The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[Tree]

Abortion should be mandatory for some, illegal for others, but under no circumstances should it be simply a matter of the mother's choice.

In other words, it's the father's or the mother's father's decision if it isn't one of the cases addressed by higher law. If you're child is non native to the country in which you're living and you don't want to get an abortion, they may arrange for and fund your one way trip to your homeland. Nobody is forcing you to get an abortion, no one is forcing you to stay where you don't have business having children.

No homeland, no children. Also the entire holy land and surrounding areas belong to the Palestinian people.

 

[Freya]

and it was all for naught because any point he thought he had went right into the garbage the minute he said that 'biology posits life begins at conception', when the phrase 'life begins at conception' comes from the fucking bible, and in fact there's no real consensus on when "life" begins

Yeah. Saying "life" misses the point too. They can't refute that cum is alive. They have to change the topic and say "it doesn't count because the genetic makeup is different from an embryo". Ok so fucking what

 

[Sparkling Yuzu]

Prolife is pro pedo:

https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/cw_osGTXcto

 

[CAPTAIN HAPPY]

After long thought I have decided to agree on the need of abortion, but the way abortions should be done is after birth, the child must be allowed to grow up to the legal age of 18 and then have a deathmatch with their faggot mom.

 

[ITK]

Abortion should be mandatory for some, illegal for others, but under no circumstances should it be simply a matter of the mother's choice.

In other words, it's the father's or the mother's father's decision if it isn't one of the cases addressed by higher law. If you're child is non native to the country in which you're living and you don't want to get an abortion, they may arrange for and fund your one way trip to your homeland. Nobody is forcing you to get an abortion, no one is forcing you to stay where you don't have business having children.

No homeland, no children. Also the entire holy land and surrounding areas belong to the Palestinian people.

This position can only be logically consistent if you also accept infanticide.

 

[Shidoen]

Yeah you can get your abortion in a state if it’s legal but you’re still killing a kid, there’s no denial in that.

 

[Tree]

This position can only be logically consistent if you also accept infanticide.

That is what abortion is isn't it? There's no denying that. But implying my half joking proposal is some blanket support for infanticide isn't true at all. Universal principles are all retarded. People aren't equal and rules are not applied to them equally, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to be fooled and enslaved by some pretext that they are or ever should be.

Perhaps the only universal principle that stands up to scrutiny is that of inequality. Now I'm not saying we shouldn't have culture and society, things which require rules be applied to people as groups, but we should never tolerate some foreign system of ideals being impose on us, forbidding us to even consider expressing our own people's notions and preferences in dealing with inequalities, especially between our type and others.

A fun thought: violence and other masculine expression shouldn't be thought of as universally wrong, it matters in what way it was used by whom and against whom, but being dishonest, disingenuous, or otherwise maliciously misleading should be universally and severely punished.

 

[ITK]

That is what abortion is isn't it? There's no denying that. But implying my half joking proposal is some blanket support for infanticide isn't true at all. Universal principles are all retarded. People aren't equal and rules are not applied to them equally, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to be fooled and enslaved by some pretext that they are or ever should be.

Perhaps the only universal principle that stands up to scrutiny is that of inequality. Now I'm not saying we shouldn't have culture and society, things which require rules be applied to people as groups, but we should never tolerate some foreign system of ideals being impose on us, forbidding us to even consider expressing our own people's notions and preferences in dealing with inequalities, especially between our type and others.

A fun thought: violence and other masculine expression shouldn't be thought of as universally wrong, it matters in what way it was used by whom and against whom, but being dishonest, disingenuous, or otherwise maliciously misleading should be universally and severely punished.

I merely find it funny that in your striving to be traditional you've argued yourself into siding with Moloch. My ancestors, when they had found that a woman had suffocated and buried her child under the floor boards, or left him in the woods to die of exposure, cut off her head and burned her body on the stake.

 

[Tree]

I merely find it funny that in your striving to be traditional you've argued yourself into siding with Moloch. My ancestors, when they had found that a woman had suffocated and buried her child under the floor boards, or left him in the woods to die of exposure, cut off her head and burned her body on the stake.

