So Pol, what about abortion? Is it murder or not? If so, what is the cut-offs for it not being murder? What about rape?
Pre-emptive baptismal process....
I love it.
>>55518204
Gr8 b8 m8 r8 8/8
But srsly to all you amifags in here ask yourselves: From what point in it's (and I'm saying "it's" for a reason) life do you consider a child as a human being ?
>there is your answer
I support abortion because it kills ugly Americans.
I hope the woman hemorrhages and dies too, so there are more dead ugly Americans.
>>55518204
My ex wife decided to abort our second child because we were traveling for a year...I regret saying yes .and I regret having my daughter as a only child...western womyn far ya!
It's mostly shitskins getting abortions, so I'm all for it.
Women can do what they feel like with their bodies, they just need to accept the consequences of it.
If a kid's gonna be born retarded or deformed, do the world a favor and abort it.
>>55520492
did you read my post?...cunt!
>>55518204
innocent human life is the basis for all social morality
rape is a violation, and therefore the consequence is a violation;
keep in mind 98% of abortions baby is healthy, mother is healthy, no rape, etc.
>>55520838
The dingo would have gotten it anyway.
>>55518204
Don't really give a shit.
>>55518204
Literally don't care. If my gf got pregnant I hope she would abort. My ex got pregnant but luckily had a miscarriage, though I admit I felt a tinge of guilt about my potential kid dying.
I'm not an edgy kid or a hypocrite, which means I don't care what others do with their bodies.
We can surely find a reasonable compromise where we say the baby is a human, and let they have abortion until that point.
>>55518204
Its murder.
I don't mind niggers getting abortion tho
>>55518204
Not aborting a retarded child is a immoral.
You would be a retarded if you didnt abort.
it's murder but i'm fine with that
>Is it murder or not?
No if they're non-white
>what is the cut-offs for it not being murder?
None if they're non-white
>What about rape?
Only if the rapist is non-white, then its fine to get an abortion.
I think abortion is the same as murder, and should be illegal.
If you're not prepared to raise a child, use som form of birth control.
>>55518204
>So Pol, what about abortion?
>>55518204
we all agree it's murder, some just claim murdering the black chidren is a good thing ( i dont)
I can't call for its abolition, as a libertarian.
>>55518204
What about wrongful conception/birth?
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/12/health/birth-control-packaging-lawsuit/index.html
>>55518204
Should be legal up to a month.
That being said, Im personally against enabling women to whore around.
>>55518204
>>55519217
>>55519554
>>55520492
>>55520587
>>55520886
>>55521466
>>55521521
>>55521553
>>55521649
>>55522099
>>55523729
>>55524931
>ATTENION /pol/
>1 in 56 of them is a JEW
Black women have tge most abortions in America.
Now imagine the black population exploding...
abortion is dehumanising.
it shows a culture which does not value life. a culture that is without human dignity and destroying itself from within.
>>55525339
this one quite gets it
>now I'm going one step further
>We should actually kill grown-ups who made very wrong choices in their life (like adopting and trying to enforce Sharia law)
>But not children who don't even know about their mother's and father's supposed wrongdoings
You could have solved this with a dictionary dumbfuck. The answer is no.
mur·der
ˈmərdər/Submit
noun
1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"
>>55519511
Life begins at conception, "personhood" is an invention used to balm the conscience of murderers.
>wanting niggers and spics to have more children
>thinking we have the prison space for that
>>55518204
Murder.
We don't murder children for the crimes of their parents.
If only the internet had images whose messages weren't spelled out in large type Impact font.
>>55526107
You know you are too stupid to inhabitate this world, don't you ?
>>55526252
lol liberal calls someone else stupid
>>55525174
>there are about 6 million jews in israel
cannot be coincidence
>>55526252
I hear some people, lacking an ability to dispute a fact will resort to attacking the person rather than the argument.
>>55526248
it isn't allowed to force someone to give up their body if they do not want for someone elses welfare. i can't be strapped down and forced to donate bone marrow or a kidney if it will let someone else live. so your argument is invalid.
>>55526465
So don't get knocked up you dumb roastie.
>>55518204
Truth be told, we'll probably have a mechanism a few hundred years from now which prevents unwanted conceptions 100% and abortions won't be necessary. Before long, we'll probably look back on this period the same way we look back on the Holocaust or slavery.
All my life I was pro choice. Wasnt even a debate.
but the older I get, the least sure I am of my position.
Abortion is fine as long as the person having the abortion gives consent. It's best to not force opinions and ideas onto others just because they disagree with you; why take away the opportunity from someone to receive a safe abortion just because you feel like abortion is wrong? If you are against abortion then don't get an abortion.
>>55526635
Make the kid give consent too.
>>55526252
>>55526362
this is not an ad hominem
>and I'm not a liberal
>I'm not a conservative either
>Just thinking every point of view through, I must say, yours on this one doesn't provide the necessary arguments to convince me
>>55526635
Murder is fine as long as the person committing the murder gives consent. It's best to not force opinions and ideas onto others just because they disagree with you; why take away the opportunity from someone to perform a murder just because you feel like murder is wrong? If you are against murder then don't kill anyone.
>>55526676
That would be impossible. It's not even a kid yet: it's a potential human who doesn't even have a developed enough nervous system to be aware of its surroundings.
