Current Events > Why is it important for abortion and gay marriage to be illegal?

(+) Yeah! (+)

DarkTransient posted...

YUHH posted...

You're not killing a baby, you're getting rid of a clump of cells. Stop being dishonest.

DarkTransient posted...

I'll continue discussing it with you when you stop declaring the people you want to legalize the killing of to be "not human" to justify it. That tactic wasn't valid when the Nazis used it, it wasn't valid when the KKK used it, and it isn't valid when pro-abortionists use it.

"I can't actually back up my position so I'm just going to equate you to the Nazis and the KKK"
---

Let's also retroactively add Death Penalities to any men who have masturbated as well. Killing potential life should be met with Death.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

Let's outlaw male masturbation. Since sperm can is used to make a baby so all sperm that dies from masturbation is killing potential life.

"Can be used to make one" is not the same thing as "is one".

Yes. And it's not 'is one' as soon as the sperm enters the egg.

There's still a long way to go until it develops into life.
---

YUHH posted...

DarkTransient posted...

YUHH posted...

You're not killing a baby, you're getting rid of a clump of cells. Stop being dishonest.

DarkTransient posted...

I'll continue discussing it with you when you stop declaring the people you want to legalize the killing of to be "not human" to justify it. That tactic wasn't valid when the Nazis used it, it wasn't valid when the KKK used it, and it isn't valid when pro-abortionists use it.

"I can't actually back up my position so I'm just going to equate you to the Nazis and the KKK"

"Why do I get compared to Nazis and KKK when I use the same kind of dehumanization technqiues as them?!"
---

Tmaster148 posted...

Let's also retroactively add Death Penalities to any men who have masturbated as well. Killing potential life should be met with Death.

It's always great when abortion proponents claim to have superior understanding of biology and the post something ignorant like this

The retroactive part is bullshit. I don't think even the most hardcore anti abortion lawmakers are that zealous.
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

Let's also retroactively add Death Penalities to any men who have masturbated as well. Killing potential life should be met with Death.

It's always great when abortion proponents claim to have superior understanding of biology and the post something ignorant like this

wooosh.
---

Darmik posted...

Yes. And it's not 'is one' as soon as the sperm enters the egg.

There's still a long way to go until it develops into life.

Are you saying you've discovered the definition of life that has alludd scientists for centuries???

When does your work get published?

Your body, your choice. No reason someone shouldnt have the option of abortion if they want to take it, America is built on freedom of choice anyways.

Gay marriage should be legal, who cares about who loves who has no baring on how you are going to go about your day.

People care way to much about how other people should act/handle themselves when those same people cant even make their own right choices. Stay in your lane, focus on you and let people live their own lives.
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Darmik posted...

Yes. And it's not 'is one' as soon as the sperm enters the egg.

There's still a long way to go until it develops into life.

Are you saying you've discovered the definition of life that has alludd scientists for centuries???

When does your work get published?

Alludd your ass outta here
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Darmik posted...

Yes. And it's not 'is one' as soon as the sperm enters the egg.

There's still a long way to go until it develops into life.

Are you saying you've discovered the definition of life that has alludd scientists for centuries???

When does your work get published?

See, that's the whole debate. You believe it's life, pro choice people believe it's a bundle of cells. That's the fundamental argument and one which will never actually be reconciled.

Nothing you say will convince me that abortion is killing human life. Nothing I say will convince you its not.
---

Unbreakable posted...

The retroactive part is bullshit. I don't think even the most hardcore anti abortion lawmakers are that zealous.

They are, just in different ways. Making laws to try and make women personally bury aborted fetuses, forcing them to get a sonogram before getting an abortion, or the best (worst) one, making them get permission from the rapist first. You know, because the rapist's feelings are so important.

And then they have the balls to say it's not about punishing women.
---

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Darmik posted...

Yes. And it's not 'is one' as soon as the sperm enters the egg.

There's still a long way to go until it develops into life.

