/lit/ - Literature

>>18975888
NOOOOO IT'S A HUMAN RIGHT TO MURDER BABIES

This is not literature

>>18975888
Rightists belong in camps

>>18975888
>B-B-B-B-BUT MUH PAIN
>MUH TOUCH A HOT STOVE

>>18975889
fetus is not a baby

>>18975888
I have been listening to liberals cry about this on the news while I drive in the car and I am astounded how desperately they want to murder babies. Women should just stop being sluts and take responsibility.

For the answer to your question though, most atheists haven’t realized that morals and values make no sense in their framework. They still adhere to some mutant secular pseudo-Christian morality

>>18975897
Cope and sneethe

>>18975911
>fetus is not a baby
And? Why do fetuses have no rights but babies do? Why do even babies have rights to begin with, why can’t we strip all babies rights and only grant rights to mentally functioning adults?

>>18975911
Semantics and pilpul. Killing a ‘fetus’ is murder, faggot

Why can't women take the consequences for their action?

>>18975923
>why can’t pigs fly

>>18975912
>They still adhere to some mutant secular pseudo-Christian morality
Strange given how Plato and Nietzsche are both the most read and popular philosophers of our time by a long shoot (going off Google searches). Both of them have argue that morals cannot be separate from the metapsychical. It’s almost like most people are midwits who are not willing to challenge their own belief systems to its logical end
L

>>18975888
For once some good news in this sad world.

>>18975911
And we are not "people", we are clumps of cells, why do you care?

>>18975888
My position on abortion is that it is not the government’s job to interfere in family matters. Abortion is murder, but that is between the mother, the father, and God. And yes, the same argument applies after birth. That being said, I do see abortion as a very vile thing, unless some medical issue for mother or baby is present. For example, if the baby has a major birth defect, killing it is the mother’s obligation, hence an abortion. Otherwise? I consider a murder, albeit one which as the parent you had the right to carry out.

>>18975939
>(going off Google searches

>>18975957
Should have said Google analytics

What is texas going to do when they become the state with the highest downsyndome population

>>18975953
Do you see all the murders withing a family as a "family matter"?

>>18975888
If you really think about it, there’s no situation in which legislating according to religious rules is immoral. If God doesn’t exist then morality doesn’t exist in the first place, therefore it can’t be immoral. If God exists then it would be moral to do his bidding since he’s the ultimate source and judge of morality.
Secularists btfo

>>18975966
And why do you think they should do something? Do you believe this marginal phenomenon is going to disrupt their economy or something? It isn't.

>>18975969
You just realized this? literally how new are you?

>>18975978
Most people still haven't and never will due to satanic pride, so he is still ahead of the curve.

>>18975921
Nope, killing beings that lack consciousness, like all fetuses before the 6th month, isn't murder.

>>18975969
>If God doesn’t exist then morality doesn’t exist in the first place
>what is moral naturalism

99/100 anti-abortionists just want it to be risky for women to have sex because they missed out on the fruits of the sexual revolution and want there to be less casual sex because if they're not getting any, no one should.
Once again, what is fundamentally just being an incel whose soul desperately needs a quick shower in pussy juice, is presented as some sort of theological or moral principle that is very dearly held, despite this being the most obvious LARP and cope of all time.
I've said it thousands of times before, and I will say it again: the transparency is so god damn cringy, so please, for the love of life, please please please, just have sex incels.

>>18975911
Fetus is literally the Latin word for baby

>>18975988
>what is moral naturalism
Kek, how you’re joking. In the absectof god the only force that exist is Will to Power

>>18975985
According to whom? is it fine to go into a hospital and kill people in vegetative states? is it fine to go to a mental asylum and kill people who barely are were that they exist, much less function properly? if so what is the cut off? at what point someone is "worth" enough to be let life?

>>18975993
>resorting to this level of sophism unironically
Yeah I read that thread on /pol/ too, which once again convinced me that the average IQ of that board is 104.

>>18975898
This is literal retard tier

>>18975999
No.

>>18975988

>>what is moral naturalism
Moral naturalism is cringe. It just takes the is-ought problem, claims it doesn't exist because it just doesn't and considers it closed. How creative.

>>18975990
what about pro-life women?

>>18975990
this

>>18975967
I did point out that murders after birth fall under this view. Of course, society would not be a pleasant place if parents were running around killing their daughters m, honor-killing style, but I will argue again that this is not the government’s place to intervene, it is society’s. There should be a cultural pressure to reject abortion, a cultural pressure to prevent fratricide and the like.
Two examples of how this works out ideally:
1. Girl gets pregnant after consensual sex. The cultural pressure should be on her to put her child up for adoption, and to not abort. That being said she can abort if she wants.
2. A father wants to kill his daughter for marrying a man he does not approve of. She should be able to flee to safety, and other community/family members would kill the father and protect her. If she was killed by the father, they would kill him as punishment. The government wouldn’t intervene in either case.
In essence, society regulates itself, and the government is weakened.

>>18975988
>>what is moral naturalism
A slippery slope towards the powerful ruthlessly dominating the weak with no regard for them, that's what it is

You're already experiencing the consequences of moral naturalism with the 1% growing more and more powerful each day, good job, atheists

>>18976006
It's not a sophism, it's literally what the word means. You can't deny it in a non circular way and I haven't been to /pol/ in 5 years so I have no idea what you're referring to.

>>18975969
That's a false dilemma.
There is a virtually unlimited amount of possible faiths, many of which coexist at the same time.
Therefore there may be situations which would upset one faith but not the others, making it possible for a legislation to be immoral from a certain point of view.

>>18975911
When you can show me the exact second a fetus goes from being a random bunch of cells to a realized human being ill get on board for aborting what comes before it.

>>18976020
Femcels exist as well, and it's the exact same principle.

>>18976027
>>18976006
Can you tell me in your own words what a sophism is?