The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[Eto]

1. because lots of men typically don't understand women's struggles at all.

2. what is wrong with those arguments?

3. so would you have supported aborting the world's worst dictators?

4. cool? so you're not 100% pro-life.

5. the chances of the unborn baby becoming an extremely noble historical figure/pioneer of society are extremely low, much lower than the chances of them becoming a degenerate criminal.

6. i don't think people are bad for being pro-life, but when you dig deeper into their reasoning for vehemently being against all abortion, you start to see through them and their ulterior motives.

most women aren't vehemently against abortion btw.

7. very nice pro-life stance, lol.

Replies are broken, so I'm numbering the paragraphs.

1. I'm not going to disagree with this, as men can be myopic on women's issues and vice versa. My point was that what difference does it make if I support and agree with your stance.

2. The problem with those arguments is that it relies on weak justifications. "A clump of cells?" Technically speaking we all are. "Abortions will happen anyway, so why ban the practice?" This is a libertarian response to anything, and you're no libertarian from what I've seen. I tossed you a bone by citing a fact that access to abortions and contraceptives reduces the need to have an abortion.

3. Trick question, so I'm not biting.

4. Cool, I didn't say I was pro-life? I said I had sympathy towards it, not that I am. I'm pro-choice.

5. No doubt that a potential baby won't be the next Washington or Alexander the Great. My point on the matter is that we don't know how they'll turn out. For all we know, they could play an important role in society, even if it's small. They could also be like you said and be dregs.

6. I'm not disagreeing with this. I also never said most women were against abortions, either. I said a decent amount of the pro-life movement involves women.

7. Nice little snipe, but if you'd read over what I typed, I never once said I was pro-life. Again, I'm simply posting because I want to point out the flaws in some of the basic arguments. I want to make sure pro-choice stances are strong. There also seems to be a misunderstanding, as I am someone who agrees with pro-choice people overall. I apologize if I didn't make that clear.

 

[The Cunting Death]

First you put your race in "quotes" as if it doesn't mean anything.

It means it has nothing to do with the conversation as you keep using it to attack ad hominem.

 

[Eto]

It means it has nothing to do with the conversation as you keep using it to attack ad hominem.

How the fuck did this conversation even turn into a discussion about race? @snailslime @Frank D'arbo Wanna dunk on the Jew hater?

 

[Lord Edge of Leetworth]

It means it has nothing to do with the conversation as you keep using it to attack ad hominem.

The jew has found a white knight to defend its non-existent honour. This is pitiful and I won't engage with someone that falls for e-girls.

How the fuck did this conversation even turn into a discussion about race? @snailslime @Frank D'arbo Wanna dunk on the Jew hater?

Excellent, let's get back on track: All anime avatars should have been aborted.

 

[The Cunting Death]

How the fuck did this conversation even turn into a discussion about race? @snailslime @Frank D'arbo Wanna dunk on the Jew hater?

Because muh jews control the media shit


Don't get me wrong i like being edgy and saying shit like kike but its all in jest. Here it's not even apart of the conversation and you're using it as an ad hominem attack because you're a filthy faggot who has a shitty take.

 

[The Cunting Death]

The jew has found a white knight to defend its non-existent honour. This is pitiful and I won't engage with someone that falls for e-girls.

Excellent, let's get back on track: All anime avatars should have been aborted.

Post hand, I want to see if you're white

 

[Eto]

Excellent, let's get back on track: All anime avatars should have been aborted.

Refutation: Fags who hate Jews should have been aborted.

 

[Lord Edge of Leetworth]

Refutation: Fags who hate Jews should have been aborted.

Good. We're both pro-choice now.

 

[gang weeder]

yes, i think too many non-qualified people have kids. there should be a screening process necessary to have your own children and adopt.

it's not eugenics because it has nothing to do with DNA.

Even though nearly any criteria you develop to try and "qualify" people as "good parents" who are "allowed to procreate" will result in blacks being disproportionately filtered out. Just like Margaret Sanger originally intended.

Your language betrays your jewishness. First you put your race in "quotes" as if it doesn't mean anything. Next you immediately exalt their so-called accomplishments like a good zionistic zuna. I have better things to do than argue with a duplicitous parasite.

I refuse to see life as a torture device. I also refuse to exalt suffering, or to assume that it was placed there for a higher cause. It is disturbing, cruel, unfair and thoroughly perverse.

It strikes me that the people who are pro-life are thoroughly divorced from reality. @gang weeder equates living, breathing people with a cluster of cells. He mocks the notion of money. He ignores what other people say and just talks in circles. These luxuries don't only mark his poor breeding, but also just how spoiled rotten he is.

