I would rather classify it as destruction of highly valuable property.

>>36236160
No its not murder legally only. It is killing though. Its like they get away with murder on a technicality.

>>36236191
Because after the child is born they have options like adoption.

>>36236225
And while pregnant they have options like abortion.

brain is completely formed and functional?-> human
brain isn't even formed, and the creature doesn't even have the most basic level of self awareness? -> not a human


there you have it, you're welcome op

>>36236125
>no one *forces* him to go through with the ordeal
Correct. That is why it is his responsibility. His survivors can't sue anyone because he is responsible
>no one thinks he *should* now die.
Here is the point - your argument for abortion boils down to 'an innocent third party (the child) *should* die because the parents refuse to accept the natural consequences of their action'.
You *are* demanding that someone die, someone who did NOT make a decision, and all so that a woman can avoid the natural consequences of her *freely chosen* action.
>she is *morally culpable* for getting pregnant
You act as if 'pregnancy' were a disease.
It isn't.
It is a living human. A human you want to kill.
>doesn't necessarily follow
You shouldn't try to use terms you don't grasp.

>>36236191
>It doesn't follow that just because someone's pregnant that they must now go through with it
It does because the only alternative is the purposeful ending of an innocent human life. You can't justify cold-blooded murder of a baby with 'but it is so inconvenient'.
Once the child is born there are ways of dodging responsibility that do NOT involve murder (i.e., adoption) so that is a different thing.

>>36236246
>"Or they could just murder an innocent child"
That is what you said.
That is what abortion is.
That's why you can't morally do it.
............
This isn't rocket surgery

>>36236246
That's killing though. We don't don't go around solving our problems by killing things. Not when there is another answer anon.
Imagine the world if we just killed our problems. We can't do that anon.

>>36236265
This is wrong on so many levels. Abortion deals with the termination of a developing human that, when left alone, will eventually become autonomous. To simply dismiss this is to be completely delusional.

>>36236265
>the creature doesn't even have the most basic level of self awareness? -> not a human
translation
>"I failed Biology!"

>>36236296
>an innocent third party (the child) *should* die because the parents refuse to accept the natural consequences of their action
you're deflecting. This is an argument completely separate from the one we're having, i.e. wether it is a child or whan it becomes one, or rather a person. I never saind anything regarding this topic.
>You shouldn't try to use terms you don't grasp.
It doesn't necessarily follow, and you know it, which is why you completely sidelined the original conversation since you have nothing to stand on.

>>36233566
>if you could somehow measure the capability of suffering in unborn children (which you probably can't)

but you can, actually, because, you know, there's no formed brain or nervous system, so basically it doesn't feel anything

>>36236365
Ending life (i.e. an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction), is by definition killing.
What point do you think you've just made?>>36236358
an innocent child, is it? is a zygote an innocent child?
There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life.

Funny how everyone sidelines the converesation when they've been btfo

>>36236412
So we can kill things as long as they don't feel a anything?
I can kill you with carbon dioxide gas when you sleep and its OK?

>>36236466
False equivalence. I'm already conscious and have a will to live.

File: 22928c0b0317d2048fbb7c5c44f66bb8.jpg (69KB, 960x720px)

69KB, 960x720px

i'd say that during the first three months it would be completely reasonable.

The brain isn't completely formed, and the fetus can barely react to stimuli at the same level of intellingence an insect would.

>>36233531
And abortion is them solving that problem, who cares if you believe a child dies in the event of an abortion? There are plenty of children outside of wombs being murdered or dying for a multitude of reasons. Solve those "problems" first.

Religious nonsense

>>36236489
Those are nice shoes.
you're also right

>>36236399
>you're deflecting.
False. I am pointing out that you are now discussing the skydiving analogy as if it were the main point.
>This is an argument completely separate from the one we're having, i.e. wether it is a child or whan it becomes one
I am not discussing any such thing because to claim a fetus is not a living human is ludicrous. By scientific definition a zygote is a living human.
Period.
To claim otherwise is to reject the scientific definition of both 'life' and 'human'.
>or rather a person
This is magical thinking. All attempts to define 'person' as separate form 'living human' boil down to just so stories that have no empirical basis, all designed to claim that human rights are not inherent in order to justify the killing of innocent humans for convenience.
>why you completely sidelined the original conversation
You may be confusing me with another poster

>>36236399
We aren't arguing that anon. WE all agree its a baby. It's only you who thinks its NOTHING.

