The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

[knobslobbin]

Because people deserve bodily autonomy. No fucking man is going to demand that I be an incubator. Embryos and fetuses have no legal rights or pain receptors, therefore the pregnant woman comes first.

Frank Herbert's optimistic vision of the future: https://dune.fandom.com/wiki/Axlotl_Tanks

 

[Rekkington]

Why would I be? You are the one who seems to be seething at people who have sex. Maybe if you troon out you'll be able to get laid

Yes everyone is so mad at you and all your abortions. You should seethe out some more random insults.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Yes everyone is so mad at you and all your abortions. You should seethe out some more random insults.

It must suck to be so autistic that you turned into a puritan boomer

 

[Thomas Highway]

Frank Herbert's optimistic vision of the future: https://dune.fandom.com/wiki/Axlotl_Tanks

Bro that is legit autistic.

 

[knobslobbin]

Bro that is legit autistic.

Do you know where you are? Look around buddy, Dune references are just the beginning.

edit: the people legitimately trying to "debate" abortion are the real autists. Shitposters unite!

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

I was a libertarian too once; then I turned 17.

Belief in a natural law doesn't make you a libertarian.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

Belief in a natural law doesn't make you a libertarian.

So you are for expanding welfare to poor single mothers then so they can provide for the child you want to force them to have?

 

[Rekkington]

So you are for expanding welfare to poor single mothers then so they can provide for the child you want to force them to have?

The "you have to pay me so I don't murder my child" demand is by far the best self-own you people have come up with. By the way, calling someone a boomer for not wanting to murder babies and give dumb whores free money forever just makes boomers seem reasonable, which even here should not be permitted.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

The "you have to pay me so I don't murder my child" demand is by far the best self-own you people have come up with. By the way, calling someone a boomer for not wanting to murder babies and give dumb whores free money forever just makes boomers seem reasonable, which even here should not be permitted.

Except it's not murder and a fetus is not a child. You retards want to punish women that have sex by forcing them to have a baby, even if they cannot afford to. People are gonna have sex. Accidents happen.

And yeah, acting like a puritanical boomer despite (probably) being in your 20s is definitely something that should be laughed at. I guess autism will do that to a person. Stop listening to evangelical boomers

 

[Rekkington]

Except it's not murder and a fetus is not a child.

A fetus is a child. As we have explained, a baby is called a fetus until it leaves the womb, if you are in favor of aborting a fetus a month before it is born you are literally in favor of tearing it apart and stabbing it in the head. From the sounds of it you would be in favor of this if a woman thinks she can be the Best Social Media Community Manager Ever, but once again for the vast majority of humans on the planet and across time you come across as a deranged freak.

You retards want to punish women that have sex by forcing them to have a baby, even if they cannot afford to. People are gonna have sex. Accidents happen.

Accidents happen, but that is not an excuse to murder a baby for the same reason a mother is not allowed to murder a baby after it leaves her womb. If you are in favor of women throwing babies into dumpsters just say so, stop trying to fog the issue with terminology you don't understand and calling everyone puritanical boomers. This lets everyone know you have some very specific personal stake in this and you are taking something out on your grandfather or something. Despite your combative nature, I would advise against turning your vagina into a vast child crypt cause you're trying to stick it to some trauma-induced avatar you've created in your head.

And yeah, acting like a puritanical boomer despite (probably) being in your 20s is definitely something that should be laughed at. I guess autism will do that to a person. Stop listening to evangelical boomers

You are the only one constantly bringing up boomers, it's weird.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

A fetus is a child. As we have explained, a baby is called a fetus until it leaves the womb, if you are in favor of aborting a fetus a month before it is born you are literally in favor of tearing it apart and stabbing it in the head. From the sounds of it you would be in favor of this if a woman thinks she can be the Best Social Media Community Manager Ever, but once again for the vast majority of humans on the planet and across time you come across as a deranged freak.

A fetus is not a child, despite what your evangelical retards say. You don't actually give two fucks about the baby or the fetus or you'd want to expand healthcare and welfare. You just want to punish harlots for having sex.

Accidents happen, but that is not an excuse to murder a baby for the same reason a mother is not allowed to murder a baby after it leaves her womb. If you are in favor of women throwing babies into dumpsters just say so, stop trying to fog the issue with terminology you don't understand and calling everyone puritanical boomers. This lets everyone know you have some very specific personal stake in this and you are taking something out on your grandfather or something. Despite your combative nature, I would advise against turning your vagina into a vast child crypt cause you're trying to stick it to some trauma-induced avatar you've created in your head.

