Current Events > You know what really bothers me about pro-choice people?

(+) Yeah! (+)

BatmanWTtP posted...

HHH is the game posted...

And see this is the question. I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows.

Answer the question

see this is the thing! I'm not pretending to be the expert on when I think a human life begins. It's okay to say 'I don't know'. Most of you would be better off for it.

Why do people always act like they are 100% right and they know everything? Why can't people question? the world would be a lot better off if we didn't have two equally bull-headed sides just trying to plead their case without giving anything to the other
---

HHH is the game posted...

Would you abort a baby the night before her due date?

No that's a dumb question given abortion is usually legal only for the first 20 weeks.

HHH is the game posted...

Shes not a human yet, right?

Also you really just don't know biology. A baby 1 day from being born is basically a human as the cells have fully developed at that point.

Maybe learn biology.
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

Yes, the fetus is a life. Human life, no less.

And? That's not the only issue when it comes to abortion. Arguably, it's not even the most important one.

It is. Again. Would you agree that a mother who cannot support her baby - let's say its a week old - and would not want to put her in the foster system, can painlessly euthanize the baby? Do you think so? If you do, all the power to you, at least you're consistent.

If not, all this stuff about social issues and positives and negatives, etc, is BS. Because if you wouldn't think about that of a human life, a person, an infant, then the only difference with the fetus is that you're dehumanizing it.

Maybe you think a fetus isn't a human, but then again, that shows that this IS the important issue.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

@HHH is the game posted...

So you don't care about social issues? You don't care about school shootings, or murder, or police violence, etc, because it doesn't personally involve you?

This is a great example of a false equivalency.

Abortion != social issues, school shootings, murder, police violence, 'etc.'

For example, a school shooting is in no way related to a woman terminating an unwanted pregnancy. I'm not even sure why you'd take this in that direction.

HHH is the game posted...

Im sorry I don't subscribe to the idea that we should only be concerned with ourselves, in my opinion you need to protect the rights of others. And yes, I know what you'll say, but again, I protect the right of the baby over the right of the mother, because the mother chose to have sex, and the baby did not get a say. Just like how the father has to pay child support because he chose to have sex, and the baby did not get a say.

Nor am I suggesting that we should only be concerned with ourselves. I actually think you might be 'strawmanning' here. That is not my argument and you are aware of that.

You are directly infringing on the right of the mother, who is a person and holds personhood, for a fetus that does not have personhood. That is not how rights work.

Also, TC, why do you keep ignoring this?

I literally responded to this in the next post.

Most of my posts have answered this.

A. Its only a false equivalency if you say a fetus has no personhood. If a fetus is treated similar to an infant, then it is not a false equivalency at all. A school shooting involves the killing of children. Is an abortion a killing? Is a fetus a child? Depends on where you think life begins, a complicated question. If you draw that line early there is no false equivalency. Agreed?

Well, then...

B. Your argument is completely based on the fact that a fetus holds no personhood. That is the whole crux of my own argument. Whether a fetus should hold personhood is a complicated question. And that is why its also not a false equivalency to bring up slavery. Okay...maybe its not an equivalency. But its a similar situation. The stripping of personhood of a group because its a lot easier for the people stripping them to believe they are not fully human
---

Asherlee10 posted...

I can guarantee you have nothing of value to add to the discussion of personhood in relation to abortion because you can't even understand the difference between a fetus and a newborn.

Literally every time I said newborn Ive been referring to an actual newborn.

How is it not complicated? I mean its easy to say 'well you are a person when you're born' but it is complicated when as you said a fetus has a consciousness and a brain inside of the mother as well.
---

HHH is the game posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

Yes, the fetus is a life. Human life, no less.

And? That's not the only issue when it comes to abortion. Arguably, it's not even the most important one.

It is. Again. Would you agree that a mother who cannot support her baby - let's say its a week old - and would not want to put her in the foster system, can painlessly euthanize the baby?

