The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[Tomboy Respecter]

Abortion isn't murder. A nickle-sized lump of cells isn't a sentient being yet.

Sentience (or any other emergent function of a human (or anything for that matter)) doesn't determine the ontological status of a thing. Literally when a sperm cell fertilizes an egg cell and conception occurs, a new human is formed. All things being equal, it is the byproduct of human sexual reproduction beween a man and a woman, a mechanism which has the purpose of creating more human beings and it has the intrinstic to develop into a grown adult human person. It's a human being just as much as the zygote of any other animal is that animal itself.

 

[ChikN10der]

I want pro-lifers to read this and make sure they take it in. This guy wants women to die if they have ectopic pregnancies, etc. This is a big problem in the pro-life movement in general I think, because people like this have taken over the face of the movement which means when you try to talk to normal people...they just see a rambling idiot who can't wrap his head around the fact that ectopic pregnancies literally kill people. IMO these caricatures are a big reason why the pro-life movement has such a big problem in the United States. (That and harassing people outside of Planned Parenthoods was always a retarded move.)



Well that's the rub isn't it? You're still killing a kid regardless. And there are plenty of real life people that will happily call women murderers if they get ectopic pregnancies aborted.

I'm more curious about stuff like genetic screening and aborting kids with Down syndrome now. Disabilities are an absolute crapshoot imo, they can be handled or they can cripple families, it seems like there's always a horror story of parents divorcing over the stress of taking care of their disabled kid. And then the poor kid ends up being shunted into a group home maintained by the state as soon as Mom dies and no one else will take the kid in. So my question is, would abortions be acceptable if it means that the state and families are no longer weighed down by disabled people?

What the fuck would anti murder people care what one random anti murder person thinks?
Lena Dunham thinks it's sexist not to want to fuck her. She is pro choice.

It's possible to be pro choice and think it's reasonable not to want to fuck Lena Dunham. It's possible to be pro life and not think woman should just die of ectopic pregnancy.

You trying to short circuit the debate by saying "see this one dude is saying crazy things, therefore he is the face of pro life" is really lazy, and convinces nobody except maybe yourself.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Sentience (or any other emergent function of a human (or anything for that matter)) doesn't determine the ontological status of a thing. Literally when a sperm cell fertilizes an egg cell and conception occurs, a new human is formed. All things being equal, it is the byproduct of human sexual reproduction beween a man and a woman, a mechanism which has the purpose of creating more human beings and it has the intrinstic to develop into a grown adult human person. It's a human being just as much as the zygote of any other animal is that animal itself.

A fetus is no more a human than a brick is a house

 

[Tomboy Respecter]

A fetus is no more a human than a brick is a house

That's a retarded analogy. If you wanted one that would work, it would be "an organic molecule is no more human than a brick is a house" or "a fetus is as human as an ice cube is water". A brick has no potential to become a house through natural intrinsic properties of it's matter (it can only become part of a house at most and through human effort,), but a human embryo (yes even newly conceived zygote) can become an adult human and does given the proper environment. That's why it makes sense to call an embryo a human: you are not only considering what it is now, but what it can become based on it's intrinsic natural properties. Just like an ice cube is water in a different form, a fetus is a human being (albeit in an unrecognizable form). Appearances don't matter, it's the thing-in-itself, it's properties and what it can become that matters.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

That's a retarded analogy. If you wanted one that would work, it would be "an organic molecule is no more human than a brick is a house" or "a fetus is as human as an ice cube is water". A brick has no potential to become a house through natural intrinsic properties of it's matter (it can only become part of a house at most and through human effort,), but a human embryo (yes even newly conceived zygote) can become an adult human and does given the proper environment. That's why it makes sense to call an embryo a human: you are not only considering what it is now, but what it can become based on it's intrinsic natural properties. Just like an ice cube is water in a different form, a fetus is a human being (albeit in an unrecognizable form). Appearances don't matter, it's the thing-in-itself, it's properties and what it can become that matters.

No, it's correct. A brick isn't a house yet. A fetus isn't a human yet and can't become a human without effort from its mother.

Just because you can't get laid doesn't mean you should punish women who can get laid

 

[Shady Attorney]

Analogies don’t work because the autism on this site won’t allow it

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Analogies don’t work because the autism on this site won’t allow it

Yeah, I am still waiting on @Erischan to tell me what a pregnant woman can do besides abort it and have the baby. He said he isn't for forcing her to have the baby, but he is against her getting an abortion too.

 

[Tomboy Respecter]

No, it's correct. A brick isn't a house yet. A fetus isn't a human yet and can't become a human without effort from its mother.