You're too detached so you are just going by semantics

So if we accept the premise that early developing fetus aren't persons and aborting them isn't killing, then I have to ask regardless how can you see denying a thing its opportunity to be a person anything other than immoral?

>>36236437
>There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life.
unless that life is human
>>36235926
Humans are ends in and of themselves because they have the capacity for reason and to be moral actors.

>>36236485
There's no possible way you know that baby doesn't have a will to live. In fact it developing more and more each day proves otherwise.

>>36234606
There are humans who feel murder is okay. There are humans who still practice cannibalism in the world. You can't say humans as if we are all the same, what I think is morally okay vs a tribes member in Papa New Guinea will be different on a lot of levels.

Human emotion is on a scale, similarly to how the development of a fetus is on a scale. Before they are considered a human, eradicating it cannot be considered murder. It's just how the world is my friend.

>>36236510
No we can solve both at the same time. Why don't I wait till all the problems of the world are solved, then tackle this?

>>36234801
Same with the men who are wasting seed in these cum dumpsters. They are obviously not fit to raise children either. Sterilize the lot of them.

>>36236368
consider the following:
>a sperm has the potential to become a human

therefore, jacking off == genocide, right? right????

"X" having the potential to become "Y" doesnt automatically transform it into "Y" nor the right to be treated the same way

>>36236523
We talked about responsibility and you completely sidelined the conversation to "abortion is evil" and started just asserting things. You know you lost the whole responsibility debate.
You're making the same meaningless semantic slight of hand that OP made. I already had a discussion on that right here>>36233817
I have no interest in going over this again.

>>36236615
You are comparing tissue
>ejaculate
with a complete organism
>a human
stop that - it makes you look retarded

>>36236562
If it cannot even feel, let alone think, then it doesn't have a will to live.

>>36236597
But one hinders the other, having more un-wanted children will not decrease the rate of neglected and mistreated children. Before adequate facilities are prepared to look after the current unwanted child population we shouldn't be creating more for no reason other then "muh morals"

>>36236605
That argument doesn't work. Sperm by itself cannot make babies. Just like periods cannot.

>>36236660
That wasn't the point I was trying to make, if you believe women should be sterilized for poor mating choices then men should have it the same. If you as a man are making that poor of a choice then you should never be a father. Sterilize both parties and it helps stop the problem even quicker.

>>36236621
>You know you lost the whole responsibility debate.
Bullshit. Your only response was
>"b-b-but no one wants the skydiver to die!"
Men and women choose to have sex = they choose to accept the risk of creating new human life.
Done.
They are morally culpable for the new human life they just actively, voluntarily created.
there is no counter-argument, as you have clumsily proven. You are trying to say
>"but if we use abortion they can end the life!"
so I moved on.
You can't keep up with your own points?!

>>36236638
>impliying a fetus without a brain is different from a human tissue or organ.

>>36236645
But being responsible and not getting pregnant in the first place can help.

We can't kill babies because "we have no room" which we do. There are thousands on waiting list for babies.

>>36236678
That's another debate for another time.

>>36236682
fuck off
There comes no moral imperative with recognizing something as life. Having sex comes at the risk of getting pregnant. Going through with the pregnancy is a whole other story.
Of course, if a thinking, feeling third party is involved, the situation changes but that isn't the case for a long time.
The fact thay you have to misrepresent me so hard with these retarded strawman arguments just shows how little you have left to stand on. You lost dude.

>>36236699
Abortion can and does help as well. If your second sentence is implying the foster and adoption process in the USA is without problems then that's simply incorrect. There are thousands of good parents waiting for adopted children, but there are even more children in the world who are mistreated/abused/homeless/orphans/in awful foster homes that amass a much greater number.

