Why are they off the Hook?
- Home
- Board: /pol/ - Politically Incorrect
- Reading: Why are they off the Hook?
I understand why liberal faggots don't want to blame a woman, forget them.
I am wondering why conservatives and religious retards don't believe a woman should be held responsible for performing an abortion?
Just on Rush some religious faggot said if you are pro life you would naturally not blame the mother for getting one..
Seriously wtf?
>>69476712
Either women have agency or not, if they don't have agency(can't be blamed for getting an abortion) then they are not responsible for themslves and should be reduced to chattel slavery.
Women are children they don't know better
>>69476800
Yes so if they can't be held responsible then they should not have a right to vote or a right to control over her own sexual access.
>>69476712
>hook
I see what u did there
>>69476712
>Have non-protected sex while fertile
>Complain and get abortion when a baby happens
Any non-degenerate women would know how to avoid getting an unwanted pregnancy.
>>69476712
Because everybody naturally understands that women aren't mentally capable of being responsible for their actions.
Any attempt to hold them responsible will make you a social pariah. Women will defend this system because it gives them a free pass. Men will defend it because they want the pussy.
>>69476712
Because women vote
>vote for me and I'll make sure to punish you for something that you percieve to be a right.
>>69477605
So by everyone saying that women aren't responsible for murder is admitting that women have no agency and thus shouldn't have any responsibility whatsoever
>>69477826
Yes. That's correct. Everybody understands this at a primal level... even if we pay the other idea lipservice.
There's a small percentage of women who are capable of autonomy, but by and large they're not.
>>69476712
>Just on Rush some religious faggot said if you are pro life you would naturally not blame the mother for getting one..
That guy is retarded, he was saying something like abortion isn't the mother killing the child because she's not physically performing the abortion. It's stupid and it's not the pro life position because it's not logically consistent. The hitmen and people that hire them are both liable.
>>69477119
kek
>>69476712
idk why you'd want to shame women who had an abortion
I'de sterilize them tho
>>69476712
If a woman gets raped there's enough stigma as it is, either making her carry the pregnancy to term or branding her for something that wasn't even her fault isn't right.
A rape victim should get an abortion done as soon as possible, before it has developed into a fetus, preferrably a morning after pill or there are some forms of abortion (in fact most abortions performed) where they just take a series of pills and it causes a miscarriage, at that early stage it's just like a period. Not even a heartbeat yet. But she should have that choice.
Or a woman who learns there is something very seriously wrong with her fetus, a chromosomal disease that cannot be treated (I'm not talking Down's Syndrome, but rather like Trisomy 9, where the baby probably won't survive a year after birth and it will be in misery its entire short life. In that case I think abortion is more compassionate than letting it suffer.
>>69479976
>If a woman gets raped there's enough stigma as it is, either making her carry the pregnancy to term or branding her for something that wasn't even her fault isn't right.
Why is that wrong? The child didn't rape anyone, that's an innocent life. We don't punish children for the crimes of the parents.
Pro-life is pro-nigger.
Go to hell, liberalfag.
>>69480149
If we're terminating the pregnancy within the first month it's not even a "child" It has no consciousness feels no pain, has no thoughts or dreams.
>>69480546
A life is a life. Go back to Stormfront with all the other inbred fucks.
>>69480583
Pro-lifers are similar, they just do what's expected of them with no actual concern for the welfare of other human beings.
>>69476712
1. Because women vote.
2. Because women like all minorities see themselves as a collective rather than a group of individuals. (ex. An attack on one woman is an attack on all women.)
3. Gynocentrism means that men instinctively see women as weaker and unable to take punishments. (Ex. Both parties are drunk but only the man can be held responsible for drunk sex because he should be stronger in mind.)
Addendum for 3. Since this is true, why did they give women 1? It was a huge mistake and neither men nor women are happy with it.
>>69480583
The problem with using consciousness as a sort of barometer of what constitutes life is that we go unconscious every night when we sleep, that obviously doesn't make us less than human. If we had an accident and became temporarily brain dead that still wouldn't make us less than human. What matters is the potential to have consciousness. We're going to wake up, we're going to recover, and in the case of the baby, he's going to grow and develop a conscious.
Claiming that one must perform functions that make one a person before one can be considered a person commits the fallacy of confusing cause and effect. You're confusing functioning as a person with being a person. You must be a person first before you can function as one, just as you must be a human first before you can function as one.
>>69480971
niggers are not human life you shit eating faggot
>>69480978
my thing is.. I want abortions to be legal but progressively more restrictive as the pregnancy develops. No abortions for second or third trimester for any reason aside from medical necessity or a child with a severe deformity that will not survive.
