Debate Android Raptor on the finer merits of 4th trimester abortions

[Larry Potterfield]

Found it by googling "AndroidRaptor ghinius" and by googling "AndroidRaptor Elizabeth" - her first name - and found out her birthday, and how and when her dad died. She is very oversharing on DeviantArt,

Huh, you're right. The dad post is right under the "I eat butts" post. I don't know how I missed that.

 

[Johan Schmidt]

Huh, you're right. The dad post is right under the "I eat butts" post. I don't know how I missed that.

The "I eat butts." post is very compelling.

 

[Disgruntled Pupper]

One of my main hobbies is debating abortion from a philosophical pro-life perspective on Disc and TikTok (no pred). Men frequently join in to say retarded things, without fail making the pro-life side look bad and derailing all the points I carefully set up. They have absolutely no empathy for the real people they're talking to and see it as a philosophical exercise. The men who do this almost without fail will argue "causal obligation" which essentially just boils down to, "Well you should've kept your legs closed!"

It's annoying and deeply retarded. I don't agree with the whole "no uterus, no opinion" thing, but wow I fucking hate those men.

You can find out what someone's true motivation is in the abortion debate by asking them if they, hypothetically, had a son who grew up and it turned out his liver was bad and he needed a new one or he would die, should the state be allowed to come in and forciblely take your liver- or any organ- if you didn't want to give it up. All of them, literally all of them, will say no, and when you ask why, when the son needs it for his RIGHT TO LIFE and you chose to SPREAD YOUR LEGS, they can't come up with a valid reason why. They'll insist it's diffrent but won't be able to explain why, or they'll say they would just give it voluntarily and ignore that other men may not want to. It all just goes back to being able to PUNISH THE SLUTS. Once again, the supposedly logical and superior sex will be perfectly happy with the whole host of well known and documented negative issues that come up when you ban abortion, as long as they can OWN THE WEMMINZ.

 

[Larry David's Opera Cape]

So the Raptor Rapture has finally arrived.

Heh heh heh heh heh...

 

[Hennessy Williams]

You can find out what someone's true motivation is in the abortion debate by asking them if they, hypothetically, had a son who grew up and it turned out his liver was bad and he needed a new one or he would die, should the state be allowed to come in and forciblely take your liver- or any organ- if you didn't want to give it up. All of them, literally all of them, will say no, and when you ask why, when the son needs it for his RIGHT TO LIFE and you chose to SPREAD YOUR LEGS, they can't come up with a valid reason why. They'll insist it's diffrent but won't be able to explain why, or they'll say they would just give it voluntarily and ignore that other men may not want to. It all just goes back to being able to PUNISH THE SLUTS. Once again, the supposedly logical and superior sex will be perfectly happy with the whole host of well known and documented negative issues that come up when you ban abortion, as long as they can OWN THE WEMMINZ.

I get this question a lot. It's essentially a modified version of Judith Jarvis Thompson's Violinist argument. The difference between me being obligated to give my womb to sustain a human fetus vs. being obligated to give my liver to my sick child is in the distinction between ordinary and extraordinary care. Ordinary care, as I'm using it, would be the necessary conditions for normal human development. We have an obligation to provide everyone in our society the ordinary means for development (water, food, baby formula or breast milk, shelter, etc...), but the only people who have an obligation to provide extraordinary care are health professionals who need to follow the Principle of Justice and Principle of Beneficence (basically distributing medical treatments in a responsible manner that balances available resources and wellbeing of the patient) in order to determine if and how this person gets a liver. We have an increased obligation to people who are vulnerable, like newborns, disabled people, and the elderly, because they have naturally are in a stage of life where they require increased assistance to meet the normal conditions for human development. However we do not have an inherent obligation to provide extraordinary care or do charitable acts.

Consider this hypothetical: You're driving through the forest at night after a brutal 12 hour shift and you see a very young child on the side of the road. The child is naked, alone, and looks emaciated. You live in the middle of nowhere and you know that nobody else will be driving down this road for at least a few hours. Are you obligated to help the child in any way?

You didn't cause it so there's no obligation that arose from your actions. You also have no established relation to this child. You REALLY don't want to stop, you're absolutely exhausted and you have a terrible migraine from your shift, any expectation that you help this child technically violates your ability to choose what you do with your body as you will have to endure pain to use your body for someone else's benefit since your Asprin is at home and helping the child will delay you.

Would you say one should help the child?

 

[Freya]

what obligation? This sounds like a rehash of "you had sex." Your argument depends on a bunch of hypotheticals and that being forced to use your own organs against your will is "ordinary". Why? Because it's just ordinary for some reason.