>asked to actually specify how and why your arbitrary definition of "personhood" is the correct one
>ignore the issue and accuse the other side of "talking in circles"

Nice projection. Again:

By what measure are they "astronomically smaller," why are those measures the correct ones for determining personhood, and who has the authority to place the arbitrary lines where with respect to these hypothetical measures that you appear unable or unwilling to provide? "An expert said so" isn't an answer.

Answer the question. It's always fun seeing pro-abortion people try and wrestle with this. I suspect you know better than to try, though. That's why you ignore it in favor of empty flaming.

but isn't lol social security a welfare state?
I have to work and pay into to something that probably when I am old an retiring age may never enjoy, and pay into something that pays disabled people a basic income to live on. a whole bunch of disabled people are on disablity ssdi, that would probably not be there if abortions werent so insanely hard to get a good 20 years ago. your anti child murder but lol much rather children starve because your so morally bankrupt that you don't want your taxes to go into welfare. its murder for a woman to abort a fetus that she can't afford, that will drive her more into poverty should she carry it to term, cost her time from work and earning an income, but its not murder to let a kid starve to death because of your desire to not have food stamps be paid with your taxes? starvation is a painful and slow and agonizing form of death. atleast with most abortions a life is ended before it even has a concept that it exists.

Nice word salad. All of that equally applies to children. By your logic, if an infant doesn't have a sufficiently "good" home life (however you want to define that--again, always fun seeing people like you try), he/she should simply be smothered to spare any further suffering + relieve the mother of the "burden" of the child so that she can get back to grinding away in the widget factory or something.

 

[AngryItalianAmerican]

We have defied God, and we have become estranged from His touch. As a father must burden his child with toil and hardship,
God must cause us to suffer that we may become like Christ.

If it helps, imagine Life as one giant rehabilitative facility with a universal, life-spanning sentence for every ill person. The Trinity is the parole board,
and at the end of the sentence you are either deemed to be fit for society (The Kingdom of God) or remain in the facility forever.

"A faith that costs nothing, sacrifices nothing and gives nothing is worth nothing"

Only the most wretched, irresponsible and selfish fathers wouldn't keep at least tangential contact with his children.

Also, Life is the kind of rehab facility filled with drugs, violence and greed. You know, a shitty one.

 

[Freya]

The Bible states that life begins when the first breath is drawn.

Genesis 2:7 and the scriptures after it literally say so.

Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.-Psalm 137:9

 

[gang weeder]

Only the most wretched, irresponsible and selfish fathers wouldn't keep at least tangential contact with his children.

Also, Life is the kind of rehab facility filled with drugs, violence and greed. You know, a shitty one.

Unlike some rehab facilities, you can check yourself out of Life any time you want. In some places the government will even help you do it. Yet we somehow still seem to hold to the notion that people should get to, y'know, actually make that choice, not have it made for them. Funny, that.

 

[Isaac]

Only the most wretched, irresponsible and selfish fathers wouldn't keep at least tangential contact with his children.

Also, Life is the kind of rehab facility filled with drugs, violence and greed. You know, a shitty one.

I apologize, it were a bad metaphor and you should ignore it. Read Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis if you want a better explanation.

 

[AngryItalianAmerican]

Unlike some rehab facilities, you can check yourself out of Life any time you want. In some places the government will even help you do it. Yet we somehow still seem to hold to the notion that people should get to, y'know, actually make that choice, not have it made for them. Funny, that.

Millions of people are without even if they are born, because irresponsible or ignorant parents pump them up in inhabitable hellholes, like Africa, where the only strategy for the continuation of kin is bloated birth rates. Or an orwelian archaic system like India, where you can be an engineer with countless years of education and effort, and still earn cents an hour because you were born in the wrong caste.

If we truly were committed to the welfare of children, we'd make all compromises possible to allow them to get to legal age.

"We'll do anything for the unborn, but once you are born, you are on your own".

-George Carlin​

 

[snailslime]

1. I'm not going to disagree with this, as men can be myopic on women's issues and vice versa. My point was that what difference does it make if I support and agree with your stance.

it doesn't make a difference, i was just curious.

2. The problem with those arguments is that it relies on weak justifications. "A clump of cells?" Technically speaking we all are. "Abortions will happen anyway, so why ban the practice?" This is a libertarian response to anything, and you're no libertarian from what I've seen. I tossed you a bone by citing a fact that access to abortions and contraceptives reduces the need to have an abortion.

fetuses are clumps of cells with no emotions nor the ability to feel pain. they're not on the same level as living human beings and animals.

i don't like political labels; i think abortion is a necessary "evil"

3. Trick question, so I'm not biting.

it was more of a hypothetical

4. Cool, I didn't say I was pro-life? I said I had sympathy towards it, not that I am. I'm pro-choice.

thanks for clarifying your stance.

