The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

From some of these posts I wonder where the U.S went wrong. You had the ''stem cell research veto'' in the 2000's that made people a few people raise a few eyebrows to American religious extremism blocking scientific progress. But that was light years away from recent times where women could be jailed not only for abortion but also miscarriage in a Roe V Wade overturn.

This is just simply unbelievable. I'll mention the 2000's again for a minute - in that decade you went to war with a theocratic islamic state not only for terrorism but because you disagreed/were outraged with their regressive policies and ill treatment towards women. People were appalled by Sharia law and could not for one second imagine such a theocratic state transpiring in the USA. Well now it's 2020 and the USA may embrace a theocracy.

It's okay when the American Taliban does it, though. Welfare for poor mothers is something they hate, though.

think about it this way, what if ants, if allowed to live long enough, would become as fully sentient and as smart as humans. would you be ok with killing ants then? this is the same situation with the fetus. Ants cannot survive without their colony at first, but when they become smart they will be able to survive alone

Yes. Those fuckers get everywhere

 

[Zero Day Defense]

Well now it's 2020 and the USA may embrace a theocracy.

No major religion's lynchpin is "abortion is murder", though you may not get that since the lynchpin of your religion is abortion. Get a grip.

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

This logic doesn't work for abortions at 9 months. Again, if you want abortion up to 8 weeks, that's very different from the current no limits abortion Dems want.

And yes, fetuses, after a certain point in development, do have a will to live and a pain avoidance reflex.

I don't know why you've decided to throw out 8 weeks, but if you're invoking it to try to make a point about prenatal awareness, your argument is a complete non-starter.

The consensus of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is that a fetus is unable to experience any sort of pain before around 26 weeks at the earliest, since that's when the anterior cingulate area of the cerebral cortex necessary to process pain begins to develop. That's long after 99.9% of abortions are performed, and in the extremely rare cases where this would apply, I see no reason why fetal anesthesia couldn't be administered as a potential compromise, especially as it's already routine in most prenatal surgeries.

The idea that a fetus possesses self-awareness at any stage during pregnancy is dubious at best, although even if I were to concede that there could be grey areas here, I still don't see how any of this could serve as a silver bullet to bypass considerations of the mother's rights, and I think it's awfully telling that you have chosen to entirely sidestep my argument in that regard. My point still stands that there are many instances in which society considers the right to autonomy over the right to life.

The dna thing is a weird straw man position nobody takes so good job convincing me that twins are different people I guess.

It's not a straw man argument at all. The belief that personhood is established at conception is entirely contingent upon DNA, since DNA is all that recognizably separates an embryo from it's mother. It's also an argument which is routinely trotted out by the pro-life lobby, so I don't think I'm being at all unfair by bringing it up.

If this is not your view, then by all means clarify your position, because it isn't clear to me what your opposition to abortion is based on.

 

[ChikN10der]

I don't know why you've decided to throw out 8 weeks, but if you're invoking it to try to make a point about prenatal awareness, your argument is a complete non-starter.

The consensus of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is that a fetus is unable to experience any sort of pain before around 26 weeks at the earliest, since that's when the anterior cingulate area of the cerebral cortex necessary to process pain begins to develop. That's long after 99.9% of abortions are performed, and in the extremely rare cases where this would apply, I see no reason why fetal anesthesia couldn't be administered as a potential compromise, especially as it's already routine in most prenatal surgeries.

The idea that a fetus possesses self-awareness at any stage during pregnancy is dubious at best, although even if I were to concede that there could be grey areas here, I still don't see how any of this could serve as a silver bullet to bypass considerations of the mother's rights, and I think it's awfully telling that you have chosen to entirely sidestep my argument in that regard. My point still stands that there are many instances in which society considers the right to autonomy over the right to life.

It's not a straw man argument at all. The belief that personhood is established at conception is entirely contingent upon DNA, since DNA is all that recognizably separates an embryo from it's mother. It's also an argument which is routinely trotted out by the pro-life lobby, so I don't think I'm being at all unfair by bringing it up.

If this is not your view, then by all means clarify your position, because it isn't clear to me what your opposition to abortion is based on.

See, what do I care about 99 percent of abortions when the other side is fighting tooth and nail for that supposed 1 percent?

When bills come up to say doctors have to try to save abortion survivors born alive, democrats vote against them.

A human fetus is created in conception. That's not a controversial statement. You can play semantic games all you want around it.

I have said before, I'm not taking the stance that all abortion ever must be banned. But I also reject the idea that fetuses aren't human until the mother decides whether or not she wants it. We're not fighting over 8 weeks vs 26 weeks, we're fighting over 8 weeks vs 9 months.

