The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[Lemmingwise]

Since no pro-choicers answered it, I'll ask the question again. For context I'll quote it so you can reread the context in which it was asked:

Finally I'd like to ask the pro-choicers in this thread: if the limit for abortion was set at 80 days, would you have a problem with that? Why?

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

I'm for freedom

 

[The Jokester]

While we're talking I would like to add the great divide that pro choicers never acknowledge. It's only a baby when it's wanted and a bundle of cell mass when it's convenient. It's a bundle of cells until you're trying to comfort your distaught wife as she's weeping into a pillow. This detachment from one and the other is maddening. Is it a bundle of cells or a child? I promise you this you won't tell your heart broken wife,

"Cheer up Honey! It was only a ball of cells!"

I have seen someone try and say this ONCE on the Jeremy Kyle show where these horrid creatures tried to justify destroying their enemy's dead baby's grave. The audience certainly didn't agree that it was "just a bundle of cells" when the girl next to them was sobbing her heart out.

A miscarriage is a tragedy, an abortion is just routine healthcare.

 

[Nom Carver]

While we're talking I would like to add the great divide that pro choicers never acknowledge. It's only a baby when it's wanted and a bundle of cell mass when it's convenient. It's a bundle of cells until you're trying to comfort your distaught wife as she's weeping into a pillow. This detachment from one and the other is maddening. Is it a bundle of cells or a child? I promise you this you won't tell your heart broken wife,

"Cheer up Honey! It was only a ball of cells!"

I have seen someone try and say this ONCE on the Jeremy Kyle show where these horrid creatures tried to justify destroying their enemy's dead baby's grave. The audience certainly didn't agree that it was "just a bundle of cells" when the girl next to them was sobbing her heart out.

A miscarriage is a tragedy, an abortion is just routine healthcare.

Of course it is. These pro choice people would advocate for literally any point that lets them have more sex. Half the people arguing in this thread probably wouldn't even change their minds about their stance if it was definitively proven that fetuses have human emotion or brain functions or whatever arbitrary "Is it human yet?" goalpost they want to stick in the mud. They're not particularly rational individuals, or intelligent. They just operate under the caveman logic of "It feel good. It be good. Me do more" without bothering to think about any of the consequences, like a 5 year old would as they eat an entire batch of cookies.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

It's not something you do for fun and you certainly would not suggest your love one to have one out of thrill seeking.

I don't believe anyone here is suggesting that there are people that do it out of thrill seeking; the disagreement is about the range of acceptable rationales for it and the supporting ideas for those positions.

The heart starts to beat at six weeks and the nerve system (the spine) is developing FOUR WEEKS after conception.

Does it really matter whether they feel pain, or if they have a heart or nerve system? If they're born with a disorder that prevents them from feeling pain, does it make their abortion okay regardless of the stage of development just because they don't feel it? If they suffer abnormalities in any of their organ systems, does that mean that they're less human according to the severity of said abnormalities? What are the implications of being "less human" while not being able to be considered completely non-human, particularly in regards to abortion? Is there some sort of threshold to humanity that, if not met, means that you can be killed without any condemnation falling on the head of the one who terminated your life? If you manage to fall below this threshold later in life (due to things like organ impairment, organ failure, or chronic illnesses), is your life automatically forfeit, or is it immaterial because you've long left your mother's womb? If it's immaterial, then is it the fact that you were born the basis for your "full humanity", rather than the faculties you have? Alternatively, is the state of humanity immaterial in the face of the desire of the mother to retain the fetus?

I can go on, but this isn't even so much a criticism of the pro-choice rationale, as it is one of the pro-life rationale that buys into any of the premises of the pro-choice rationale.

 

[Muh Vagina]

Do any of you tards have a uterus?

So do unborn children. The have been scans showing unborn children literally trying to get away from the utensils used to kill them.

The heart starts to beat at six weeks and the nerve system (the spine) is developing FOUR WEEKS after conception. They feel pain.

Wrong

So if you were anesthetized or otherwise rendered unconscious it would be okay to kill you?

I am not inhabiting another person's body and sapping their nutrients.

EDIT: @Lemmingwise yes, I would be against an 80 day limit, because sometimes later term abortions are necessary. And FYI, later term abortions are always for health reasons.

 

[The Jokester]

Do any of you tards have a uterus?


Wrong

I am not inhabiting another person's body and sapping their nutrients.

EDIT: @Lemmingwise yes, I would be against an 80 day limit, because sometimes later term abortions are necessary. And FYI, later term abortions are always for health reasons.

But it's not wrong though, is it?

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/pregnancy-week-by-week/in-depth/prenatal-care/art-20045302#:~:text=Just four weeks after conception,the eyes and ears develop.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

Do any of you tards have a uterus?

If any of us do, will any of our arguments suddenly have worth?

I am not inhabiting another person's body and sapping their nutrients.

You're moving goalposts.

 

[Muh Vagina]

If any of us do, will any of our arguments suddenly have worth?

