/sci/ - Science & Math

Pro-life should be renamed to pro-ignorance.

You make me want to punch a baby.

I'm against abortions, but I'm all for killing babies. Pro-murder makes me wet myself.

Since nobody has a good definition on when 'human life' begins or ends, it can't be globally decided. Let each person decide.

Doctor that started the largest pro-abortion group on earth, tells us WHY he made a mistake, and shows an abortion as it takes place.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek
Shit is so inhuman. I can concede to abortion up to 8 weeks. 8 weeks is enough time for a woman to "choose".

i'm not pro-life, I'm anti choice

-me to a femanist liberal classmate, who then became amazingly butthurt

Why do Americans insist on calling it "circumcision" instead of "male genital mutilation"?

I think abortion is definitely wrong, but I'm not convinced that it should be illegal.

>>1718934
Why do doctors call it surgery, and not mutilation?
You see where I'm going here?

>>1718942
No, because everyone calls "female circumcision" as "female genital mutilation".

>>1718893
why do i call this a straw man?

You can't be pro-life and support war.

It just doesn't make sense.

>>1718893

no one should be forced to be the life-support system of anyone else, adult or fetus.

if an adult was attached to your body in need of life-support you would have no obligation to support him for 9months. It would be "nice" of you to, but no legal responsibility would be obliged of you.

A fetus, an adult, a teenager, anything that is connected to your body, sucking your nutrients and changing your life style has no right to demand you become a life-support machine for him.

I wouldn't demand it of anyone, but I would find it "nice" if they did carry me...but being "nice" is not the same as being moral.

>>1718957
Well unless she's been raped, a pregnant woman has agreed to become pregnant.

>>1718959
You overextimate the intelligence of women.

>>1718959

First of all, it could also be involuntary due to condom breakage, pill not working, etc.

Secondly, consent doesn't matter unless you make a legally binding contract with the person you are life-supporting. If it was an adult you could make such a contract, a fetus has no moral capacity to enter into a contract with the mother, ipso facto you can shit it out with no moral consequence.

>>1718957
>>1718971


pretty bullet proof

>>1718957
Except, with a fetus, unless rape has occurred, the woman CHOSE to have sex, and probably CHOSE to do so without protection. A mother has the responsibility of protecting her child, from the moment of conception, just as a father has the responsibility to protect the mother, and child.
That's called parenthood. If you don't wanna be a parent, USE A CONDOM, OR PILLS FFS. It's that simple.

>>1718959

Yeah, no.

You can't be pro-life and support capital punishment.

It just doesn't make sense.

>>1718957
This is absolutely retarded (sorry for the strong and rather meaningless language) and will always fall apart.

i can say WITHOUT A DOUBT that you will not continue to hold that view.

>>1718982

except pills can not work and condoms can break, etc

and the woman can change her mind and shit out the fetus because there is no contract between the two, a fetus has no moral capacity...

it's no different than a woman sticking a pencil in her vagina and then deciding to take it out...nothing of value was lost, pencils have no moral capacity

I'm pro-abortion up to five years after the birth.

>>1718994

>i have no way to counter your brilliant argument But I will assume there is a way and thus you are wrong

hey buddy, try using your brain more

>if an adult was attached to your body in need of life-support you would have no obligation to support him for 9months. It would be "nice" of you to, but no legal responsibility would be obliged of you.

>A fetus, an adult, a teenager, anything that is connected to your body, sucking your nutrients and changing your life style has no right to demand you become a life-support machine for him.

/thread

>>1719000
>equates life with a pencil
Seriously? SERIOUSLY?
Let me ask you this then. What makes you worth anything? Why shouldn't I be allowed to just up and kill you, for no reason? It's not like you signed a contract with me to keep you alive.

>>1718994
Yeah, I'm not just going to take your word for it. At least try to make a valid point, mmkay?

it wont matter because soon birth control will be so secure abortions won't be necessary.

>>1718922

Is already a human being what will become human.

the same reason pro-lifers dont call it pro-forced-pregnancy or pro-forced-parenthood

>>1719010
yeah, this is pretty solid.
It only occur once every 50 years, but i think we got a smart person among us.

>>1719013

What makes someone worth something is their experience, their education and their thoughts. None of which are possessed by a fetus.

>>1719013


you can kill me legally in some situations, like self-defense, life isn't inherently sacred.

there is an implicit civil contract between us enforced by the government

"worth" is irrelevant, what matters is context

you can kill ppl in self-defense, you can kill people who attach themselves to your body and demand life-support because they infringe on your freedom

A friend of mine got a girl pragnent and he was shitting bricks because he didn't really want to have a kid. When she went in for an exam the doctor offered a prenatal genetic screening which she decided to do. Results came back and babby had formed with down's syndrome so she aborted and me and the dad went to vegas and partied like madcunts for the weekend.

Basically my personal experience with abortion has been pretty awesome and I recommend it to everybody.

>>1719030
No. You're nothing. You're one of 6.5 billion people, breathing air that I could be breathing, eating food that I could be eating, drinking water that I could be drinking, and giving no major benefit to society. If you weren't here, someone would take your place.
You are worthless, in the eyes of science, and society as a whole.