 

[Eris!]

From some of these posts I wonder where the U.S went wrong.

Roe V. Wade, or thereabouts.

But that was light years away from recent times where women could be jailed not only for abortion but also miscarriage in a Roe V Wade overturn.

I genuinely don't understand why you would have a problem with a woman being jailed for murder.

Many men also fail to understand that grown women are also refused to have their tubes tied by their doctor. Even after the age of 30. There are women who request hysterectomies for endometriosis and are denied because the medical board or their doctor presumes ''they might want to STILL have a baby''.

The doctor has bodily autonomy and can always say no to selling you his labor.

Welfare for poor mothers is something they hate, though.

Get a job.

Yes. Those fuckers get everywhere

Moral nihilists are stupid.

The consensus of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is that a fetus is unable to experience any sort of pain before around 26 weeks at the earliest, since that's when the anterior cingulate area of the cerebral cortex necessary to process pain begins to develop.

Remember when doctors thought babies didn't feel pain until they were a year old, and wouldn't use anesthesia no matter how much the baby cried?
Anyway, if I murder you painlessly that doesn't make it not murder.

The idea that a fetus possesses self-awareness at any stage during pregnancy is dubious at best

Who gives a shit? It possesses humanity.

considerations of the mother's rights

What rights specifically? There is no right to murder your child.

My point still stands that there are many instances in which society considers the right to autonomy over the right to life.

You are being euphemistic when you say "right to autonomy." You are avoiding the fact that they want to use that autonomy to murder their child.

The belief that personhood is established at conception is entirely contingent upon DNA, since DNA is all that recognizably separates an embryo from it's mother.

It's dependent on metaphysics. You are a human for the entire duration of your existence. From beginning to end. The beginning is the beginning, this seems obvious to me, and yet you people argue against it for some insane reason.

 

[Sweetpeaa]

Roe V. Wade, or thereabouts.

I genuinely don't understand why you would have a problem with a woman being jailed for murder.

The doctor has bodily autonomy and can always say no to selling you his labor.

Get a job.

Moral nihilists are stupid.

Remember when doctors thought babies didn't feel pain until they were a year old, and wouldn't use anesthesia no matter how much the baby cried?
Anyway, if I murder you painlessly that doesn't make it not murder.

Who gives a shit? It possesses humanity.

What rights specifically? There is no right to murder your child.

You are being euphemistic when you say "right to autonomy." You are avoiding the fact that they want to use that autonomy to murder their child.

It's dependent on metaphysics. You are a human for the entire duration of your existence. From beginning to end. The beginning is the beginning, this seems obvious to me, and yet you people argue against it for some insane reason.

I have the increasing suspicion that you are not out of your teens. RVW's implementation had a lot to do with female deaths related to the underground abortion aspect. Abortion will just go back underground or become DIY in the USA. You should look at history before you come to a decision based on emotion and immaturity.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

RVW's implementation had a lot to do with female deaths related to the underground abortion aspect.

Is that so? Because that's irrelevant to the case that ascended to the SCOTUS, as well as the justification for its verdict.

Abortion will just go back underground or become DIY in the USA.

"Gimme the abortion, or the baby gets it!"

That's your argument: abortion needs to be constitutionally protected because if it's not, then women will injure themselves trying to abort the child. You can't even concede that the lack of safety in the procedure (and by the way, should RvW be overturned, it would only mean that abortion legality would be decided on a state-by-state basis) would be enough of a turn-off to decrease the overall number of abortions-- but apparently, we need to protect women that're so desperate to discard the consequences of their actions that they'll nearly kill themselves in the process, because we can't count on them to not.

How... misogynistic.

You should look at history before you come to a decision based on emotion and immaturity.

The most ardent pro-choicers/pro-abortionists I've spoken to here are either hardly out of their teens themselves or have a kitchen sink's worth of mental disorders and complexes.

 

[Clamsworth]

The sheer volume of a pro-lifer’s mental gymnastics are enough to qualify them for Special Olympics.

 

[Muttnik]

I think pro-lifers have their hearts in the right place. I just get a little disturbed that the life and welfare of the mother is more or less completely dehumanized or disregarded for something that hasn't fully come into sentience yet.

 

[Sweetpeaa]

Is that so? Because that's irrelevant to the case that ascended to the SCOTUS, as well as the justification for its verdict.


"Gimme the abortion, or the baby gets it!"

