The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[Android raptor]

Here’s something a little philosophical to veer from the pro-life/pro-choice topic:

In terms of quality of life, the viability of the fetus, and what deformity the fetus has, where do we draw the line? At what point do we consider something is a form of eugenics?
We have places like Norway that allow women to abort if their future child is determined to have Downs Syndrome.
That being said I do think it’s up to the parents to decide whether to keep their potato or not. But they really have to consider the child’s quality of life in the long run.

I think for me it would be the likely prognosis of the condition plus the care the parents will provide to the kids. I've said before that I'm not a huge fan of aborting for downs but I think it's much better than the alternative of downs kids being born into situations where they aren't wanted and will probably be mistreated. Due to powerlevel reasons I'm always going to favor the option that prevents a disabled kid from being potentially abused above all else.

In terms of just the condition itself, I think it probably depends on a case by case basis. But if you've recieved a diagnosis that more than likely the kid will live a very short life of non-stop medical crisis, if it's born alive at all I don't abortion is eugenics so much as just preventing unnecessary suffering. Similar to Israel keeping record of Tay-Sachs carriers so potential parents can take steps to prevent kids with Tay-Sachs from existing. Whether it's technically eugenics or not, Tay-Sachs is one of those nightmare fuel, 100% fatal horrific conditions that I think it's ok to prevent.

 

[MirnaMinkoff]

To me, forced abortion is the REAL definition of "anti-choice."

Women who would be willing to abort a disabled children would also be more likely to do screenings for defects IMNSHO. My own personal experience is that the pregnancies that lead to severely disabled babies also frequently cause serious complications in the mother, and that might be the main reason why they might choose an early induction, and no treatment beyond comfort care if the baby is born alive.

I have also read, and mentioned elsewhere in this thread, that by many accounts, children with Down Syndrome are almost nonexistent in Iceland, which makes me wonder if the parents really did choose not to have them, or were coerced into it or the babies were not cared for after birth.

There’s lots of stories on it.

"What kind of society do you want to live in?": Inside the country where Down syndrome is disappearing

Iceland has almost eliminated Down syndrome by aborting virtually 100 percent of fetuses that test positive.

www.cbsnews.com

The tests are totally optional as is choosing to terminate if you have the tests that reveal DS. I’ve visited Iceland, the people tend to be very practical, aren’t sentimental, nor do they tend to be religious. They tend to be educated and that could certainly effect their views on having a child with severe intellectual deficits. They have like one jail with less than a 100 inmates in the entire country. It’s a very progressive society and abortion does not have the stigma there that it does in countries like the USA.

 

[GenociderSyo]

You’re allowed to abort Downs Syndrome babies in the USA too?

This is due to the main Down Syndrome Foundation:
Some states have tried to ban abortions of it and passed bills.

ACLU News & Commentary

The latest in the fight for our civil liberties.

www.aclu.org

They also tried to get it federally banned:
"The bills would ban doctors from “knowingly perform[ing] an abortion being sought because the baby has or may have Down syndrome,” according to a press release on Inhofe’s website. Physicians could face a fine and/or up to five years in prison if they perform an abortion knowing that the reason is based on a test result or prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome.


The bills also state that “if the doctor does not know whether Down syndrome is a contributing factor,” the doctor must first ask a pregnant person if they are “aware of any test results indicating that the child has Down syndrome,” and then inform them of the ban. If a doctor fails to do so before performing an abortion, they would also face a fine and/or up to five years in prison."

 

[Bad Take Crucifier]

State-mandated tard babies

 

[MirnaMinkoff]

This is due to the main Down Syndrome Foundation:
Some states have tried to ban abortions of it and passed bills.

ACLU News & Commentary

The latest in the fight for our civil liberties.

www.aclu.org

They also tried to get it federally banned:
"The bills would ban doctors from “knowingly perform[ing] an abortion being sought because the baby has or may have Down syndrome,” according to a press release on Inhofe’s website. Physicians could face a fine and/or up to five years in prison if they perform an abortion knowing that the reason is based on a test result or prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome.


The bills also state that “if the doctor does not know whether Down syndrome is a contributing factor,” the doctor must first ask a pregnant person if they are “aware of any test results indicating that the child has Down syndrome,” and then inform them of the ban. If a doctor fails to do so before performing an abortion, they would also face a fine and/or up to five years in prison."

Yes, I recall these. They were just awful PR stunts when it came down to it - just empty pandering to the pro-life base without any real teeth or enforcement.