>>36233782
>If you accept that human life is intrinsically valuable
It isn't. We place value on human life, because of the qualities possesed by humans, and for a more pragmatic reason, because it helps keep society stable.
A zygote or an embryo doesn't posses any of the valuable qualities of a human, only the potential to posses them in the future.
The only victims in a miscarriage are the parents and their relatives. The fetus simply lost its chance to exist. Much like the limitless number of people who never come into existence aren't victims.

>>36236733
Going by your logic we can throw new born babies in the trash too. Heck we can throw two year olds in there too. Who care they won't object.

>>36236774
Yep, more strawmen and misrepresentation. Fuck off, I'm done with your bullshit.

>>36236741
So....we should all just stop having children?

Another option is to keep the baby themselves.

>>36233165
For every abortion you stop, I'll have 10. You are making the world a worse place.

>>36236742
I see the value in those "useless zygots" they have great potential.

I hope one day you see it too.

>>36236898
You could potentially go impregnate a woman right now. Leading to a potential human being born in 9 months time. A lot of potential value, huh?

>>36236678
Men are already held accountable for poor mating choices.

>Man rapes
>get sterilized
>Man doesnt pay child support
>get thrown in prison
>man kills his child
>man goes to prison(life sentence guaranteed).

>woman rapes
>she dindu nuffin
>woman almost never has to pay child support because they get children,house, half a man shit by default.
>woman commits infanticide
>poor woman
>gets a light sentence

You faggot cucks are the ones who make women a protected class. Fucking normies get off my board.

>>36233504
>t. Brainlet that doesn't know about DNA

>>36236924
Yes. When you have a baby I hope you see the special potential in him/her. It's infinite anon.

>>36237018
Sentimental drivel.

>>36237048
Awwww anon.

You are a great guy. I'm sure your child will be great too.

File: 1490453818724.jpg (17KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 300x300px

>>36237140
As your disingenuous ass no longer have any argument to make, I shall cease communication.

>>36237167
No I really think that you are a good guy. I see your potential! You made good arguments here. You used science good in this conversation. I can see you are very logical.

>>36236638
you are comparing a clump of cells that cannot survive on its own
>a zygote
with a complete, autonomous organism
>a human
stop that - it makes you look retarded

:^)

File: You+doing+the+bait+gods+work+bro+_c3c9500ee5ff1b3ad249a14256b84a89.png (18KB, 325x167px)

18KB, 325x167px

>>36236895
>implying you could impregnate 10 women

>>36233165
>Abortion doesn't make you unpregnant. It makes you the parent of a dead child.
Strictly speaking he's right. The DNA of the fetus is already developed and different from the mothers, it is an offspring who's life has been prematurely ending.

>>36235165
Bullshit, human DNA is human DNA. You don't start becoming human at any stage, you are human from the start.
I swear it's like you don't understand basic biology.

>>36233737
No it doesn't, Sperm doesn't have a full set of DNA

>>36239659
>>36239334

Something as stupid as a single hair cell has a full set of human DNA with 46 chromosomes. Your logic is invalid. A cygote is not the same as a human being.

>>36239749
Its not invalid cause the Zygote has a different set of DNA than you do, making it another human being entirely.

do any of you understand that a cygote or embryo can be cultivated to produce a single human organ, and not a fullyfunctional human being? It doesn't necessarily have to become a human, and it certainly is no different from a clump of human cells, like your organs, your skin, your blood or even your hair and fingernails.

is a cell a child?

two cells?

four cells?

if you answer yes to any of these questions you should have been murdered in the womb.

>>36239843
>>36239838
Were you not a zygote yourself in your mothers womb?

>>36239791
>a clump of mixed human cells without a brain is the same as sentient human being because the dna is not the same as yours

first, what you say makes no sense at all, specially from a biological standpoint

second, according to your logic, the fetus of a human clone wouldn't be human(you know, same dna and shit), so killing it is alright then?