For rape, financial concerns, failed birth control, etc.. I think the first trimester is VERY generous and would prefer if they could get it done within the first month (but I do know some people will slip through the cracks as they might have been on birth control and not noticed it until a month later) But up to the first 3 months maximum to prevent any fetal suffering.
I'm looking at it from an angle of compassion for a HUMAN life that can feel pain and have emotions. Before sufficient brain development. I don't consider that a human life. It's like losing dead skin cells, yes it has the DNA instructions for a human life, but those cells by themselves don't think don't feel don't experience pain, so I'm not killing humans by scratching my face, or getting an injection, or getting surgery done, and a woman terminating a pregnancy really early on before that embryo has developed into a fetus I don't think is killing a human.
>>69481334
Because white "men" are cucks.
>>69481853
If I were to inject you with a drug that made you incapable of feeling pain would that make you less than human?
>>69481434
You're still conscious when you sleep, you still have emotions, you still have dreams, you still have thoughts, you will still react to pain or other stimuli.
It's called an "altered state of consciousness" "Unconsciousness" is a bad term To lack consciousness only occurs when you die, or go "brain dead" which is again, another bad term, because when you're "brain dead" you have no consciousness, the part that made you "you" is gone forever, your emotions, your thoughts, your opinions, your dreams that's all gone, you just have a body that's still functioning to feed a brain stem. Really the part that matters is dead. When a person is in a coma they are not unconscious they are not brain dead, there's still brain activity, they're in an altered state of consciousness, which they may or may not recover from.
>>69482089
If you were to inject me with a drug that actually took all aspects of my consciousness away, thinking, feeling, sensation, pain...
Then yes, because I'd be dead, you'd have killed me with that injection whether my heart and lungs still worked or not.
Not even surgical anesthesia is a complete loss of consciousness, though it's as close as you can get to death while still living.
>>69482692
>>69482468
Wouldn't it follow that you're less than human since you're less than conscious?
>>69481853
>I want abortions to be legal but progressively more restrictive as the pregnancy develops.
In my state they are illegal after 12 weeks. Or something like that.
No one WANTS dead babies. And to impose specific laws for rape is too much to ask for, the pointless infighting will never end because women lie about rape constantly.
Really, we don't place too much value on human life once it's out of the womb.
>>69482089
It'd make them a junkie.
Good going conservacuks, enjoy even higher populations of poor minorities.
Everyone be sure to adopt a poor black baby who was almost aborted!
Because that's what happens right? They're given up for adoption instead of just living a life of neglected and abused misery turning into even more shit adults.
>>69482947
>Really, we don't place too much value on human life once it's out of the womb.
I'd say that's a direct consequence of not placing any value on human life in the womb. I don't know why liberals try to argue that pro lifers don't care about kids after they're born. It's incredibly stupid.
>>69482898
If you're completely lacking conscious then you are a corpse, not a human, or, you're an embryo that has not developed enough to have any consciousness yet.
>>69483243
>I'd say that's a direct consequence of not placing any value on human life in the womb
No it's a direct consequence of people being religious cucks and obsessing with what happens in the afterlife instead of looking at the facts and numbers. Conservashits are the fucking problem for trivializing and shitting up the quality of life for everyone EXCEPT when it involves *pregnant women* that is why every abortion thread on /pol/ is somehow also racebait.
>>69483243
But pro-lifers don't care about kids after they're born. They dump the burden on the mother and if the mother hates the child (obviously as she didn't want it) and abuses/neglects/abandons it or kills it herself, who cares.
>>69483319
Again you're committing a fallacy
>Claiming that one must perform functions that make one a person before one can be considered a person commits the fallacy of confusing cause and effect. You're confusing functioning as a person with being a person. You must be a person first before you can function as one, just as you must be a human first before you can function as one.
>>69476712
We have too many humans, why do you insist on adding more that arent even wanted by the ones birthing them?
>>69479976
Trump is for Abortion in the case of Rape and incest. Of course a liberal faggot adds nothing to the conversation
>>69483432
Every single charity in my town is religious and every established pro life group provides childcare assistance. All of their services are completely free of charge unlike pro abortionists who claim they care.
>>69480149
Fuck that you cant make someone raise a fucking rape baby
>>69480149
But the child with its existence is a burden and a pain for the mother, just like a disease or a cockroach infestation. Yeah they might not want ro actively hurt you but reality is, they still hurt you and that's why you get rid of them.
>>69483719
Nobody is forcing anybody to raise anyone.
>>69483797
Then give birth and adopt the child away, you can pretend he doesn't exist and the innocent child gets a chance at life.
>>69483710
Can a woman just dump the crotchling there and never have anything to do with it again for the rest of her life, no questions asked?