This is all I'll say on the matter but lol. lmao

 

[Bunny Tracks]

Would you say one should help the child?

Yes, because it's a literal fucking child alone, starving, and naked in the woods. You should pull over, talk to the kid to see what the hell is going on, call the cops, stay with the kid until they show up, and then let them take it from there.

Seriously, what kind of psychopathic, subhuman example is this? This is peak scrote mentality.

 

[Hennessy Williams]

what obligation? This sounds like a rehash of "you had sex." Your argument depends on a bunch of hypotheticals and that being forced to use your own organs against your will is "ordinary". Why? Because it's just ordinary for some reason.

This is all I'll say on the matter but lol. lmao

Yeah it doesn't rely on those hypotheticals, retard. Those are called reductios, they're mental exercises to demonstrate that killing babies is wrong, because apparently just saying that killing babies is wrong isn't good enough lmao.

The obligation has nothing to do with causation. It's ordinary because it's the necessary condition for any human development, ending another human's life or refusing to provide care to a person just because they're in a vulnerable stage of normal human development is absolutely abhorrent.

Also gross status. Stop sacrificing your babies to Baal and Moloch, witch.

 

[Hennessy Williams]

Yes, because it's a literal fucking child alone, starving, and naked in the woods. You should pull over, talk to the kid to see what the hell is going on, call the cops, stay with the kid until they show up, and then let them take it from there.

Seriously, what kind of psychopathic, subhuman example is this? This is peak scrote mentality.

Bitch, are you retarded? You just hit me with the, "But I did eat breakfast today!" It's a hypothetical that tests logic, its not supposed to be a realistic scenario. It shows you that even if you have no relation, no causal obligation, and you don't WANT to do it, you still have to.


I hope the actual scrotes aren't reading this because you're making us look developmentally delayed by not understanding the basic concept of a hypothetical. Most niggers can do better.

 

[Dyn]

Bitch, are you retarded? You just hit me with the, "But I did eat breakfast today!"

No she didn't. You laid out a hypothetical, and she clearly understood it as a hypothetical and responded to it as a hypothetical. She didn't say "But I didn't drive past any scared naked children in the woods today".

The problem is your hypothetical is just plain bad, because feeling morally obligated to pull over and check if somebody is in distress is not remotely close to feeling morally obligated to house and feed them for nine months as a primary caretaker. If you're trying to reduce it to 'we all have a moral responsibility to help anyone in need', you need to explain why your own house isn't full of mentally ill homeless drug addicts you're feeding and taking care of.

 

[Hennessy Williams]

No she didn't. You laid out a hypothetical, and she clearly understood it as a hypothetical and responded to it as a hypothetical. She didn't say "But I didn't drive past any scared naked children in the woods today".

The problem is your hypothetical is just plain bad, because feeling morally obligated to pull over and check if somebody is in distress is not remotely close to feeling morally obligated to house and feed them for nine months as a primary caretaker. If you're trying to reduce it to 'we all have a moral responsibility to help anyone in need', you need to explain why your own house isn't full of mentally ill homeless drug addicts you're feeding and taking care of.

If I was the only person who could provide them care, then I would take them into my home. However adult homeless people CAN provide for themselves and we have a societal system based on the protection of vulnerable citizens that is additionally obligated to care for them.

And no, she didn't engage because it's not logically consistent in the slightest. Saying something retarded like "oh it's not 100% analogous" isn't the defeater you pagan niggers think it is. NOTHING is 100% analogous to pregnancy, that's not the ethical principle being tested here.

Nothing worse than a pro-choice scrote, it truly disgusts me. If you want to be able to pump and dump without consequence then do it in a faggot, since you seem to think that personal liberty is more important than actual morality.

 

[Freya]

Yeah it doesn't rely on those hypotheticals, retard. Those are called reductios, they're mental exercises to demonstrate that killing babies is wrong, because apparently just saying that killing babies is wrong isn't good enough lmao.

The obligation has nothing to do with causation. It's ordinary because it's the necessary condition for any human development, ending another human's life or refusing to provide care to a person just because they're in a vulnerable stage of normal human development is absolutely abhorrent.

Also gross status. Stop sacrificing your babies to Baal and Moloch, witch.

well you showed your true colors pretty quick. back to /pol/ with you

 

[Nonconsentual Pronouns]

@Hennessy Williams Why is this happening outside of the however many abortion debate threads there are to contain this madness? This is probably the last place on the entire website to be arguing for women to have less legal bodily autonomy than literal corpses, anyway. Like damn, use your time to volunteer for or foster kids who were only born because their mothers were stopped from getting abortions if it matters that much to you like it does to all of the scrotes who hate single mothers, hate "frigid bitches", hate abortion, hate contraception, etc.