>>36239918
Alright, prove you were never a "clump of cells" once in your human life then?

>>36239869
i was also a sperm in my fathers balls. And before that, my father was a sperm on my grandpa's balls. What is your point?

>>36239869
no doubt I was, but I sure as hell wasn't conscious or human.

>>36239952
You were never sperm in your fathers balls cause sperm never had a full set of DNA.

>>36239950
I don't understand what that is meant to imply. Right now there could be food in your stomach, but that doesn't make it okay to eat shit because it was once a sandwich

File: 1464703829888.png (157KB, 409x409px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 409x409px

>>36239976
>food analogy

Please stop.

>>36239969
but that sperm had half my dna. The cygote that gave birth to me wouldn't have existed without thet sperm, in the same way i wouldn't have existed without that cygote.

The law of causality doesn't make a cygote equal to a human being.

File: Pepe-Finnish-Polititian.jpg (498KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

498KB, 800x1200px

>>36240003
not gonna happen, friendo

>>36240017
There is a radical difference, scientifically, between parts of a human being that only possess "human life" and a human embryo or human fetus that is an actual "human being." Abortion is the destruction of a human being. Destroying a human sperm or a human oocyte would not constitute abortion, since neither are human beings. The issue is not when does human life begin, but rather when does the life of every human being begin. A human kidney or liver, a human skin cell, a sperm or an oocyte all possess human life, but they are not human beings they are only parts of a human being. If a single sperm or a single oocyte were implanted into a womans uterus, they would not grow; they would simply disintegrate.

>>36240066
throwing the word "scientifically" into your post doesn't really fool anybody anon

the scientific community does not defend your point of view.

>>36239950
first, read this: >>36239952

second, your arguments still imply that killing a clone cygot is ok, because a clone has the same dna as the mother

>>36240100
first, read this >>36240066

Second, your argument implies that the mother was okay with being cloned in the first place.

>>36240087
Every embryologists in the scientific community will tell you the same thing.

>>36239659
so? Semen has enough carbon.

>>36240066

>A human kidney or liver, a human skin cell, a sperm or an oocyte all possess human life, but they are not human beings they are only parts of a human being. If a single sperm or a single oocyte were implanted into a womans uterus, they would not grow; they would simply disintegrate.

do you know how cloning is a thing?
do you have any idea how it works?

>>36240161
Do you have any idea what a human being is?

>>36240135
i read it, and it has zero scientific value, it is the same fucking argument all over again:
>muh zygote has full set of dna and can grow to be human

Also what does the mother consent have to do woth the value of that cygote's life? You are making no fuking sense at all.

>>36240196
yes, i have a much clearer idea than you. It is what's inside our brains that makes us human, not just a fucking strand of dna.

>>36240135
>Every embryologists in the scientific community will tell you the same thing.
that I believe
it just won't be what YOU'RE telling me.

>>36240233
>>36240233
>no scientific value

lol

Are you a embryologist? Biologist?

What are your credentials?

I can link thousands of articles that state the same thing by scientists who actually study the field of this.

>>36240268
so you literally believe retards and people with mental disorders are sub-human

>>36240295
retards and people with mental disorders at least have a functioning brain. A fucking cygote during it's first 2 months doesn't even have a brain to begin with.

File: 1490675835544.jpg (82KB, 717x617px)

82KB, 717x617px

>>36235531
i don't think moulder would appreciate that

it's not so much about running out of food as it is fucking up the atmosphere.

>>36240276
https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/kisc/kisc_01humanembryology.html
http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/07/debating-the-moral-statu.html
http://www.justfactsdaily.com/the-science-of-abortion-when-does-life-begin/

>>36240357
this

we raise and slaughter like a billion cows every day and nobody gives a fuck because they're not sentient. fetuses are even less so.

>>36239749
But you ignore the key fact that from this DNA a person springs.
If every strand of hair that fell from my head became a person I would treat it with more respect.

Why does it matter if we kill an unborn human? We kill plenty fully grown humans all the time

>>36240372
>when does life begin?
literally nobody has ever debated this
cells are alive

the question is when is it human.

