Abortion take - debate me bitches

[jkcwakcjw]

Okay, this thread has kind of split into different topics.
Now let's move onto the next topic, top or bottom?

@Volksstaffel

i didnt get the memo what does this mean?

 

[Mogden]

Top

Bottom

 

[angelpie]

i think there are just as many pro choice men as women. isnt it a stereotype that its men who want the casual sex with as many women they can? i dont think those men want a baby or to pay child support either.

depending on if you believe plan b is pro choice or not, it seems to me its more common to find pro choice men these days, just as much as women. at least in my age bracket (people in college).

There’s more women than cucks

 

[Prince]

You're bottom?

No lol I meant that top was the only correct answer

 

[Volksstaffel]

No lol I meant that top was the only correct answer

Oh I thought we were having gay sex and we're discussing our roles

 

[Mogden]

Oh I thought we were having gay sex and we're discussing our roles

Yeah I was confused too

 

[Volksstaffel]

Yeah I was confused too

Threesome?

 

[hachiko]

Technically I think black babies deserve to live just like white ones.
But ethnic abortions lead to fewer ethnics which I support. It's more of a joke. The ethnocide problem should be solved by deportation and not by abortion

you begin by claiming that black children “deserve to live just like white ones,” yet immediately follow that with an admission that you support their abortion when it comes to ethnics because it leads to “fewer ethnics.” that is not a moral position, that is literally a contradiction. you cannot simultaneously affirm the value of life while advocating for its termination based solely on the ethnicity of the child. you just aren’t consistent

Eugenics isn’t always about racism but racism is always about eugenics. Also there’s symbolic purity in keeping your bloodline true to its origins. This is observable in many cultures over the years. The race mixing is part of the Jewish psyop to dilute culture differences so they can use social media and hookup culture to create their optimized slave culture and when they make a one world government, no opposition will exist because they seduced the opposition into its own genetic and cultural extinction. Look at Japan. Look at the UK.

i won’t bother responding to conspiracy disguised as arguments, it’s utter ramble to me. both of you are coming from warped moral principles
ill agree to disagree now

 

[hachiko]

arent you ethnic

i thought the same exact thing

 

[Volksstaffel]

you begin by claiming that black children “deserve to live just like white ones,” yet immediately follow that with an admission that you support their abortion when it comes to ethnics because it leads to “fewer ethnics.” that is not a moral position, that is literally a contradiction. you cannot simultaneously affirm the value of life while advocating for its termination based solely on the ethnicity of the child. you just aren’t consistent

I can, I just did

i won’t bother responding to conspiracy disguised as arguments, it’s utter ramble to me. both of you are coming from warped moral principles
ill agree to disagree now

Ethnocide is a conspiracy? Jfl

 

[Mogden]

Threesome?

you begin by claiming that black children “deserve to live just like white ones,” yet immediately follow that with an admission that you support their abortion when it comes to ethnics because it leads to “fewer ethnics.” that is not a moral position, that is literally a contradiction. you cannot simultaneously affirm the value of life while advocating for its termination based solely on the ethnicity of the child. you just aren’t consistent

i won’t bother responding to conspiracy disguised as arguments, it’s utter ramble to me. both of you are coming from warped moral principles
ill agree to disagree now

It’s not conspiracy. It’s just framed that way by mainstream media. If you look into it, every radical leftist or Marxist idea in America was pushed by the funding of secular Jews. Kirk was onto this before he was killed. Additionally Jews own pornhub, tinder, bumble, onlyfans, and all of meta. Via blackmail and direct asset owning.

 

[Volksstaffel]

i thought the same exact thing

n****r I'm German and 1/8 Italian

 

[Mogden]

It’s not conspiracy. It’s just framed that way by mainstream media. If you look into it, every radical leftist or Marxist idea in America was pushed by the funding of secular Jews. Kirk was onto this before he was killed. Additionally Jews own pornhub, tinder, bumble, onlyfans, and all of meta. Via blackmail and direct asset owning.

I’m not saying the left is Jewish. Both sides are. It’s because we’re in a game of chess.

 

[OsamaBinBallen]

I think all abortion should be illegal, unless:

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

Both these conditions need to be reviewed by a court.

Having sex is automatically agreeing with the possibility of having a child. Therefore a child being created, unwanted or not, is a result of your decision to have sex.

If you don't want to have a child, don't have sex dumb whore.

forgive me if this is bait dear infamous hacker 4chan…

civic inequality / achieving maximum global egalitarianism should ABSOLUTELY come before limiting abortion.

take a thought experiment: if the world is equally fair to all children born, and they have an equal chance to succeed, so it is entirely dependent on their inherent genes and not a severely lacking nurturing, yes we should never abort again unless it’s r**e / a threat to the mother.