Are you saying you've discovered the definition of life that has alludd scientists for centuries???

When does your work get published?

See, that's the whole debate. You believe it's life, pro choice people believe it's a bundle of cells. That's the fundamental argument and one which will never actually be reconciled.

Nothing you say will convince me that abortion is killing human life. Nothing I say will convince you its not.

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.
---

jborgan posted...

making them get permission from the rapist first.

This literally never happened. There was a law that had a loophole under which a rapist could theoretically sue to prevent an abortion, but was clearly intended for couples where one partner wants it and the other does not.
---

jborgan posted...

Unbreakable posted...

The retroactive part is bullshit. I don't think even the most hardcore anti abortion lawmakers are that zealous.

They are, just in different ways. Making laws to try and make women personally bury aborted fetuses, forcing them to get a sonogram before getting an abortion, or the best (worst) one, making them get permission from the rapist first. You know, because the rapist's feelings are so important.

And then they have the balls to say it's not about punishing women.

That's incels for you. Also Incels believe rape should be legal, so it's not really surprising they tend to be rape apologist.
---

It's mostly old conservatives trying to go back to the good old days and have brainwashed young ones to be against freedom.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Darmik posted...

Yes. And it's not 'is one' as soon as the sperm enters the egg.

There's still a long way to go until it develops into life.

Are you saying you've discovered the definition of life that has alludd scientists for centuries???

When does your work get published?

See, that's the whole debate. You believe it's life, pro choice people believe it's a bundle of cells. That's the fundamental argument and one which will never actually be reconciled.

Nothing you say will convince me that abortion is killing human life. Nothing I say will convince you its not.

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

It's pre-life

Not alive if it literally can't survive outside the host
---

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I'd like to see you look at a bunch of ovulation gunk, a miscarriage and some other random entrails and tell us which ones are human and which ones aren't.
---

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I'd like to see you look at a bunch of ovulation gunk, a miscarriage and some other random entrails and tell us which ones are human and which ones aren't.

Reminds me of that picture that got sent around social media of a blown up tumor in a cute shape and people saying "how could you want to kill this"
---

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I'd like to see you look at a bunch of ovulation gunk, a miscarriage and some other random entrails and tell us which ones are human and which ones aren't.

I'll do that when you can look at a bunch of atoms and tell me which ones are which elements.

Just because you can't distinguish something visually doesn't mean there's no difference.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I'd like to see you look at a bunch of ovulation gunk, a miscarriage and some other random entrails and tell us which ones are human and which ones aren't.

I'll do that when you can look at a bunch of atoms and tell me which ones are which elements.

Just because you can't distinguish something visually doesn't mean there's no difference.

Are people saying that atoms should have the same rights as rape victims?
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Sure. As soon as they are born they can be taken to an orphanage. Consider it part of the eviction process.

It has no right to be in a woman's body against her will. Thus, it must be removed.

If you can think of a way to remove it without killing it, go for it. Until then, it has to stay legal

Sounds like the vast majority of this topic is about abortion, the same-sex marriage part got brushed to the side lol.

The question at the core of this is "does a fetus deserve personhood?"

I say no. A fetus is pre-life, unable to survive outside its host body and merely a potential human.

I personally believe first trimester should be allowed, third illegal and second should be the one up for debate.
---

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?
---

Unbreakable posted...

I say no. A fetus is pre-life, unable to survive outside its host body and merely a potential human.

Independence isn't a requirement for personhood.

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

I say no. A fetus is pre-life, unable to survive outside its host body and merely a potential human.

Independence isn't a requirement for personhood.

Surviving outside a body is a good deal less than "independence". Otherwise you could say every child born is independent

You don't count age from growing in the body, you count age from birth. Pre-birth is pre-life
---

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I'd like to see you look at a bunch of ovulation gunk, a miscarriage and some other random entrails and tell us which ones are human and which ones aren't.