Traditional? Moloch? I'm not some regressive.

I must not have been clear enough in what I was saying since what say about your ancestors is sensible. Pay particular attention to how you specified your ancestors finding one of their women had murdered her child. They of course would also punish a foreigner in their land doing the same, if they had decided to tolerate them in the first place. But nobody sane is jumping at the bit to go to war with some country thousands of miles away because they handle their own people disagreeably. Oh wait the american government, chief moloch worshiper itself, does just that.

To be extra clear, I too would advocate severe punishments for any person merely spreading or amplifying the idea that the women of my people would think about killing their own children. However I don't feel pressed to extend myself to stop some invading shitskin invited here by our moloch occupied government from making themselves less of a problem. In fact, that they tolerate their own doing such a thing should be among the many reasons we ought not to tolerate them entering our jurisdictions let alone living among us in the first place.

To be extra extra clear: people aren't equal. It's wrong, naive, and dangerous to think people who are not like you would have any reason to act like you except by force of law. Now if you don't want some life strangling shithole tyrant of a government that would allow, even encourage, child murder (and worse) unilaterally, while making your life miserable if you effectively oppose such "freedoms", then you have to have people who are like you in positions of power discriminating between who belongs and who doesn't.

Basically what I'm saying is if you aren't willing to discriminate against high time preference people, and especially those which encourage socially detrimental policies among the hosts they parasitize, then you won't ultimately be effective at stopping baby murder.

 

[Spud]

I think children should be born into loving families wanted by both parents and abortion is an effective way to ensure that kids are born into families that want them.

 

[Gog & Magog]

I think children should be born into loving families wanted by both parents and abortion is an effective way to ensure that kids are born into families that want them.

Perhaps, but this doesn't stop the Ralphs or Meighs of the world. xD
Also, nice to see @Tree here preaching the good word of Aryan Jesus in a thread that its got nothing to do with. (btw you realize not every Farmer you speak with is white, yes?)

 

[Spud]

this doesn't stop the Ralphs or Meighs of the world.

Tell me about, then people start whining about muh eugenics when you suggest more clinics in socioeconomically disenfranchised places

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

I think children should be born into loving families wanted by both parents and abortion is an effective way to ensure that kids are born into families that want them.

Except abortion doesn't actually do this. Plenty of families have kids that aren't loving or don't end up wanting them, even if abortion is an option. Murdering children isn't going to magically mean that every family that has children will suddenly be a great, loving family. And even children born to unloving families can eventually find loving ones, say, through adoption. But a dead child is dead forever.

 

[Spud]

Murdering children isn't going to magically mean that every family that has children will suddenly be a great, loving family.

Whereas forcing them to have the kid would have a different result?

even children born to unloving families can eventually find loving ones, say, through adoption.

How long would that take though, when the kids 3? 7? 14? What happens if the kid develops Stockholm from being raised in an abusive household and doesn't want to leave? Gonna force them out and make them break every connect they've forged despite the circumstances of their birth? What if the adoption agency that the kid gets moved to is abusive? There is no good answer that makes everything sunshine and rainbows but the least we can do is make it quick and painless rather than suffering.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

Whereas forcing them to have the kid would have a different result?

There are plenty of real life examples of people having children accidentally or in less than ideal circumstances, but then going on to be great parents and raise great children. Your future isn't set in stone just because of a less than ideal beginning.

How long would that take though, when the kids 3? 7? 14? What happens if the kid develops Stockholm from being raised in an abusive household and doesn't want to leave? Gonna force them out and make them break every connect they've forged despite the circumstances of their birth? What if the adoption agency that the kid gets moved to is abusive?

We can't know the future, so these are impossible questions to answer. The point is that the child has a future, and an opportunity to live life and decide for themselves how it will go and how it will end.

There is no good answer that makes everything sunshine and rainbows but the least we can do is make it quick and painless rather than suffering.

This is just a broken, self-defeating mindset. Would you rather your parent's never gave birth to you? Why do you continue to live in suffering? Why not just kill yourself? The human race continues to exist precisely because our forefathers didn't think like this.