>>69483710
No backwater religious institution handing out flyers and employing crazy people will convince a drug addict, depressed woman who's boyfriend beats her regularly that she will be a good mother and her child won't be a potential monster. Sometimes it's just not in the cards and you have to cut your losses.
>>69483985
Yes you can drop off children at any hospital or fire station no questions asked.
>>69483985
You can do that at any hospital. But imo it's way more fucked up than just having an abortion.
>>69484037
It's funny you saying potential monster, so even you know nothing is set in stone. To say that we should subject a child to abuse so severe that he dies a horrible, painful death, in order to "protect" him from the possibility of suffering uncertain, unspecified, potential abuse in the future, is bizarre logic and even more bizare morality. Suppose someone pointed out to you that with the increasing crime rate, there is a growing chance that someday you might be mugged, kidnapped, murdered, or otherwise victimized. Would you think that a good solution to this danger would be to be tortured to death today to avoid the possibility of being the victim of such a crime in the future?
>>69483434
You can drop a kid off at the police station, no questions asked. I don't even think there is an age limit. Decide on day one you can't deal with it? Take it to the station. 8 years and you're starting to snap - you can still drop that bitch off on society without any trouble.
They don't want people to snap and kill their kids and themselves (this happens a lot with moms for some reason) so they offer an alternative.
I know europe has baby drops but not sure on if there is an age cut off there. But just because they have it doesn't mean society expects them to raise it if it's a detriment to either parent or children.
>>69484246
We're not talking about torture though, are we, so your hamfisted rhetorical situation doesn't really apply enough to warrant an answer. Cheeky fuck.
>>69483978
Who will refund me the medical expenses I am forced tp go through during the pregnancy?
What if the pregnancy hinders me at work and makes me lose my job? Should I be forced to put my life at risk being unemployed and not having therefore the means to sustain myself because of a piece of shit I do not want? Something objectively dangerous and damaging like that does not deserve to exist.
Also how do you guarantee that it will never come bother me when it's an adult?
Because it's like that sweatting man pressing buttons
>ban abortion
>more blacks
>>69483471
It's not really a fallacy though, I'm consistent on 2 views.
If you're terminating a pregnancy within the first month or so, before enough brain development has taken place, that embryo has no ability to experience life as a human, therefore, it's not killing a human to terminate it.
So I think the best option as far as abortions go are to restrict later term but allow early term, to minimize chance of suffering. A child born to a family that does not want it is going to suffer, a child growing up in foster homes their entire life is suffering, high rates of poverty, abuse, and neglect, poor nutrition, poor health, higher rates of drug abuse, crime, teenage pregnancy (which just continues the cycle), self abuse/mutilation, suicide attempts, all higher risks in those that are raised under foster care.
The second view I'm consistent on, following the same theme.. is that when someone is rendered "brain dead" as in no brain activity, with no chance of recovery...
It's time to let go. The sooner you unplug the machines and say your goodbyes the sooner you can begin the healing process.
I had a cousin beat into a brain dead state by trailer park wiggers thinking they were a gang and needed to up their street cred, his heart beat, and while he was on a respirator his lungs exchanged gas. But he was never going to recover, never going to smile again, never going to talk again, walk again, never going to be the Dave we all knew and loved, he was gone. After a week of anguishing.. they disconnected the machines, they buried him, we mourned, we grieved, but then we could heal. You can't heal while they're in the hospital brain dead hooked up to machines that keep them "Alive" holding onto hope for a miracle.
>>69484129
>>69484331
That will totally not create a generation of traumatized mentally fucked-up people who will turn to criminality. Nope.
>>69484433
I think children inside the womb being attacked with knives, doused with caustic chemicals, crushed, starved, literally having their arms and legs ripped off count as torture.
>>69484097
Until he becomes a drug dealer at 20.
>>69481434
But if we go to sleep/get in a coma we were someone before that. A fetus has never been a thinking, dreaming thing. Thus i don't think it is a problem to abort an unwanted kid.
>>69484714
Take ONE biology class instead of christposting on a sri lankan ventriloquism board.
Am I the only one who wants to rape that bitch in the OPs picture? Just to teach that stupid cunt a lesson.
>>69483672
We're not talking about Trump, we're talking about OP saying that Women should be stigmatized for having an abortion for any reason.
Basically we're talking about OP being a faggot.
>>69484714
It's not torture if they can't feel anything because they aren't conscious yet. It's like saying cutting a potato is torture.
>>69484677
>that embryo has no ability to experience life as a human, therefore, it's not killing a human to terminate it.