>>55526824
How would you know? Have you tried asking him?
I don't like abortion.
I don't think it's something the government should fund or even deal with
Let the states handle the legality of abortion.
The women should fight for insurance companies to cover the cost (which they won't) or pay for it out of pocket.
If women are too stupid to keep their legs shut, they should either pay for it, keep the child, put up for adoption, or pay to have it killed.
>>55526963
Now this is the most terrifying post so far
>if only men could get pregnant
>>55526741
Also that argumentative device, I forgot what it was called, but it's terrible. If I were a liberal I'd make a law preventing people from using it.
>>55527063
>personal responsibility terrifies me
>>55518204
You do it you live with it, having kids or aborting. Both now and the rest of your life. Good or bad.
>>55527171
>a woman being able to make decisions about her own body and reproduction terrifies me
>>55526190
are hispanics the new niggers or something
>>55527338
You keep using that phrase "her own body".
>>55526741
Good job pointing out the importance of context. Murdering someone else has quite different effects on the people involved than abortion. with murder being an individual choosing to act upon another individual and abortion being an individual choosing to be acted upon.
The ownership of kittens is fine as long as the person owning the kittens gives consent. It's best to not force opinions and ideas onto others just because they disagree with you; why take away the opportunity from someone to own a kitten just because you feel like owning a kitten is wrong? If you are against owning a kitten then don't own one.
I hope that shows you how ridiculous your rebuttal was.
>>55527425
Because it is.
>>55527447
You know it's illegal to kill a kitten.
>>55527338
A woman can do whatever she likes with her own body, so long as she's not taking the life of another human in the process. Same as a man.
>>55526525
>so don't get bone cancer you fucking rugrat
im a guy, too, you autist
>>55527425
as it is
>>55527472
Well at least you confirmed your virginity, but could you at least take the time to acquire some form of education?
>>55527447
Abortion is a woman choosing to act upon another human with DNA separate from her own.
>>55527338
>>55527512
At least I am allowed to wear pants without feeling guilty about my privilege to wear pants.
>>55527511
Wrong. Someone else's right to live ends where your bodily autonomy begins.
>>55527593
I knew where this b8 would go. Maybe time to bring up the ad hominem again ?
>>55527447
>and abortion being an individual choosing to be acted upon.
how is it and individual choosing to be acted upon if the mother gets to choose to kill the fetus?
It's absolutely nessisary if we don't want to lose.
>>55527690
Isn't it illegal to be conservative in Germany? Because Hitler guilt and such?
>>55518204
Abortion should only be used for non-viable fetuses or if the fetus shows signs of genetic problems.
Children of rape can be adopted(white babies are the most coveted adoption type,babies of any race are also favored)
In this day and age of modern effective birth control there is no excuse of getting knocked up besides being a dummy
>>55527661
So anyone who inconveniences my bodily autonomy, by say cutting ahead of me in line is subject to murder by your standard?
>>55527760
That's not an example of infringing upon bodily autonomy.
>>55527760
Who is fighting who anymore?
>>55527751
It doesn't matter if there is no excuse. Do you honestly want a whore, and one too stupid to take birth control, to raise another human being, and more importantly, for that human to grow up and vote?
>>55525339
>it shows a culture which does not value life.
Or it shows a culture which values life that is certain, matured and experienced over one which is not.
>>55527760
not to mention that a fetus can't possibly be liable for "hijacking" the mother's womb since it didn't choose to be conceived
>>55527750
>Nah
>We've been ruled by conservatives for 70% of the time since 1949
>feel free to look it up
>>55527823
It is. Bodily autonomy refers to your right to govern your body to do whatever you wish. If someone stops you from doing so, they've violated that autonomy - whether externally or internally.
This reasoning might be too lefty for /pol/ but I think it's the best pro-choice argument in existence:
It's not murder, and it doesn't matter if the fetus is living or not, or how far into the pregnancy the woman is, or any other factor imaginable.
Bodily autonomy is this concept that you have total control over your body. It's why it's illegal to take organs from non-organ donors. Basically, everyone can do whatever the fuck they want to with their bodies. So you've got a fetus that is using the body of the mother to grow and survive, but that mother doesn't consent to the fetus being there. This gives the mother the right to stop that fetus from using her body (ie abortion.)
Not allowing abortion means dead people have more control over their bodies than a living woman.
Like I said, probably too lefty for /pol/. But that's the best argument for abortion that the left has.
>>55525174
>>55525999
>>55526252
>>55526740
>>55527063
>>55527525
>>55527690
>>55527856
learn to greentext you fucking newfag
>>55527892
Someone cutting in front of you in line is not infringing on your bodily autonomy.
>>55527909
Let me get this straight: liberals actually believe that a human fetus is another organ of its mother's body?
>>55527751
>non-viable fetuses
That's called a miscarriage not an abortion.
>>55527909
Consent is withdrawn at the moment of conception when a new human life enters the equation.
>>55518204
It's murder and should be put on illegality except for retarded babies cause they've shitty genetics.
>>55528000
They are forcibly and without your consent impeding upon your use of your body.
>>55528013
Technically thats true. But you need to decide first at one point you think something is human and why.
>>55527843
> values life that is certain, matured and experienced over one which is not.
euegenics in one sentence. as i said, a lack of human dignity.