I'll do that when you can look at a bunch of atoms and tell me which ones are which elements.

Just because you can't distinguish something visually doesn't mean there's no difference.

Are people saying that atoms should have the same rights as rape victims?

Are you saying that's actually what you thought I was saying, rather than simply that I was making an example of how visual distinguishability isn't a sufficient counterargument?
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

I say no. A fetus is pre-life, unable to survive outside its host body and merely a potential human.

Independence isn't a requirement for personhood.

We're not talking about dependence.

We're talking about a body forming that potential life inside of it. Without that body there is no life. That body might not even be able to accomplish forming that potential life through no fault of the host.
---

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Pregnancy and Birth aren't exactly great things to put a rape victim through. Maybe you should stop wanting to punish women for the actions of men.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Are you saying that's actually what you thought I was saying, rather than simply that I was making an example of how visual distinguishability isn't a sufficient counterargument?

We're not talking about being able to tell atoms apart.

We're talking about identifying human life.

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I can identify human life with my own eyes.
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother

This is a real post
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Not true in the slightest. Some women get morning sickness and pain quite fast
---

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Are you saying that's actually what you thought I was saying, rather than simply that I was making an example of how visual distinguishability isn't a sufficient counterargument?

We're not talking about being able to tell atoms apart.

We're talking about identifying human life.

DarkTransient posted...

If you think something that's undeniably alive and undeniably human isn't "human life", you don't need convincing, you need an evaluation.

I can identify human life with my own eyes.

Once it reaches a certain age. Which is entirely irrelevant when we're discussing before that point; a point at which you've shown you can't identify it even with far more than just your own eyes.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Pregnancy and Birth aren't exactly great things to put a rape victim through. Maybe you should stop wanting to punish women for the actions of men.

Again, rape makes up only a small percentage of abortions, most are just because people refuse to wear condoms.

That being said I totally support harsher sentences for rapists as a preventative measure, but as a compromise it would have to come with a higher standard of proof.

Because we love government so small it can fit in your privates
---

Tmaster148 posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Pregnancy and Birth aren't exactly great things to put a rape victim through. Maybe you should stop wanting to punish women for the actions of men.

Saying "you're not allowed to kill someone you don't want to be alive" is not a punishment. Once again, pro-abortionists have to resort to emotionally-charged language and dismissing their victims as "non-human" because there literally isn't a single shred of real-world reasoning to support their position.

Honestly, the entire pro-abortion brigade should be put on a high-risk watchlist, if they can justify this with innocent babies, who knows who else they might try to justify the same thing towards.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Once it reaches a certain age. Which is entirely irrelevant when we're discussing before that point; a point at which you've shown you can't identify it even with far more than just your own eyes.

No I can identify a baby.

Unless you mean a certain term within the pregnancy?

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

That being said I totally support harsher sentences for rapists as a preventative measure, but as a compromise it would have to come with a higher standard of proof.

Good grief
---

DarkTransient posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Pregnancy and Birth aren't exactly great things to put a rape victim through. Maybe you should stop wanting to punish women for the actions of men.

Saying "you're not allowed to kill someone you don't want to be alive" is not a punishment. Once again, pro-abortionists have to resort to emotionally-charged language and dismissing their victims as "non-human" because there literally isn't a single shred of real-world reasoning to support their position.

Honestly, the entire pro-abortion brigade should be put on a watchlist, if they can justify this with innocent babies, who knows who else they might try to justify the same thing towards.

No one is pro-abortion. You complain about the opponent's using emotional charged language, but here you are using "pro-abortion" and "murder".
---

DarkTransient posted...

Saying "you're not allowed to kill someone you don't want to be alive" is not a punishment. Once again, pro-abortionists have to resort to emotionally-charged language and dismissing their victims as "non-human" because there literally isn't a single shred of real-world reasoning to support their position.

It's pre-life. You're resorting to emotionally charged language by labeling it life.
---

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

That being said I totally support harsher sentences for rapists as a preventative measure, but as a compromise it would have to come with a higher standard of proof.