Except that the millions of children in africa, rural china, rural russia, greenland, etc. etc. could be born with superior genes (say, an “einstein”) yet never succeed due to severely limiting socio economic factors

That alone should disprove the “value of life” and the idea that a child’s potential is infinite and therefore infinitely deserving of chance.

Those who cannot provide for an einstein should be fully allowed to abort, as the einstein or anything less would only hinder them socially/economically/dare i say politically

 

[Volksstaffel]

forgive me if this is bait dear infamous hacker 4chan…

civic inequality / achieving maximum global egalitarianism should ABSOLUTELY come before limiting abortion.

take a thought experiment: if the world is equally fair to all children born, and they have an equal chance to succeed, so it is entirely dependent on their inherent genes and not a severely lacking nurturing, yes we should never abort again unless it’s r**e / a threat to the mother.

Except that the millions of children in africa, rural china, rural russia, greenland, etc. etc. could be born with superior genes (say, an “einstein”) yet never succeed due to severely limiting socio economic factors

That alone should disprove the “value of life” and the idea that a child’s potential is infinite and therefore infinitely deserving of chance.

Those who cannot provide for an einstein should be fully allowed to abort, as the einstein or anything less would only hinder them socially/economically/dare i say politically

Dnrd

 

[Transposon]

A treatise on abortion moral philosophy is gonna come up, wait 2 minutes please. I've actually spent some good time thinking about this and think I've struck to the heartbeat of the whole debate. Let me type it out

There’s this concept called gradeability in philosophy.
The best way to explain it is to imagine the rainbow
There’s no ‘point’ where the colour violet becomes indigo, or blue into green.
It’s a smooth transition, it’s a spectrum so as to say
Now, I want to bring up the second important concept relevant to this issue, the word - 'convention'. Broadly - ‘A convention can be defined as an agreed-upon standard, custom, or rule that governs behavior or practice’. Here's an example - we all agree with each other, it’s understood, that the abstract word ‘chair’ relates to that wooden object with 4 legs. To expand on this, it can indeed be said, all of our communication is based upon agreed upon definitions.


In an analogous manner, at one end you have the zygote. A unicellular organism in the female's fallopian tube and at the other is a delivered baby. The whole journey between the zygote to a human, thus, is like the transition of the colours, dependent on an innumerable number of mitoses. You can’t ’really’ point out one exact place where the ‘clump of cells’ becomes a human. So.. we have to choose, based upon our convenience, an agreed upon standard that we can all get behind, very similar to how - cross-culturally, we've decided for ourselves that the age '18' is when a teenager becomes an adult. There isn't even a persuasive biological certitude as to why, but we had to pick one age and so we we did. What matters more is we all agree upon this age, not that things would have changed were it to be 17, instead.

So, now we're left with the question, "What trait becomes a human, human?" We want women to be given rights, to do with their bodies as they want, but I'm quite sure none of us want to condone murder either. This in my opinion, then, is the core question of our issue.
Were it not for the stakes behind this, I might even call this question beautiful, our human-ness is something we're emotionally tied to.
Unfortunately, I think there cannot be a very satisfactory answer to this with the current political climate.

Before the left took very strongly to this issue, as far as I'm aware this was mostly in the hands of physicians. There the consensus was that heartbeat should be the measure. I can get behind this, it's very intuitive after all.
At one extreme, you have people who think that birth begins at conception. Their criteria is based, not on, morphological similarities to the 'human form'. But a cell having the potential to be human. Although I can get behind this too, the boundaries get fuzzy. Is a sperm not a potential human too, or an egg? In the left there’s this popular concept. I think it's that - it should be legal till 24 weeks since till then the foetus cannot survive outside of mother’s womb.
More importantly I do not think anyone wants to use logic to solve this issue. It's a very large, elaborate, virtue-signal fest going on between the left and the right. Who's more virtuous, the side that wants to save the poor women, repressed since millennia, or the one that wants to save indefensible little babies.

The people who say 'women should do whatever with their bodies and thus get an abortion at any point', come at this from the wrong angle. Not to mention how much of a slippery slope this is.. Should we all allow people to do xyz obviously morally corrupt action if it's their bodies making the 'action'.


The most I can hope for us, is, to get behind some universal laws at least. Everyone should be given the absolute best of medical care, if r**e or incest were involved.
Now if the question is, if Jessica, the college going girl, who 'accidentally' got pregnant and doesn't want to be a mother at 21 should get an abortion or not, we have to define the period till which she can, so a murder doesn't end up happening.