>>1719030

worth is in the eye of the beholder, best to argue for abortion in a way that can treat the fetus as an adult, so you don't get into stupid arguments like "is it conscious" or "is it special like a human" etc

treat the baby like a full grown person, and argue from there so they can't counter you with marginal examples like "well then we should kill retards because they have low IQs" etc

Like I said, legal up to 8 weeks.
A woman can have up to 2 months to make the choice.
Otherwise, welcome to motherhood.

>>1719063

no reason to set a 2month limit...

if some asshole midget attached himself to your body and used you as a life-support machine no one would demand you nourish him for 9months...

the fact that he dies when you separate yourself from him isn't your fault, that's just how the situation works. Tough luck for him.

abortion is just early emancipation

>>1719063

yes, because female bodies are perfect clocks and never miss a single period and there's no way that any girl could go 2 months without knowing she is pregnant, right?

>>1719068
If some unrelated midget attached itself to me?
Get lost.
If my own offspring was attached to me?
Well, I did make it, and it is alive, so I have a responsibility to bear it.

Note, the word RESPONSIBILITY, a word most liberals seem to despise with gusto.

>>1719071
>I had sex last night, i better see if I'm pregnant
THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR NOT FUCKING KNOWING

Its all about the golden rule for me. Pro-choice, pro-life they both have their reasons, they both effect me.

Pro-choice is good for those who have been born, but bad for those unborn

Pro-life is bad for those born, but good for those unborn.

Well, when I was an unborn fetus, I wouldnt of given a shit about my own life. So I go with the one that I actually care about. Pro-choice! \o/

Not to mention all the other benefits for a society that is pro-choice. Yes, abortions actually make the world a better place.

How do "pro-life" conservatives manage to walk past every fucking single homeless person in American and demand that women produce more people when they don't want to?

Does "life" officially end at birth?

>>1719078
>I have a responsibility to bear it.

sure is subjective opinion states as fact in here.

>>1719105
they don't give a fuck anymore once the child is born. Until they turn 18 though, and can die for their "god" in some silly war.

Fuck choice. Compulsory abortion for the genetically deformed, all other pregnancies must be brought to term and if you don't want the fucking kid, give it up for adoption.

>>1719121
killing babies is easier and more fun though

>>1719121
Fuck freedom. Lets grab random conservative males and implant tumors in their abdomens and only take them out when they're about fifteen pounds. It's not like there's any risk to them; we promise to take the tumor away when it's big enough.

>my face when I'm anti-abortion but willing to let it slide for the first two months, anti-war, anti-capital punishment, have taken a homeless guy to McDonald's for breakfast, and am against the needless killing of ANY life whatsoever.
>I'm also pro-gun, and pro-stem-cell research, and pro-science.

>>1719121

yeah that sounds good to me just as long as the pro-life cunts are the ones that are going to pay for all those bastard children to be raised without mothers because its not my problem and i don't give two shits about those kids.

>>1719136
are you me?

>>1719136
Wow, a whole McDonalds breakfast? Too bad he had to sleep in the snow dude but at least you purchased him breakfast. Knowing that homeless people get the occassional McShitty breakfast from self-aggrandizing college kids makes me feel better about added more unwanted people to the world.

No more abortions, ever!! Fuckwad promises to buy them breakfast.

Why do conservafucks call it "pro life"? "Anti-woman" or "poop out that future war casualty" are more accurate names.

>>1719136
>>1719155

SAMEFAG WITH SHORT TERM MEMORY

>>1719175
>my face when I'm anti-abortion but willing to let it slide for the first two months
>I'm anti-abortion but willing to let it slide for the first two months
>willing to let it slide for the first two months
pay attention next time, sport

>the majority still hasn't realized that "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are both fucktarded terms
>implying this is a shock
pro-abortion or anti-abortion you left-wing, right-wing fuck ups

>>1719195

/thread

>>1719195

im being trolled, but anyway. "Pro abortion" implies being in favour of aborting ever fetus, which is clearly ludicrous.

Pro choice is correct since it implies the option to choose to keep or abort

>>1719209
>implying pro-choice people aren't really pro-abortion
Don't try and bullshit people.

>>1719213

>>1719209
Pro-choice is too vague a term. Ask any person and they're likely to tell you that they like to make choices.
Pro-life is also too vague as again, ask any person and they're likely to tell you that they like life.
Yeah I know the two terms have become associated with abortion I'm just being a naggy nit-picker

>>1719230
Yeah, you just got called out, and you folded.

>>1718982

Who says she has the responsibility to care for that baby, you? Well, buddy, who the fuck are you? You think you make the rules? Guess what, you don't. We decided on them before you were born.

From the moment of conception, what is there, is an unborn human being.

That human being has the same rights as any other - it's not the property of the mother, or anyone else. It's not for someone else to decide if it should be killed.

As long as inalienable human rights exist, abortion is morally wrong. The whole pro-abortion stance seems to stem from some idea that because these things are small and incomplete, that they are less than human.

But I don't see it that way. I see the fact that they grow from a microscopic size, with no consciousness, etc. as purely incidental. Suppose people were born adults after a fully conscious 9 months, no tiny foetus, no vagina. I bet you'd be pro-life then.

I rest my case.

>>1719285 From the moment of conception, what is there, is an unborn human being.

No, it's not even a fetus at conception. Hell, it's not even a PREGNANCY at conception.

I don't need little feeble-minded boys telling me who not to abort. I wish I was your mom so I could dump you.

>>1719285
If it's a human at conception, why don't we have funerals when women miscarry?