That's your argument: abortion needs to be constitutionally protected because if it's not, then women will injure themselves trying to abort the child. You can't even concede that the lack of safety in the procedure (and by the way, should RvW be overturned, it would only mean that abortion legality would be decided on a state-by-state basis) would be enough of a turn-off to decrease the overall number of abortions-- but apparently, we need to protect women that're so desperate to discard the consequences of their actions that they'll nearly kill themselves in the process, because we can't count on them to not.

How... misogynistic.


The most ardent pro-choicers/pro-abortionists I've spoken to here are either hardly out of their teens themselves or have a kitchen sink's worth of mental disorders and complexes.

Religious instability falls within the realm of a mental health disorder. You're willing to deny safe and legal abortion to women and hope that ''if caught'' they'll serve a life sentence or be executed because of your religious instability (as with most of the pro life community). There is no good reason to view abortion as ''murder'' unless you're a retarded American Christian. Which sadly is the case a lot these days. Black and white thinking, no middle ground, thoughts of violence and hatred towards women all are the result of an underlying mental disorder that only ''starts'' at religious instability.

Oh, and your bible doesn't exactly have a problem with abortion either. There are even instructions in it on how to perform one.

There is no such thing as ''pro-life''. It is nothing but an obsession of controlling women and trying to make their lives miserable in order to satisfy a personal inferiority complex. No other western country is as obsessive about abortion but the USA. And that didn't used to be the case. Even 10 years ago the ''pro life lobby'' wasn't nearly as active and threatening as it today. USA is going down the tubes. Fuck religion.

 

[Eris!]

RVW's implementation had a lot to do with female deaths related to the underground abortion aspect.

Murder being dangerous for the murderer is a good thing and we should not pursue legal protections specifically to protect murderers in the act of murder. If you get an abortion I hope you die from it. It's like you genuinely can't internalize that we're talking about murder.

The sheer volume of a pro-lifer’s mental gymnastics are enough to qualify them for Special Olympics.

What mental gymnastics?

I just get a little disturbed that the life and welfare of the mother is more or less completely dehumanized or disregarded for something that hasn't fully come into sentience yet.

That's how you treat strangers. I don't care about your welfare. See after your own welfare. The only reason this is an issue at all is because of the murder part. I don't have to actively care about your wellbeing to care about preventing you from being actively murdered, or to prevent you from actively murdering someone. If the woman stops being a murderer I stop caring about her or paying any attention to her, as I should.

 

[Muttnik]

Murder being dangerous for the murderer is a good thing and we should not pursue legal protections specifically to protect murderers in the act of murder. If you get an abortion I hope you die from it. It's like you genuinely can't internalize that we're talking about murder.

What mental gymnastics?

That's how you treat strangers. I don't care about your welfare. See after your own welfare. The only reason this is an issue at all is because of the murder part. I don't have to actively care about your wellbeing to care about preventing you from being actively murdered, or to prevent you from actively murdering someone. If the woman stops being a murderer I stop caring about her or paying any attention to her, as I should.

Watch out, you guys. We have an edgy BIG BOY badass in this thread who stands up to the MAN against LITERALLY Hitler MURDER!!

You can't just keep using buzzwords like "murder" to define a very debatable, complicated issue like this that MANY people are polarized on. You want to argue ethics? Then do it. Stop being all "because I say/think it's this". Explain your reasoning. Part of a good debate is listening to different perspectives instead of spamming the same old shit.

Not EVERYONE feels that it's murder, jackass. Not EVERYONE is you. There's a difference between something blatant and something complicated. And the fact that it's an even 50 split means--gasp--other people have different perspectives!

 

[Eris!]

You can't just keep using buzzwords like "murder" to define a very debatable, complicated issue like this that MANY people are polarized on.

Yes I can. Want to know why I can? Because it's not a buzzword. It is literally, factually, objectively murder. You literally cannot deny this. I am baffled that any of you pretend to disagree. I certainly do not believe any of you actually do, since I don't believe you can. It's absurd. Killing your infant child in the womb is murder. If I walked up and stabbed your womb, I murdered your baby. It's not different because a doctor does it. None of the excuses you people offer ever make it not murder, they're just deflections.

You're asking me to explain my reasoning for why killing your own child is murder, and pretending that this is a reasonable debate with two reasonable sides to it.

This is not something complicated. I can't see how you can possibly think that it is. It's blatantly murder.

 

[AnimeGirlConnoisseur]

Can anyone explain to me the popularity of the hard right agenda? I can wrap my head around the fiscal aspects (low tax blah blah) but what does the average citizen benefit from having no availability of pregnancy termination? especially in a Covid-19 stricken world.