 

[Mandy?]

High stress if you engage in this btw

 

[Transposon]

There’s this concept called gradeability in philosophy.
The best way to explain it is to imagine the rainbow
There’s no ‘point’ where the colour violet becomes indigo, or blue into green.
It’s a smooth transition, it’s a spectrum so as to say
Now, I want to bring up the second important concept relevant to this issue, the word - 'convention'. Broadly - ‘A convention can be defined as an agreed-upon standard, custom, or rule that governs behavior or practice’. Here's an example - we all agree with each other, it’s understood, that the abstract word ‘chair’ relates to that wooden object with 4 legs. To expand on this, it can indeed be said, all of our communication is based upon agreed upon definitions.


In an analogous manner, at one end you have the zygote. A unicellular organism in the female's fallopian tube and at the other is a delivered baby. The whole journey between the zygote to a human, thus, is like the transition of the colours, dependent on an innumerable number of mitoses. You can’t ’really’ point out one exact place where the ‘clump of cells’ becomes a human. So.. we have to choose, based upon our convenience, an agreed upon standard that we can all get behind, very similar to how - cross-culturally, we've decided for ourselves that the age '18' is when a teenager becomes an adult. There isn't even a persuasive biological certitude as to why, but we had to pick one age and so we we did. What matters more is we all agree upon this age, not that things would have changed were it to be 17, instead.

So, now we're left with the question, "What trait becomes a human, human?" We want women to be given rights, to do with their bodies as they want, but I'm quite sure none of us want to condone murder either. This in my opinion, then, is the core question of our issue.
Were it not for the stakes behind this, I might even call this question beautiful, our human-ness is something we're emotionally tied to.
Unfortunately, I think there cannot be a very satisfactory answer to this with the current political climate.

Before the left took very strongly to this issue, as far as I'm aware this was mostly in the hands of physicians. There the consensus was that heartbeat should be the measure. I can get behind this, it's very intuitive after all.
At one extreme, you have people who think that birth begins at conception. Their criteria is based, not on, morphological similarities to the 'human form'. But a cell having the potential to be human. Although I can get behind this too, the boundaries get fuzzy. Is a sperm not a potential human too, or an egg? In the left there’s this popular concept. I think it's that - it should be legal till 24 weeks since till then the foetus cannot survive outside of mother’s womb.
More importantly I do not think anyone wants to use logic to solve this issue. It's a very large, elaborate, virtue-signal fest going on between the left and the right. Who's more virtuous, the side that wants to save the poor women, repressed since millennia, or the one that wants to save indefensible little babies.

The people who say 'women should do whatever with their bodies and thus get an abortion at any point', come at this from the wrong angle. Not to mention how much of a slippery slope this is.. Should we all allow people to do xyz obviously morally corrupt action if it's their bodies making the 'action'.


The most I can hope for us, is, to get behind some universal laws at least. Everyone should be given the absolute best of medical care, if r**e or incest were involved.
Now if the question is, if Jessica, the college going girl, who 'accidentally' got pregnant and doesn't want to be a mother at 21 should get an abortion or not, we have to define the period till which she can, so a murder doesn't end up happening.

@Mogden here
@apatheia @johnfkennedy @slopslinger what do you think?

 

[Mogden]

@Mogden here
@apatheia @johnfkennedy @slopslinger what do you think?

This is gold, make this its own thread please

 

[OsamaBinBallen]

forgive me if this is bait dear infamous hacker 4chan…

civic inequality / achieving maximum global egalitarianism should ABSOLUTELY come before limiting abortion.

take a thought experiment: if the world is equally fair to all children born, and they have an equal chance to succeed, so it is entirely dependent on their inherent genes and not a severely lacking nurturing, yes we should never abort again unless it’s r**e / a threat to the mother.

Except that the millions of children in africa, rural china, rural russia, greenland, etc. etc. could be born with superior genes (say, an “einstein”) yet never succeed due to severely limiting socio economic factors

That alone should disprove the “value of life” and the idea that a child’s potential is infinite and therefore infinitely deserving of chance.

Those who cannot provide for an einstein should be fully allowed to abort, as the einstein or anything less would only hinder them socially/economically/dare i say politically

@Transposon respond?

 

[Transposon]

This is gold, make this its own thread please

done

 

[Mogden]

done

Tag me

 

[Transposon]

@Transposon respond?

let's have a discussion under my thread. I just posted it. You seem like an intelligent person

 

[RRM]

I think all abortion should be illegal, unless:

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

Both these conditions need to be reviewed by a court.