>>1719297
>it's not even a PREGNANCY at conception.
You've just gone full retard, son.

>>1719306
Because most women prefer to grieve privately. They do grieve though.

>>1719307

It's not a pregnancy until five days later, son. Implantation. Until then it's just a "chemical pregnancy". Not pregnant by medical definitions.

Anti-choice fucks don't even know what they're arguing about, they just repeat what they're told.

>>1719308
Women can grieve about anything. They're hormone driven, mentally unstable creatures

>>1719337
Actually, a recent scientific study says that men are more emotional. We just hide it, to act tough.

>>1719311
I don't think anyone here is against morning after pill which I...think is what's being implied here. That sperm and egg most certainly are not a fetus

>>1719377
Citation?

>>1719377
Eagerly awaiting the next study saying exactly the opposite, in the bullshit department of the sciences

Women will get upset if they are dissallowed to do something and if they are dissallowed to do something. I personally feel that once a fetus is created that abortion is murder.

>>1719387
Excuse me, we're equally emotional.
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980520132438data_trunc_sys.shtml

>>1719404
>fetus is created that abortion is murder
golden rule: If it can survive without immediate life support outside of the womb, it's murder. Otherwise, it's not alive to begin with

>>1719405
>Men and women experience the same level of sadness while watching tearjerkers like Titanic - but women are more likely to reach for a box of tissues.
Only emotion I had watching that movie was boredom. Granted, it's an emotion, but still...

>>1719418
Doctors everywhere just facepalmed.
Seriously, learn biology.
Everyone on life support in the hospital is dead. Despite the heartbeat, and brain action, NO LIFE.
also, this again-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek

Didn't we just have this thread?

>>1719432
It doesn't mean they're dead. It just means they're not alive (anymore). Small yet vital (no pun intended) difference

>>1719455
>Not alive
>Not dead
Pick one.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dead
Definition of DEAD
1
: deprived of life : no longer alive

>>1719455
So it's OK to kill them? No? Then you need a different value for what grants right to life. (I recommend sentience.)

>>1719285

wow, this changed my mind about abortion.

>>1719468
>Not alive
>Not dead
>Pick one.

Schrodinger's cat says no.

>>1719052
So do we need to have murder investigations for every still birth or miscarrige. FFS abortion can rid the world of autism. Look at Sparta, they fucking aborted kids up to 13 years after birth.

>treat the baby like a full grown person, and argue from there so they can't counter you with marginal examples like "well then we should kill retards because they have low IQs" etc
I wish there was a way to genetically test fetuses, and grade their gene patterns in the categorys of physical strength, positive and negative mutation, intelligence, and any thing else that may be relevany. We abort all but the top 10 percent. This would speed up evolution much faster. If every generation only included the top ten percent of the gene pool in 40-80 years the newest generation would be made up of the top 1 percent of their grand parents gene pool. Their kids would be the top tenth of a percent and so on.

>>1719432

are you >implying that anyone that requires a ventilator is no longer alive?

Pro choice fag here (conservative as well), I always find it funny so many pro choices are so touchy about admitting it's muder for all intents and purposes. Who gives a shit? Fuck babies.

>>1719505

lol. there are ways of employing eugenics in more humanitarian ways and this isn't one of them.

>>1719505
Obviously you would NOT be in that top percentile, with your 1337 sageru skills.

>>1719285
> Suppose people were born adults after a fully conscious 9 months, no tiny foetus, no vagina. I bet you'd be pro-life then.
but they don't so I'm not. If you knew that the child you or your girl friend, wife, baby's momma was about to birth was going to be born with a debilitating disease, why not cull the fetus? If the fetus didn't ask to be born, why give it the right to life? If some one doesn't have the time or money to raise a child, why put more strain on social service programs and adoption agencies? Is anybody reading the question marks? Why won't one of you pro-life faggots answer me?

>>1719536
My name is Sage dumb ass.

>>1719577
No matter what we say, you're gonna continue to believe that life in the womb isn't work keeping.
Did you watch the linked video? If you haven't, all your question to pro-lifers will be answered there.

>>1719524
>I always find it funny so many pro choices are so touchy about admitting it's muder for all intents and purposes.
That's because it probably isn't, depending on your definitions. Murder is the willing (add in more irrelevant qualifiers here) killing of a *person*. It's very much arguable whether or not a fetus constitutes a person.

>>1719594
Lots of things are disgusting and horrifying. This does not automatically make them morally wrong. Killing cows is disgusting and horrifying. Eating feces is disgusting and horrifying. These things are still perfectly morally acceptable, at least relative to murder. So what's your point?

>>1719613
>It's very much arguable whether or not a fetus constitutes a person.
It isn't even that. _People_ have to be sentient. Fetuses are not sentient. End of argument.

Do you anti-abortionists also hate male masturbation? A regular male kills thousands of unborn children in a month.

>>1719594
Of course a gynocologist is going to be pro-life. He's going to make so much more money off of a patient that comes in and gets ultra sounds, and routine check ups every month than some one who walks in and says get this fetus out of my body today. I never want to come back here.

>>1719615
Because killing cows=/=killing potential humans, with beating hearts, and working brains, and moving arms and legs, that respond to abortion instruments by trying to struggle and escape.
There's a sanctity to life. Killing the unborn is wrong, as is killing murderers, and people in other countries in acts of war. It's so quintessentially uncivilized. If an alien species saw us doing this shit, they'd think we were batshit cavemen.