A brick will never be a house. It will be PART of a house, but you can't live in a brick. You can live in a collection of bricks, but that's not a brick. Again, a better analogy between an human and a fetus would be an ice cube and water: both a fetus and an ice cube are different forms of a more basic substance and given the right circumstances both will develop into the form that we are familiar with (an adult human being and liquid water). There's no process in utero that changes the intrinsic characteristics of a fetus and it fact it's the beginning of the human person's tendency to seek out nourishment for one's own sustenance which they will continue to have until the day they die. It literally makes zero sense to put an arbitrary date on when a fetus is human or not when it already is performing the most basic acts of a living thing and was the result of the sexual congress of a human male and female. It literally makes more sense to say that a spermatozoa and ovum (two clearly non-human reproductive cells) combine to make a new substance, a human being.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

I'd like to point out that @Muh Vagina, when presented with a case of a woman exercising her right of bodily autonomy to resist pressure to get an abortion at the behest of the couple who commissioned her for surrogacy, actually tried to argue that the surrogate mother was in the wrong because she put the couple through a lawsuit where they spent time and money fighting for parental rights (for a child they didn't even want) and provided a loving family for the child when she wouldn't step up to the plate herself.

Don't pay attention to her guilt-tripping (that ignores that a man generally supports the woman as she deals with all those bodily changes), and don't pay attention to her uterus-based gatekeeping. She's not pro-choice, and that aside, her participation in this thread will likely still lower the bar of standards.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

A brick will never be a house. It will be PART of a house, but you can't live in a brick. You can live in a collection of bricks, but that's not a brick. Again, a better analogy between an human and a fetus would be an ice cube and water: both a fetus and an ice cube are different forms of a more basic substance and given the right circumstances both will develop into the form that we are familiar with (an adult human being and liquid water). There's no process in utero that changes the intrinsic characteristics of a fetus and it fact it's the beginning of the human person's tendency to seek out nourishment for one's own sustenance which they will continue to have until the day they die. It literally makes zero sense to put an arbitrary date on when a fetus is human or not when it already is performing the most basic acts of a living thing and was the result of the sexual congress of a human male and female. It literally makes more sense to say that a spermatozoa and ovum (two clearly non-human reproductive cells) combine to make a new substance, a human being.

A collection of bricks, put in the right arrangement, is a house. A collection of cells, put in the right arrangement, is a person. A fetus isn't there yet, just how a brick isn't there yet.

Most Americans don't find abortion to be murder. It seems only the fundie evangelicals do. We have separation of church and state in America, so keep your laws off of women's bodies.

 

[Tomboy Respecter]

A collection of bricks, put in the right arrangement, is a house.

Sure. No argument here.

A collection of cells, put in the right arrangement, is a person. A fetus isn't there yet, just how a brick isn't there yet.

By its very nature, a fetus has the natural tendency to become an adult human being when in the environment that best facilitates it (the uterus of a human female) just the same way that ice has a natural tendency to become water when placed in an environment that is above it's melting point. We say ice is a different form of water and recognize this because there is nothing different between the chemical formulas for water and ice, just the state they are in. Likeso, a human fetus is a human being as much as an adult human. They both have the same basic natural tendencies and both of them are different states of the human life cycle. It's not really hard to understand why both of them are human beings in the same sense (a fetus isn't a potential human being, that would be spermatozoa,ova and imaginary people that don't exist. It's an actual human being).

Most Americans don't find abortion to be murder. It seems only the fundie evangelicals do. We have separation of church and state in America, so keep your laws off of women's bodies.

1) What does this have to do with my argument? People can have a wide varietiy of opinions that aren't backed up by a combination of empirical observation and rational explanation/thought.
2) Nice ad hominem.
3) Realistically, I think it's too impractical to get every single abortion doctor or woman that goes through with abortion. It'll cost way too much money and take time and reosurces away from things the government ought to do. At the same time, it's clearly an issue of whether states want to endorse that sort of nonsense in their terrirotries since abortion isn't a right at all and you can't even argue it is. If everyone has the right to life, liberty and happiness, don't they need to be born alive in the first place? Anyways, I honestly do hope RvW gets repealed so that at the very least there can be state governments that don't endorse infanticide and those that do want it can go to states that do endorse it. It's hardly a religious issue when it goes against the founding principles of this nation.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Sure. No argument here.


By its very nature, a fetus has the natural tendency to become an adult human being when in the environment that best facilitates it (the uterus of a human female) just the same way that ice has a natural tendency to become water when placed in an environment that is above it's melting point. We say ice is a different form of water and recognize this because there is nothing different between the chemical formulas for water and ice, just the state they are in. Likeso, a human fetus is a human being as much as an adult human. They both have the same basic natural tendencies and both of them are different states of the human life cycle. It's not really hard to understand why both of them are human beings in the same sense (a fetus isn't a potential human being, that would be spermatozoa,ova and imaginary people that don't exist. It's an actual human being).