 

[Spud]

This is just a broken, self-defeating mindset. Would you rather your parent's never gave birth to you? Why do you continue to live in suffering? Why not just kill yourself? The human race continues to exist precisely because our forefathers didn't think like this.

Why do you think I live in suffering? No shit the human race continues regardless of my input and I wouldn't want it any other way. I have no responsibilities to "The Human Race" So I am going to live MY life the way I see fit. Also muh forefathers, do you even know who they are? What they did for work? The relationships they had? The content of their character? Or do you just bring them up to dunk on people? You aren't special just cause you jizzed in a girl and she carried it to term

So what solution have you got that makes everything sunshine and rainbows? The point was to be realistic rather than live in a fantasy world where everything goes right and no one gets hurt because to actually think about the logistics is hard work and it's easier to type words onto the Internet about what should be done.

The point is that the child has a future, and an opportunity to live life and decide for themselves how it will go and how it will end.

I don't disagree with you on the point but the issue is what CAN be done? You gonna go through the hood and save every tyrone and shaniqua before they get killed by a drive-by or parental abuse? Gonna invade the African continent to stop hunger throughout? Gonna create a multi-national NGO to stop violence by making everyone live in a pod and eat bugs?

There are plenty of real life examples of people having children accidentally or in less than ideal circumstances

Yes, yes. There were people who are born in third world countries everyday who can actually do something with their life but how does that answer my question? Forcing people to have a kid will result in that kid being neglected. Yes the kid should be put up for adoption but what about reality? With how many kids that are already in the foster system and the abuse that happens in said system would it be better for them to suffer through a childhood of abuse and neglect? First from the people who doesn't want them. Second from those who say they want to help but actually want to hurt them and third by a world that will never care about them.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

Why do you think I live in suffering? No shit the human race continues regardless of my input and I wouldn't want it any other way. I have no responsibilities to "The Human Race" So I am going to live MY life the way I see fit. Also muh forefathers, do you even know who they are? What they did for work? The relationships they had? The content of their character? Or do you just bring them up to dunk on people? You aren't special just cause you jizzed in a girl and she carried it to term

What's even the actual argument here?

So what solution have you got that makes everything sunshine and rainbows? The point was to be realistic rather than live in a fantasy world where everything goes right and no one gets hurt because to actually think about the logistics is hard work and it's easier to type words onto the Internet about what should be done.

Except you weren't being "realistic". You were just being a doomer about life.

I don't disagree with you on the point but the issue is what CAN be done? You gonna go through the hood and save every tyrone and shaniqua before they get killed by a drive-by or parental abuse? Gonna invade the African continent to stop hunger throughout? Gonna create a multi-national NGO to stop violence by making everyone live in a pod and eat bugs?

As much as I would want to go to the hood and give every child a chance at having a great life, with as little hardship as possible, that's just not possible. Life has always been hard. Our ancestors were born in worse conditions than any of us live in today, and they still persevered despite it all. That's all we can do. If one wants to make the world a better place, there are numerous ways to do so, from giving to a charity, to volunteering, to getting a job in an industry that helps others. And, hey, guess what? Many people who come from those terrible circumstances do end up going on to do just that, to help others who lived lives like theirs. We can't judge someone's potential by their circumstance. As the old saying goes, that which doesn't kill you, will make you stronger. Some of the greatest people who ever lived came from terrible circumstances.

Forcing people to have a kid will result in that kid being neglected. Yes the kid should be put up for adoption but what about reality? With how many kids that are already in the foster system and the abuse that happens in said system would it be better for them to suffer through a childhood of abuse and neglect? First from the people who doesn't want them. Second from those who say they want to help but actually want to hurt them and third by a world that will never care about them.

First and foremost, if you are having a kid, unless rape was involved, nobody forced you into the situation. You made a choice to have sex and put yourself in that situation. That was your CHOICE, so nobody is being forced to do anything. Having a kid is a natural result of having procreative sex.

Second, once again, there are bad situations, horror stories, but their are plenty of kids who are helped IMMENSELY by foster care and adoption. Those systems still do a valuable service, despite their defects. The answer is press for reform of the adoption and foster care systems, not kill more kids.