I'm not sure, but that has nothing to do with my stance on abortion. I simply haven't formed a complete stance on euthanasia yet.

But euthanasia and abortion are separate. And the reason I say that it might not even be the most important issue, is because the issue of bodily autonomy is more critical to the discussion. It's through the issue of bodily autonomy that there is no inconsistency regarding how I treat the baby before and after it's born.

HHH is the game posted...

People will get mad at this analogy but it's probably the same mindset that slave owners use to continue feeling guilt-free over slavery. Well the slaves aren't really people! Here comes Godwin's law. Its the same thing with the dehumanization of Jews in Nazi Germany.

If those people aren't people, then you aren't doing anything wrong. Right?

Obviously I am not saying abortion is the same thing necessarily as slavery or the holocaust.

Probably.

But let's say for a second that a fetus was a life. That these were actually babies.

Then what we're talking about is the mass murder of babies, right?

And the fact that people are so easily stripping them of their humanity....well...that does seem to be a massive issue does it not?

The difference of course is that we really don't know about the humanity of a fetus. Its a tough question to come to terms with. Obviously slaves were people and Jews were people. So its not the same thing. Thats an extreme example.

But I bring it up to refer to the fact that being so eager to strip them of humanity could just be a mental exercise to avoid dealing with the enormity of this discussion.

And viewed in that lens most of the things the pro-choice people have been spewing about emotions, and about responsibility becomes very silly. Almost callous really.

To say that abortion is none of anybody's business, to say its nothing like school shootings, to say its nothing like these other social issues, is to say that you are completely confident that a fetus is not a life and that this is an 'obvious' thing. That is just not true.

And I again repeat that most of the arguments you guys are posting could be just as easily applied to newborn babies and that is NOT an exaggeration. Most of the other arguments could be applied to fetuses in the 3rd trimester.

So please....don't childishly act like this is a simple argument. Yes there has to be a line and that's a complicated quesiton, so don't simplify it or ignore it to push your agenda.

Wow

And you keep doing "let's say a fetus is a life."

Okay.

Let's say a crocodile is a squid. Let's say the sky is lava. Let's say the moon is Bob Saget. Let's say a cell phone is a ham sandwich. Let's say slaves aren't people. You are literally doing the exact thing you condemn people for doing in your analogy, "let's say"ing.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

Would you abort a baby the night before her due date?

No that's a dumb question given abortion is usually legal only for the first 20 weeks.

HHH is the game posted...

Shes not a human yet, right?

Also you really just don't know biology. A baby 1 day from being born is basically a human as the cells have fully developed at that point.

Maybe learn biology.

Ok great. When is the line that a baby is a human? Is that an easy question for you? You guys are asking me for an exact answer but Im not the one saying its easy! I think its hard but you obviously dont, so what day is a baby a human now?

And that's great about abortion legal in the first 20 weeks, but from this topic all your arguments really dont hold up if YOU are drawing a line between the first 20 weeks and the next 20 weeks, since everything that people have said have been either true for newborns as well, or true for third trimester fetuses as well.

Nobody has been wiling to admit the question is on what day a baby becomes a human.
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

But euthanasia and abortion are separate. And the reason I say that it might not even be the most important issue, is because the issue of bodily autonomy is more critical to the discussion. It's through the issue of bodily autonomy that there is no inconsistency regarding how I treat the baby before and after it's born.

Understandable, but its still an important question, because if a fetus is not a life then its ONLY an issue of bodily autonomy.

If a fetus is a life its an issue of bodily autonomy vs the life of a child.

That, in my opinion, is a very different argument, and it hinges on the question on if a fetus is a life
---

HHH is the game posted...

And that's great about abortion legal in the first 20 weeks, but from this topic all your arguments really dont hold up if YOU are drawing a line between the first 20 weeks and the next 20 weeks, since everything that people have said have been either true for newborns as well, or true for third trimester fetuses as well.