The whole point of an abortion would be that you would end the pregnancy early. There's zero reason to carry a child further, just to abort it later. It's more complicated and a lot more effort. Like I said, you don't actually give two fucks about the child or the fetus or you'd want to expand welfare and health services.

You are the only one constantly bringing up boomers, it's weird.

That's because you spazes are acting like boomers.

 

[Rekkington]

A fetus is not a child, despite what your evangelical retards say. You don't actually give two fucks about the baby or the fetus or you'd want to expand healthcare and welfare. You just want to punish harlots for having sex.

A fetus is a child, medical professionals call the baby a fetus before it leaves the womb, this is not even debatable you just don't like what words mean.
Also this weird twisting of motivations is so common with you people I don't even think you question it, so because I do not want babies murdered that means I need to give the mother money? No, I can just be against murder. A person can be against both murder and welfare, it is insane for you to keep harping on this.

Like I have mentioned previously, if you believe poor mothers should not have children you should go speak to poor children and ask them if they would rather be dead.
Here's the thing: you don't care about children. You just want to have carefree child murder. You don't want to address the reality that children of single mothers don't deserve to die.

The whole point of an abortion would be that you would end the pregnancy early. There's zero reason to carry a child further, just to abort it later. It's more complicated and a lot more effort.

Oh so now it's about ease and lack of effort, I thought it was about the happiness of the child. It sounds like on a long enough timeline every argument just comes back to you wanting abortions to be as cheap and fun as possible, and if not everyone should pay you. Everything really just end up at your pussy and free money.

That's because you spazes are acting like boomers.

We are not your parents, HHH.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

A fetus is a child, medical professionals call the baby a fetus before it leaves the womb, this is not even debatable you just don't like what words mean.
Also this weird twisting of motivations is so common with you people I don't even think you question it, so because I do not want babies murdered that means I need to give the mother money? No, I can just be against murder. A person can be against both murder and welfare, it is insane for you to keep harping on this.

Like I have mentioned previously, if you believe poor mothers should not have children you should go speak to poor children and ask them if they would rather be dead.
Here's the thing: you don't care about children. You just want to have carefree child murder. You don't want to address the reality that children of single mothers don't deserve to die.

Like I said, you don't actually give two shits about the fetus/baby. Otherwise, you'd want to expand welfare and health services. Instead, you want to punish poor single mothers that can't afford their babies because you want to punish them for having sex.

Like Bill Clinton said, make abortions safe, legal and rare. Expand access to birth control and sexual education. Instead you puritanical boomertards want to deny both of those things, even though studies have shown they make abortions go down quite a bit.

Oh so now it's about ease and lack of effort, I thought it was about the happiness of the child. It sounds like on a long enough timeline every argument just comes back to you wanting abortions to be as cheap and fun as possible, and if not everyone should pay you. Everything really just end up at your pussy and free money.

As I explained above, I am not "for" abortions, but I am for women having access to them. All banning abortion does is keeps poor people in a cycle of poverty. You boomertards can preach about sex abstinance all you want, which is easy because no woman will have sex with you, but us pro-choice people live in the real world. Also, a fetus can't be happy or sad. It doesn't have emotions until quite far along in the pregnancy.

We are not your parents, HHH.

Why do you act like a boomer? You know you aren't 60 years old, you should act more your age and stop listening to your evangelical megachurch pastor that's grifting you for cash. Autists gonna get conned, I guess

 

[Bonesjones]

We get it, you are so gross and pathetic that women won't have sex with you if they couldn't destroy any consequences associated with the act. Maybe get off kiwifarms and develop a life and personality instead of blowing your unemployment on hookers?

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

So you are for expanding welfare to poor single mothers then so they can provide for the child you want to force them to have?

I support a Catholic society, and as such support a welfare state.

So yes, I do think single mothers, like any other mother, should be entitled to child benefits. Not every pro-lifer is a US evangelical.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

I support a Catholic society, and as such support a welfare state.

So yes, I do think single mothers, like any other mother, should be entitled to child benefits. Not every pro-lifer is a US evangelical.

You're one of the few, then. Most pro-life tards are against that stuff, too

 

[FatalTater]

Soo...Texas, which has been infiltrated by a lot of woke lefties, has practically outlawed abortion.