They'll have more merits that yours do, because people with uteruses might have to make that decision one of these days. You will never have to worry about carrying an unwanted baby.

That Mayo Clinic link says nothing about fetal pain.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

They'll have more merits that yours do

You disingenuous bint. You met the last person who expressed to you that she thought that the attitudes around abortion in the West have gone too far with a "you do you, and you let others do what they want":

and the progressive left is pushing for insane shit like abortion up to the time of birth.

[...]
Since you're the only pro-life woman who has chimed in here, you focus on your own bodily autonomy and let me focus on mine. Capisce?

Your gatekeeping has nothing to do with argumentative merit and everything to do with shutting down conversation so nobody, male or female, can call you out on your shitty arguments. I've said it repeatedly, but now it's literally come full circle.

 

[Sriracha]

I was thinking about this debate and birth control as a whole and the likelihood of an unwanted pregnancy due to birth control failure is so incredibly low. That got me thinking, and I found this interesting article that shows that regarding unintended pregnancies, 42% decide to end those pregnancies and 54% of those women were not using birth control. 41% were inconsistent with birth control. I think everyone could find middle ground here in that if women under the poverty line were able to receive free birth control that requires little maintenance (like IUDs), there would be less baby murder.

 

[The Jokester]

I was thinking about this debate and birth control as a whole and the likelihood of an unwanted pregnancy due to birth control failure is so incredibly low. That got me thinking, and I found this interesting article that shows that regarding unintended pregnancies, 42% decide to end those pregnancies and 54% of those women were not using birth control. 41% were inconsistent with birth control. I think everyone could find middle ground here in that if women under the poverty line were able to receive free birth control that requires little maintenance (like IUDs), there would be less baby murder.

I would happily agree to free birth control. It's better than literally having your baby torn apart.

This reminded me if this video I saw. This was an ex abortion doctor who performed 1,200 abortions. But after losing his own adopted child just couldn't do it anymore.

https://youtu.be/A16gzm9eaa8

It's pretty graphic on how he goes into it. Now he's totally pro life and wants it stopped. He tells the audience how he would pull out pieces from legs to intestines.

 

[Freya]

Since no pro-choicers answered it, I'll ask the question again. For context I'll quote it so you can reread the context in which it was asked:

Like 90% of abortions in the US are done within the first trimester already.

Nobody is getting an abortion at 3 months just for shits and giggles. By that point there's usually a serious medical issue thats the reason

 

[Sriracha]

This reminded me if this video I saw. This was an ex abortion doctor who performed 1,200 abortions. But after losing his own adopted child just couldn't do it anymore.

I got into a debate years ago with one of my friends who was going to med school because one of his classmates didn't want to ever have to perform D&Cs, and he felt like it's your responsibility to perform them as a doctor regardless of politics. I think at the time he used the argument vets love animals and don't want to put them down, but that's half the job and you can't back out.

It's a really hard call with abortion because of situations like a missed miscarriage where there is no fetal pole (baby) and it's an empty sac, you aren't really ending a human life you're just removing a literal sac of cells. When you hit the 12 week mark it's a little bit sadder for some doctors. The only reason we have abortions up to 12 weeks is because at 11-13 weeks we can do a nuchal translucency scan to detect down syndrome, and having a child with downs can be a life sentence. Now, we have testing to detect genetic anomalies at the 6 week mark but it's too expensive for a lot of people. If the government would subsidise it, I'm positive that it'll lessen the amount of women who have abortions at 12 weeks and it'll be less traumatic for women and doctors.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

The only reason we have abortions up to 12 weeks is because at 11-13 weeks we can do a nuchal translucency scan to detect down syndrome, and having a child with downs can be a life sentence. Now, we have testing to detect genetic anomalies at the 6 week mark but it's too expensive for a lot of people.

That, and it's not definitive, meaning the tests can be inaccurate and you risk killing a child that wouldn't have actually had a deformity and you'd never know either way. That can easily wreck someone if they end up being the kind of person to dwell on this and come across a person who happened to receive such a test result only to give birth to a perfectly normal child.

 

[Sriracha]

That, and it's not definitive, meaning the tests can be inaccurate and you risk killing a child that wouldn't have actually had a deformity and you'd never know either way. That can easily wreck someone if they end up being the kind of person to dwell on this and come across a person who happened to receive such a test result only to give birth to a perfectly normal child.

It's more accurate than a nuchal translucency test for trisomy but you are 100% right that it's not definitive. There are diagnostic tests but they aren't really safe and can cause miscarriage.

 

[Muh Vagina]

I think everyone could find middle ground here in that if women under the poverty line were able to receive free birth control that requires little maintenance (like IUDs), there would be less baby murder.

The only pro-choicers who would be against this are the hardcore libertarians and they're the minority. Most of us have been advocating for this for years.

 

[Freya]

Try to get a sperm cell to implant onto uterine lining, then, and see if the sperm cell by itself develops into a human being. Or, do the same with an unfertilized egg cell.