The far-hard-alt-extreme-ultra right basically just wants to control a womyn's right to choose what she want's to do with her body (as outlined by the framers in the Constitution). Conservitards and Donald DrumpKKKt want to restrict this right solely, because 2000 years ago some Romans put a Yahudi on a stick and this Yahudi told them to hate strong empowered womyn. There is literally no other reason why someone would not be 100% on board with abortion.

But in all seriousness, I think that pro-life people disagree with abortion for two reasons. The first is religion. The second reason is that some people just don't buy the argument that fetuses aren't people. There is probably some overlap between these groups, but I think that's how it works. If you think that fetuses are people then the pro-abortion argument basically becomes "Women should be allowed to kill unborn babies for their own convenience because YAASSS KWEEEN SLAAAAYYY". If you think that fetuses are people then the average citizen benefits the restriction of abortion, because nobody wants to live in a country where the most vulnerable people are being killed and there is no way for the legal system to get justice for them.

Also, regardless of what you think about abortion, none of the moral issues involved in this situation change just because there is a coof going around.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

Religious instability falls within the realm of a mental health disorder.

Seethe more and tip harder. I've only made arguments against abortion here that lack a religious appeal.

You're willing to deny safe and legal abortion to women and hope that ''if caught'' they'll serve a life sentence or be executed because of your religious instability (as with most of the pro life community).

When you speak to other people, you need to make sure that you're speaking to them, and not whoever it is you think is behind them. Did I blow your fuse so badly by pointing out your misogyny (your suggestion that women would try to kill themselves in the absence of safe abortion methods-- never mind I'm nowhere close to advocating an abortion ban) that you couldn't tell the point I was actually making and you relapsed into r/atheism-tier rhetoric?

Oh, and your bible doesn't exactly have a problem with abortion either.

This is why, of course, Christians have been always been against it.

...right.

This is not something complicated. I can't see how you can possibly think that it is. It's blatantly murder.

To be fair, you're on a debate thread. And just because something is obvious doesn't mean that it still can't be argued.

This is the kind of thinking that put traditionalists into a pickle when all the groups and dissents they marginalized combined and transmogrified into our current cultural scourge.

 

[Eris!]

The second reason is that some people just don't buy the argument that fetuses aren't people

It all just boils down to this. If you can mentally contort yourself into thinking it's not a person, you can excuse abortion. If you're sane, you can't.

 

[Pigtoad]

I'm very pro-abortion, but not because I support a woman's right to choose but because I support eugenics lmao

 

[Muttnik]

Yes I can. Want to know why I can? Because it's not a buzzword. It is literally, factually, objectively murder. You literally cannot deny this. I am baffled that any of you pretend to disagree. I certainly do not believe any of you actually do, since I don't believe you can. It's absurd. Killing your infant child in the womb is murder. If I walked up and stabbed your womb, I murdered your baby. It's not different because a doctor does it. None of the excuses you people offer ever make it not murder, they're just deflections.

You're asking me to explain my reasoning for why killing your own child is murder, and pretending that this is a reasonable debate with two reasonable sides to it.

This is not something complicated. I can't see how you can possibly think that it is. It's blatantly murder.

Yes, a true hero. He protects the sanctity of life. How bold! How noble!

And yet you sound like the exact same person that would refuse to help a starving single mother out because she was forced to have a kid and has no way of taking care of either parties. And the kind of person who would look down at a mother who chose to give the baby up for adoption. And the kind of person who would complain about a mother's genetic eraserhead goblin shitting itself and screeching in agony in public. Etc.

Didn't you literally just say

I don't care about your welfare. See after your own welfare.

So then why care about a fetus at all?

I don't LIKE the fact that abortion sometimes has to happen, or the idea of getting rid of potential life. But to be this narrow minded and holier than thou about it when it's not that simple is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Eris!]

Yes, a true hero. He protects the sanctity of life. How bold! How noble!

And yet you sound like the exact same person that would refuse to help a starving single mother out because she was forced to have a kid and has no way of taking care of either parties

Yes. It's weird that you think these two things conflict each other when you are replying to a post where I explicitly explained why they don't:

So then why care about a fetus at all?

I don't. I care about murder.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

There is no such thing as ''pro-life''. It is nothing but an obsession of controlling women and trying to make their lives miserable in order to satisfy a personal inferiority complex.

How is this about controlling women, when the concern is about making abortion safe, which requires it to be conducted by a trained surgeon (who's likely male, no less)? If anything, it's the bodies of those surgeons that are being controlled.