>>1719621
"Arguable" as in "I'm not going to pick a side". I'm pretty sure I agree with you, but I really can't tell where the invisible line goes, so it's hard to say.

>>1719621
>Fetuses are not sentient
[citation needed]

>>1719648
People kill animals to eat and survive. A mother can kill an unborn to survive because she cannot afford to raise it. What is the difference there?

>>1719627
A single cell is not the same as a a fetus. Even a simple embryo isn't the same. What makes a fetus worthy of life is it's heart, brain, and moving arms and legs. It has opposable thumbs. It has genetalia. It has the beginnings of a face.

>>1719654
You're comparing humans to animals.

I'm all for abortion up to the 54th trimester. Better to end something horrible before it reaches the point where you have to grant it rights.

>>1719654
Because women don't die if they have children to take care of you fucking dipshit.

>>1718893
>liberal compassion
>compassion
>implying fetuses have feelings

>>1719661
Indeed. Why shouldn't I? We're all multicelled organism of the planet. We kill and deal with each other to stay alive, it's nature.

>>1719665
>poverty
>no money for herself let alone her child
>both die of starvation or disease
herp derp

>>1719668
If we all act on our nature, then we'll be just like the animals that we kill. Humans have ethics and morals. Animals don't.

>>1719653
Human babies can't even pass the mirror test until 18 months, said test being necessary but not sufficient to establish sentience in modern thinking.

>>1719013

Unless you're a christfag (and it's probably still the case if you are) then you have to realize how FUCKING INSIGNIFICANT YOU ARE. You guys give moral theory way too much credit.
I'm alive by random coincidence and so are you, but you don't matter so shut the fuck up and enjoy life instead of arguing something so insignificant.

All you are getting out of typing on a computer right now is mind-numbing, time -wasting nothing. Make yourself feel good by winning a debate, prop yourself up on a high ladder... you don't matter. If you die in 10 seconds I don't fucking care and neither does any of the rest of the vast universe.

Do something more constructive.

>>1719680
That doesn't happen in countries where abortions are performed in clinics. In the US, there's no risk of starvation.

Why isnt adoption even an option
in any of these "discussions" ??
Planed parenthood centers
wont bring the subject up unless you ask doesnt make sense to me

>>1719681
And are those of any other use than survival, cooperation between ourselves?

>>1719681
Yes they do you retard.

Dogs have been known to save their owners from drowning, and some people have been saved by whales/dolphins who they've never met before. In fact, animals do good not because they were told to, but because they WANT to. Something which you cannot comprehend, christfag.

>>1719660
>What makes a fetus worthy of life is it's heart, brain, and moving arms and legs. It has opposable thumbs. It has genetalia. It has the beginnings of a face.

The problem with this is that it would regard killing an entire alien civilization as more morally acceptable than killing a single human, which I'd disagree with. If you'd also disagree, that means you have some other criteria for what makes something worthy of life.

Also, mammalian fetuses are all extremely similar in the early stages of development.

>>1719681
>If we all act on our nature, then we'll be just like the animals that we kill.

You callin' black folk animals?

>>1719686

>Do something more constructive
>implying it would matter in the long run
not that I nessecarilly disagree but with your reasoning all is futile because thermal death of the universe / big crunch etc...

Abortion is abit like drug abuse. There's no way its a morally right thing to do but making it illegal not only doesn't stop it it makes it more dangerous. Do you really want backyard abortions again?

>>1719685
It's a good thing most doctors don't agree with you.
People that are pro-abortion-
Have no children, or
Have never seen an ultrasound.
I shutter to think about myself being aborted. No one had the right to decide my fate but me, and nature.

>>1718893
I have an answer to your question OP, but you must answer a question for me first.

It's it funny that the women who are against abortion are the ones you don't want to fuck in the first place?

>>1719706
Those are just exceptions. Those few animals just couldn't tell predator from prey. Dogs save their owners because they are dependent on them for food and shelter and not because they love their owner.

>>1719723

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be in a position to care had I been aborted as a fetus.

>>1719706
true dat

but result in more ethical controversies

do animals with empathy deserve to live more than sociopaths?

>>1719726
And men who are against abortions are the lonely virgins who nobody wants to fuck in the first place.

>>1719727

It's actually pack mentality and they think of you as family, but thanks for playing.

Cats, on the other hand...

>>1718893
LOL at gaythiests
= gay theists

>>1719727
>Dogs save their owners because they are dependent on them for food and shelter and not because they love their owner.

yes... the dog acts out of logic and not out of an instictual impulse shaped by devotion and empathy

fucking dogs! why so selfish?!

>>1719735
lol why you mad tho?

>>1719723
You weren't a person when you were a fetus. People seem to have trouble with this concept, but before birth - for some time after birth, even - there was no "you" which could counterfactually have been aborted.

>>1719727
>Dogs save their owners because they are dependent on them for food and shelter and not because they love their owner.
>a human mother saves her children because she is dependent on them for food and shelter and not because they love their children

sorry but ethology is naturalistic and pretty predictable

has nothing to do with the divine

>>1719727

A dolphin wouldn't save its own prey nor one of its predators, so what would saving a drowning human fall under?

Don't bother answering, you've been ignorant enough for one day.