>>55527909
>that the left has.
So the best argument of "the left" is the legal standard for abortion?
>>55528030
Why is it always Americans who are so butthurt about this ?
>>55519511
this is a philosophical question, sceintists cant answer this and they admit that. sperm from a human is human sperm an embryo growing inside a human is a human embryo and so on.
people confuse being considered a "person" with being human.
at the end of the day when you abort a baby you are killing a human. which in my eyes is murder. however the world is being overpopulated so perhaps it is needed if you look at it from a really horrible and harsh point of view
>>55526099
A human fetus is a human being. It may not seem like a "person" but it very clearly is biologically a distinct human
>>55527909
You can't apply laws intended for adult criminals to children, especially unborn children. If you shot a 7 year old trespasser on your property and claimed you had the right based on castle doctrine, you would rot in prison.
>>55528013
The bodily autonomy arguments views a human fetus more as a parasite than an organ. It's a separate entity from the mother that lives off of the mother's body. Technically, fetuses CAN be considered parasites, though that's not a common belief in both the left or right because that's totally dehumanizing. Instead, the left opts to view fetuses as non-living so there is less of a moral dilemma.
>>55528130
I had to take a sex education class in middle school. Is that not a thing in europe?
>>55528153
>euegenics in one sentence.
Eugenics doesn't predicate on value of life but upon projected merit during life. Try not to confuse the two.
>>55528117
No they aren't. They are simply standing in front of you.
Are you really this fucking retarded or just pretending ?
>>55528172
Lack of Muslims mostly. When you don't see regular beheadings, you tend to value human life more.
>>55528172
Pervasive and historic tradition of puritanism.
>>55527909
>doesn't consent to the fetus being there
Lost me there. That's not true unless she was raped, which is the only circumstance abortion should even be considered.
>>55528251
Which is impeding your progress. I mean, this is what you're getting at. That the taking of a unique and separate life is okay if they're inconveniencing you, right? If it's not, then abortion isn't okay.
>>55528205
castle doctrine is different from bodily autonomy in that castle doctrine refers to a violation of property lines, not actual physical violation of the body.
Bodily autonomy can be argued as the basis for laws against rape, murder, assault, or any other crime against someone's own being.
>>55528251
>>55528353
Why the fuck are you two still going on?
>>55528190
Yes
But at the end of the day, why should Christians or Muslims ... (arguably the most stupid persons on earth) get to decide about this ?
>>55527508
Yes I do know as it is considered animal cruelty, but killing a kitten also has a different context from having an abortion. It is legal to euthanize kittens if there is a reasonable reason to do so which is a different context as well.
>>55527593
And that women is also pregnant with that individual so the woman should be able to decide what the fate of the fetus is.
>>55527708
The mother is the one choosing to be acted upon. Abortion is a medical procedure. It's not something that can be done without physical repercussions.
>>55527851
But it was conceived and taking care of it once it is born takes a lot of time, money, and effort. Why force that on someone who knows she isn't ready. Yes adoption is a thing, but adoption programs have their own flaws and the kid wouldn't have a good life either way. Why force that kind of suffering on the kid when it could have been prevented with an abortion?
>>55526740
>incorrectly greentexting
For fucks sake desu senpai
>>55528225
human life has merit in itself.
>>55528398
Why are you so triggered that we are?
>>55518204
It's murder, but it's "my body" so it's my choice
>>55528458
Thank you for making it clear you are intentionally conflating the two.
>>55528420
The mother is choosing to act upon the child, not herself.
>>55528342
>That's not true unless she was raped
See >>55524931
>>55528394
Yes, castle doctrine and bodily autonomy are not the same thing, that's why they are different terms. You have yet to explain why one should justify summery execution of a child while the other should not.
I don't even think abortion should be banned, because the children conceived by parents who would abort shouldn't be born. But your logic is stupid.
>>55528552
Birth control is never 100% and by choosing to participate in sex armed with that knowledge, you are responsible for the outcome whatever it is.
>>55528526
Both are being acted upon. It's just that the mother is the only one who has the ability to make the decision for them to be acted upon.
>>55518204
I've got two kids. Daughter is 17, son is 8.
Single dad as my wife died in a car crash in 2012.
I'm totally against abortion. But that's easy for me to say. What about rape victims who get pregnant? My children were born from love. So I do my best. I miss my wife. My daughter is a great help - she gives me a hand with shopping and cooking. My father in law is a retired doctor and always refused to do abortions. I discussed this topic with him and he asked me a question: 'when does life begin'? I could not give an answer.
>>55526369
GOYS KNOW
O
Y
S
K
N
O
W
>>55528224
Conception does not make a human by law.
>>55528420
Your parents prevented you from taking the government-mandated sex education course, and also never bothered to give you the birds and the bees talk? No wonder your opinions are so off.
>>55528458
>>55528485
>>55528496
>>55528526
>>55528552
>>55528555
Now all of you haven't got to the most important point of abortion yet
>>55528342
By bodily autonomy, you can withdraw consent at any time. Similar to some rape situations. While definitely not cool to the guy, if a girl decides to withdraw consent during sex and LET'S THE DUDE KNOW but he keeps going, that's rape. I know there are some shitty arguments in the SJW world involving situations like that, but if I was getting butt fucked by a guy and decided I'd have a enough, I definitely wouldn't think "well I told him could at first, so now I guess I'm just stuck till he stops."
