The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
I bring up valid points, you just dismiss them as "not valid arguments" because they don't align with your views.

And you come off like a hardcore Republican, dude.


Yes? Both result in a preventable death.

Forced organ donation can be done without killing. Blood is donated regularly by living people. kidneys and liver can be, too. And there's organ donation from cadavers. Do you think those should be forced?

You think they should, but again, you vote Republican and seem to care a lot more about forcing women to give birth than you do about social welfare considering you never commented that elsewhere.


No you don't. You claim women should not have control over their own bodies. Hence you think a corpse and fetus shoudl have more rights than they do.


>posts like a religious fundie 4chaner
>gets anally agitated when called cringey
>uses religious fundie site for claiming life begins at conception



Whatever you call it, it doesn't change my point.
<Continues to screech about christcuckery

<Continues to get more ass blasted

<Continues to derail conversations with others to formulate a false victory.


https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html
 
I am just reporting when people violate the new rules. If you don't want to enforce the rules, why are you a mod?
To clarify the rules for everyone ITT:

If you have mean words in your post, but are still pushing a political argument == not a rule violation
If you just flame the user, or talk to other users about what a faggot,incel,etc, the poster you disagree with is, that's a rule violation.
 
<Continues to screech about christcuckery

<Continues to get more ass blasted

<Continues to derail conversations with others to formulate a false victory.


https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html
>posts like this is 4chan
>seethes when called a cringy chantard
>posts like a religious fundie
>seethes when called a religious fundie
Murder isn't averting a preventable death, its going out with the express intent to kill someone.
Oh, so you're fine intentionally and recklessly killing people then? I suspect that's only because you want to keep the bodily autonomy that you have, although you don't care about removing women's.

No, that would violate bodily autonomy.
So you're fine with removing women's bodily autonomy, but not your own? Got it.

Women should be free to chose if they want to have sex or not. After they have sex they don't suddently gain the right to commit murder to avoid being inconvinienced as a result of their own actions.
People are going to have sex. Getting an abortion is indeed handling the consequences of having sex. Forcing people to raise and pay for a child, especially when you vote against increasing social welfare and healthcare access, is very hypocritical.

This is the 4th comment where I say I support stipends for married couples who are expecting.
You say that you support it, but do you vote for it?
 
You say that you support it, but do you vote for it?
Surely you can understand voters not getting principles they would like to vote for ever addressed by politicians, or at least, not by politicians they support?
TBH the only mainstream politician I can recall off-hand vocally supporting stipends for expecting couples are Mitt Romney and Steve Daines.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: MrJokerRager
To clarify the rules for everyone ITT:

If you have mean words in your post, but are still pushing a political argument == not a rule violation
If you just flame the user, or talk to other users about what a faggot,incel,etc, the poster you disagree with is, that's a rule violation.
Likewise with the crying/sweating hulk hogan images, feel free to post those but not by themselves. Make sure there's an actual on-topic smear of words to go with it. They probably don't have the intended effect on that poster that you're expecting, but I laugh at them so there's that.(Not because of the poster, I just think it's a funny expression not commonly shared from a tough guy from 40ish+ years ago)
 
Surely you can understand voters not getting principles they would like to vote for ever addressed by politicians, or at least, not by politicians they support?
TBH the only mainstream politician I can recall off-hand vocally supporting stipends for expecting couples are Mitt Romney and Steve Daines.
Right but when he votes straight Republican, but then claims to support social welfare, he doesn't really have room to talk when Republicans do their best to eliminate welfare. So he's saying that he votes Republican, possibly simply because they're anti-abortion, but then won't vote Democrat even though they're for expanding welfare. So he's saying a fetus's life is more important than expanding welfare

Likewise with the crying/sweating hulk hogan images, feel free to post those but not by themselves. Make sure there's an actual on-topic smear of words to go with it. They probably don't have the intended effect on that poster that you're expecting, but I laugh at them so there's that.(Not because of the poster, I just think it's a funny expression not commonly shared from a tough guy from 40ish+ years ago)
Can we just ban posting like it's /pol/?
>stuff like this
>and this
>and then this


All this does is makes it easy to strawman someone and is cringy, considering isn't /pol/
 
Right but when he votes straight Republican, but then claims to support social welfare, he doesn't really have room to talk when Republicans do their best to eliminate welfare. So he's saying that he votes Republican, possibly simply because they're anti-abortion, but then won't vote Democrat even though they're for expanding welfare. So he's saying a fetus's life is more important than expanding welfare
No he isn't, learn to read. Republicans generally aren't entirely anti-abortion most of them simply don't support abortion being used as birth control.
 