>>1719769
>implying egyptology is real

>>1719754
And yet, there WAS.
Even medical doctors agree with this. Only butthurt atheist pseudo-scientists believe this kind of shit.
That's why most doctors will do whatever they can to save an expectant mother, and why they hook premature babies up to expensive equipment, even in the case of mothers that can't afford the premie life support.

>>1718893
If the other side goes with rebranding themselves as the 'we fuck up your life and pretend its for your good but don't care about consequences on your side as long as our souls are saved for this act of kindness' it would be ok I guess.

>>1719769
>Firefighters save lives because they love random strangers and not because of money
>Lifeguards save lives because they are ethically and morally upright people and not because of money

Sorry, bro, but it doesn't work that way.

>>1719778

>>1719779
Vets will also try to save stranded kittens. I fail to see how this offers evidence that fetuses are people.

>>1719770
Dolphins are known to be playful animals. Clearly, they are saving humans to entertain themselves.

>>1719779
Who's butthurt? I had my abortion, I don't give a shit what you Christfags whine about. I didn't want it, I had an abortion, problem solved.

>>1719802
you are painfully libertarian

NO YOU GREEDY JEWWANNABE!

NOT EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING CARES ONLY ABOUT PROFIT!

>>1719818
>implying that most people would risk their lives to save other people without pay

>>1719817
Too stupid to use a condom?
Fucked your cousin?
Can't into birth control pills?
Either way, you're one dumb cunt.
You'd been my chick, I'd have beat the ever loving shit out of you, prison time be damned.

>>1719833
>implying he's not a bitter socially retarded sociopath
i know that's 4chan, but... seriously?

Hey, I thought the United States was a FREE country. Now it imposes limits on your use of your own body ? Haha!

Love,
Canada

>>1719856
Come on, man. Don't tell me you've never heard of the many stories where pedestrians just ignore people who are dying or in need of help.

>>1719863
>implying a genetically similar, yet different being is YOUR body
By your logic, you're in the moral right to molest children, as long as they're YOURS.

>>1719875
Children aren't part of your body

Don't try USA, you ain't as free as you think.

Love,
Canada

>>1719888
Hey, fuckheads. Start making decent games, EH?

>>1719868
where I live most people whenever someone is in danger either panic or try to help

indifferent people are rare

>>1719136

Not bad, good sir.

if you are pro life than anytime you miss a chance to get a woman pregnant inside of your non violent ability to do so you are comitting "murder"

I AM PRO-LIFE. STOP KILLING CANCER CELLS. THEY DON'T BELONG TO YOU, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN WILL!

>This is what "pro-life" people actually believe

>150 posts

If you're thinking "hmm maybe there's something going on in this thread", maybe you should instead start an easy/moderate pre-calc problems thread, okay?

Why is /sci/ so easily trolled? There are places much more suitable for this kind of thing.

>davien 9,000

You have to completely ignore science to believe that any fetus younger than 3 months is "alive." And the vast majority (like 98%) of abortions are done within the first trimester, with the remainder typically only being done if the mother's life could be put in danger.

Do pro-life faggots really believe that women wait half a year before getting an abortion?

>>1718957

a baby/child up until the age of 5 or so is pretty helpless, and totally reliant on caregivers for all of their needs, slowly weaning their way out of them. is it ok to murder small children? how about toddlers who know how to talk? how about infants who can't focus their eyes and require nutrients from their mother (milk)? An unborn fetus, if taken out could survive in an ICU? Where is the line?

Both sides are wrong in a lot of ways.

Pro-abortionists (fuck your shit-headed propagandist terminology, same goes for the other side) incorrectly refer to the fetus as their own body, it is not. It is a seperate being, however incomplete and we need to start coming up with a comprehensive way of dealing with children's rights. The problem is, this has been turned into an issue of women's rights, like a lot of other things. If a woman wants to get an abortion, supposedly it's her right to choose but if she's attempting to extract child support from a man who has been tricked into raising a child that isn't his for several years then it's about what's in the child's best interests.

There's also a certain amount of maturation that has to take place with respect to the people who live in our society. Sex is an adult behaviour. When you become an adult you are responsible for your actions and informing yourself of the consequences of those actions and it's nobody's job to bail you out in any way. Contraception is not 100% reliable. If you have sex there is a chance, no matter how small, that you may become pregnant. This is your fault. This is life.

>>1720056

Cont'd

Anit-abortionists regularly take contradicting stances on different, but related, issues. A lot of them will agree that abortion is wrong while failing to recognize that many criminals come from homes that are broken in some way. Unwanted pregnancies often produce children that grow up to be unproductive members of society that syphon social resources those same anti-abortionists constantly whine about being used too excessively.

They must also consider what kind of death is acceptable. Is it better to die in the womb when faced with being raised by a mother that wishes you didn't exist or is it better to die on a battlefield, 5000 miles away from your home and a family that loves you because your government desires control over more oil.

As far as I'm concerned, if you've failed to see the problems with both sides and have taken a firm position, you're kind of an idiot. Sorry.

>>1720004

When people are such dumb fucks they sometimes don't realize they're pregnant until they're giving birth on a public toilet, who the fuck knows what they believe.

>>1720059

Not the guy who wrote this the linked post, but there can also be extenuating circumstances. Rape, Incest, Severe disability on the part of the child, mother's life being in danger and so on can really change the equation. Something this personal does have to be taken on a case by case basis, and as such I feel the law is ill suited to handle it.

