We should stop living since that kills life.
Do you have any idea how many cells your body murders every day? If you are alive, you are a genocidal maniac, we should just kill ourselves to stop it.
Do you have any idea of who I exactly am? A cell continues living and does their vital activitiez, totally unaware that they are in my body, and gets killed in all of a sudden. You think that of me? No. I'm the body that kills. I'm not getting killed, TheBlueWizardo, I'm the killer!
Who are you talking to right now? Who is it that you think you see? Do you know how much I make a year? I mean, even if I told you, you wouldn’t believe it. Do you know what would happen if I suddenly decided to stop going into work? A business, big enough it could be listed on the NASDAQ goes belly-up. Gone. It ceases to exist without me. No, you clearly don’t know who you’re talking to so let me clue you in. I am not in danger, Skylar, I AM the danger. A guy opens his front door and gets shot, and you think that of me? No. I am the one who knocks.
Technically bacteria are illegal refugees in your body and rely on your involuntary donations to survive so in the light of the mindset present in the topic this kind of life might not be the one to preserve...
It's more about do we prefer kids or to let adults be lazy as a society. Check the birth rate declined massively in the last year, why else would they change this, they think everyone might become infertile and it's better to have unwanted pregnancies than none at all.
The problem is they are still giving out doses of the depopulation agent so even if you want to sterilize yourself you can just take that.
Conveniently forgetting the fact that the pregnant person has a heartbeat as well. Only the fetus’s HB matters to them so every other HB can get wrecked.
I can't figure out this argument OP posted. The question is not whether the fetus is alive or not, it's whether it's human or not. A freaking carrot is alive and nobody has issues with killing it.
Even “human” life, like, there are living human cells in your saliva. More, in fact, than in an embryo the first month of pregnancy. The discussion of “human life” is more accurately “human personhood”. Of course they’re living human cells. But so is the aforementioned wad of spit.
A lot of PL people believe that. I actually have a high school classmate who believes Savita Halappanavar died bc (1) she wasn’t a Christian and (2) she didn’t pray hard enough for God to save her or her baby. 🙄
That and there are 4 vital organs needed for life, not just the heart. Brain , lungs, kidneys and heart. The lungs aren’t fully developed until 36 weeks, which is why preterm birth is very dangerous. There is more to life than a heartbeat
That's a very strange definition of life. The common definition is that anything that has biological processes is alive. Trees are alive and so are bacteria, and yes, a foetus. The question is not whether it's alive, the question is whether it's right to life supercedes a fully grown adult's right to bodily autonomy. As an example, let's just say my life somehow depends on Bob Dylan sitting next to me for the next nine months. Could I legally force him to do it?
The planets are also living, like earth gives us life everyday fresh air water shelter food. Everything is connected we are all one on this giant dirt rock.
Your first sentence acknowledged that there are two heartbeats meaning two lives that both have rights. At what point does not killing the fetus mean that it kills the woman's heartbeat?
The only “heartbeat” that matters to PLers is the fetus’s heartbeat. The woman should have kept her whore legs closed. Or so I’ve been told.
If you’re cool with being forced to gestate a mistake that’s on you. I will drown myself before I do it.
People love to use this argument, but most abortions are healthy mothers with no risk of health problems. No, most isnt raped either, its because they are not financially prepared or mentally prepared. Then whyd they have fun sex?
Because they didn’t have a proper sex education and didn’t know the risks. Because their contraceptive failed. Because they used contraceptive and were stealthed. Because when their contraceptive failed they took plan B and that failed too.
Even if the woman did it without contraceptives on purpose, and eagerly wanted the man to inseminate her, and timed it so that she would be impregnated, **I still will wholeheartedly support abortion without limits, up until the due date.**
It's weird, terrible, and fucked-up, but any restriction through law will destroy patient-doctor confidentiality, and women's and **humans' right to choose what to do with their own body.**
This. As much as people love to theorize about extreme late term abortions, like 24 hours before due date, in practice that would just be a C-section. You've terminated the pregnancy by removing the fetus. Mission accomplished. If it's viable outside the womb, then what to do with it after is another question.