 

[Chandelier]

I only criticized how the current system holds men accountable, even in an illogical manner (primarily because the government gets a cut of child support checks, so has no incentive to fix the system or modify it), while women are allowed to shirk responsibility by simply murdering their child, and the man has no say, producing an inherently unfair system.

You are held accountable because you impregnate women in the first place. Take some accountability for your actions. Those are the words you love repeating to us. If the law was harsher on men, and implemented mandatory child support at conception, with threats of jail time, guaranteed men would be loudly complaining about this as they do about divorce rates, prenup, or any other social issue they feel shirked on.

If men are upset, they can choose not to ejaculate in women. Simple as.

If you admit that the embryo is alive, then at that point, the whole debate on abortion turns into rationalizing the killing of a human in different situations. If you deny it, then you're arguing purely from emotion, not critical thinking.

Life begins at conception, yeah? But it doesn't start developing until it reaches the uterus, of which it has a 40% chance or so of doing so. So is it alive before it reaches the uterus, or is it a non-entity? Since we're on that topic, here's LiveAction complaining about Tennessee's IVF law:

Following the fall of Roe v. Wade in June, Tennessee’s pro-life “trigger” law protecting preborn children from abortion from the moment of fertilization took effect on August 25. Now the state’s attorney general has stated that the law will not protect preborn human beings who exist within Tennessee fertility clinics.

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti released an opinion stating that the law “does not apply to a human embryo before it has been transferred to a woman’s uterus and, therefore, disposing of a human embryo that has not been transferred to a woman’s uterus is not punishable as a ‘criminal abortion.'”

Skrmetti explained that though an embryo may fit under the law’s definition of an “unborn child,” the law itself does not criminalize disposing of embryos that have yet to be implanted because no one is pregnant and therefore no one is having an abortion. He wrote that “if there is no pregnancy to terminate, there can be no abortion.”

So who is right? It's not considered murder in IVF, despite those embryos being little humans.

Except abortion doesn't actually do this. Plenty of families have kids that aren't loving or don't end up wanting them, even if abortion is an option. Murdering children isn't going to magically mean that every family that has children will suddenly be a great, loving family. And even children born to unloving families can eventually find loving ones, say, through adoption. But a dead child is dead forever.

Adoption is an alternative to responsibility, not parenting. You are giving up your child to the state. For people who want the state to stop meddling in their affairs, your solution is to dump the children you directly created to the hands of someone else. They aren't toys. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Their emotional disconnect from the children they never wanted will pass on to their kids, and plenty of said kids note how unwanted they felt. They carry that for years.

First and foremost, if you are having a kid, unless rape was involved, nobody forced you into the situation. You made a choice to have sex and put yourself in that situation. That was your CHOICE, so nobody is being forced to do anything. Having a kid is a natural result of having procreative sex.

Second, once again, there are bad situations, horror stories, but their are plenty of kids who are helped IMMENSELY by foster care and adoption. Those systems still do a valuable service, despite their defects. The answer is press for reform of the adoption and foster care systems, not kill more kids.

First and foremost, if men are having sex, you are choosing to ejaculate into a woman. Nobody said you couldn't wear a condom. Did it feel better not to wear one? Did you expect the woman to simply use birth control, which is the easy way out?

There are plenty of people here who state, repeatedly, that they want rape victims having children, regardless of how young or old they are. Remember that the OH 10-year-old rape victim was initially viewed as a hoax until it was confirmed true.

You want to reform adoption and foster care services? That requires more government money, something you don't want to spend because it's your taxpayer money. It's not something pro-life politicians are advocating for, either. You will crow about 'murdering children', yet the maternity care and other social support systems are not in place for women. In Texas your Medicaid will be cut after two months after having those much vaunted children.

As much as I would want to go to the hood and give every child a chance at having a great life, with as little hardship as possible, that's just not possible. Life has always been hard.

Why not? What's stopping you? You want everyone else to take responsibility and do better but you can't be bothered? Funny, because black children are adopted the least, and are the cheapest of all foster care children. This is NIMBY behaviour.