5. No doubt that a potential baby won't be the next Washington or Alexander the Great. My point on the matter is that we don't know how they'll turn out. For all we know, they could play an important role in society, even if it's small. They could also be like you said and be dregs.

yep.

7. Nice little snipe, but if you'd read over what I typed, I never once said I was pro-life. Again, I'm simply posting because I want to point out the flaws in some of the basic arguments. I want to make sure pro-choice stances are strong. There also seems to be a misunderstanding, as I am someone who agrees with pro-choice people overall. I apologize if I didn't make that clear.

i apologize for the snipes lol, it's just hard to tell who's arguing to genuinely understand a position better. this is deep thoughts on kiwi farms.

The jew has found a white knight to defend its non-existent honour. This is pitiful and I won't engage with someone that falls for e-girls.

Excellent, let's get back on track: All anime avatars should have been aborted.

take your schizo meds and go back to choking on HIV cock, loser.

get back to me with some good arguments when you're the one who gets to bear children and contribute to society (lol never).

Even though nearly any criteria you develop to try and "qualify" people as "good parents" who are "allowed to procreate" will result in blacks being disproportionately filtered out. Just like Margaret Sanger originally intended.

and a lot of poor whites too. i'd say asians would be very advantaged in this scenario.

>asked to actually specify how and why your arbitrary definition of "personhood" is the correct one
>ignore the issue and accuse the other side of "talking in circles"

don't waste your time on the mentally ill fruit basket.

Nice projection. Again:

Answer the question. It's always fun seeing pro-abortion people try and wrestle with this. I suspect you know better than to try, though. That's why you ignore it in favor of empty flaming.


Nice word salad. All of that equally applies to children. By your logic, if an infant doesn't have a sufficiently "good" home life (however you want to define that--again, always fun seeing people like you try), he/she should simply be smothered to spare any further suffering + relieve the mother of the "burden" of the child so that she can get back to grinding away in the widget factory or something.

no sane person supports smothering living children. we just think it'd be better if these people never brought life into the world in the first place.

 

[snailslime]

We see a great variance of outcomes with integrated minorities in cultures insulated from the systemic racism that plagues the American shit-hole. And even if we don't account for the variety of outcomes my statement is fundamentally true. Read actual science and not Charles Murray's trite.

You feel obligated to subject a troubled woman to indentured slavery yet would refuse to provide even a penny for her and the child's wellbeing. You are a piece of shit.

double post again, but lmao your arguments are so inconsistent it's funny. you hate racism yet you use racist ad-hominem attacks. are you drunk or high, or an unmedicated schizophrenic?

 

[Lord Edge of Leetworth]

take your schizo meds and go back to choking on HIV cock, loser.

get back to me with some good arguments when you're the one who gets to bear children and contribute to society (lol never).

and a lot of poor whites too. i'd say asians would be very advantaged in this scenario.

don't waste your time on the mentally ill fruit basket.

no sane person supports smothering living children. we just think it'd be better if these people never brought life into the world in the first place.

double post again, but lmao your arguments are so inconsistent it's funny. you hate racism yet you use racist ad-hominem attacks. are you drunk or high, or an unmedicated schizophrenic?

I am not going to breed you.

 

[snailslime]

I am not going to breed you.

i don't want your gross genes in me

 

[Lord Edge of Leetworth]

i don't want your gross genes in me

What, you wanted them on you?

 

[gang weeder]

Millions of people are without even if they are born, because irresponsible or ignorant parents pump them up in inhabitable hellholes, like Africa, where the only strategy for the continuation of kin is bloated birth rates. Or an orwelian archaic system like India, where you can be an engineer with countless years of education and effort, and still earn cents an hour because you were born in the wrong caste.

If we truly were committed to the welfare of children, we'd make all compromises possible to allow them to get to legal age.

"We'll do anything for the unborn, but once you are born, you are on your own".

-George Carlin​

Would you favor murdering those children as a solution to end their suffering? Because that's what abortion is. "The child might suffer after they are born so we should kill it pre-emptively so that they don't suffer." For the millionth time, this line of thinking also suggests that it is good to smother infants in their crib if they don't have a "good" home life. After all, if we let them live, they only have a life of suffering to look forward to, right?