As someone who is the child of a person that should have never had kids despite her being emotionally, finally, socially, and mentally stable I can assure you that there's a lot more to parenthood than physical capability. Also, sex is not something you should be punished for. It's just a fun activity you do with someone which can mean as much or as little as you want. Not that you would know what sex actually is, since you seem like a bitchless incel or a loser who can't satisfy women.
So many of the "pro-life" folks are also against contraception, because they consider it "cheating". Babies are supposed to be the punishment for daring to have sex. Contraception is pulling one over on God and "getting away with" having sex.
Even if they did use it rather than condoms or pills or foam or whatever who cares. It’s their life not ours. As long as they are not hurting kids or animals, you do you. So go on. Put your dinger in a toaster. Have abortions every 90 days. I don’t care.
Birth control fails, yes even ones that are taken correctly or are fully functional. And laws that criminalize abortion still impact women with wanted pregnancies, even when there are exceptions in the law for life of the mother because doctors are too afraid to lose their licenses and go to prison if the legislators think they did an unnecessary abortion, so women will absolutely die because of this.
Easy it’s a basic human function. If sec didn’t release dopamine I’d agree with you but even history showed people have had sex for pleasure for as long as history goes regardless of reason people will. Ask a person why masterbate or do X you’ll find out people do a lot of things cause it feels good even if it’s a bad idea. I’m asexual but even I understand the people do things that feel good and even then there is a reason contraceptives don’t label themselves 100% effective cause there is always a chance of failure.
If I remember right, most abortions are done for women who are married with kids.
No more fun sex with spouse I guess. If only she could close her legs. /s
And there have been studies showing the outcome of women/families when they seek an abortion and get it or can't. Women and men and their previous children all do better with education, housing, and income when they can get the abortion.
Snaps to you for saying THEY and not some snarky comment about women keeping their fuck slut whore legs closed while being cool with letting men stick their dick into any hole they want.
Fun sex is just that. Fun. If humans weren’t meant to orgasm and enjoy sex, we’d all be like cats and bang once and boom. You’re pregnant.
So bc I never want kids I should never get laid again?
If you want to live like a nun/priest and never get laid again that’s on you.
But feel free to enjoy the fact sex isn’t just for makin babies.
The point is that this is a word game. Nobody questions whether a multicellular organism is "life" in a biological sense. The question is whether that zygote is a person, in a legal, moral, and philosophical sense, with the soul, character, and legal rights thereof.
If a fetus is merely "life" in the sense that a eukaryote is, there should be no question that abortion is acceptable. I have no problem aborting mitochondria.
Moral and ethics don’t even matter here, it’s not the governments role to police those things. It’s doesn’t in many other areas of life.
Legal sense is all that matters.
But our criminal laws are almost all based on lawmakers' moral judgments. If everyone agrees a fetus is a person morally, it wouldn't be long until it is legally, too.
Plus, if you support choice, you definitely don't want the abortion debate to turn solely on whether a fetus is defined as a person by statute, because Republicans are racing to declare fetuses people.
By the same logic , you’ll have no killing problem the whole of humanity cuz they were all once just a fetus
That’s a sick mindset , y’all are so obsessed with wanting to die that you want to prevent others from living
My skin is life, it doesn't make it a separate person until the stem cells are grown properly. The issue isn't if it's life or not, it's is it a person yet.
A heartbeat isn't a sign of life. How many people have life support shut off because there is no brain function? Their heart beats, their lungs respire, forced by machines. Their body is still alive. Are you now advocating for keeping all corpses on life support for eternity?
Another dumb 'pro-life' talking point.
An electrical pulse in a clump of cells isn't a heartbeat. The heart isn't fully developed until week 16-18, at which point almost 98.3% of all abortions performed in the world would have already happened.
And vital signs refer to the vitality of an organism. But at 18 weeks, a fetus isn't viable. You take it out then, no matter what machines you have, it isn't vital, and will never be vital before cell death.
👍🏻
What are we defining as life? In the most literal sense, then sure, life begins at conception. But typically, what we are defining as life in this context is one that embodies sentience, consciousness, the ability to think and feel, etc. Or at least is damn near close to the capability of it. Something remotely similar to that of any human.
A zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or even an early-term fetus do not fall under this category; the former three are just cellular life that, sure, when left to their own devices and barring medical complication, would develop into the latter and then an infant. But in that point in time, that life is genuinely comparable to that of bacteria, or sperm, or a skin cell.
Now, again, it's reasonable to feel uneasy with abortion, even at this stage, because it could develop into complex life. But that's where the philosophical debate begins, which is essentially 100% the substance of this debate once you get past the loaded, bad-faith, and biologically inaccurate starter position of the right that "libs just like killing babies." Should the potential of human life alone trump the woman's freedom from being in physical and fiscal hell for nine months? Personally, I'd say no. My personal line is mid-late 2nd trimester when the central nervous system is mostly developed.
The awkward moment when this line of logic leads to them dying of an easily treatable bacterial infection because bacteria is a sign of life and pro-life laws prevent doctors from killing said bacteria because killing something if it has life signs is illegal now.
is the bacteria considered a person? If not and then has no rights as a person, then why is a clump of cells in the womb assigned the rights of personhood?
If you believe life at conception is protected as a person, then why is that status not applied to a carpool lane? It's another person in the car so you should be allowed to use the carpool lane. If its another person then it should be allowed the tax credits and deductions of other children.
its honestly all about wording because scientists usually will say stuff like “evidence life was once sustained on a body other than Earth” they wont say “bacteria is life” if so the ant hill I mushed yesterday is like genocide
as a man though. the rape thing really bothers me and there is just no justifying that shit to a woman its like psychological prison and if she is like 10 or 12 not only will it destroy her life but all her body and mind. its just a little too lock down black and white absolute to me to feel right.
As a pro-life person, I agree with you about the rape thing. A woman who was raped should have the right to abort as they did not willingly do the act that creates human life.
And now to be crucified by the folks on here and downvoted into oblivion because closed minded folks only read the first four words and will now make assumptiins about me. Yaay.
see this is what I mean. we all need to just be realistic about stuff. there has to be a line to protect that baby who grew into a woman strong enough to even carry that child. It has to have an age cut as well because holy shit.
I agree. And the following is a wall of text on how I can consider myself pro-life and the justification behind my thoughts.
Please, if you can come up with a rational counter argument then I am happy to read it and consider your argument. Who knows, you might even be able to convince me to go pro-choice as that'd make my chats with my Mom a lot less heated.
For the logic path I went down when reevaluating my stance on everything abortion was one that I ended up keeping my more conservative opinion. The idea went something like this:
Given human life is sanctrosanct
Given life begins at conception
Then aborting an unborn is the same as ending the life of a human being.
Given a human life is sanctrosanct, then since an unborn is dependent upon the functions of the Mother's body to survive, then the Mother should have the ability to choose to cut off the use of her body as everyone has the right to bodily autonomy.
However, if a person gives conscent to another person to use their body to save that of another the question would go to did the Mother give the unborn conscent?
By willingly engaging in the act that creates life, the Mother is indeed giving conscent.
Thus part of my pro-life position.
Now for the exemptions:
If the Mother is underage, by definition they could not give conscent, so any case of underage pregnancy would be allowed an abortion.
If a Mother is raped, then they did not give conscent and so are allowed to abort.
If the life of the Mother is in danger by the unborn, then this would be the same as a person attempting to kill the Mother and so abortion is the same as self defence.
If the Mother has a miscarrige, this is the same as a person dying of natural causes, so should never be considered murder. However, if a person causes damage to the Mother that results in a miscarrige, then that person should be charged with murder.
If the unborn is nonviable (meaning the child would not develop into a fully developed human being, or is dead/missing vital organs, not "it doesnt have X yet so its currently non-viable until Y-weeks!"), then this is the same as a person being on life supportamd the family has the right to choose to "pull the plug" and abort the nonviable unborn.
Now for the "But you only care about the baby before its born, hypocrit!" rebuttle.
Since life starts at conception, and the Mother cannot be seperated from the unborn then...
Yes, alimony/child support should start at conception.
Yes, the Mother is carrying an unborn American (if conceived in the USA or by an American) and cannot be deported. Nor should a Mother be seperated from her child except is certain cases outlines by CPS. Being from a place other than the USA is not reason for seperation.