Go learn biology. Most of the first twenty weeks the fetus is just a group of cells and if taken out of the mother would just instantly die.
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Let's say a crocodile is a squid. Let's say the sky is lava. Let's say the moon is Bob Saget. Let's say a cell phone is a ham sandwich. Let's say slaves aren't people. You are literally doing the exact thing you condemn people for doing in your analogy, "let's say"ing.

Well here we go.

Do you think 'is a fetus a life?' is a question on the same level of 'Is the moon Bob Saget?'

You are saying the answer is obvious. I really don't think it is.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

And that's great about abortion legal in the first 20 weeks, but from this topic all your arguments really dont hold up if YOU are drawing a line between the first 20 weeks and the next 20 weeks, since everything that people have said have been either true for newborns as well, or true for third trimester fetuses as well.

Go learn biology. Most of the first twenty weeks the fetus is just a group of cells and if taken out of the mother would just instantly die.

So now we are back to this. That the issue and question is - when is a fetus a life.
---

HHH is the game posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

And that's great about abortion legal in the first 20 weeks, but from this topic all your arguments really dont hold up if YOU are drawing a line between the first 20 weeks and the next 20 weeks, since everything that people have said have been either true for newborns as well, or true for third trimester fetuses as well.

Go learn biology. Most of the first twenty weeks the fetus is just a group of cells and if taken out of the mother would just instantly die.

So now we are back to this. That the issue and question is - when is a fetus a life.

No. You literally just don't understand biology and you want to force other women to go by you lack of knowledge.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

And that's great about abortion legal in the first 20 weeks, but from this topic all your arguments really dont hold up if YOU are drawing a line between the first 20 weeks and the next 20 weeks, since everything that people have said have been either true for newborns as well, or true for third trimester fetuses as well.

Go learn biology. Most of the first twenty weeks the fetus is just a group of cells and if taken out of the mother would just instantly die.

So now we are back to this. That the issue and question is - when is a fetus a life.

No. You literally just don't understand biology and you want to force other women to go by you lack of knowledge.

I understand your point of view, but not your stance that this is a simple question.
---

HHH is the game posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

And that's great about abortion legal in the first 20 weeks, but from this topic all your arguments really dont hold up if YOU are drawing a line between the first 20 weeks and the next 20 weeks, since everything that people have said have been either true for newborns as well, or true for third trimester fetuses as well.

Go learn biology. Most of the first twenty weeks the fetus is just a group of cells and if taken out of the mother would just instantly die.

So now we are back to this. That the issue and question is - when is a fetus a life.

No. You literally just don't understand biology and you want to force other women to go by you lack of knowledge.

I understand your point of view, but not your stance that this is a simple question.

Then go learn some basic biology and understand why a comparison of a fetus to slavery is dumb.
---

HHH is the game posted...

BatmanWTtP posted...

HHH is the game posted...

And see this is the question. I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows.

Answer the question

see this is the thing! I'm not pretending to be the expert on when I think a human life begins. It's okay to say 'I don't know'. Most of you would be better off for it.

Why do people always act like they are 100% right and they know everything? Why can't people question? the world would be a lot better off if we didn't have two equally bull-headed sides just trying to plead their case without giving anything to the other

I say I don't know all the time. Hell, I'm agnostic and "I don't know" is a tl;dr of many foundations of my beliefs. I've reached the conclusion I've reached in regard to abortion because I don't have any kind of feelings for or emotions regarding fetuses, unlike you. They are fetuses. That's it. You also keep bringing up "But what about abortions the night before she's gonna go into labor?" while conveniently ignoring everything Asherlee posts about viability, trimesters and the medical science behind current abortion laws. You are reminding me of trump with his "they're ripping babies out of their mothers the day before they're to be born!" nonsense rhetoric, and I'm pretty sure you've stated that you are generally liberal so if you said you don't support trump and would not knowingly parrot his rhetoric, I would believe you, but knowingly would be the operative word.
---

HHH is the game posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

But euthanasia and abortion are separate. And the reason I say that it might not even be the most important issue, is because the issue of bodily autonomy is more critical to the discussion. It's through the issue of bodily autonomy that there is no inconsistency regarding how I treat the baby before and after it's born.