>>1720074

Absolutely agree with having each case reviewed though I would point out that it would create even more beaurocracy and put more strain on the already limited resources of the health care system.

In light of this, no offense, slightly more realistic assessment, I'd say a time limit is a better choice. Say... 6 months? Maybe the point at which the baby is able to survive outside the womb, whatever that might be (though I realize this is changing but like everything else we must adapt, deal with it).

why review each abortion? Who the fuck cares? Certainly not you pro-life assholes, none of you fags take care of unwanted babies.

JUST LET IT GO

>>1720114

Well, some of us consider difficult ethical question with a little more care than "fuck it."

>>1720074

any kind of system where women can get abortions if they are raped but not from consensual sex is a horrible idea

think about it.

>>1720530

No contraceptive is 100% effective. It's called being a responsible adult and living with the consequences of your actions. If you decide to have sex and you get pregnant it's your fault. That's life. Grow the fuck up.

WAAHHHH BUT ILL BE INCONVENIENCED.

Stfu.

Usless people having children that will not be a net positive to sociality need to get abortions. I feel its my duty to fund planned parenthood chapters located in negro communities.

>>1720828
You're either a troll or a strawman given some kind of corrupt un-life. In either case kindly go sodomize yourself with a rusty chainsaw, preferably one inversely proportional to your own intellect to ensure maximum discomfort.

Also saging because fuck this shit.

>>1720828

And they choose to deal with the consequences by getting an abortion.

"You chose to go in a place with people and you got a disease because of it. You knew there was a chance, now you want to take antibiotics? Deal with the consequences of your actions and be sick."

Most women get abortions with in the first few days of discovering they are pregnant if they are to get an abortion.

Listen up faggots:

There are cases where abortion is universally permissible (such as when it threatens the life of the mother).

Because it is obviously permissible in some cases, then it is a private matter contained within the doctor/patient relationship and the government has no business violating that privacy.

So, regardless of your personal morality of it, there is no legal justification for interference.

If conservatives oppose universal healthcare because they don't want the "government between you and your doctor", then they should be pro-choice for the exact same reason.

The abortion debate is NOT about morality (a personal matter), it is about legality (a societal matter), and society does not have any say when it comes to the privacy of you and your doctor deciding what is best for you.

>>1720828

yeah but if you allow abortions from rape but not from consensual sex then if a girl wants an abortion she has to throw a guy under the bus to get it.

this should scare the fuck out of any male that has sex at least semi-regularly

>>1720940
That's a good point, there are already enough false rape accusations. Imagine what would happen if it was "raise some little shit for 18 years of my life" or "tell the police some guy raped me and get him sent to jail for 5 years with nothing but my word as evidence"

>>1720935
That's like saying
1) relations between a husband and wife are private.
2) therefore if a husband chooses to murder his wife, it is no business of the government.
i'm sure some on 4chan will agree with that, but bad logic is bad.

>>1718893
this picture implies it's legal to get an abortion in the 3rd trimester, it is not.

You what this means?

Yes, Republicans/Conservatives are stupid.

It also implies that major surgery, such as an abortion at this stage, would be looked at so lightly...

Fucking conservatives...idiot assholes.

>>1720975
No, it's like saying:
1) relations between a husband and wife are private.
2) the government has determined they have no legal justification in preventing a man from murdering his wife
3) therefore if a husband chooses to murder his wife, it is no business of the government

you missed the central point - the debate is: "should we make abortions legal?", but everyone thinks the debate is: "are abortions immoral?" - two different things - you can believe that abortion is immoral, but also believe that it should not be illegal.

>>1720999
They are not separate things. Our collective moral code is what we draw from to determine our collective legal code.

>>1719010
If it was due to your action that the human life was attached to your body, then wouldn't you be obliged to support it? If you cage an adult human and don't feed it, it will die; will you not be charged for murder? Likewise if there is a foetus which can't survive without your aid and it is as a result of your action, then you are culpable if it "dies". And if the foetus was regarded by law as a human life, you would be charged for murder. But hey, everyone else just accept this argument of his and be uncritical because you don't want abortion to be wrong, kay? Btw, his argument is a reproduction of someone else's published argument.

>>1721025
bullshit, just because it's immoral doesn't mean it's illegal - there are so many legal activities in which you can participate that many people would say is immoral and many moral activities which are highly illegal

>>1721036
No one said otherwise. And yet our collective moral code is what we draw from to determine our collective legal code. There is no other source.

>>1721035

>btw his argument...

Who fucking cares?

>>1721042

The collective moral code probably ends up being Christian in majority. So, why isn't it legal to stone the shit out of your child when they talk back? Why is incest illegal? Why aren't zombie movies treated as religious experiences?

>>1721046
>it's immoral, it's illegal
>many people would say is immoral, are highly illegal
>>1721046
that's not a logical argument so fuck you

I don't get what's so hard about this.

If you are Pro-Choice, then choose to not have sex. It's not that hard. And don't say, "But baby might have really bad disease" or "What if girl was raped?", because if that is what you wanted abortion for you'd ask for just that and not free reign to abort any baby.

If you DON'T want a baby, DON'T have sex. There's your choice. You people need to stop trying to circumvent all the negative consequences of your life and learn to get some responsibility.

>>1721064
Gee, maybe because ancient Hebrew code =/= christian morality?

The reason it is NOT legal to kill your newborn or 1-year-old is SOLELY because you live in a country whose legal system is derived from Christian morality.