 

[Megatardingo]

Especially because it's autistic and stupid.

Autism is the real meaning of life, we've finally got the answer we were looking for.

 

[Lemmingwise]

Fair enough. I apologise for misrepresenting you

Why? She's misrepresenting what went on there herself. Her supposed "effort post" was a two-line post. I did not post in all caps, as you can see. Just a bit of sarcasm.

Why apologise to someone who is misrepresenting what went on to such a degree?

Trying to find common ground or being concillatory is one thing, and commendable, but giving in to this degree is just being a doormat.

It's a very american thing; the closeted homosexual hater.

It's a meme, mostly started by the "american beauty" movie. It's a completely exaggerated phenomenon and a way for people to use the proverbial "faggot" insult in a dishonest way, despite supposedly being pro-homosexual. It's the same way people in this thread try to use "incel" as a way to derail discussion.

The way gay lobby used internetbombing using the politician name "Santorum" and calling it the lube and shit mixture you get from anal sex, so that when you google for it, that's the explanation you get.

So the closeted homosexual hater isn't an american thing, but to claim someone is, is an american meme. Even in this thread it's a self-described "fag" who did it, which is hardly surprising.

They just want a way to hate on women and gays but in a "legitimate" way

If you can't dispute the legitimate points, it means that some negative judgement is justified.

 

[Muh Vagina]

what if instead of murdering your baby you just went to church

I don't believe in your magical sky man.

It's murder and your attempts to deflect from that central issue are sad.

We've gone over this a million times. It's not murder.

 

[FEETLOAF]

We've gone over this a million times. It's not murder.

Yes it is.

I don't believe in your magical sky man.

Doesn't matter.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

what if instead of murdering your baby you just went to church

Have you ever touched a vagina before?

 

[FEETLOAF]

Have you ever touched a vagina before?

Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

 

[Freya]

Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

>doesn't deny it

 

[FEETLOAF]

>doesn't deny it

Why would i take a troll seriously and actually answer his question?
What possible reason is there to do so? He's not even fun like the other retards here. It's just one note over and over again, and no one laughs.

 

[Vulva Gape]

Prolifers put the fetus' right to life over the woman's right to choose.

Before the third trimester, as the vast majority of abortions are done, the fetus is 100% dependent on the woman. Without the womb, it would die. Therefore, society has a greater responsibility to the needs of the woman.

I pointed out the inconsistency of labeling abortion as murder (law definitions aside) a few pages ago and I did not see a rebuttal.

Is taking a terminally ill patient off life support murder? In both scenarios, the body is completely dependent for survival on something else. That is, physically removed from these things, death would occur. If abortion before the third trimester is murder, how is this scenario different?

 

[Johan Schmidt]

Prolifers put the fetus' right to life over the woman's right to choose.

Before the third trimester, as the vast majority of abortions are done, the fetus is 100% dependent on the woman. Without the womb, it would die. Therefore, society has a greater responsibility to the needs of the woman.

I pointed out the inconsistency of labeling abortion as murder (law definitions aside) a few pages ago and I did not see a rebuttal.

Is taking a terminally ill patient off life support murder? In both scenarios, the body is completely dependent for survival on something else. That is, physically removed from these things, death would occur. If abortion before the third trimester is murder, how is this scenario different?

The difference is potentiality of life. The baby is growing into a being that is no longer dependent on the mother for immediate survival. A zygote is a completely different individual 'under construction' the moment the sperm enters the egg. A person on life support for a terminal illness, barring a miracle will die. You remove the life support for ethical reasons as well, you don't just do it because it's convenient. The persons quality of life can be non existent (as in they are brain dead), or they could be in extreme pain. These cases are incredibly tough for doctors and family members as well.

I've had to watch doctors explain the same thing, fifty, or a hundred times over only to be told they're lying pieces of shit and they want to - for some reason - murder the persons loved one; and that the loved one would be getting back up any day now after a four month coma.

If we knew for a fact that the patient on life support would - in a few months - spring back up right as rain and be cured, then turning off his plug would be murder. The two instances are wholly incomparable. If an ongoing pregnancy had an extremely low chance of success and if it did succeed then the mother would die, then by not aborting you are murdering the mother. The issue of patient life support is extremely complicated, I'd say far more so than abortion actually. There's ethics of triage, of hospital space, of deserved'ness, of chances of recovery, of qol after recovery. Removing a patient from life support is never done lightly by any doctor, and is never easy on the family when it happens.

