The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

FEETLOAF said:
I ignore them because they should be ignored.
Click to expand...
In which case, you're only interested in morality theory rather than its application, which renders any moral stance you profess at the apex of uselessness. You make proclamations while actively avoiding discussing their implications and practical consequences, as if people aren't actually living these experiences.

FEETLOAF said:
Yes, because he has not murdered anyone.
Click to expand...
In this scenario, he consigned both wife and child to death despite the fact that he had the means to at least save the wife. Whereas the child is his responsibility on account of him being responsible for his conception as well as him being his flesh and blood, the wife is also necessarily his responsibility on account of his marriage to her and his position in the household. This clearly isn't an ideal situation at all, and either way, there's blood on his hands (well, both husband's and wife's), but would you suggest that failing in responsibility to both wife and child is substantially better than failing in responsibility to only the child?
Muh Vagina said:
Stem cell research saves lives.
Click to expand...
Not if it comes at the cost of destroyed embryos, obviously. Of course, this is ostensibly not a problem since stem cells supposedly are harvested from after-birth products such as the umbilical cord, and there's research being done to synthesize stem cells in order to evade the ethical issues altogether.

Muh Vagina said:
You're not "pro-life".
Click to expand...
You're not "pro-choice".
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: Lemmingwise, Muh Vagina, Admiral Mantoid and 2 others
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Marchesa of the Vast, Caecia, Agent Abe Caprine and 7 others
Zero Day Defense said:
In which case, you're only interested in morality theory rather than its application, which renders any moral stance you profess at the apex of uselessness. You make proclamations while actively avoiding discussing their implications and practical consequences, as if people aren't actually living these experiences.
Click to expand...
I just told you the practical application: Don't murder your baby.
Zero Day Defense said:
and either way, there's blood on his hands
Click to expand...
Incorrect.
 
Zero Day Defense said:
Not if it comes at the cost of destroyed embryos, obviously. Of course, this is ostensibly not a problem since stem cells supposedly are harvested from after-birth products such as the umbilical cord, and there's research being done to synthesize stem cells in order to evade the ethical issues altogether.
Click to expand...
Cancer patients are more important than embryos. Especially embryos that won't be used.
Zero Day Defense said:
You're not "pro-choice".
Click to expand...
Blobs of cells don't have rights. Deal with it.
Prester John said:
Embryonic stem cells cause tumors called teratomas. Other types of stem cells, such as placental stem cells, show medical promise without forming teratomas and without being harvested from embryos.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5822788/
Click to expand...
The benefits of embryonic stem cells still outweigh the risks.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
  • Disagree
Reactions: Luna Lilo, FEETLOAF and Prester John
Zero Day Defense said:
Obviously not what I meant.
Click to expand...
What did you mean? I am very interested in the practical application of morality, but that practical application should ignore any sort of utilitarianism or pragmatism. Don't murder your baby, no excuses, no exceptions, do not pass go, do not collect 200$.
Muh Vagina said:
Cancer patients are more important than embryos.
Click to expand...
No one is more important than anyone else.
 
Muh Vagina said:
Stem cell research saves lives. Why would you be against that? You're not "pro-life".
Click to expand...
Making non-medical late abortions illegal is a choice. Why would you be against that? You're not "pro-choice".

Yinci said:
The Debate of Abortion is between the Christians and everyone else. Abortion is a example of the divide between the religious Right Wing and the non Religious right wing. In Poland the clergy took controll of the state is is forcing polices like banning Abortion that we debate in the United States.
Click to expand...
If that were the case, these maps would look more like each other:

Abortion_Laws.svg.png
legal.PNG


religion2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Feels
  • Dislike
  • Like
Reactions: Fentanyl Floyd, Muh Vagina, Marshal Mannerheim and 2 others
Prester John said:
I see lots of benefits listed in the "pros" list for adult and induced pluripotent stem cells that are not embryonic stem cells. I see embryonic stem cells listed quite a bit in the "cons" list.
Click to expand...
The cons for adult stem cells seem to be that they're harder to produce and probably more expensive because of it. The cons for embryonic baby stem cells are definitely more in the "can kill you horribly" area of disadvantage. That and the baby-murder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zero Day Defense, Fustrated, Prester John and 1 other person
Marshal Mannerheim said:
Evil may never be done so that good results from it.
Click to expand...
You people make me want to stack Evil on Top of Evil because it's not evil to me. I feel like god officially hates me. Starting to make sense now. He can't stop the evolution of his subjects.
 
FEETLOAF said:
No.
Click to expand...
Totally starting to trail off here but I was thinking that things like Rent and Food prices play into the well being of individuals overall. For me I would advocate a intervention into the market to modify to uplift the health of the People. Assuming with your no you believe that meddling with commodity affordability would be worse? I don't want to live in a rented cage like people do in Hong Kong.
 
Yinci said:
You people make me want to stack Evil on Top of Evil because it's not evil to me. I feel like god officially hates me. Starting to make sense now. He can't stop the evolution of his subjects.
Click to expand...

If I go to saudi arabia, they consider things evil that I think are not. I might not participate in considering some things evil. But then why would I start to do other evils on top of that, evils that I agree are evil? Wouldn't that be an unnecessarily spiteful and childish response? That's how it seems to me.
 
Lemmingwise said:
If I go to saudi arabia, they consider things evil that I think are not. I might not participate in considering some things evil. But then why would I start to do other evils on top of that, evils that I agree are evil? Wouldn't that be an unnecessarily spiteful and childish response? That's how it seems to me.
Click to expand...

Bitch I am going to be using stem-cells to warp the temple of God into a lovecraftian monster. You will call me the Devil!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back