If you had a big pile of money and told a friend he could have all of it, but while he was collecting it you decided against it and he took it anyways, you'd win that court battle.
>>55528420
so you're saying we should kill babies because taking care of them would be hard?
is every pro-choicer a complete psychopath?
>>55518204
Minority population control.
Not only should abortion should be legal, it should be funded by taxpayers so we can set up abortion clinics in low-income (nigger) neighborhoods and give Traynisha and ShaQuanda free abortions.
A couple hundred dollar procedure is significantly cheaper than 18 years of increased welfare payments, plus getting too many abortions can sterilize a woman. It's really a win-win for society.
>>55528649
>Birth control is never 100%
Straw man? No claim was made that it was. It was asserted that a woman _always_ "consents to the fetus" except in case of rape.
>>55528690
So, lacking a capacity for informed consent means that they have no rights?
>>55528708
Because the laws are written by liberals on the payroll of reptillian aliens who wish the death of the white race. Seriously, how new are you?
I'm against it but I'm a little apathetic about it because the pro-life movement is a joke that basically hasn't done anything in 40 years. Even the biggest ally in the movement, the Catholic Church, doesn't do much and there are many scandals of bishops and cardinals supporting pro-abortion laws and donating to it or investing to it. Just search around "life site news" or "life news" for the deets.
Pic related is at the funeral the Catholic Church gave in the nicest church in Canada to the prime minister who legalized abortion
>>55528552
Birth control was never guaranteed in the first place.
If you have sex, be willing to either kill your own offspring or raise it.
Your choice.
>>55528767
If she engages in an act where a fetus is a possibility, then yes. Birth control in no way alleviates her of responsibility when it isn't a guarantee.
>>55528827
Plus the pro-life movement gets keked by the GOP every election when their politicians pretend to be pro-life then proceed to do absolutely nothing about it after the election.
I would be against abortion, but like 90%+ of abortions are black babies in the inner cities, so my anti-crime sense overrides my anti-abortion, it all boils down to "If you are anti-abortion, you are pro-crime.".
>>55528801
So if you want a new law, you should decide when being a human starts and why.
Also notice that you cannot support the death penalty and being anti-abortion the same time, despite conservatives often being both.
>>55526107
>Life begins at conception, "personhood" is an invention used to balm the conscience of murderers.
Pre-emtpive baptism.
/thread
>>55528844
>If you have sex, be willing to either kill your own offspring or raise it.
That's kind of the point, i.e. the legality of "kill your own" non-offspring (literally children or young of a parent thus thus unborn are non-offspring). Your argument predicates upon some sense of consent when the conduct indicates no such conduct was given and in fact consent is directly contradicted from any such imputation.
>>55528854
>If she engages in an act where a fetus is a possibility, then yes.
Great idea. Let's completely disregard every other act and decision made to focus on one aspect. Would you consider a woman who went in for a medical procedure to prevent pregnancy, still on birth control, timing her cycles, etc. still "consenting" to bearing a fetus?
>>55528934
There's absolutely nothing they can do about it. It's a decision for the SCOTUS who use the 14th amendment as their way of circumventing the Constitution and pushing whatever agenda they want. It's like that asshole who used to pull made-up shit in rock-paper-scissors.
>>55528967
>Also notice that you cannot support the death penalty and being anti-abortion the same time, despite conservatives often being both.
Don't strawman m8, you absolutely can be anti-abortion/pro-death penalty, people recieving the dead penalty have earned their fate, unborn fetuses have not earned their death.
I'm not even against abortion and you're a retard.
>>55529054
>when the conduct indicates no such *consent was given
Fixed
>>55528967
As far as I know a fetus doesn't have any arms for quite a few weeks and aren't capable of killing anyone for at least 3 years.
>>55529053
>pre-emptive baptism
Before threading yourself, want to maybe clarify what you mean?
>>55528555
Fetuses are parasitic by nature. That's how the grow to be born. An un-parasitic fetus is failed pregnancy.
Let me say that I don't favor abortion, I think it's fucked up, but by bodily autonomy the woman has the right to decide how her body is used and who interacts with her body.
Violation of property boundaries is less personal and less consequential to a person's well being if it is by a child, that's why you couldn't just shoot some kid you cut through your lawn. It doesn't make you sick in the mornings, experience hormone changes, or physically alter your body like a pregnancy will. Fucked up, but that's how the concept works.
>>55529109
>use the 14th amendment as their way of circumventing the Constitution
Use the Constitution to circumvent the Constitution? Or do you simply not realize that amendments are part of the Constitution?
>>55528723
I think people should only have children if they feel like they can support them.
>>55528789
They're only potential humans so why should they have the same rights as humans?
>>55529054
>Would you consider a woman who went in for a medical procedure to prevent pregnancy, still on birth control, timing her cycles, etc. still "consenting" to bearing a fetus?
If she engages in an act where a child is a possible result, no matter how minute? Yes.
If you drive a car you consent to the possibility of a car crash, regardless of whether you do it soberly and safely. It's called personal responsibility and accepting the potential consequences of an action you take.
>>55529120
You cannot give the government the right to take away a person's life while the same time you deny that right to the person who needs to create that life m8.