Understandable, but its still an important question, because if a fetus is not a life then its ONLY an issue of bodily autonomy.

If a fetus is a life its an issue of bodily autonomy vs the life of a child.

That, in my opinion, is a very different argument, and it hinges on the question on if a fetus is a life

It's alive, yes. And I said most, not only. And this should not be viewed as a battle between bodily autonomy vs the life of a human. It's a measured decision made on the back of all the factors at play, both from a more philosophical perspective as well as a pragmatic one.

We have a situation where a living thing is inside another living thing. As a society that values control over one's explicit body (which is the same reason you have to sign consent form after consent form for various medical procedures, even including posthumous organ donation), it is unreasonable to force an individual to carry an unwanted life inside their own body. It doesn't matter whether it's human life or not. Giving that right over one's own body to the individual is a critical allowance our society offers its citizens. That is the primary argument for why abortion should be allowed.

The only thing it being a human life really brings to the table is to compare the personhood of the fetus to the personhood of the mother when making a decision. And I see no good reason that the fetus should be granted greater personhood than the mother.

HHH is the game posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Let's say a crocodile is a squid. Let's say the sky is lava. Let's say the moon is Bob Saget. Let's say a cell phone is a ham sandwich. Let's say slaves aren't people. You are literally doing the exact thing you condemn people for doing in your analogy, "let's say"ing.

Well here we go.

Do you think 'is a fetus a life?' is a question on the same level of 'Is the moon Bob Saget?'

You are saying the answer is obvious. I really don't think it is.

If I was to concede to you "a fetus may or may not be a life," your stance on abortion would still be "that fetus inside of you might be a life, but it also might not be. Therefore, I will impose upon you to treat it as though it is a life. Now go take responsibility for it!" However, even if I also took the may or may not be stance, I would still favor what I know to be a life (mother) over what may or may not be a life (zygote/embryo/fetus) because I don't bring emotion to the table, as I have no feelings toward or emotional affinity for some fetus. You apparently do.
---

I don't see why you care if the fetus is a life or not. It's completely and utterly irrelevant to the abortion debate. Let's say you're right. It's a living baby. Let's treat it with the same laws we treat an adult human.

An adult human has no right to my body against my will. Period. Even if he'd die without it. Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent. Hell, even if he needs a simple harmless blood transfusion, he can't have my blood without my consent.

Personal autonomy rules are absolute, and supercede even death. If you'd die without my blood, you can't have it unless I allow you to. Even if I'm fucking dead - you still can't have my organs or blood if I refuse to be an organ donor post-mortem.

Saying that a woman has to allow a fetus to leech nutrients off her and invade her body for 9 months is quite literally giving her less rights than a corpse. Because even a corpse's bodily autonomy is respected over the lives of anyone it might be able to save.

It is a simple decision, because whether the fetus is alive or not doesn't change these simple facts.

Darklit_Minuet posted...

I don't see why you care if the fetus is a life or not. It's completely and utterly irrelevant to the abortion debate. Let's say you're right. It's a living baby. Let's treat it with the same laws we treat an adult human.

An adult human has no right to my body against my will. Period. Even if he'd die without it. Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent. Hell, even if he needs a simple harmless blood transfusion, he can't have my blood without my consent.

Personal autonomy rules are absolute, and supercede even death. If you'd die without my blood, you can't have it unless I allow you to. Even if I'm fucking dead - you still can't have my organs or blood if I refuse to be an organ donor post-mortem.

Saying that a woman has to allow a fetus to leech nutrients off her and invade her body for 9 months is quite literally giving her less rights than a corpse. Because even a corpse's bodily autonomy is respected over the lives of anyone it might be able to save.