>>1721092

>Christian
>morality

Choose one (and not that "to avoid redundancy" shit).

>>1721090
L2science, fucktard. It isn't even alive for the first 1/3 of the pregnancy; aka the trimester where the overwhelming amount of abortions are done. Go back to church if you wanna preach abstinence bullshit. While you're at it, go ahead and preach Communism; both are equally incompatible with human psychology.

Has anyone seen what second and third trimester abortions look like? It's not a pretty thing. I don't have a problem with abortion in the 1st trimester.

>>1721111
I choose neither.

>>1721112
Wow. Enjoy your 18th century science. It is alive from conception, idiot.

>>1721092
Infanticide was common in the americas before Christianity came with the white man. It is still common in africa india and china.

>>1721042
>And yet our collective moral code is what we draw from to determine our collective legal code. There is no other source.

This is not true, sorry. Our legal codes are drawn up to facilitate the smooth running of society. There are some 'moral' issues but these are usually the most problematic and disputed parts of any legislation - fox hunting and animal rights being a very good example.

>>1721112

HAHAHAHA, nice assumptions.

I didn't say never have sex until marriage, nor did I ever say whether the baby was alive or not. I merely said, If you don't want a baby don't have sex. Have sex all you want, just be prepared to have a baby at anytime. Can't go around fast food and candy all the time and not get fat. Deal with the consequences. If we keep finding ways to make all the "bad" consequences "go away", people won't care what they do, and that causes chaos.

>>1721090
Bit like Pascal's wager, really. If there's a chance abortion is murder then either don't have sex or be prepared to keep the baby. And who could be certain it's not murder? It's probably the prima facie opinion we have when we are younger and then there's the controversy and then, going deeper, a seeming intractability. Why not as a people wait until we have a true, indisputable solution to the problem and not be potentially killing our own selves? And for what? Sex? Disgusting.

>>1721129
No central nervous system = not alive in the sense you're talking about. If you disagree, how do you feel about the mass genocide of corn stalks worldwide?

>>1721112
Science? This has nothing to do with Science, yet. First we must philosophically look at the problem and decide what life is. Then we can ask the retard in the lab-coat if the foetus is alive or not. Pleb.

>>1721171

If there's anything people will kill other people for, it's for sex, money, and/or power. It is pretty disgusting when you put it that way.

>>1721138
People DO deal with the consequences of having sex if that consequence is pregnancy: it's called an abortion. If you have no qualms with it, wtf was the point of your post in the first place?

>>1721180
Things without a CNS are not alive? GTFO. You're an idiot.

>>1721191
If wondering whether or not a fetus with no nervous system is "alive" is what you consider philosophy, I don't think you're really in any position to talk about doctors being retards.

>>1721204
Not in the sense that this subject is about, dumbass. Quit playing semantics. Who do you really think you're fooling by focusing on whether or not someone says "alive" or "sentient"? You know exactly what I meant.

>>>>/new/

>>1721196
>If there's anything people will kill other people for, it's for sex, money, and/or power. It is pretty disgusting when you put it that way
>and religion too, a lot of murder because religion

My face when this thread had 200 replies.

Seriously, how did you let that happen?

I'm an atheist and I'm against abortion after like, 8 weeks. Go figure.

>>1721197

I was pointing out that we as human beings need to understand that we have to deal with consequences of our actions. And aborting the fetus is dealing with it, it is not the proper way of dealing with it. I don't care about whether the baby is alive, a parasite or whatever. It is irritating to see people say, "X causes Y, but I don't want Y so I'll do X and figure out how to dodge Y." If you eat bad you will get fat. If you do not work you will not get money (People that leech off welfare without actually trying to get back on their feet are equally annoying). If you have sex you will get pregnant. And then people will play sympathy cards to try and sway others for their own selfish lustful reasons. It's so irritating.

Why must you end a potential life? Is nine months really too much to give someone a chance at life? Give them up for adoption, I don't care. Why completely deny this potential human the right to live, feel happy, sadness, anger and everything we feel? It just doesn't sit right with me.

I am lawful evil and I say abortion after 8 weeks is bad.

Let them live, that I may slaughter them and exploit their misery.

>>1721230

That's power. Crusades were for land, and land = power. No one just outright attacks someone because of their religion unless they are crazy, like Hitler and even then it's because he wanted his land and jobs back. inb4 all religious people are crazy.

>>1721241
These people are still paying for their abortions. How the hell are they "dodging" any consequence? If you're a woman and get pregnant after having sex, the default consequence is a kid; if you don't want a kid, the consequence is payment for an abortion. Notice the lack of any dodging.

And there are already too many people. Preventing a life before it even exists is more forgiving than forcing a kid to grow up an orphan and most likely be doomed to a life of menial labor from the very start because of it. And also, by that same logic, I should have to pay for a prostitute or rape a woman instead of jacking off, so I always give my soldiers a chance at life.

>>1721239
>I'm an atheist and I'm against abortion after like, 8 weeks. Go figure.

Me too. The question of where the collection of cells becomes a 'life' is a huge grey area. I'm not against cleaning out a large collection of cells, but once the thing is past the point where it might survive independently it seems somewhat harsh.

Of course, I think that people should be sterilised before they get to reproductive age and then only allowed to have the procedure reversed when they've passed some sort of fucktard test. Anyone with creationist views automatically fails the fucktard test, naturally.