The point is they have the potential to experience life, to form consciousness. The difference between the fetus and your cousin is the loss of potential, your cousin would never regain that consciousness so he's basically dead. A more apt comparison would be if your cousin was temporarily brain dead. Where we know that given enough time he would gain or regain consciousness. It wouldn't be right to kill him because he has potential.
>>69484714
Oh shut up you unbelievable faggot.
I love that all abortion discussion is about men. All the time. Forever. Men are the ones deciding what women should do about their bodies. Imagine a ruling body of women deciding on whether or not men masturbating should be outlawed. Those are potential lives too, right? Since you dipshits can't understand biology well enough outside of "muh fee-fees." let's talk about all the potential lives killed by male masturbation.
Men should not only not fap, but they should be given a tremendous run-around if they do fap. You should have to go to special centers if you want to fap. You should spend days signing paperwork if you want to fap. And then when it's time to finally fap? Declined. Denied. Sorry. There's a paperwork error. You're gonna have to try another clinic.
>>69482089
Most retarded comparison in human history
>>69485018
The unborn absolutely can feel pain. After a few weeks they respond to all kinds of outside stimuli.
>think of the children... not the unstable criminal adults these children will become
Pro-lifers in a nutshell.
>>69485216
For starters, abortion does not affect only women. Every aborted child has a father as well as a mother. If a women chooses not to have an abortion, the father can be required to provide child support for 18 years. Why should he have legal responsibilities but no legal rights?
Furthermore, almost half the children aborted are males. Every male is a former fetus; every male born since 1973 is a former fetus who could have been legally aborted.
It is difficult to think of any other situation where someone has seriously suggested that only those who might commit a certain act have a right to an opinion on whether or not it should be legal. Would you say that only white people have a right to an opinion on racism, because only white people owned slaves or lynched blacks?
If only women have a right to an opinion about abortion, then only plantation owners have a right to an opinion about slavery.
>>69483978
Pretend doesn't work for everyone anon, I mean I get that it does for religious people that's what they base their entire faith on, but for a lot of people they know, and every day of that pregnancy they're reminded of that rape over and over, every time that fetus moves, they're made again aware of that rape.
I mean if it were possible to transplant the embryo into a willing surrogate or artificial womb. okay whatever, you can give it a chance, but the woman raped shouldn't have to bear it.
It was a crime committed against her. Either terminate as early as possible or find a way to transfer it to someone willing.
But telling her no, you are forced to relive your rape every day until the child is born and then maybe if you're lucky someone will adopt it then you can not have anything to do with it...
That's wrong.
Not to mention, can't always find adoptive parents, shuffling the responsibility back onto the rape victim.
>>69485216
That really is what it's all about. Control.
Because it takes a man to get a woman pregnant, she cannot have rights while she is pregnant or be treated as an autonomous human being in a civilized world that can make decisions for her own well being or that of others.
>>69485312
Learn biology you idiot.
The embryo does not feel anything until it's developed enough.
>>69485500
Do you think mothers should have right to kill rape babies after they're born?
>>69485216
false equivalence
and i'm "pro choice"
>>69485461
Because he's not the one carrying the child. It's as simple as that. Both absolutely do not have the same rights to it because there is absolutely no way to share the birth process. If both agree to have a child, that's great, but if the man wants it and the woman does not? Of course she can have an abortion. It's exactly like sex in that scenario. A man wants to fuck, a woman does not. The two can talk, they can discuss pros and cons, but at the end of the day, if the woman does not give consent, then he absolutely cannot have sex with her. It's the same exact thing here. It's literally her partner using the woman for her body.
Women carry to term. Women give the birth itself. That the male partner wants a child? Tough fucking titties, dude.
>>69485625
She's not making decisions on her own behalf, there's another individual person growing inside her. If you think you can do whatever you want with your own body you should try walking up to a police officer and inject some heroin and see what happens. Even if you could do whatever you want with your own body, the babies body isn't yours.
>I tell my husband we will never have sex again since I do not want to risk being pregnant when I don't want to (I bet you pieces of shit are against the pill too)
>he rapes me and these pieces of shit want me to bear the spawn of such a disgusting person
I'd rather kill the piece of shit myself.
>>69485994
She's thinking on behalf of both lives, and you're being disingenuous by acting like you would be concerned with that life if she chose to have the baby despite unfavorable conditions.
And appeal to law too? Kill yourself why don'tcha.
>>69485994
Then take the baby's body out of mine because I don't want it inside me and I will use violence against it to expel it from my body. It's not wanted and it has no right to be inside my body when I don't want it to.
>>69485213
It's not about potential, otherwise every time you fap you're killing hundreds of millions, or if you don't fap, and have wet dreams, hundreds of millions.