1) What does this have to do with my argument? People can have a wide varietiy of opinions that aren't backed up by a combination of empirical observation and rational explanation/thought.
2) Nice ad hominem.
3) Realistically, I think it's too impractical to get every single abortion doctor or woman that goes through with abortion. It'll cost way too much money and take time and reosurces away from things the government ought to do. At the same time, it's clearly an issue of whether states want to endorse that sort of nonsense in their terrirotries since abortion isn't a right at all and you can't even argue it is. If everyone has the right to life, liberty and happiness, don't they need to be born alive in the first place? Anyways, I honestly do hope RvW gets repealed so that at the very least there can be state governments that don't endorse infanticide and those that do want it can go to states that do endorse it. It's hardly a religious issue when it goes against the founding principles of this nation.

1. It has a lot to do with it. There is separation of church and state. Just because fundies think something is wrong and the majority of people don't doesn't mean it should be.

3. It's not infanticide since they aren't infants yet. Are you okay with abortion in the cases of rape and incest? Or do you think a woman who gets raped should be forced to bear and raise her rapist's baby?

 

[Tomboy Respecter]

1. It has a lot to do with it. There is separation of church and state. Just because fundies think something is wrong and the majority of people don't doesn't mean it should be.

3. It's not infanticide since they aren't infants yet. Are you okay with abortion in the cases of rape and incest? Or do you think a woman who gets raped should be forced to bear and raise her rapist's baby?

1) We're talking about the actual state of affairs of whether a fetus is a child, not what people think about it. The average person has many views on many things, a lot of which are contradictory. If we follow your argument to its logical end, then slavery was alright 200+ years ago because no one had a problem with it except those dang Negros and Quaker abolitionists but magically it isn't now.Also, I literally made no references to God explicitly to give a more universal and logical viewpoint about how you can easily deduce why that's true so I don't even know where you are getting this fundie angle from, since they honestly defend their views very poorly as well.

2) They are literally infants since that word means (from the Latin) that they are young humans that don't have the capacity for speech yet, which they are. And why should a child be punished for the crimes of another person? It's not the child's fault that they were born in such unfortunate circumstances, it's the rapists'. The child didn't magically impregnate the woman against her will, the rapist did. And no one said she has to raise it as well. That's why there are such things as communities and neighbors. If the trauma of the rape is that great, it would be best for the child and the mother that a close relative or a friend raises the child. At the same time, you shouldn't kill the child because of what someone else did. That's the peak of injustice really. That's essentially the equivalent to someone bringing you along for a ride, then he kills someone in broad daylight while you watch helplessly, both of you getting arrested and both of you sentenced to death. It is perfectly just and fine for him to die but you weren't an accomplice in the deed nor did you have any knowledge of it, It would make no sense nor would it be just to kill you in that instance.

 

[AnimeGirlConnoisseur]

1. It has a lot to do with it. There is separation of church and state. Just because fundies think something is wrong and the majority of people don't doesn't mean it should be.

>Fundies! Fundies! Fundies!

Listen, I understand that alot of these people are cringe and they want to shove their views down everyone else's throats, but that isn't want being pro-life is all about. I don't care about a Yahudi getting nailed to a cross, I'm just not convinced that a fetus isn't a human.

Also, just because the majority of people think one way doesn't mean it's true. 500 years ago we all believed Earth was the center of the universe and that the sun, the planets, and all of the stars rotated around Earth.

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Abortion is a metaphysical entity which exists throughout space and time. Saying that a brick isn't a house is correct. But you have to realize that we don't just live in the third dimension, we live in all dimensions; a complete world. By killing a fetus you're messing with other alternate realities where the fetus becomes human. This is what hulk hogan doesn't understand.

The 4th dimension is the time dimension. What you have to understand is that abortion is not a crime in the 3rd dimension, but is a crime in the 4th dimension because they know what that fetus will turn into so you're actually killing a fully grown person. When mothers who committed abortions reincarnate in the 4th dimension they will be put in jail.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

1) We're talking about the actual state of affairs of whether a fetus is a child, not what people think about it. The average person has many views on many things, a lot of which are contradictory. If we follow your argument to its logical end, then slavery was alright 200+ years ago because no one had a problem with it except those dang Negros and Quaker abolitionists but magically it isn't now.Also, I literally made no references to God explicitly to give a more universal and logical viewpoint about how you can easily deduce why that's true so I don't even know where you are getting this fundie angle from, since they honestly defend their views very poorly as well.