Its not a strawman at all, you're just not smart enough to realize what this actually means.
Your logic is literally that a bunch of cells we don't even know if they will produce a human IS a human. Now THAT does not make any sense to me.
It doesn't matter if it's wrong, it's convenient and it reduces the nigger population.
>>55529278
>If she engages in an act where a child is a possible result, no matter how minute? Yes.
Thank you for convincing me that you cannot see reason. By this logic stepping out your front door is consenting to being run over, murdered, robbed, etc.
The right to abortion allows socially inferior people to not having children for whom they can't fend and who will turn out as criminals or social cases
So it's justified in it's own way
Like I said, I'm not a liberal, I'm a pragmatic
>>55529173
The 14th amendment exists to bypass the rest of the Constitution and has historically been used for that purpose alone.
>here are all the rules
>rule 14: we can disregard any of them because rule 14
>>55518204
Abortion is murder...of the smallest degree and should be legal before the 1st trimester. It helps alleviate the burden on society. If you were to see the kind of mothers who have unwanted pregnancies, you'd realize this is a good thing.
>>55529292
The person on death row has received his due process, IE trial by judge and jury, the fetus has not.
And again, I'm all for abortion, but that point is silly.
>>55529278
ehhhhhh if you go out driving and someone slams into and you did nothing wrong, you don't consent to being hit. You don't even consent to the possibility of being hit. Like when I walk outside I don't consent to possibility of being mugged.
>>55529337
Wow. You are a first class retard that is honestly and sincerely trying to argue that part of the Constitution is not Constitutional. The Constitution defines what is and is not constitutional and you cannot pick and choose which parts are Constitutional.
>>55529344
exactly !
>>55529197
"potential" humans.
In what other context outside abortion is "potential" human a thing? And why does it exist for no other species in existence at any stage of development? Destroy an eagle egg and explain about "potential eagles." Murder a pregnant woman and explain about "potential humans."
It's a fallacy used to dehumanize unborn children.
>>55529321
You consent to the possibility of it, yes. I understand as a libfag you believe that there should be literal safe spaces where the universe interjects at your behalf to stop bad things from happening, but it doesn't work that way.
>>55529292
How about some middle ground: it is A-OK for a woman to have an abortion, provided the baby is tried in a court of law and judged by a jury of its peers after hearing a case from a prosecutor paid taxpayer money to make the defendant sound contemptible and a defense attorney who will be assigned if a better one cannot be afforded.
>>55529422
I see you're not the least bit familiar with the Constitution or the fourteenth amendment. So, newfriend, I suggest you lurk /pol/ a little more and you'll find out.
>>55529519
You mean the baby's legal guardian, the mother? Okay then
Nothing wrong with it. If the government wants unwanted babies, then it should also be able to raise them and feed them to make sure they won't grow into unwanted citizens, likely fate of unwanted babies.
>>55518204
I think abortion is morally wrong. At the end of the day abortion means the death of an organism (whatever you want to call it..fetus, baby, child, etc). I would not do it myself but I would not want to live in a situation where it were illegal, and woman were going through illegal, unsafe abortions and risking their own lives.
>>55529508
>I understand as a libfag
First you convince me that you are closed-minded. Now you've convinced me you are a twit. Disagreeing with you does not indicate I'm from a different political spectrum.
>>55529554
Ah. I should have looked more closely at the IDs. You're the same retard.
>I see you're not the least bit familiar with the Constitution or the fourteenth amendment.
Oh the ironing.
Out of pure morbid curiousity where do you get the belief you can pick and choose what parts of the Constitution are constitutional? Can I ignore your right to bear arms and place you under citizen's arrest you if I see you carrying anything I deem makes you "armed?" Or how about your freedom of speech, religion, etc? Why do YOU get to choose what parts of the Constitution are not constitutional? No one else does but it seems you consider yourself special.
>>55518204
I was always convinced abortion was a Jewish plot to prevent non-rich-non-jews from multiplying ?
>>55529574
No, no, being a parasite to the free life of a liberal woman is too great of an offense. The baby is to be tried as an adult. (besides with your addition it'd be the baby's mother being killed and it kind of ruins the analogy)
>>55529652
I would. Imagine if your desire to kill another life meant you had to do so in conditions that might cost you your own. There'd be a greater appreciation for said life, and a helluva lot more personal responsibility toward not being in that predicament in the first place.
>>55518204
it's murder. if a rape victim gets pregnant we should let her live long enough for it to be born and then kill that women.
>>55528697
Many rape babies are alive today. Maybe ask one of them if they wish they had been MURDERED for the sins of their father instead.
Who kills the children of the criminal?
On a personal level, I do not like it and am pro-life (unless it's a black baby). But as a libertarian, on a legal level I am pro-choice.
>>55529779
in 99 percent of rape cases the woman is guilty, either of prostitution or adultery, most times both.
>>55529699
Do you think it's just a coincidence that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court named the 14th amendment and things done in its name unconstitutional? Or that since its inception Constitutional lawyers and judges from both parties have been calling out how unconstitutional it is? Or even the people it supposedly "helps" like Roe v Wade where the woman in the years since has said it was a gross misuse of authority?
But you think just because they managed to get it added automatically makes it Constitutional.