Even if you fuck for the purpose of procreation... only one out of about 300 million sperm results in a life (maybe, it could be aborted, it could be miscarried, it could just fail to implant), while 299,999,999 "potential" lives were murdered.
my test is... does that life experience human consciousness RIGHT NOW.
Not will it eventually experience it if you leave it to develop for a few more weeks.
again there's no such thing as a temporary LOSS of consciousness... there's a temporary ALTERED STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS.
A loss of consciousness means dead or brain dead.
and why I even bring up that "brain dead" thing is because I consider it 2 sides of the same coin. Pro lifers will keep a brain dead relative on machines until they are bankrupt, and they never heal from that loss as long as their loved one is still a "patient"
>>69486139
Existential nihilism is your friend, pain is an illusion.
>>69485994
Once again, basic biology. Read up on that shit please. For that matter, read up on body autonomy. A lot of modern issues aren't about biology, but this one is absolutely about biology. Men cannot have any fucking say in the process because they are not the ones going through the experience. A fetus has no legal rights because a fetus is not a human being, and even if the fetus did have rights, it does not take over the rights of the woman giving the birth. That is complete slavery. Banning abortions is completely telling women "You are nothing outside of your ability to shit out a baby"
>>69486468
If pain is an illusion then the shitling can be killed fine pre-birth and post-birth because its supposed "pain" won't matter. It's just an illusion.
>>69486721
It doesn't matter, actually.
>White and classy, women wouldnt get pregnant unless she wanted to.
>Abortions are for nigger hos and white trash
>therefore they spare the master race of future shitskins in schools
>some jews like to pretend to be conservatives to get rednecks to not support abortians
>be better
>>69486791
Glad to see you approve of child murder. My own life matters to me so I'll be glad to kill him.
>>69486899
I never said I approved of it. I said it didn't matter objectively, I still don't want bad things to happen to kids.
>>69485709
No, it should be taken care of the sooner the better, for the sake of both the mother and the embryo/fetus.
Why, if you were raped and find the idea of bearing a rape baby to be reminding you of your rape, would you not get it done as soon as possible, I mean morning after pill, or the hormone pills that you can take within the first month.
If I were in that position I'd get it done as fast as possible, not just to not cause suffering to a fetus, but so that I'd get rid of that constant reminder of the rape.
It's like.... if you grabbed a pile of shit with your bare hands.. you don't just let it fester and stink on your hands all day, you wash that shit off as soon as possible, so you aren't constantly reminded that you were holding shit with your bare hands by the smell all day. You wash your hands clean of it and try to forget it.
>>69483719
It's called adoption, nutsack.
>>69481434
>temporarily brain dead
You're either brain dead or you're not. The fact you believe people can recover from brain death shows you're uneducated as fuck.
If you're brain dead and totally lack consciousness, then yes, you are less than human. You're not even human, you're a vegetable at that point.
So yeah, that fetus that can't think, percieve, feel, is definitely not a person.
>>69486354
>my test is... does that life experience human consciousness RIGHT NOW.
and exactly how do you perform that test? if you're going to give a criminal the death penalty you have to prove without a shadow of a doubt that he's guilty. wouldn't it make sense for abortion to have the same requirement? why is consciousness even your criteria? you say being asleep is an altered state of consciousness, so does that mean when you're sleeping you're an altered state of human?
>>69487052
But you want bad things to happen to women and do not care if they suffer from them. Why should they listen to you then when you have made yourself their enemy?
>>69487166
Who adopts kids besides celebrities and gay couples. Seriously
>>69486353
and this is the other reason why abortions do need to remain legal.
If they're illegal women do absolutely insane things to try and get rid of an unwanted pregnancy. They will use coathangers, they will flood their vagina with bleach. Many of these back alley procedures are dangerous and may kill the mother as well, and they're often done later in development when the fetus most definitely will suffer, and sometimes they fail to get the job done and only disfigure it for life.
>>69476712
How can anyone be against abortion?
Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake
>>69487166
No thank you I don't want more mentally ill adults there's plenty enough of them. Adoption fucks up the adopted.
>>69486605
a fetus is not a human being
maybe you should read your biology. if a fetus with a complete set of human chromosomes isn't human what is it? a giraffe? a sweet potato?
>>69487269
You must not have read any of my posts. I am not a sadist. Or a religious person. They're not mutually exclusive.
>>69487254
Before about 8 weeks, we're talking it's impossible.
Perhaps you could try ultrasound to attempt to see how much brain development has taken place but before there's a brain, there's definitely not a human.
>>69476712
I don't give a fuck if you do or do not get an abortion. I'd rather fuck a woman that's had an abortion, because at least then I know she's not an insane baby-hungry dipshit.