It is a simple decision, because whether the fetus is alive or not doesn't change these simple facts.

We have a winner.
---

Darklit_Minuet posted...

I don't see why you care if the fetus is a life or not. It's completely and utterly irrelevant to the abortion debate. Let's say you're right. It's a living baby. Let's treat it with the same laws we treat an adult human.

An adult human has no right to my body against my will. Period. Even if he'd die without it. Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent. Hell, even if he needs a simple harmless blood transfusion, he can't have my blood without my consent.

Personal autonomy rules are absolute, and supercede even death. If you'd die without my blood, you can't have it unless I allow you to. Even if I'm fucking dead - you still can't have my organs or blood if I refuse to be an organ donor post-mortem.

Saying that a woman has to allow a fetus to leech nutrients off her and invade her body for 9 months is quite literally giving her less rights than a corpse. Because even a corpse's bodily autonomy is respected over the lives of anyone it might be able to save.

It is a simple decision, because whether the fetus is alive or not doesn't change these simple facts.

But... but... it's an innocent baby human life!! My feelings and emotions tearfully wail out to me to believe it should be held up on some sacred pedastal!! D:
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

But... but... it's an innocent baby human life!! My feelings and emotions tearfully wail out to me to believe it should be held up on some sacred pedastal!! D:

Remember: Feelings don't matter. Unless you really feel a fetus is a person or that the Christian God is real. Then we must respect feelings.
---

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/response-body-autonomy-argument

I agree with this response to the body autonomy argument
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Darklit_Minuet posted...

I don't see why you care if the fetus is a life or not. It's completely and utterly irrelevant to the abortion debate. Let's say you're right. It's a living baby. Let's treat it with the same laws we treat an adult human.

An adult human has no right to my body against my will. Period. Even if he'd die without it. Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent. Hell, even if he needs a simple harmless blood transfusion, he can't have my blood without my consent.

Personal autonomy rules are absolute, and supercede even death. If you'd die without my blood, you can't have it unless I allow you to. Even if I'm fucking dead - you still can't have my organs or blood if I refuse to be an organ donor post-mortem.

Saying that a woman has to allow a fetus to leech nutrients off her and invade her body for 9 months is quite literally giving her less rights than a corpse. Because even a corpse's bodily autonomy is respected over the lives of anyone it might be able to save.

It is a simple decision, because whether the fetus is alive or not doesn't change these simple facts.

But... but... it's an innocent baby human life!! My feelings and emotions tearfully wail out to me to believe it should be held up on some sacred pedastal!! D:

And no matter what your stance on abortion you are really acting like a scumbag right now. If you don't feel feelings and emotions about this discussion you probably aren't equipped to have it
---

HHH is the game posted...

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/response-body-autonomy-argument

I agree with this response to the body autonomy argument

The opinions of a stupid bitch sure are life-changing.

It's not just organ donation. If I volunteer to allow an adult human to somehow leech off my living body, I have the autonomy to let him die at any time. I am not obligated to allow eternal consent. My rights trump his life.
---

Right, but I agree with the fact that its not like a baby just appears there. In, a way you are already consenting when you have sex.
---

and honestly if you are not mature enough to deal with the responsibility of the chance of pregnancy you are probably not mature enough to be sexually active anyways
---

HHH is the game posted...

Right, but I agree with the fact that its not like a baby just appears there. In, a way you are already consenting when you have sex.

There is no such thing as already consented. You are either currently consenting or not.
---

oHHH is the game posted...

and honestly if you are not mature enough to deal with the responsibility of the chance of pregnancy you are probably not mature enough to be sexually active anyways

"I'm not ready for a child, so let me kill the fetus now" is actually pretty damn responsible. You are helping your life, the nonexistent child's life, and society's wellbeing. It's also a tough decision for most women, so don't act like it is an easy choice.

Sex is only for procreation if you want to procreate. Join the modern fucking world and leave your views in 1542.
---

HHH is the game posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

Darklit_Minuet posted...