 

[Johan Schmidt]

Why? She's misrepresenting what went on there herself. Her supposed "effort post" was a two-line post. I did not post in all caps, as you can see. Just a bit of sarcasm.

Why apologise to someone who is misrepresenting what went on to such a degree?

Trying to find common ground or being concillatory is one thing, and commendable, but giving in to this degree is just being a doormat.



It's a meme, mostly started by the "american beauty" movie. It's a completely exaggerated phenomenon and a way for people to use the proverbial "faggot" insult in a dishonest way, despite supposedly being pro-homosexual. It's the same way people in this thread try to use "incel" as a way to derail discussion.

The way gay lobby used internetbombing using the politician name "Santorum" and calling it the lube and shit mixture you get from anal sex, so that when you google for it, that's the explanation you get.

So the closeted homosexual hater isn't an american thing, but to claim someone is, is an american meme. Even in this thread it's a self-described "fag" who did it, which is hardly surprising.



If you can't dispute the legitimate points, it means that some negative judgement is justified.

Being charitable it could be seen that you were baiting her. I also think she was being shitposty. I was getting her and android mixed up in my head.

As for the gay thing; the more you know. And gross.

 

[Vulva Gape]

You remove the life support for ethical reasons as well, you don't just do it because it's convenient.

This is literally what prochoicers believe about abortion. Nobody's aborting for fun. It's the ethical thing to do in the case where the pregnancy is unwanted and supporting the child is not an option.

 

[Johan Schmidt]

This is literally what prochoicers believe about abortion. Nobody's aborting for fun. It's the ethical thing to do in the case where the pregnancy is unwanted and supporting the child is not an option.

I agree. I did a big sperg post back about it if you wanna read my opinion on that. It's in the highlights for some reason.

I was saying that your comparison was absurd. The terminal patient has next to no potentiality to life, whereas the fetus does. That's the difference between them; the fetus is building up an independent life, the terminal patient is not.

I don't think that anyone here actually thinks that the average woman is just hopping into clinics and cackling while she hoovers out a baby; but - no offence - have you been reading this thread? It has literally been nothing but sex based insults, people cackling about how much they fantasize about killing babies and then trying to claim the moral highground.

Abortion is a very complex topic, and most people are probably not comfortable with the idea of ending a babies life; but you wouldn't know it from this thread in particular. It being 'ethical but terrible' is not what the prolifers in this thread are talking about. You can't on the one hand go 'The prolifers just want the freedom to make a terrible but needed choice' and then on the other hand have people talking about if they had kids they'd like to drown them and they love dreaming about aborting babies.

 

[Vulva Gape]

I agree. I did a big sperg post back about it if you wanna read my opinion on that. It's in the highlights for some reason.

I did read that post. I actually agree with you. In my utopia abortion would be unneccessary because men and women would act in a way that respects life. But unfortunately our world will probably never achieve that, and therefore banning abortion only would result in domestic violence, decrease in gender equality, more single moms, and women dying out of desperation. That's why I defend the right to choose for women, because banning it won't fix these core societal issues, only move the harm elsewhere.

I also think that sex-based arguments are hypocritical. It takes two to tango. No woman is getting pregnant all by herself. The failure of men to take any of the blame of abortion onto themselves (and men being left out in pro-life arguments) implies that it's all a woman's fault for choosing.

I guess you could call me pro-life in theory but pro-choice in reality. But you will never see me protesting in front of Planned Parenthood yelling at women who have had to make this terrible decision because it was neccessary for reasons I wouldn't understand. Pro-lifers seem to put majority of the blame on women, and this is why I will never align with them.

 

[Rabidcolombian]

You know what’s actually not “hard to get”? The fact that what someone chooses to do with their pregnancy is none of your fucking business.

When lawmakers and outside parties begin inserting themselves into what is a very personal and painful decision, we end up with more and more tard babies clogging up Tard Baby General because people are guilted into changing their decision because they’re afraid of being shamed, ridiculed, told they’re going to hell etc. by people who should just mind their own business to begin with.

Easier access to abortion means less shame around the procedure, which means more people with deformed and diseased fetuses will seek out the procedure without shame.

Spoiler: Not to clog up the thread

Stop straw manning the argument. The discussion wasn’t about abortion regarding tard babies, it was about abortion concerning ALL babies. I’m not here to act like the pro life movement doesn’t do retarded shit, but forgive me for daring to have the opinion that aborting a healthy baby in the womb out of convenience (which happens more often than not) is a shitty thing to do and entirely different from aborting a deformed potato. Get the damn context and stop being offended over something I never said.