>>69487544
You are not a sadist but you approve of a raped woman being forced to carry the result of her trauma and offense against her for an extended period of time. Nope, you are a sadist like all pro-lifers.
>>69487322
All of this.
If you have a child and never adopt you, you're part of the problem.
>>69487835
Again you neglected to read my clearly pro-choice posts in favor of imaginary ones. My condolences.
>>69487374
>heroin needs to be legal so people won't make krokodil in their toilets
>>69487640
why is the brain the thing that makes you human? a person who had his brain surgically removed might be dead, but it's not like he turns into another species. you're basically arguing that since sharpness is a defining quality of a knife, a knife that's become dull isn't a knife any more.
>>69487510
A cluster of cells. A cluster of cells that can grow into a human. Just like zygotes. Just like sperm cells. Just like any number of microscopic tiny shits. It is not an independently viable person. It has not reached personhood. In the same way that an egg has not reached chickenhood. In the same way that anything has not reached anything because it's not the fucking thing that you all want it to be.
That's the central problem. Just because it can grow into something else does not mean it should take up the life of someone who already is that something that you people want it to grow up to be. You're not pro-life, you're anti-women. You're pro-birth. You don't even give a shit about the baby after it's born.
Here, I'll save all you mongs the trouble:
https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html
Read up, rethink your position, please stop thinking with your fee-fees.
>>69488169
>might be dead
Exactly. It's a corpse. It was a human being but no longer and that makes a shitton of difference.
Also a dull knife gets thrown away.
>>69484871
No I am saying that if abortion were illegal why would women get a pass from punishment which is what those on the left and right are saying.
Trump said, if it's illegal and she does it she should be punished..
Everyone was flipping their shit over this hypothetical. Why does everyone think the women should be absolved of any punishment? Why?
>>69488292
>tfw you realize they're using religion as a soapbox for their pregnancy + s/m fetish
Haha gross.
>>69488473
Because why should a woman be punished for protecting her life and her body from an intruder?
>>69483862
>>69483978
>impyling just having something grow, move and be alive inside of you for 9 months that is the result of you having been raped at first isn't just going to wreck whatever is left from your mind
If you've ever seen a difficult pregnancy close up like my sister in law, it's a wonder women even want to bring the little shits to term. It's not a fucking walk in the park. Let alone doing that for a rape baby.
You have no heart and no soul.
>>69488292
and what species are those cells? a zygote has a complete set of dna unique from it's parents. this is how sexual reproduction works. personhood is a completely unscientific metric, and independent viability depends on external factors. premature babies that would have died 80 years ago can be kept alive with current medical science. it isn't hard to imagine that in the future we'll be able to grow babies in tanks from conception to birth. you can't say that one fetus isn't human in 1930 but a fetus at an identical state of development is human in 2030 just because medical science has advanced.
people who try to use mystical bullshit like "personhood" to define human life instead of the qualities we all learned in 9th grade science class are the ones actually stuck on their feelings.
>>69488169
a person who had his brain surgically removed is not a person, it's a corpse.
A corpse of a former human does should be treated with dignity out of respect for the person they once were, and for living family and friends, but that corpse does not have the same rights as a human.
The brain is the part that makes us who we are, all the most important aspects of who "we" are, are due to the brain. Even if you think "but I have a bum leg, isn't that a part of who I am?" that's only partially true. The bum leg is the cause of a change in who you are, but the actual effect is due to your brain's perception, interpreting the pain signals that bum leg sends, attempting to accomodate for that bum leg's lack of full range of motion, or unsteadiness when standing, and how that bum leg makes you feel emotionally and how you deal with it.
Your brain is basically everything about you.
>>69485216
Describing the physical actions performed in an abortion has nothing to do with men vs. women you insufferable cunt.
>>69488473
The hypothetical of whether a woman should be punished IF it were illegal is a pretty dumb question to ask. You should have clarified, but I was thinking along the lines of putting a scarlet letter on woman who got abortions despite it being legal.
Making abortions illegal carries far more punishment than any fine or imprisonment can do, women die attempting illegal abortions.
That is ultimately one of the reasons why abortion was made legal.
>>69489186
>The brain is the part that makes us who we are, all the most important aspects of who "we" are, are due to the brain.
and why is that? in ancient egypt they thought the heart was the most important organ. brain activity may be a sign that a person is still alive, but we have no idea how brain waves actually correlate with actual thought and personality. if you stand on the position that a person is nothing more than a brain, then free will doesn't exist because the brain is just an organ that operates with completely deterministic systems.
>>69487066
That doesn't actually answer the question.
A woman is raped. Because of reasons the baby is carried to term. Should the woman have the right to kill the child because it reminds her of a painful past?