 

[Gog & Magog]

What is the moral difference between abortion and euthanizing horrifically malformed children who have no future?

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

You are held accountable because you impregnate women in the first place.

And women should be held accountable for allowing herself to get impregnated in the first place. It takes two to tango, buddy. The woman didn't just lie there take it, she had to agree to have sex in the first place. Both parents need to be held accountable, and both parents should share equal responsibility. The system as it is does not do this. I don't know why you don't understand this. The issue isn't that men are held accountable. Its that men and women aren't held accountable equally.

If the law was harsher on men, and implemented mandatory child support at conception, with threats of jail time, guaranteed men would be loudly complaining about this as they do about divorce rates, prenup, or any other social issue they feel shirked on.

Do you know anything about the current system? THIS IS WHAT THE LAW ALREADY DOES. Child support is mandatory, with threat of everything from garnished wages to jail time for those who don't pay.

If men are upset, they can choose not to ejaculate in women. Simple as.

And if women don't want to have a baby, they can not let men ejaculate into them. Simple as.

Adoption is an alternative to responsibility, not parenting. You are giving up your child to the state. For people who want the state to stop meddling in their affairs, your solution is to dump the children you directly created to the hands of someone else.

Adoption isn't giving a child to the state. Its giving the child to another family. Children who are wards of the state end up in orphanages, not adoptions. Adoptions also aren't "dumping" children anywhere. The family who takes in the adopted child choose to adopt the child in question. People aren't just forced to take children they don't want. Do you even understand how any of the systems you are talking about work?

Their emotional disconnect from the children they never wanted will pass on to their kids, and plenty of said kids note how unwanted they felt. They carry that for years.

So your solution is to murder the child instead so they don't feel unwanted? How is that a solution?

First and foremost, if men are having sex, you are choosing to ejaculate into a woman. Nobody said you couldn't wear a condom. Did it feel better not to wear one? Did you expect the woman to simply use birth control, which is the easy way out?

What are you even trying to argue here? Nobody in this thread has argued that the man didn't choose to have sex. But for some reason, you pro-abortion people seem to completely disregard that the woman in this scenario has agency and can simply choose to not have sex, completely forestalling the issue the abortion entirely. You can't argue that women are "forced" to carry children to term without completely taking away a woman's agency and ability to say no to sex.

There are plenty of people here who state, repeatedly, that they want rape victims having children, regardless of how young or old they are.

Point to someone in this thread who said that, specifically, who wasn't an obvious troll.

You want to reform adoption and foster care services? That requires more government money, something you don't want to spend because it's your taxpayer money.

Who says I don't want the government spending money to reform foster care and adoption? I've argued in this very thread that that is something that should happen. You've raised up a straw man about me in head to argue against that instead of actually going after anything I've said.

It's not something pro-life politicians are advocating for, either.

Really, dude? All pro-life politicians are not advocating for reforming the adoption/foster care system? All of them? Speaking in absolutes is stupid.

You will crow about 'murdering children', yet the maternity care and other social support systems are not in place for women. In Texas your Medicaid will be cut after two months after having those much vaunted children.

Lack of "maternity care", whatever that means in this context doesn't make murder okay. Another problem with you pro-abortion people; you think that if a situation isn't 100% ideal, then we should throw out basic human morality and be completely okay with killing children, because the existence, or lack thereof, of government programs determines right and wrong to you.

Take this argument and apply it to any other situation and you realize how stupid it is. For example, "How can you oppose rich people hunting down the poor and homeless for sport? You don't support government housing programs, or welfare to take care of them. You crow on and on about hunting down the poor and homeless, yet welfare to help those people are not in place." See how stupid that sounds?

Why not? What's stopping you?

Reality. I'm not super man. I'm not George Soros with a billion dollars to burn helping the poor. I'm not God. I can't be everywhere at once. Nobody can.

You want everyone else to take responsibility and do better but you can't be bothered?

Did I fucking say that? No, I didn't. Once again, you love to create straw men and put words in people's mouths that they didn't say, to argue a point nobody was arguing.

Funny, because black children are adopted the least, and are the cheapest of all foster care children. This is NIMBY behaviour.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? What is your point?