Having sex is automatically agreeing with the possibility of having a child. Therefore a child being created, unwanted or not, is a result of your decision to have sex.

If you don't want to have a child, don't have sex dumb whore.

Volk why are you always doing the most randomest things

 

[Volksstaffel]

Volk why are you always doing the most randomest things

Hiw

 

[Volksstaffel]

How

 

[RRM]

Hiw

idk I feel like we both know you wouldn't care about abortion if the girl is Stacy
you forgot about your political beliefs for some Turkish woman

 

[KobeLebron2423]

idk I feel like we both know you wouldn't care about abortion if the girl is Stacy
you forgot about your political beliefs for some Turkish woman

Mirin this take bhai!

 

[Volksstaffel]

idk I feel like we both know you wouldn't care about abortion if the girl is Stacy

In what context lol

you forgot about your political beliefs for some Turkish woman

Women are something else. I always loved ethnic girls

 

[Volksstaffel]

In what context lol

Women are something else. I always loved ethnic girls

 

[Anxietypilled]

1k views wow

 

[RRM]

In what context lol

no context just useless unneeded abortion

 

[Volksstaffel]

1k views wow

Chad

no context just useless unneeded abortion

Whatever

 

[Anxietypilled]

abortion should be allowed for all- no questions asked

 

[Volksstaffel]

abortion should be allowed for all- no questions asked

Rope f****t

 

[Anxietypilled]

Rope f****t

relax Chutiya

 

[a1adenn]

I think all abortion should be illegal, unless:

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

Both these conditions need to be reviewed by a court.

Having sex is automatically agreeing with the possibility of having a child. Therefore a child being created, unwanted or not, is a result of your decision to have sex.

If you don't want to have a child, don't have sex dumb whore.

Honestly I believe in antinatalism and I deadass wish my parents wouldve aborted me

 

[zombiebeatz2006]

Valid take

 

[BlendedBulge]

I think all abortion should be illegal, unless:

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

Both these conditions need to be reviewed by a court.

Having sex is automatically agreeing with the possibility of having a child. Therefore a child being created, unwanted or not, is a result of your decision to have sex.

If you don't want to have a child, don't have sex dumb whore.

Absolutely fucking agree

And r**e is also debatable cause in that case you aren’t risking anyone’s life you just don’t like the way child was concieved

But I think r**e is partially genetic so it’s probably better to do an abortion in such cases so the baby won’t be like their father

 

[MingyuePalaceRuinedMyLife]

I think all abortion should be illegal, unless:

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

Both these conditions need to be reviewed by a court.

Having sex is automatically agreeing with the possibility of having a child. Therefore a child being created, unwanted or not, is a result of your decision to have sex.

If you don't want to have a child, don't have sex dumb whore.

Abortion should be illegial because what if bgm was aborted...

 

[limo8]

To have kid you need to be fit like they do with adoption

 

[BlendedBulge]

government shouldn’t dictate what anyone chooses to do w their body is my take

“Their” body in question

They are doing it with the other person not with themselves

 

[BlendedBulge]

I have nothing to debate with you on this topic, we share the same opinion.

Mess we agree on a lot of topics honestly

 

[BlendedBulge]

Nah, it's a good thing.

Pull-out game isn't that stressful anymore.

 

[BlendedBulge]

There’s this concept called gradeability in philosophy.
The best way to explain it is to imagine the rainbow
There’s no ‘point’ where the colour violet becomes indigo, or blue into green.
It’s a smooth transition, it’s a spectrum so as to say
Now, I want to bring up the second important concept relevant to this issue, the word - 'convention'. Broadly - ‘A convention can be defined as an agreed-upon standard, custom, or rule that governs behavior or practice’. Here's an example - we all agree with each other, it’s understood, that the abstract word ‘chair’ relates to that wooden object with 4 legs. To expand on this, it can indeed be said, all of our communication is based upon agreed upon definitions.


In an analogous manner, at one end you have the zygote. A unicellular organism in the female's fallopian tube and at the other is a delivered baby. The whole journey between the zygote to a human, thus, is like the transition of the colours, dependent on an innumerable number of mitoses. You can’t ’really’ point out one exact place where the ‘clump of cells’ becomes a human. So.. we have to choose, based upon our convenience, an agreed upon standard that we can all get behind, very similar to how - cross-culturally, we've decided for ourselves that the age '18' is when a teenager becomes an adult. There isn't even a persuasive biological certitude as to why, but we had to pick one age and so we we did. What matters more is we all agree upon this age, not that things would have changed were it to be 17, instead.

