The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

Worship is a strong word, especially considering that a person is a grifter but it's nice not to be treated like cattle but a human every now and then. That's how grifters keep their grift - they make people like them.
Correct, gullible people like you. Although most don't have such a short temper like you
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: SSj_Ness (Yiffed)
Correct, gullible people like you. Although most don't have such a short temper like you
Professional grifters make a living recognizing people they intend to con and to be a successful grifter, one needs to be very charming and learn to read a room.

If you think that one has to be unintelligent to be grifted, well...
 
Professional grifters make a living recognizing people they intend to con and to be a successful grifter, one needs to be very charming and learn to read a room.

If you think that one has to be unintelligent to be grifted, well...
I see you are unaware of the (lack of) intelligence of your typical Trump supporter

Trump's not even that charismatic, he just says the shit that certain people wish they could say
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: SSj_Ness (Yiffed)
I see you are unaware of the (lack of) intelligence of your typical Trump supporter
It's always nice to see someone who generalizes without nuance. Would you like to talk about how Trump has a grip on your life after he has left office?

Trump's not even that charismatic, he just says the shit that certain people wish they could say
You definitely don't get to say who's a grifter and who isn't then, since you fail to recognize what made Trump appeal to people who voted for him.
 
Every other woman that's expressed themselves as pro-choice here is also sex positive, but I don't suggest that they're also men.

It's literally just you.

In the entire site.
You're still not getting nudes from me. Seethe.

You're creepily obsessed with women's bodies. Every times there's a thread on abortion or a woman getting in trouble for being scantily clad, you're always there to put in your autistic two cents. You are the problem here. Not me.

This paper seems to suggest major flaws with that study:
The author of that study is a pro-life extremist whose work has come into question multiple times.
By the way, it may be best to try to link directly to research articles rather than news articles.
The link to the study was in the article.
This is called utilitarianism.

Don't do it.
Answer the question. Why do you believe that rape victims deserve to suffer?
 
You're still not getting nudes from me.
Nobody said anything about wanting to see your dick.

You're creepily obsessed with women's bodies. Every times there's a thread on abortion or a woman getting in trouble for being scantily clad, you're always there to put in your autistic two cents.
Maybe this would matter if these were the only topics I commented on, or if you bothered to describe the extent of said contributions. As it stands, you're only continuing to call me a big doo-doo head obliquely.

Answer the question. Have you stopped beating your buck?
Similar energy.
 
Last edited:
Nobody is going to see any dick, because I don't have one and I never did.

You could possibly get laid if you spent less time on this autism. Don't you have a hobby? Why can't you just admit that you're wrong?
Answer the question. Why do you believe that unborn babies deserve to die?
I believe that a woman's bodily autonomy is more important than the non-existent rights of a non-sentient blob of cells that can't even feel pain. And rape victims shouldn't have to suffer through prwgnancy, labor, and the recovery period for the sake of a monster's spawn. Her well-being is more important.
 
Nobody is going to see any dick, because I don't have one and I never did.
I'm not taking your word for it.

You could possibly get laid if you spent less time on this autism.
Only an incel would hyperfixate on "getting laid" while talking to a person who's already explained why he's deliberately not having sex until he's married.

The pipeline goes [simp --> incel --> troon]. Be careful.
 
While the author of the article I linked to does seem to be biased, the same could probably be said about your the authors of your study. With that said, if what he said is true about your study, that could be a problem for its accuracy. If there are flaws in a study, that can be a problem regardless of any bias of the one pointing it out. Not to mention, from an intuitive standpoint, 99% seems suspiciously high. Actually, looking at the site the news article links to, the percentage reported by the study may actually be 95%, not 99%.

As far as the link being in the article, I would say it's still good to be as direct as possible, although it looks like it's not a link to any journal article, but to a page discussing the study with a bibliography, which appears to include the papers generated from this study. The apparent inaccuracy in the news article's reporting of percentages, would be an example of a reason to link to articles themselves. Some studies may be difficult to understand, but maybe abstracts would be sufficient in some of those cases.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SSj_Ness (Yiffed)
I'm not taking your word for it.


Only an incel would hyperfixate on "getting laid" while talking to a person who's already explained why he's deliberately not having sex until he's married.

The pipeline goes [simp --> incel --> troon]. Be careful.
New flash: women make fun of incels and virgins like yourself too.

Seriously, how have you not necked yourself yet? Your entire life revolves around this forum.

Unborn babies can arguably feel pain from 12 weeks onwards, and can definitely feel pain from 20 weeks onwards. Do you only support abortion in the first trimester?
Wrong. Facts over feels.

While the author of the article I linked to does seem to be biased, the same could probably be said about your the authors of your study. With that said, if what he said is true about your study, that could be a problem for its accuracy. If there are flaws in a study, that can be a problem regardless of any bias of the one pointing it out. Not to mention, from an intuitive standpoint, 99% seems suspiciously high. Actually, looking at the site the news article links to, the percentage reported by the study may actually be 95%, not 99%.

As far as the link being in the article, I would say it's still good to be as direct as possible, although it looks like it's not a link to any journal article, but to a page discussing the study with a bibliography, which appears to include the papers generated from this study. The apparent inaccuracy in the news article's reporting of percentages, would be an example of a reason to link to articles themselves. Some studies may be difficult to understand, but maybe abstracts would be sufficient in some of those cases.
Science trumps religion. Therefore, the study I linked to is more reliable. The author of your study uses his Catholicism to justify what he wrote.
 
This thread should be renamed from "The Abortion Debate" to "@Muh Vagina's Gender Debate - With Abortion."

1628565358158.png
 
It does not matter if they're the same or not, and I never claimed that they were regardless. Those are just different stages of human development, simple as that. A toddler isn't a teenager just like a zygote isn't an embryo. These are just labels for periods of human development, none of which are appropriate for killing.

Don't project your ignorance and emotional instability onto me, bro. It's bad enough that you support infanticide, don't also be an uncivilized brat. Guess that's expecting too much from your kind though.
Supporting abortion doesn't equal infanticide. Could you be a more bleeding vagina? I happen to support both feticide and infanticide but I don't represent the average pro-choicer who almost always believe once the baby is born it's life should be protected.
 
Get rid of abortion and get ready for all the unwanted babies growing up and becoming criminals. Abortion is necessary especially for the poor who tend to make poor decisions and have unprotected sex and get pregnant like 15 times in their lives. They use their excess amount of kids to soak up more welfare and then neglect their kids, creating kids who will grow up to be nothing more than petty thieves and scum. If you legalize abortion, that poor mother can at least fix her problem of being pregnant while not being able to afford such a financial obligation.
 
Supporting abortion doesn't equal infanticide. Could you be a more bleeding vagina? I happen to support both feticide and infanticide but I don't represent the average pro-choicer who almost always believe once the baby is born it's life should be protected.
It's a false distinction, eat shit faggot.
 
Get rid of abortion and get ready for all the unwanted babies growing up and becoming criminals. Abortion is necessary especially for the poor who tend to make poor decisions and have unprotected sex and get pregnant like 15 times in their lives. They use their excess amount of kids to soak up more welfare and then neglect their kids, creating kids who will grow up to be nothing more than petty thieves and scum. If you legalize abortion, that poor mother can at least fix her problem of being pregnant while not being able to afford such a financial obligation.
This from the freakonomics guys. It only holds true due to abortion being much more common anong black women and guess what black crime rate is like?

Also the idea that they'll have kids to soak up welfare.... why would they have an abortion if that is their goal?

...and legalize abortion? Where do you live that it isn't legal?
 
Back