Oh, to be so young and fucking naive.
>>55529779
Soviet Russia :^)
>>55518204
Should be legal and free everywhere.
It would stop all these niglets and downies running around.
The child should not suffer the consequences for the actions of its mother. Being born to a potential single mom, who also most likely had to give up her "dreams" to raise the child is pretty much a safe guarantee to a shitty life, which might be worse for both the society and the child than for it to never have been born.
>>55529868
>the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court named the 14th amendment and things done in its name unconstitutional
Robers did? Got a citation for that?
If you cant support a child you should'nt have one. Which is why my ex gf got one, no regerts
>>55529922
Feel free to Google it, he was quite pissed when SCOTUS used the 14th amendment to bypass the State and legalize gay marriage.
>Near the end of his 29-page dissent, Roberts registered this strongly worded reprimand:
> "If you are among the many Americans -- of whatever sexual orientation -- who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today's decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it."
>>55529990
You could have simply ceased to be a leach before knocking a chick up.
>>55518204
I'm a big supporter of abortion
Anyone who actually considers it is a degenerate who will just bring another welfare parasite into the world anyway
>>55529990
>Feel free to Google it
You've got nothing and hoping you can distract me off on a wild goose chase? Thank you for failing. Go read the sticky about Burden of Proof.
For abortion on all accounts.
Better to have no children than mentally ill children having been raised by a parent that didn't want them.
Quality over quantity.
>>55529857
Where did you get this number from?
>>55530100
Just face it /pol/
abortion is one of the best things that could have happened to society
>>55530093
I assume you meant to quote my post. Since I figured you for an uppity faggot that would balk at any link I provided you, I just quoted the pertinent sections and gave you the information to find a source you trusted.
But since that has you in tears, here you go:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/06/26/john-robertss-full-throated-gay-marriage-dissent-constitution-had-nothing-to-do-with-it/
http://www.businessinsider.com/chief-justice-roberts-on-gay-marriage-ruling-just-who-do-we-think-we-are-2015-6
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/06/26/supreme_court_holds_same_sex_marriage_bans_are_unconstitutional.html
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/06/26/supreme-court-affirms-constitutionality-of-gay-marriage
Better? Ready to dry your eyes?
>>55518204
Should be legal, but never recommended as a first option.
Look at it as a fast-track communion. Pass go, go directly to church. Collect....something.
Preemptive baptismee
>>55530233
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/06/26/john-robertss-full-throated-gay-marriage-dissent-constitution-had-nothing-to-do-with-it/
I'll just start with the first one. Can you specify what passage you are relying on? I don't see anywhere in this link that supports your claim that "CJ Roberts named the 14th Amendment and things done in its name unconstituational."
It seems the article, and your earlier quote only points out how the decision reached did not have any constitutional basis and rather _not_ that the decision was based on 14A. Not once was it mentioned in your quote.
>>55529644
But the parents made the child, not the state? Why should the state be responsible for raising it? Just because he said you could not kill everyone who is a burden to you?
>>55518204
I just dont get why women want it paid for by the government.
If I cant see worth shit, the gov wont give me a pair of glasses. If my teeth are fucked up, the government wont take care of my dental needs.
Why should the gov ever give out free abortions?
>>55530380
Are you really admitting to being such a newfag here that you're entirely ignorant of a major nationwide event that is less than four months old?
The Reddit influx is real, apparently.
Since you were apparently unaware of the event, let me dumb it down for you. Some months ago, the Supreme Court invoked the 14th amendment to invalidate the 10th amendment and make gay marriage a federal decision. The Chief Justice in that article is stating that using the 14th amendment for such an action was unconstitutional.
Now, unless you're convinced that both the washingtonpost and I are making this all up just to ruse you, maybe you'd go educate yourself on the subject before you embarrass yourself further?
>>55530411
> Why should the state be responsible for raising it?
> Just because he said you could not kill everyone who is a burden to you?
Why should the state be responsible for getting it out of vagina alive? Just because some hypocrites wants to?
Why should the state force its people into poverty?
>>55529428
Destroying a fertilized eagle egg is killing a potential eagle as you're stopping an eagle that would be born from being born. There's nothing wrong with doing so as long as it is deemed necessary to do so. Calling fetuses potential humans isn't dehumanizing as it is calling them what they are. It's synonymous with unborn children and fetus, but you are just not very comfortable with its use. You view its use as dehumanizing only because you are uncomfortable with its use. You're looking at it as if it's a problem when it's really just you that has the problem.
>>55518204
>>55518204
morally opposed to it (if theres nothing medically wrong with the baby or its a rape/incest) but I'm a man so I'll never ever get an abortion and it's not up to anybody to tell women they aren't allowed to get one.
basically if a woman's like "lol I don't want this perfectly healthy baby" then it's a moral wrong but it's none of my business
this is of course for white women. if it's black women I believe in mandatory abortions.
>>55530682
>he lives in a country that pays for other people's healthcare with his taxes
>>55525339
>it shows a culture which does not value life
being against abortion is like actually destroying the life of at least two people
If abortion were illegal, maybe people would start treating sex less like a fun activity that people should/must be doing frequently.