I don't see why you care if the fetus is a life or not. It's completely and utterly irrelevant to the abortion debate. Let's say you're right. It's a living baby. Let's treat it with the same laws we treat an adult human.

An adult human has no right to my body against my will. Period. Even if he'd die without it. Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent. Hell, even if he needs a simple harmless blood transfusion, he can't have my blood without my consent.

Personal autonomy rules are absolute, and supercede even death. If you'd die without my blood, you can't have it unless I allow you to. Even if I'm fucking dead - you still can't have my organs or blood if I refuse to be an organ donor post-mortem.

Saying that a woman has to allow a fetus to leech nutrients off her and invade her body for 9 months is quite literally giving her less rights than a corpse. Because even a corpse's bodily autonomy is respected over the lives of anyone it might be able to save.

It is a simple decision, because whether the fetus is alive or not doesn't change these simple facts.

But... but... it's an innocent baby human life!! My feelings and emotions tearfully wail out to me to believe it should be held up on some sacred pedastal!! D:

And no matter what your stance on abortion you are really acting like a scumbag right now. If you don't feel feelings and emotions about this discussion you probably aren't equipped to have it

Don't get fucking sassy with me, kiddo :P
---

HHH is the game posted...

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/response-body-autonomy-argument

I agree with this response to the body autonomy argument

My argument covers that already with this

Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent

My getting into a car crash could be the reason he needs it, yet he still can't have it.

Besides, the action vs inaction debate is something that the moving trolley problem addresses - would you let 5 people die, or pull the lever and let one person die to save those 5? Letting 1 person die is a lesser evil than letting 5 people die, and the fact that you have to pull the lever to change it from an inaction to action doesn't change my view on this whatsoever. You're responsible for the 5 people dying if you take inaction and choose not to pull the lever.

We have enough bad parents and poor, mistreated children as is. There is no good reason to force more into existence. No one benefits.
---

If the fetus didn't want to be aborted, it should have just emerged out of the uterus when it had the chance.

/end responsibility arguments

do pro-lifers support jailing women and force feeding them if they don't try to ensure a healthy baby is born?
---

Darklit_Minuet posted...

I don't see why you care if the fetus is a life or not. It's completely and utterly irrelevant to the abortion debate. Let's say you're right. It's a living baby. Let's treat it with the same laws we treat an adult human.

An adult human has no right to my body against my will. Period. Even if he'd die without it. Even if I'm the reason he needs access to my body to live. If I get in a car crash while driving with him and he needs a new liver and I'm the only match, he can't have my liver without my consent. Hell, even if he needs a simple harmless blood transfusion, he can't have my blood without my consent.

Personal autonomy rules are absolute, and supercede even death. If you'd die without my blood, you can't have it unless I allow you to. Even if I'm fucking dead - you still can't have my organs or blood if I refuse to be an organ donor post-mortem.

Saying that a woman has to allow a fetus to leech nutrients off her and invade her body for 9 months is quite literally giving her less rights than a corpse. Because even a corpse's bodily autonomy is respected over the lives of anyone it might be able to save.

It is a simple decision, because whether the fetus is alive or not doesn't change these simple facts.

WTF, this post does not match what I tagged you as.
---

Prestoff posted...

WTF, this post does not match what I tagged you as.

Why would you tag me wrong then?

Darklit_Minuet posted...

Prestoff posted...

WTF, this post does not match what I tagged you as.

Why would you tag me wrong then?

I had you tagged as a guy who thinks there is such thing as "no accents". I didn't expect a quality post from you is all. I'll take away the tag though.
---

Prestoff posted...

Darklit_Minuet posted...

Prestoff posted...

WTF, this post does not match what I tagged you as.

Why would you tag me wrong then?

I had you tagged as a guy who thinks there is such thing as "no accents". I didn't expect a quality post from you is all. I'll take away the tag though.

He did make that topic.
---