Gov. Greg Abbott signs into law one of nation’s strictest abortion measures, banning procedure as early as six weeks into a pregnancy

The signing of the bill opens a new frontier in the battle over abortion restrictions as first-of-its-kind legal provisions intended to make the law harder to challenge are poised to be tested in the courts.

www.texastribune.org

https://archive.ph/deAmY

Who benefits from a lot of unwanted children running around? What could possibly be the use of them?

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

If your mother is dying of kidney failure and you don't give her a kidney you are a bad person and you will burn in hell.
If a complete stranger is dying of kidney failure and you don't give them a kidney no one gives a shit.
You have specific moral duties to your family. They have a specific relationship to you which creates mutual obligations.

Whatever duty a person has to their family is for them to assume, not for their family to impose upon them. While most of us are fortunate enough to belong to loving families, there are plenty of less fortunate people who have legitimate reasons not to want to associate with their family, and these people are well within their right to refuse to donate an organ if it would go against their will.

It absolutely can.

You will never be able to deter every mistake or transgression. Any moral system which assumes that people never make mistakes is not applicable to the real world. Unwanted pregnancies are still occasionally going to happen, and you're still left with the dilemma about what ought to be done about them.

 

[Rekkington]

You will never be able to deter every mistake or transgression. Any moral system which assumes that people never make mistakes is not applicable to the real world. Unwanted pregnancies are still occasionally going to happen, and you're still left with the dilemma about what ought to be done about them.

In a moral society you do not kill them. We can list all the ways we have done this in the past, including orphanages and adoption - all of which both endorsed and ran by Christians, so this claim that pro-life people dislike this is completely wrong and ahistorical - but I've seen more enthusiasm from women wanting to shut these down as well. It's because, at the end of the day, women like HHH actually aren't concerned about children but rather the power of their vaginas. That's why it always starts and ends with that one single issue, they only throw in the whole shit about "you're a hypocrite if you don't want universal basic income for mothers" as a way to just make the issue retarded.
Again, the moral system is just "don't kill children." That's pretty much it, including from a religious angle. Other solutions are evolved and created based on that. The solution that we should kill children if the mothers aren't rich enough or did a whoopsie daisy is madness and, in my opinion, mostly a bad-faith argument.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

Early Christian thought on the subject of abortion was mostly influenced by the Aristotelian concept of delayed ensoulment, and the writings of Christian scholars like Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine reflect this. The view they took was that before the very late stages of pregnancy, an embryo/fetus was ontologically on the same level as plant life: alive, but without a soul. It wasn't really until the middle of the 19th century that the modern pro-life movement began, after the Catholic church finally took a firm line against abortion, having decided that personhood begins at conception.

This is not entirely true. The concept of ensoulment has a history within the Church, but the condemnation of abortion goes back much further to the earliest Christian scholars in 100 A.D., who forbade "murder of a child by abortion" and any number of chemical concoctions intended to induce miscarriage. Anything intended to "destroy" rather than "create" was considered contrary to God's laws. We know this because they thought it was hilarious that they were accused of being cannibals while abortion was common in the Roman world. They argued against abortion because it involved murder, violence, selfishness, witchcraft, an indifference toward life, an indifference toward children, a misunderstanding of human biology ("that is a man which is going to be one; the fruit is already in the seed" - Tertullian), and a misunderstanding of your responsibility to your neighbor, which includes the child who is dependent upon you but not part of you. It was never based purely on the speculative theory of ensoulment, though that does appear sometimes in their treatises against it, and it's usually tied to conception, not a "delayed" form. Ensoulment is just a theory designed to explain a biblical incident where John the Baptist and Jesus "leapt for joy in their mother's wombs" when their moms met. Their personhood is already present there, reactive, emotive, spiritual, and integral to the Incarnation. Christian thought has always understood the unborn as their neighbors, as fully human and worthy of protection, and they used a similarly wide range of arguments that pro-lifers use today to talk, on the one hand, of the value of all human life, and on the other, the responsibility of a mother to her child even in the womb.

I'll add that people who speak about the (Roman) Catholic Church as though the Church of Rome was the only Christian church ever, while only citing Western theologians (and only the prime suspects at that), are altogether too ignorant to be discussing the history of Christian thought. Additionally, citing only two prominent figures in the Church without weighing their commentary in the context of the community to which they submitted themselves is no better than outright misreading their works. You would be much better served observing the community itself rather than a small collection of its (albeit inspired) writers.

No fucking man is going to demand that I be an incubator.

Nobody demands men to give birth in the first place, it's literally impossible. You haven't anything to worry about.