If the woman was raped or she will die because of the baby then go ahead but it shouldn't for birth control
>>55522099
I agree only legal when a subhuman is involved
>>55530710
Classifying it as a potential human when it is scientifically a human is an appeal to emotion fallacy meant to dehumanize the unborn as somehow less than human. Don't be so stupid as to think anyone is fooled into thinking it wasn't your intent.
>>55530592
>ome months ago, the Supreme Court invoked the 14th amendment to invalidate the 10th amendment and make gay marriage a federal decision.
This probably a waste of time but:[citation needed]
You clearly have a flawed understanding of the law. You cannot even get "named the 14th amendment" supported because you cite a decision that does not involve 14A and thus why your links do not "name" it. Marriage is a substantive due process right and the case was determined to due process under 5A on the federal level. This means that state laws are trumped under the Supremacy clause of the Constitution (and I wouldn't put it past you to try and argue that is not constitutional as well) making all state laws preventing gays to marry unconstitutional.
>Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which federally defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, is unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause's guarantee of equal protection. The federal government must recognize same-sex marriages that have been approved by the states.
>>55530764
How many times do you have to be told not to have sexual intercourse with one you deem to not be spongeworthy?
>>55526528
So as a better time of enlightenment that purged the subhumans
>>55530915
Why are you so opposed to sex being a fun activity, nothing more ?
>>55531063
Same reason you're opposed to wearing a condom or at least cumming on her and not in her.
>>55530765
>>55530899
So fucking what? Call it "killing a human", but it doesn't change anything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPxi5wzmPRA
>>55530902
Ahhh, you're going to use Kennedy's flawed approach. Good. Explain to me how "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." is the least bit connected to gay marriage, let alone overriding the 10th amendment in what is securely the purview of the states?
>>55530902
>This means that state laws are trumped under the Supremacy clause of the Constitution (and I wouldn't put it past you to try and argue that is not constitutional as well) making all state laws preventing gays to marry unconstitutional.
Blah. Wrote that badly. I meant tp write how Roberts didn't claim that 5A was not constitutional in an earlier case in a similar issue.
>>55531185
If it doesn't, why feel compelled to call it otherwise? Why create the whole "personhood" term in the first place?
>>55531199
>Ahhh, you're going to use Kennedy's flawed approach.
Thank you for proving you have absolutely nothing but twisted logic to support your attempt to put words in CJ Roberts mouth.
>>55531185
If he didn't have that rusty old person voice nobody would take him half as seriously as they do.
>abortion thread on /pol/
my mandatory post as always
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tNfYvgVLS8
>>55531284
I'm still waiting. I asked a question but you respond with ad hominem.
>>55520138
That is heartbreaking
>>55531370
>I'm still waiting
So am I. Why should I fulfill your request when I have been waiting longer for you to fulfill mine? Feeling like a special little entitled snowflake?
>>55527750
>Hitler
>conservative
>>55518204
On a side note, I was on Jezebel the other day to argue with feminazis.
On the topic, on chick threw out the "it's my body, my choice" argument.
So I quickly reminded her that it is actually the baby's body but I'm still fine with her murdering it if she chooses.
So she replies back something along the lines of; "It can not survive outside my body, therefore it's like an organ, my body muh choice".
I responded that, "a newborn will not survive outside your body either without support, so that argument is bs."
Thanks for listening.
>>55531199
>Explain to me how "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
Let me give you just a little teaser and highlight where your error lies.
>without due process of the law
5A provides for taking of person's property as "due process of the law." I wonder if that might extend to other governmental conduct . . .
>>55531415
Tangential to the point, but he certainly wasn't a libertarian or a hippy.
>>55531474
how can you stand arguing with those keks? Like, I would be too sickened to do so
>>55531118
Yeah sometimes I just can't control myself. So explain to me why the woman has to endure the consequences of that because abortion should be illegal ?
>>55531289
>>he lives in a country that pays for other people's healthcare with his taxes
> If he didn't have that rusty old person voice nobody would take him half as seriously as they do.
You're moron.
>55531284
I'm just fine with calling it like. But it's still completely irrelevant to me. It's like the debate whether to call the Pluto a planet.
>>55531635
She could be more selective with her breeding patterns and not open her legs to a douche who doesn't pull out.
>>55531597
I thought perhaps there would be some sensible feminists (in the original sense of the word). And I was interested to see what the #1 gathering point of Feminists looks like.
I can not stand feminists anymore. None of them. I don't even care if they are sensible feminists. A sensible feminist at this point would abandon ship. That movement have no fucking credibility anymore.
>>55531474
You did a good thing.
>>55531414
>Why should I fulfill your request when I have been waiting longer for you to fulfill mine?
I gave you a bunch of links you stupid cunt. Want a comprehensive one? Here:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Now, since I've gotten into great detail on my part and you blurted some regurgitated shit from Kennedy out, feel like pretending you can explain any of it? You've certainly had time enough to try and google something by now.
Degenerate, but a necessary evil to control the nigger population. The government should not use our taxes to fund it. Instead, we should fund the Holocaust: Nigger edition to nip the bud.
>>55531716
Well it's come to this
Why are men not so selective then ?
I think we should just use the advantages the pill/condoms/abortion has given us over evolution
>>55528190
Exactly. I dont like abortion either
Abortion is literally murder. It's fucking Moloch worship.
>>55518204
It's like super-duper murder.