>>1721274

abortions are amazingly disproportionately cheap though compared to raising a child.

i paid for one once, best 800 dollars I ever spent. the alternative is well over 100-300k in child support over the kids life depending on how much you make.

Morals: If the story

- wear a condom.....

>>1721274

If you wanted to pull the whole "Then don't masturbate" card, you should have at least said to regularly have sex since our sperm die anyway. And, that same logic could be used anywhere. "I didn't study, but I still had to put effort into cheating." "I'm too lazy to properly work out, but I still had to pay for this surgery." It is all dodging.

In my opinion it is more painful to kill them. Who is to say they would have subpar jobs and not be a contribution to society? And don't act like having a not so great job is reason enough to not live because if that were the cause, then most of the world would commit suicide and everything would crumble. And the solution to ending over population? Don't have sex. I really don't understand. If you don't wan't a baby, don't have sex. It's simple logic. You aren't forcing anyone to live, the kid could commit suicide if it's as bad as you make it seem.

>>1721241
"Drinking causes dysentry, but I want to live for more than 2 days so I'll have a drink and figure out how to treat diarhoea, purify water, and prevent contamination in the first place."
All of human progress and advancement is based around getting out of things we don't like. You have a computer because someone wanted maths answers but hated arithmetic.

And really abortion tend to be a last ditch effort thing where contraceptive procedures break down, analagous to mixing up a coolerfull of salt-sugar solution and hoping not to die.

I haven't formally studied embryology or bioethics yet (that'll probably be in third year) but it really seems that embryos and fetuses don't develop the necessary attributes to be treated as people for quite some time. Ignoring the "famous violinist" problem however, I can see a point where abortions should be at the discretion of a triage expert rather than the mother, but C-sections would not produce a child capable of independent life.

>>1721217
You said "alive". I assume that one someone says "alive", that they either mean "alive" or else they are retarded. I was correct in my assumption.

>>1721302
No fucking shit. You don't think that $800 is a hefty enough price for simply having sex? If an abortion cost as much as a child, there'd be no need for them anyway.

No, it's not dodging. It may be mitigating the consequence, but it's not dodging it altogether. Hell, the whole point is to mitigate it. So what punishment are they "dodging" in this case, anyway? Punishment for having sex? OMG. Because relationships are totally healthy when the couple never have sex. oh wait.

oh and btw, hopeless virgin detected.

I think it was Schroedinger who wrote about life. Something about defining it life as something which decreases entropy. Anyway he was speaking philosophically, him being a scientist was accidental. If Stephan Hawking was to talk about whether the extra dimensions are real, he would be speaking philosophically. They're not predicting something to be observed or measured, which is acting scientifically. This case is the same, nothing to do with science. They have no hypotheses which upon being confirmed would mean that a foetus is a human life. Arrogant scientists.

>>1721338
Jesus Christ. A first-trimester fetus is no more "alive" than a blade of grass.

In fact, that blade of grass is arguably MORE "alive" than a fetus, seeing as that blade of grass can live on its own.

A fetus may be alive in the sense that it's a carbon-based lifeform with cells, but it's not sentient, which is the entire damn point. Of course, if you had anything more than semantics to offer, I supposed you'd use them instead of referring to pathetic grammar nazi bullshit and thinking that anyone takes you seriously.

>>1721339

Consequence =/= Punishment

>>1721357
Abortion is a consequence. What makes one consequence superior to another?

>>1721325

Part of that is learning to not do the things that causes bad things."Drinking bad water causes problems so I will purify the water, but there is a small chance it is still dirty." "Having sex causes pregnancy, so I will use contraceptives, be there is a small chance pregnancy will still occur." There are plenty of ways to prevent pregnancy, and you're one lucky couple if more than one of those things failed when you tried them at the same time.

>>1721379

It is not superior. You learn different things form different consequences. With abortion, you learn you can always fall back on it. And with not aborting it, you learn to be more cautious about your sexual habits or you might have another child.

>>1721357
>CONTINUES TO IMPLY THAT SPENDING MONEY ON AN ABORTION ISN'T A CONSEQUENCE.
If it isn't a punishment you want out of it, then why the fuck are you butthurt over someone spending $800 for having sex as opposed to the several hundred thousands of dollars if they had the kid?

Better yet, why the hell do you continue to insist that there should be "consequences" in excess of $800 for something that you SAY you have no moral problems with?

Even better yet, how the hell did you manage to press the big shiny button on your computer to turn it on?

>>1721389
1: This makes no fucking sense. People have sex. Pregnancies happen no matter how "cautious" people will be.

2: there's no harm in "falling back" on an abortion. In fact, as you say so yourself, there's about negative $99,200-$299,200 harm done when compared to actually having the kid.

>>1721390

>Implying I'm butthurt about anything and it is not you who is butthurt
>Implying I was the person who got an abortion
>Implying my button is shiny

1. Being actively cautious lowers the rate of whatever you are avoiding.

2. I said you could put it up for adoption.

Stupid to say people learn to rely on abortion. They don't. It's a last option solution. But a useful last option solution.

Argumants against abortion are illogical and never based on real world knowledge. Most anti-abortionist views are emotional responses which points to underlying issues caused by thoughts of other people having sex. Worry about your own body, not other people's.

>>1718923 I can concede to abortion up to 8 weeks. 8 weeks is enough time for a woman to "choose".

So... that's 8 weeks after the birth right?