If you say "why didn't she take care of it earlier" that's dodging the question.
>>69476712
No one wants to face the reality of abortion today.
>>69488292
>A cluster of cells. A cluster of cells that can grow into a human. Just like zygotes.
100% correct given a suitable environment to grow in and time to develop.
>Just like sperm cells. Just like any number of microscopic tiny shits.
100% incorrect. Sperm by itself will never become human, nor will bacteria become human.
For someone who argues against fee-fees, you're surprisingly ignorant of biology yourself. Or maybe you're just baiting. Who knows.
>>69488292
>https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html
> As pointed out above in the background section, there is a radical difference, scientifically, between parts of a human being that only possess "human life" and a human embryo or human fetus that is an actual "human being." Abortion is the destruction of a human being.
seems pretty clear cut to me. did you even read this yourself?
>>69489155
I'm not understanding your argument at all. Are you saying that because the cells are of human species, we should give them more rights than existing people of that same human species? The argument isn't about the chance to kill off our species, it's about not doing something against someone's will.
Personhood isn't mystical because there are clear definitions to when a human life becomes a human life. That's what personhood means. We're not using it as a meter to describe humanity, we're using it to describe viability. Arguing semantics doesn't change the fact that the cluster of cells, human or not, does not allow anybody to lose body autonomy.
Everything up to that is "potential," which is an empty word. It's pure conjecture. That word is the mystical term that means nothing outside of fee-fees, and that's ultimately all the argument comes down to. 9th grade biology was fun and all, but the source I posted goes beyond that to dispel myths
In the future, when technology has reached the point where abortions can not only ensure body autonomy but also save the cells and grow them into a human being somewhere else will be the ideal end to the abortion debate, but right now, the fact of the matter is that a living human being is losing personal rights to a non-living human being. Dead human beings have more body autonomy than women in some states.
>>69490240
>Personhood isn't mystical because there are clear definitions to when a human life becomes a human life.
yes and this happens when an egg cell is fertilized by a sperm cell. forget about 9th grade biology, if you can't understand the source you linked you need to go back to 4th grade reading.
>>69490120
But if the owner of said suitable environment is not willing to have this potential life develop inside her environment, which sje owns since it's her body, it finds another environment or it does not develop. A potential being does not override an existing being whose freedom and agency must be respected first. Unless you are pro-slavery as well?
>>69490144
Yes, and when a fetus has reached a certain point, of development it is officially classified as fully human. Still the argument against pro-choice is also against what is scientifically accepted. So yeah what's the deal chief
>>69490240
>Are you saying that because the cells are of human species, we should give them more rights than existing people of that same human species?
>>69490679
If a fertilized egg is a person, it can be tried for trespassing and violation of the mother's body and be condemned to capital punishmemt for that.
>>69489762
Because I thought the answer was obvious that no of course not.
Terminating before it has a brain eliminates that dilemma.
>>69489605
Because the ancient egyptians knew nothing about human anatomy. People used to consider the heart to be the source of emotions and unfortunately that outdated thought persists in many aspects of culture.
>Give your HEART to Jesus
>You wear your HEART on your sleeve
>My HEART says to make this decision
The heart is just a muscle that pumps blood to feed the other organs in your body. You can replace the heart with a machine, you can transplant a heart, and when the person wakes up.... they're still the same person, because they have the same brain.
If you were to transplant a brain though, even if the surgery is successful.. if somehow you prevented loss of consciousness in the brain that was to be transplanted... the result from waking up would not be the person who's body you put the brain in but rather the brain that you put in the body.
Actually, that brings up a point of head transplants. They're going to attempt the first human one in China in 2017, because China has no medical ethics whatsoever of course.
When they do a head transplant on mice they die seconds after regaining consciousness .. like their body was functioning.. the brain wakes up, and cannot deal with the massive change that has taken place and just dies.
>>69490718
in non-rape cases consent to fuck should be implied consent to be impregnated since that's the natural result of sex. in rape cases then it's still a question of whether the child's right to stay alive outweighs the mother's right to not have her feelings hurt. if you're a strict libertarian you could argue that it doesn't, but most pro-abortion arguments come from people who support universal right to healthcare at other people's expenses.
>>69490880
read the damn page you linked. conception is the only point that can be considered the start of a human being with any scientific basis.
>Myth 14: "A �person� is defined in terms of the active exercising of �rational attributes� (e.g., thinking, willing, choosing, self-consciousness, relating to the world around one, etc.), and/or the active exercising of �sentience� (e.g., the feeling of pain and pleasure)."
>Fact 14: Again, these are philosophical terms or concepts, which have been illegitimately imposed on the scientific data. The scientific fact is that the brain, which is supposed to be the physiological support for both "rational attributes" and "sentience," is not actually completely developed until young adulthood.