>>55531911
It's men's nature to spread their seed as much as they can, it's women's nature to make sure the seed they receive is from a worthy donor. Hence why the average /r9k/ male is sad because he has no gf, and the average /r9k/ female is sad because she has no hot bf.
>>55531821
>I gave you a bunch of links you stupid cunt.
The first one, the very first one, and your OWN citation failed to name it or mention it as unconstitutional. The closest you got was the decision was not based upon the constitution. I told you directly and even included a pic to emphasize that you failed to fulfill my request. You are not trying to argue that the mere attempt, regardless of how it failed, fulfills my request? And even linking the case CJ Roberts was dissenting in somehow fulfills my request?
I've read it and not once did ANY Supreme Court Justice "name the 14th Amendment as unconstitutional." The closest you get is that the decision's force as a rule of law through 14A is an unprecedented foray into marital law, an area of law that the Supreme Court has avoided as much as possible (though not entirely such as with child support and parental kidnapping).
I still await for you to present something other than your tortuously twisted logic as putting words in CJ Roberts mouth as mentioned previously. You asserted that he NAMED the 14th amendment as unconstitutional and you have yet to provide a link that CJ Roberts even NAMES the 14th Amendment for anything.
>>55529278
This is my first post on /pol/ in all the years I've lurked here to tell you that you are really fucking stupid to believe that.
It should be legal, but femenists that deny the fact that its taking the life of a human being are retarded.
I see it the same as pulling the plug on a vegetable, with the added bonus of if the parents not being able to support said child it would lead to more than just 3 ruined lives. Kid would grow up in a shit situation and have an awful childhood.
Oh and abortion of retarded/otherwise "malfunctioning" samples should be mandatory. Yes, this includes blacks and black mixes
>>55531821
Oh, and I forgot my pic to emphasis I'm still waiting.
>>55532036
Yes. And this leads to another question: Why does it always have to be the women who decide what happens to the child ?
>>55532263
Because they have the ability to deny sex.
There's only three situations where abortion morally acceptable:
>The child was conceived through rape
>The child was conceived despite the use of contraceptives
>There is a good chance that the mother will die if the child is born
>The child would be born suffering from a terrible genetic problem or disease
It is a necessary but insufficient evil to help control the nigger population.
>>55532319
*four situations
>>55532082
>i ctrl+F'd 14 and got nothing
>damn justices always typing out fourteenth
I can only give you the information, I can't make you read it. Seriously though, lurk moar. I shouldn't have to condense months worth of discussion and threads down to paragraphs and cited links for you because you wanted to jump in the deep end ignorant as fuck. It's literally the first board rule:
>Red pill me on X. (with no extra content or input of your own)
You stupid fucking mong.
>>55532318
Not even at that stage I meant
Also later on
>>55532319
>justifying murdering someone who committed no crime
>>55532386
You mean whether the child should live or die? I have no opinion, being anti-abortion to begin with.
>>55532371
>I can only give you the information
It's nice that you give information but what would be relevant would be if you gave information that fit the request. I requested that you provide a link to support your assertion of "CJ Roberts named 14th amendment is unconstitutional." I still await you to fulfill that request and will demand that you fulfill that request before you expect others to fulfill your later request.
>Red pill me on X.
Your red pill is completely made up bullshit. Just because I don't swallow your poop pill does not indicate stupidity. In fact, I'd argue swallowing a poop pill, regardless of what color you claim it is, would be an act of stupidity.
Totally ok.
>>55518204
>go on /pol/
>have mostly conservative views
>pro small government
>someone mentions abortion
>everyone goes apeshit and demands the government to decide what should be done with an individual's body
>>55532755
Whose body?
>>55532589
Alright then.
I didn't want to go this far back in the child's development.
I have now 2 children, both of whom were "Wunsch" children (sorry there isn't a better word in English)
Their mother and I broke up - she decided to raise them atheist
I have no say in this because she's the mother and she'll always be right
That's the case in any Western country - why ?
>>55532791
any woman's body
>>55532755
>an individual's body
pregnancy ALWAYS involves 2 people
if you want to argue that it only involves the women, that is one thing
>>55532263
Because we pitied them for thousands of years as the weaker sex and once we extended the olive branch of equality, they turned against us demanding more and more "rights" without more responsibilities.
>>55532371
>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Oh, and in regard to your "providing information" let's look at Robert's own dissent in the "information provided."
>Petitioners brought lawsuits contending that the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment compel their States to license and recognize marriages between same-sex couples. In a carefully reasoned decision, the Court of Appeals acknowledged the democratic “momentum” in favor of “expand[ing] the definition of marriage to in
clude gay couples,” but concluded that petitioners had not made “the case for constitutionalizing the definition of marriage and for removing the issue from the place it has been since the founding: in the hands of state voters.” 772 F. 3d, at 396, 403. That decision interpreted the Constitution correctly, and I would affirm.
Here he makes it quite clear that 14A is part of the Constitution and he would affirm this judicial action in regards to 14A and the Constitution.
Perhaps you should look more closely at the information next time?
>>55532921
Yeah I get what you're saying anon, but what about male fetus' bodies?
>>55532614
>Your red pill is completely made up bullshit
Yeah, because that's what it was referring to.
Read the sticky, lurk moar, stop embarrassing yourself you stupid faggot.