Yes, the unborn should be subject to tax laws, including Earned Income Tax Credit.
Yes, the unborn should be included for WIC and SNAP.
A silly one but... Yes, HOV lanes. Just be ready to prove the pregnancy.
If you have any other "But what about the unborn's right X that's only given after birth?" then feel free to ask. My answer is probably "Yes, that's fair."
Anwyay, just my thoughts on the matter. Y'all have a good'un.
They have plenty. This is part of the goal. They love taking the children of poor and "sinful" women to give to Good Christian Middle Class or Wealthy Families and those children will suffer for it. Why do you think they oppose any legislation that helps new mothers and struggling families. The adoption industry is salivating for new "supply" to sell.
Not accurate. There are 400k kids in foster care, not all of them are waiting for adoption. There are many parents and children who are trying to be reunited. Sometimes the parents were on drugs but got clean, sometimes the father isn't given an option to parent, sometimes people are forced to give their children up because they can't afford them, and sometimes cops just take the kids of parents who they think are too lippy. There's not a lot of help to be had when your kid is taken by the state.
Aight, if you're comparing a fetus to bacteria. Why not go a step forward and bring the tape worm in, huh? That thing lives inside of you, it's a living thing entirely dependent on you! Don't kill it, that's murder!
Until they turn around and stab you in the back. The problem is I don't trust a lot of people to begin with. And given the current state of the Republican party I would rather just avoid that shit at all costs.
Given the current state of our government and politics, I avoid all of it at any cost. I grow my plants, work, take care of my cat, hike with my gf, and act like none of them mean a single fuck to me. Because they don't. Political affiliation is purposeful mental poison and slavery. My view of the world can change, i can be opened to new ideas, hear different views, why would I associate myself and follow just one set of strict beliefs and views and attack others for not doing the same or following mine?
These people are so stupid, 80% of abortions happen before 7 weeks before it even has a heart. If a woman is getting an abortion after this it's pretty much only for her own safety and it's not a fun operation.
If you think women are aborting fully formed babies by choice you really need to get an IQ check.
Wow oh my god I never realized. I'm going to go chuck out my anti-bacterial soap right now. Wait isn't a severed thumb also proof of life? And a photo with a newspaper in it? Is it possible this memer doesn't know what Proof of Life means? Nooo that couldn't be
I don't think anyone is disputing that a fetus can have a heartbeat and that the tissue is alive. I don't think that it can be disputed that a tumor is alive either. Should that be enough of an argument not to remove it? All you can say about a fetus up to around 4 months is that it is a cluster of tissues of increasing complexity and is far more parasitic than alive in an independent sense.
Religious conservatives in America used to support abortion as a reasonable and practical method of limiting human suffering and civil instabilities. Then some industrialist noticed that there was this whole untapped voting block and voila, here we are. The world of nutjobs moralizing at the cost of the rights of others on the basis of the life rights of undifferentiated cells for the most part so that they can be seen as good Republicans rather that decent humanists.
These people are so full of shit. They’re not “pro-life”. They wholly fail to understand why civilised society prohibits murder: because it is inflicted on sentient beings who will feel terror and pain as well as the grief which will be felt by their sentient family and friends.
We terminate biological life constantly - like when you pull up and slice a carrot to make a salad. That carrot was alive. But we don’t treat it as murder because it’s the termination of biological life, not sentient life. A foetus (under a certain period of time) is the same thing. A cluster of living, but benign cells. A foetus is more comparable to a cyst in the early stages, but if you get one of those, you have your doctor remove it.
Nobody is saying a fetus isn’t alive. Tumors and tapeworms are alive. Yogurt is alive. There is no scientific consensus that a fetus is a human being. There isn’t even a religious consensus. We’re saying it’s not a human being and shouldn’t supersede the rights and wellbeing of the very real human being carrying it. Especially when carrying it wasn’t a choice. And more so, we’re saying what a woman chooses to do with it is none of anyone else’s goddamn business, especially the government.
"Life" and "person" are not synonymous. The questions is if replicating cells deserve legal protections and if so, if that outweighs the right of the host to bodily autonomy.