Can we just ban posting like it's /pol/?
>stuff like this
>and this
>and then this


All this does is makes it easy to strawman someone and is cringy, considering isn't /pol/
Greentexting is a time-honored internet tradition and I will not have you slandering it by comparing it exclusively to /pol/ posters.
 
Greentexting is a time-honored internet tradition and I will not have you slandering it by comparing it exclusively to /pol/ posters.
Greentexting is cringey on a site with actual quotes

No he isn't, learn to read. Republicans generally aren't entirely anti-abortion most of them simply don't support abortion being used as birth control.
Lol no one uses abortion as just birth control. That's stupid. It's a last resort.

Although Republicans are now trying to ban birth control in some states and it sounds like that might be coming next from the SC.
 
Lol no one uses abortion as just birth control. That's stupid. It's a last resort.

Although Republicans are now trying to ban birth control in some states and it sounds like that might be coming next from the SC.
the fact that the majority of abortions Planned Parenthood carries out are purely elective with no real reason says otherwise.
 
Birth control can and does fail. People are gonna have sex, it's in our biology
Yes I'm aware birth control isn't 100% effective. However, that doesnt magically mean abortion as birth control isnt disgusting especially when the arguments for abortion are all "mothers life, babies life, rape and incest" when those all add up to about 7% of abortions performed.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: secret watcher
Yes I'm aware birth control isn't 100% effective. However, that doesnt magically mean abortion as birth control isnt disgusting especially when the arguments for abortion are all "mothers life, babies life, rape and incest" when those all add up to about 7% of abortions performed.
No woman is going to do that, though. It's an invasive procedure.

People will also get pregnant from sex and give birth, that too is in our biology.
Right, but you want to force women to give birth just for giving into our biological needs
 
So you're incapable of controlling your basic biological urges, is that it?

People have evolved to control their base urges. You don't see me dropping a dookie on the floor whenever I want to take a shit.
You have an unhealthy obsession with shit, man.

Except that millions of women seem to have done it.
Most women have had children once they hit age 30 or so.
Nobody is being forced to give birth. Birth control isn't 100% effective but abstinence is.
They are being forced to give birth if they get pregnant. Like I said, fucking is in our biology. People are gonna fuck. Birth control fails. It happens. You want to control women's bodies, make them give birth, but also don't want to help them in any way with the pregnancy or paying for it or healthcare for said pregnancy.
 
Most women have had children once they hit age 30 or so.

They are being forced to give birth if they get pregnant. Like I said, fucking is in our biology. People are gonna fuck. Birth control fails. It happens. You want to control women's bodies, make them give birth, but also don't want to help them in any way with the pregnancy or paying for it or healthcare for said pregnancy.
Again, talking about abortion not giving birth. and again, NOBODY IS BEING FORCED TO GIVE BIRTH. Again, if people dont want to have kids they should practice celebacy if they can't possibly accept the 0.01% risk of birth control failing or otherwise get comfortable with the idea they could have kids. Also it's not my problem they're pregnant and they need to pay for it themselves because, again, not my problem.
 
That was one example. Humans have to control all sorts of biological urges. Can't just piss on the floor whenever you want, or whip your dick out on the subway train and start jacking off on a whim, right?
You mention taking a shit and diapers a lot, though. It was just a vague observation.

But again, people are gonna fuck. You may not like. You may think because you haven't had sex, that others can control it, but it's a lot harder to do than you think. And birth control can fail. You want to force someone to raise a child because they made a mistake or their birth control failed. You also want to gut welfare programs and are against government-funded healthcare, so you want them to pay out the ass for it, too.

Again, talking about abortion not giving birth. and again, NOBODY IS BEING FORCED TO GIVE BIRTH. Again, if people dont want to have kids they should practice celebacy if they can't possibly accept the 0.01% risk of birth control failing or otherwise get comfortable with the idea they could have kids. Also it's not my problem they're pregnant and they need to pay for it themselves because, again, not my problem.
You are forcing them to give birth, though. Your showing your lack of sexual education, here. Birth control fails a lot more than 0.01%. It's more common than you think. Condoms are not even close to that effective. I think the most effective are like 97%, and with millions of people fucking, that's gonna result in a lot of pregnancies still.

It's telling you want to force them to give birth but not pay for it. Again, you're showing your Republican hypocrisy here. You're "pro life" until they're born, then you don't care if they die because of lack of healthcare or money.

This is you:
1656696410037.png
 
Back