>>69491274
Because taxes should be spent on anything but preventing the spread of disease and keeping people from dying gruesome deaths.
>>69491491
Didn't link it though.
>>69491274
>>>69490718 (You) #
in non-rape cases consent to fuck should be implied consent to be impregnated since that's the natural result of sex
But that's wrong. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. I have sex for intimacy, not for reproduction, that's why I take the pill every day to ensure I do not get pregnant. Too bad pro-lifers hate birth control and sex education in matters of birth control as well, so you in fact deprive women of their agency.
>>69491231
>Actually, that brings up a point of head transplants. They're going to attempt the first human one in China in 2017, because China has no medical ethics whatsoever of course.
I heard about that. Who'd have thought we'd be creating frankenstein's monster this soon.
He has to call himself that if it works.
>>69491704
read it anyway then. trying to argue based on science when science directly contradicts your own points makes you sound like an idiot.
>>69490144
>>69490120
Sorry, posted before refreshing. I admit to error. My only argument is bodily autonomy, which should never be compromised.
>>69476712
>you would naturally not blame the mother for getting one
I'm sure there are plenty of people who would naturally blame the mother. They're just saying that because Trump. That's literally the only reason.
>>69491973
if two conjoined twins only have one liver, should the twin with the liver on his side be allowed to cut off his brother for comprising his bodily autonomy?
>>69491274
Again: consent to fuck is not consent to be impregnanted. That's why the pill exists. Do you want to force womem to become pregnant against their will by denying them birth control as well? No woman who didn't wish to be pregnant would consent to sex anymore and
rape would skyrocket as consequence.
>>69492291
Yes that's what's usually done. That or lose both since conjoined twins have very short lives depending how they're conjoined. In your case it's either save one or lose both.
>>69492291
Depends on how old they are, medical options available for the brothers after, but pretty much yes. I don't understand the reason to use this as an example.
>>69492421
wearing a seatbelt doesn't mean you shouldn't be surprised if you get hurt driving down the road at 200mph. if you have sex knowing that you might get pregnant you don't get to argue "but I didn't want to."
>>69491784
>so you in fact deprive women of their agency.
> """"agency""""
Dumbest euphemism for "whore" ever.
>>69491893
The chance of success is almost non existant. He will probably die during the operation, if they restore consciousness, he'll probably suffer the same fate as the mice. We don't even know WHY they die like that, some sort of shock? I don't know if it's immunological because they die when they fully wake up and start reacting to their environment again.
I think the patient is someone who's going to die soon anyway though and he's volunteered.
>>69492880
>quality bants from Russia
What if I told you that women are allowed to enjoy casual, consequence-free sex like men, fampai.
>>69492688
Are you saying married and non-married couples should have sex only that one time they are going to have a child and never have sex again? Enjoy your divorces, kid. And you are dodging the question.
>>69493305
how am I dodging the question? pregnancy is a known consequence of sex. if you consent to sex then you're consenting to all possible consequences to sex.
>>69492688
Sex is not driving at high speed. You can want sex but not children. That's why birth control exists.
Again, do you also want to deprive women of their means to prevent unwanted pregnancies such as the pill?
I say you get 2 chances to learn your lesson. Two no-questions-asked abortions, after that you need to present some highly significant mitigating circumstances.
>>69493519
But there are means to prevent unwanted consequences. Are you for or against them?
Also if a woman decides to no longer consent to sex with a man she's in a relationship with because she does not want to get pregnant, and he forces her, how do you ensure that she is not forced to live with living trauma and that the rapist is punished accordingly since husbands/boyfriends are the least expected committers of rape?
>>69476790
I'm okay with women not having agency.
>>69494031
And the true face of the pro-life movement reveals itself.
>>69483243
>You should be held ersponsible for my actions either way
>>69476712
Well to discuss these issues, you must be firmly grounded in the biological reality of the world. Without these biological presuppositions, arguments for the rights of specific creatures will not have a solid foundation to rely upon. Women evolved with the faculty of manipulation and deceit, not responsibility and integrity. Women are more greedy and short-sighted than men, which is why so many women will naturally succumb to prostitution (or forms of it such as marriage). Women rely on monkey branching to reproduce with the best male they can get, so they have no concept of love or loyalty.
Presuming women don't have the faculty of genuine reason and integrity, the female surely does not have responsibility and does not want it. In fact all policies the female votes for removes responsibility of their actions while simultaneously giving them more power which requires responsibility. This is the movement towards the gynocracy.
All that being said, I don't believe that a zygote or an embryo has a right to life just as I don't believe my sperm or an ant has a right to life.