So, now we're left with the question, "What trait becomes a human, human?" We want women to be given rights, to do with their bodies as they want, but I'm quite sure none of us want to condone murder either. This in my opinion, then, is the core question of our issue.
Were it not for the stakes behind this, I might even call this question beautiful, our human-ness is something we're emotionally tied to.
Unfortunately, I think there cannot be a very satisfactory answer to this with the current political climate.

Before the left took very strongly to this issue, as far as I'm aware this was mostly in the hands of physicians. There the consensus was that heartbeat should be the measure. I can get behind this, it's very intuitive after all.
At one extreme, you have people who think that birth begins at conception. Their criteria is based, not on, morphological similarities to the 'human form'. But a cell having the potential to be human. Although I can get behind this too, the boundaries get fuzzy. Is a sperm not a potential human too, or an egg? In the left there’s this popular concept. I think it's that - it should be legal till 24 weeks since till then the foetus cannot survive outside of mother’s womb.
More importantly I do not think anyone wants to use logic to solve this issue. It's a very large, elaborate, virtue-signal fest going on between the left and the right. Who's more virtuous, the side that wants to save the poor women, repressed since millennia, or the one that wants to save indefensible little babies.

The people who say 'women should do whatever with their bodies and thus get an abortion at any point', come at this from the wrong angle. Not to mention how much of a slippery slope this is.. Should we all allow people to do xyz obviously morally corrupt action if it's their bodies making the 'action'.


The most I can hope for us, is, to get behind some universal laws at least. Everyone should be given the absolute best of medical care, if r**e or incest were involved.
Now if the question is, if Jessica, the college going girl, who 'accidentally' got pregnant and doesn't want to be a mother at 21 should get an abortion or not, we have to define the period till which she can, so a murder doesn't end up happening.

I legit recently thought about it the same way it’s a spectrum

 

[Grilldaddy❤️]

5 pages jfl don’t agree about the r**e exception tho I don’t think the r**e of someone justifies them killing another human who had nothing to do with the r**e

 

[Kykas]

I think all abortion should be illegal, unless:

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

Both these conditions need to be reviewed by a court.

Having sex is automatically agreeing with the possibility of having a child. Therefore a child being created, unwanted or not, is a result of your decision to have sex.

If you don't want to have a child, don't have sex dumb whore.

Hahah n****r no one cares women can decide in western society men have no power

 

[Randomized Shame]

Every able-bodied human being deserves the right to live.
Who knows the number of Teslas and Da Vincis we've lost to abortion.
INB4 we wouldn't have geniuses if they weren't raised correctly. Just lol.

I'd also like to add that people who have hereditary diseases should be able to have abortions. @Volksstaffel
Huntington's disease, cystic fibrosis, schizophrenia are no joke to live with, much less bring someone into the world to suffer like you did.

Eh...

You wouldn't say it should be illegal for someone to refuse to give a body part to another person to save their life, right? You have to AGREE to give up a body part. You have to AGREE to donate blood. They can't just siphon your blood. They're not allowed to do it without your consent. It doesn't matter if it would save a life, it doesn't matter if you're the only person who could save that person. You have a choice.

An unborn child cannot be taken out of your body and survive. If it can, then it's obvious it shouldn't be aborted. Being pregnant is a selfless act, and requires you to give up your own body to birth a child. Your body is never going to go back to how it was previously. You're giving up your own body for life; it's beautiful and it's wonderful. Making that mandatory is horrible, and lacks empathy towards women who have ever gone through pregnancy or birth.

I don't understand how you can be anti-abortion but be in support of eugenics, though. If you view it as murder, then murdering the people you think "suffer beyond a reasonable point" is... well... I guess I don't want to get into it now. It just seems unusual is all.

Either way, people who talk about the life of the child AFTER it's already been born is missing the point. I don't have an interest in talking about whether or not a hypothetical child is going to live as a poor child or is going to become the smartest man on the planet. It has nothing to do with a made up child in a world full of billions of people; it's about the choice as someone who already exists and has a life, and whether or not that person is entitled to picking this specific medical procedure.

In my opinion, people should be allowed to seek medical treatment in general, for their own reasons, and I don't think they should need to justify it if it's not being billed through insurance. What would we ever gain by controlling someone else's body like that? Again, if the child is developed enough where it could survive outside of the body, then that's a different discussion in my opinion. Then it becomes about "when are they allowed to have an abortion?" rather than "should it be allowed at all?".

 

[Naticel]

1. The mother's life is in serious danger if she gives birth
2. It was r**e

also i think it should be allowed if the child is gonna be like retarded

 

[Volksstaffel]

also i think it should be allowed if the child is gonna be like retarded

Reasonable