With the millions of hispanics crossing the border expect catcalling to seriously pick up in frequency

This shit is not to be underestimated when it comes to the influx of brown men into the west. This shit right here is why women need to beat out the men in the racism department in stead of being turned into streetshitter/nigger/spic/goatfucker handmaids.

 

[Dyn]

If I was the only person who could provide them care, then I would take them into my home.

That's very kind of you. I sure wouldn't. I'd lock my door and let them die in the fucking street, and pretty much anybody who was being honest would either say the same thing, or they'd already have a house full of refugees and foster children they're looking after because they're such amazingly generous people.

Nothing worse than a pro-choice scrote, it truly disgusts me.

That's okay, I've never been particularly concerned with the opinion of hops who act like they just discovered the wikipedia article on 'logical fallacies', so we can just agree to disagree.

 

[Vibromatic Heart Bed]

Yeah it doesn't rely on those hypotheticals, retard. Those are called reductios, they're mental exercises to demonstrate that killing babies is wrong, because apparently just saying that killing babies is wrong isn't good enough lmao.

The obligation has nothing to do with causation. It's ordinary because it's the necessary condition for any human development, ending another human's life or refusing to provide care to a person just because they're in a vulnerable stage of normal human development is absolutely abhorrent.

Also gross status. Stop sacrificing your babies to Baal and Moloch, witch.

I wish people on both sides of the debate would stop with the retarded analogies and "mental exercises".

Forced pregnancy is a unique and terrifying experience for which there exists no comparisons. It is a nuanced issue, you can't just simplify/boil abortion down to "KiLLiNg bAbiEs". That's retarded.

An embryo is not a baby. An embryo is not analogous to a child freezing on the side of the road. They are not the same. One is a proto-human with zero sentience, the other is a born human with thoughts and the capability to suffer. If you believe they're the same, that is your belief, don't force that shit on me.

Experiencing a migraine and delaying my trip home after a 12 hour shift is not analogous to pregnancy. Here I remind you that pregnancy is a life-threatening medical condition, with complications including (but not limited to) eclampsia, stroke, heart failure, hemorrhage, embolism, post-partum psychosis, infection, and DEATH. Literal death. A migraine isn't going to kill me. (your retarded analogy might, though)

You don't get to force people to put their lives at risk. You need people's ongoing consent to use their bodies. When you force people to submit their bodies, you are no better than a rapist.

Begone, handmaiden.

(Sorry to derail the thread, back to man-hating)

 

[Hennessy Williams]

well you showed your true colors pretty quick. back to /pol/ with you

True colors like moral integrity and not ending the life of innocent human beings?

 

[Hennessy Williams]

@Hennessy Williams Why is this happening outside of the however many abortion debate threads there are to contain this madness? This is probably the last place on the entire website to be arguing for women to have less legal bodily autonomy than literal corpses, anyway. Like damn, use your time to volunteer for or foster kids who were only born because their mothers were stopped from getting abortions if it matters that much to you like it does to all of the scrotes who hate single mothers, hate "frigid bitches", hate abortion, hate contraception, etc.


This shit is not to be underestimated when it comes to the influx of brown men into the west. This shit right here is why women need to beat out the men in the racism department in stead of being turned into streetshitter/nigger/spic/goatfucker handmaids.

My entire employment is pro-life work, pre and post natal lmao.

Don't project sloth onto me just because you don't do shit for movements that you care about, such as the slaughter of innocent human beings in the womb.

 

[fake farts]

I think the poster is a woman. she seems to just be a very strange person

Probably. Being a trad whore performing for cumbrained conservatard scrotes brings out their moid-like tendencies though. Truly, the biggest group of Women with penis envy.

 

[Hennessy Williams]

That's very kind of you. I sure wouldn't. I'd lock my door and let them die in the fucking street, and pretty much anybody who was being honest would either say the same thing, or they'd already have a house full of refugees and foster children they're looking after because they're such amazingly generous people.

That's okay, I've never been particularly concerned with the opinion of hops who act like they just discovered the wikipedia article on 'logical fallacies', so we can just agree to disagree.

Hey faggot check this out:




Oh no! What would I do without being able to do this to my own child??? Mah raights!!

 

[Dyn]

Hey faggot check this out:

You might see a dead baby, but the only thing I see is how dumb and mad you are rn.