"Proof beyond a reasonable doubt" seems like a good enough standard, really. False accusations are pretty common, for sure, but false convictions are still pretty damn rare - most false accusations never even end up going to court, let alone getting a guilty verdict. (And yes, I know it's not literally "none of them", that's why I said "most".)
---

DarkTransient posted...

Saying "you're not allowed to kill someone you don't want to be alive" is not a punishment. Once again, pro-abortionists have to resort to emotionally-charged language and dismissing their victims as "non-human" because there literally isn't a single shred of real-world reasoning to support their position.

Forcing to birth a baby that was forced inside of you and send it to the outside world is most certainly a punishment.

You're punishing the woman by forcing her to give birth after experiencing a disgusting act.

You're punishing her by forcing her to make the decision of either raising a baby born from rape or abandoning it to the outside world.

Those are all things she would need to live with for the remainder of her life.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Pregnancy and Birth aren't exactly great things to put a rape victim through. Maybe you should stop wanting to punish women for the actions of men.

Saying "you're not allowed to kill someone you don't want to be alive" is not a punishment. Once again, pro-abortionists have to resort to emotionally-charged language and dismissing their victims as "non-human" because there literally isn't a single shred of real-world reasoning to support their position.

Honestly, the entire pro-abortion brigade should be put on a watchlist, if they can justify this with innocent babies, who knows who else they might try to justify the same thing towards.

No one is pro-abortion. You complain about the opponent's using emotional charged language, but here you are using "pro-abortion" and "murder".

You support the right to abortion, you're pro-abortion. That's not emotional language, that's literally descriptive language. It's not emotional just because I refused to use your euphemism.

And, uh, care to point out where I called it murder? Because I'm pretty sure I outright stated it wasn't, on the grounds that murder is a legal term that specifically excludes it. That's why I used the term "killing" instead, because that's a common (non-legal) term that does cover it.
---

Darmik posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Saying "you're not allowed to kill someone you don't want to be alive" is not a punishment. Once again, pro-abortionists have to resort to emotionally-charged language and dismissing their victims as "non-human" because there literally isn't a single shred of real-world reasoning to support their position.

Forcing to birth a baby that was forced inside of you and send it to the outside world is most certainly a punishment.

You're punishing the woman by forcing her to give birth after experiencing a disgusting act.

You're punishing her by forcing her to make the decision of either raising a baby born from rape or abandoning it to the outside world.

Those are all things she would need to live with for the remainder of her life.

No, it is not a punishment. A punishment would be "you got raped, so you're going to jail" (y'kno, like what actually happens in a lot of Middle Eastern countries, the same ones you no doubt claim can do no wrong). This is literally just not letting them kill someone who is in no way at fault for the rape - indeed, they didn't even exist yet when the rape happened.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Unbreakable posted...

SageHarpuiaHX posted...

Landlords have to go through a process to remove tenants, you can't just kick them out with all their stuff on the side of the road, that's illegal.

So you want women to shove an eviction notice up there?

Put it up for adoption once it's born. By the time the baby acually starts to become an inconvenience to the mother it's already well along regardless.

Pregnancy and Birth aren't exactly great things to put a rape victim through. Maybe you should stop wanting to punish women for the actions of men.

Honestly, the entire pro-abortion brigade should be put on a high-risk watchlist, if they can justify this with innocent babies, who knows who else they might try to justify the same thing towards.

lmao. Told you, you're not going to get a reasonable discussion out of him.
---

I support the right for people to chose to get an abortion if they so want. I don't support abortion.

But frankly QAnon believers like yourself really give a lot of reasons to support it.
---

DarkTransient posted...

False accusations are pretty common,

2% isnt common lol
---

Tmaster148 posted...

I support the right for people to chose to get an abortion if they so want. I don't support abortion.

"I don't support it, I just support it."
---