In reality, we're talking about abortion irrespective of legality because we're talking about abortion itself, never mind that less women will resort to abortion if it's made largely illegal because it means that they're putting themselves at greater risk by practitioners who aren't keen on following the laws.

Where did you get this "wisdom" from? I heard something like this-- apparently it came from a study that entirely involved prostitutes, who already live on the outskirts of the law?


You couldn't possibly cope harder. "Uhhhh, pregnancies are hard!" And somehow we manage millions of births yearly, and managed millions of births on a yearly basis before abortion became mainstream, before the idea of killing your child in utero became as acceptable a thought as it is now (after the time that it was acceptable, but trifles).

Instead of talking about how we could alleviate any suffering of pregnant women without turning to abortion (e.g. promoting stable family structures so there's someone to provide while the woman is pregnant, providing additional services on the state and/or local level especially for not-well-to-do pregnant women, improving the institutions of adoption and group homes for when an adoption can't be immediately arranged), you use this reality as a reason for why women must be able to kill their children before they get to see the light of day.


"I believe we as a society should be more wary of resorting to abortion as a means of dealing with pregnancy given that the fetus is in fact ontologically a human being and should be given human consideration."
"You just believe that women are objects, and you don't care about women's feelings or that they get hurt during pregnancy and labor."
"I recognize that pregnancy and labor are difficult, but we're talking about human lives, which easily outweigh all those discomforts. And if you won't wish to be pregnant such that you potentially suffer any of these hardships, consider not having sex."
"YOU'RE A MISOGYNIST!"

Nobody cares, or even talks about how in most countries men are liable to any draft that automatically designates them cannon fodder, and unlike women (in the case of countries where they allow women to stick their toes in the door, because God knows it's logistically impossible for them to be conscripted like men, because who the hell is going to fling their entire population at the enemy unless they're at the end of their rope and they can't do otherwise), they can't ever take pregnancy as an out.

Imagine being a young male that couldn't or didn't dodge the Vietnam War draft, being flown out into a jungle with funny-talking trees because some people halfway across the world were doing things that your country were getting jittery about. Imagine developing a lifelong mental disorder barely anyone knows anything about because you narrowly avoided getting bumped on several occasions by what amounted to a conga line of muggers with military gear who didn't know nor care about your own rules of engagement-- or, alternatively, imagine getting shot down and lost with no comrades around and at best having a kit that, while equipped with a radio to call for help, was largely meant to help you cope with almost certain demise. Or--or-- imagine spinning a roulette wheel of chronic illnesses because you inadvertently breathed in a tactical pesticide deployed by your own government, and having a one percent chance of getting compensation for an issue they caused.

Nobody talks about those laws directly governing male bodies as units of warpower, or the consequences of said laws. Nobody talks about how our society regularly regards men as disposable. Not even the men, because that's what we do. That's what's expected of us. That's what we even largely want to do-- protect the women and children of our societies. That's our responsibility as men, whether we're pumping the shotgun or readying the crowbar to bump off an intruder or getting turned into mincemeat in a foreign land. I daresay, that's what we're evolved to do.

Meanwhile, we also allow some women to whinge about how hard pregnancy is and how they should be allowed to kill their children if at any point they decide that they don't consent to taking care of their own flesh and blood, and we'll be nagged at and called misogynists contributing to the

this fuckin guy

 

[ADHD]

I think everyone could find middle ground here in that if women under the poverty line were able to receive free birth control that requires little maintenance (like IUDs), there would be less baby murder.

This is already a thing. I'm not sure how much it varies from state to state, but at least in my state, you can go to your local health department and get your pelvic exam and birth control there. The costs are sliding scale, so for many (all? I'm not sure of the income cutoffs) low income women it would be free.

 

[Bunny Tracks]

this fuckin guy

You know, it is possible to not like abortion, and be sympathetic towards women who are pregnant. Like it, or not, even with modern medicine, and science, pregnancy is still a very dangerous, uncomfortable, and painful thing to go through, and it's not like pregnant women are whining for no reason. They're literally growing another person inside them, and eventually have to push that person out of their cunt holes.

Their guts get moved around, they might become incontinent, their cunts usually tear, and they gotta be sewn up with vaginal stitches, and other shit, they're at risk of dying from infection, and other complications from the birthing process, and the possibility of the fetus miscarrying, and not passing through them, their hormones get thrown all out of whack, they're gotta deal with morning sickness, and the even worse version of that where they gotta be put on IVs and feeding tubes because they can't keep food down because they keep throwing because their always so nauseous, they risk getting postpartum depression, or even worse, postpartum psychosis and might do all thing horrific things that come with that like killing their children like Andrea Yates, or even fucking eating them like that other lady did on that infamous 911 call.

Look, my point is that while I don't like abortion, and think it should always be heavily regulated, claiming that women are just being whiny, spoiled cunts about being pregnant for no good reason when that's blatantly not true is just honestly a really fucking retarded, ignorant, naïve, and frankly incel-y thing to say.