>>36240394
Hey man that kid we killed could have been the guy to cure my mothers disease, and figure out ways to improve life everything, or he could've been a bum who shits all over my yard. We'd never know.

>>36240285
I can also link you thousands of articles by supposed "experts" that believe in creationism, or that claim the earth is flat.

I have enough understanding of biology to know mitosis, meiosis, fecundation and cloning works, and i am telling you the arguments you are presenting me are fucking retarded from a scientific point of view. Fuck off with that bullshit.

>>36240450
And a Embryo is another human being then.

>>36237246
>still no argument
Different anon here, you're a cuck

>>36240470
>cloning

Lol you're still going on about cloning. Its added nothing to your argument.

>>36233165
No one cares, faggot. Go cry about it somewhere else

>>36233504
quality b8 m8 oregano

the general consensus in philosophy is what makes a human a living thing is sensation and self-awareness. in laymens terms, it starts with the brain stem. a human adult that doesn't have a functional brain stem is inert, unmoving, unresponsive, and shows minimal activity on MRI scans. legally they're alive, but can be taken off of life support with consent of the family.

other than that it's magic hoodoo bullshit to say you care about the living soul of the half-formed vegetable, and you know it. you want to control the population, just say it. don't pussy foot around it, this is 4chan. the appeal to adorable slaughtered feti shouldn't move anyone here.

File: 1473432697001.jpg (34KB, 312x321px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 312x321px

>>36240591
>Philosophy

Not an argument

>>36240517
you missed the point then.

My point is to prove that the embryo having different/new dna or the same as the mother doesn't change it's value.

This completely refutes this argument: >>36239791

Congratulations on knocking down that man of straw OP.

The argument isn't that fetuses aren't human, it's that they aren't persons. For more on the concept of person vs human, go read a fucking book.

>>36233165
If the childlet isn't developed enough to feel pain who cares. It hurts no one.

Personally, who cares? Stem cell research is very valuable for people who are actually alive. If you wanna kill a kid before they reach 2 years in the name of science go ahead, no one on this board remembers when they were 2.

I understand not only that this is a very extreme perspective, but it is a heavily divided issue (I think nationally pro-choice leads by 1%) , so here's how you solve the issue: make it states rights. Everyone here wants to have their cake and eat it too, but why should you enforce the same beliefs on people that are from Alabama and California? Different cultures, let the people dictate how they view it.

>>36240628
A clone isn't another human being. Its a clone. It has the same DNA as you, same face, same everything. Its you. With a different perspective.

This has nothing to do with the embryo stage at all, as an embryo has different DNA than both parents.

>>36240614
main idea: the general consensus in philosophy is what makes a human a living thing is sensation and self-awareness.

evidence/analysis: in laymens terms, it starts with the brain stem. a human adult that doesn't have a functional brain stem is inert, unmoving, unresponsive, and shows minimal activity on MRI scans. legally they're alive, but can be taken off of life support with consent of the family.

conclusion: other than that it's magic hoodoo bullshit to say you care about the living soul of the half-formed vegetable, and you know it

it's a poorly cited argument, but it's still an argument. maybe it's time for your parents to remove your feeding tube.

>>36240719
an Embryo isn't a vegetable.

>>36240707
do you know hiw actual, real-life cloning works?
tip: they grow as embryos inside a female's womb.

>>36233565
>someone does something bad to you
>take out your frustration on an innocent, defenseless baby and kill it to make yourself feel better
Women are evil. The baby didn't do anything wrong, why should it have to die? How can you even justify that?

>>36233207
>>36233214
>Ok
>Sure
It's true though. It was set to have the potential to be alive and live a life and they cut it off. Abortion is wrong in most cases and is never a noble thing to fight for

>>36240958
So? Its not like it was due to natural reasons.

>>36241016
>get raped
>kill the rapist baby to stop his rapist caveman genes from further infecting the gene pool

i guess the concept of a noble sacrifice is foreign to you?

>>36241079
The baby didn't rape anyone, kill the rapist instead desu