2) They are literally infants since that word means (from the Latin) that they are young humans that don't have the capacity for speech yet, which they are. And why should a child be punished for the crimes of another person? It's not the child's fault that they were born in such unfortunate circumstances, it's the rapists'. The child didn't magically impregnate the woman against her will, the rapist did. And no one said she has to raise it as well. That's why there are such things as communities and neighbors. If the trauma of the rape is that great, it would be best for the child and the mother that a close relative or a friend raises the child. At the same time, you shouldn't kill the child because of what someone else did. That's the peak of injustice really. That's essentially the equivalent to someone bringing you along for a ride, then he kills someone in broad daylight while you watch helplessly, both of you getting arrested and both of you sentenced to death. It is perfectly just and fine for him to die but you weren't an accomplice in the deed nor did you have any knowledge of it, It would make no sense nor would it be just to kill you in that instance.

So you are fine with forcing a poor girl to bear her rapists baby and then put the burdon of raising it on her relatives? That's really shitty.

Are you also fine with expanding access to welfare and foodstamps to help pay for the rape baby?

 

[Tomboy Respecter]

Abortion is a metaphysical entity which exists throughout space and time. Saying that a brick isn't a house is correct. But you have to realize that we don't just live in the third dimension, we live in all dimensions; a complete world. By killing a fetus you're messing with other alternate realities where the fetus becomes human. This is what hulk hogan doesn't understand.

The 4th dimension is the time dimension. What you have to understand is that abortion is not a crime in the 3rd dimension, but is a crime in the 4th dimension because they know what that fetus will turn into so you're actually killing a fully grown person. When mothers who committed abortions reincarnate in the 4th dimension they will be put in jail.

I cant even tell if this is satire or not.

So you are fine with forcing a poor girl to bear her rapists baby and then put the burdon of raising it on her relatives? That's really shitty.

Are you also fine with expanding access to welfare and foodstamps to help pay for the rape baby?

You want to fucking kill an innocent child for something that they didn't even do. That's actually inhumane. Even if the child is put up for adoption in an orphanage or something if the woman absolutely can't deal with the trauma of the rape (which honestly shouldn't be belittled), it's better than the child dying. You can't really virtue signal when what you are talking about is worse than the most unfortunate of all possible reasonable solutions to the problem.

Also, what does welfare have to do with the child? I get that children cost money and generally are expensive, but that's why we live in communities: in order to help one another whenever we face problems we can't fix ourselves. My stance on welfare in general is that it should go to those that completely unable to work due to age or mental/physical disabilities on a near permanent basis and if you are of working age, you get like 3-6 months of it while you job hunt.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

You want to fucking kill an innocent child for something that they didn't even do. That's actually inhumane. Even if the child is put up for adoption in an orphanage or something if the woman absolutely can't deal with the trauma of the rape (which honestly shouldn't be belittled), it's better than the child dying. You can't really virtue signal when what you are talking about is worse than the most unfortunate of all possible reasonable solutions to the problem.

Also, what does welfare have to do with the child? I get that children cost money and generally are expensive, but that's why we live in communities: in order to help one another whenever we face problems we can't fix ourselves. My stance on welfare in general is that it should go to those that completely unable to work due to age or mental/physical disabilities on a near permanent basis and if you are of working age, you get like 3-6 months of it while you job hunt.

It's not a child yet, dude. You can't get it through your skull that some people don't view it as murder because they don't view it as life yet.

And welfare has a lot to do with the child. Children are expensive, you even said it yourself. If you're going to force women to bear a child, you damn well better also be prepared to help pay for their doctor visits (universal healthcare) and be fine with social welfare programs. Otherwise you are pro-life until the baby is born, then you don't give a shit about them anymore. Your community idea is a pipe dream; it doesn't work that way in the real world

 

[AnimeGirlConnoisseur]

And welfare has a lot to do with the child. Children are expensive, you even said it yourself. If you're going to force women to bear a child, you damn well better also be prepared to help pay for their doctor visits (universal healthcare) and be fine with social welfare programs. Otherwise you are pro-life until the baby is born, then you don't give a shit about them anymore. Your community idea is a pipe dream; it doesn't work that way in the real world

You don't have to support the existence of any sort of government program in order to believe that a group of people have rights and shouldn't be killed (and maybe some of these programs should exist or be expanded; I don't know). This is like me arguing that, since you've never given me any money or help with anything during the entirety of my life, you don't think I'm a person and it's okay for someone to kill me.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

You don't have to support the existence of any sort of government program in order to believe that a group of people have rights and shouldn't be killed (and maybe some of these programs should exist or be expanded; I don't know). This is like me arguing that, since you've never given me any money or help with anything during the entirety of my life, you don't think I'm a person and it's okay for someone to kill me.

So you're pro-life until they're born, then fuck them, right?