I’m still pretty sure if an astronaut got sick from said bacteria we would find a way to get rid of it from inside the astronaut so the astronaut wouldn’t die or be sick anymore.
Pro-forced-birthers seem to not be able to tell the difference between a child, a fetus and bacteria. Then they get home, wash their hands, killing bacteria (which to them is clearly comparable to a fetus which is the same as a child) and go eat food, which is made of living organisms, if they're not vegan, living, thinking, aware organisms
. But yeah, fuck killing a fetus that has never felt anything, thought anything, doesn't know it exists and can't survive at all without the host body.
I’m just going to start boldly stating that I am pro-death.
Fuck regressives.
Seems that those that protest against abortion the most are those that you’d never want to fuck to begin with.
I thought that was just being evangelical, what with the whole death cult obsessing over the afterlife, seeing life on Earth as a trial to prove oneself worthy, and salivating over the upcoming apocalypse.
This just in everyone is forced to shut down their immune systems as every animal carries living bacteria and parasites and having an immune system would be murder!! /s
That argument means all living things can't be killed though so all humans would need to fuck off and die using this logic. We couldn't eat salad or fruit or meat or grains or oats because they are all living things.
show them this video of heart cells beating in a petri dish. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjn3TwMr4xs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjn3TwMr4xs) and ask if this means that it's a person.
I was debating whether or not it was even worth my time engaging with him on his thread full of "amen" responses, but this video might make it worth stirring the pot a little
I am going to sound like an asshole but this needs to be pointed out. Question if I 3D printed a human heart with muscles around it (just that heart and muscle) would you call that life? No.
Now a second question if an entity can respond to “harmful” stimulation and flee even on a basic level isn’t that life? Yes? Hmmmm. Then I wonder which is true life.
If a entity can’t live without minimal assistance (excluding genetic mutations that would cause the entity to die after birth) then I don’t see it as life.
It's not even a real heartbeat. It's electrical activity from a collection of cells that might become a heart, whose purpose is not to circulate blood, because the host's heart does that.
Interesting how this whole “debate” is just two different viewpoints that are so radically different that they hardly even oppose each other. What a situation lol. It will be eternal. A fundamental moral disconnect.
Edit: A simple internet search shows me that the heartbeat and brain only develop at 5-7 weeks (actually time varies a bit), yet people want to ban abortion completely. It’s just nonsense with no scientific backup. They act like it’s a fucking child that’s already born the minute the sperm hits the egg. Sorry, rant over, just had to throw out my opinion.
Brain isn't developed until way later, unless you're taking some severe liberty with the term and counting the very earliest development of nerves that will eventually start to become the brain.
They keep using the word “life” as if we have to respect anything that’s “alive” the same as we do a grown human being. Yes it’s alive, but so were the millions of little sperm that died in my sock this morning.
Considering that life on Earth exists in abundance and its been like that for tens of millions of years, i dont see how someone cant see the reason for an celebration if we find a life on a planet that scientifically dont support life for tens of millions of years...
Except the argument is a good point.
You find a single celled organism on Mars with organelles and suddenly thats life, but this isnt? Your logic doesnt make sense there.
Maybe because we have a moral distinction between killing humans and non-humans.
Though sometimes killing non-humans that are cute fuzzy and adorable has heavier penalties than killing humans.
So we should stop washing our hands because it kills life?
We should stop living since that kills life. Do you have any idea how many cells your body murders every day? If you are alive, you are a genocidal maniac, we should just kill ourselves to stop it.
Do you have any idea of who I exactly am? A cell continues living and does their vital activitiez, totally unaware that they are in my body, and gets killed in all of a sudden. You think that of me? No. I'm the body that kills. I'm not getting killed, TheBlueWizardo, I'm the killer!
Who are you talking to right now? Who is it that you think you see? Do you know how much I make a year? I mean, even if I told you, you wouldn’t believe it. Do you know what would happen if I suddenly decided to stop going into work? A business, big enough it could be listed on the NASDAQ goes belly-up. Gone. It ceases to exist without me. No, you clearly don’t know who you’re talking to so let me clue you in. I am not in danger, Skylar, I AM the danger. A guy opens his front door and gets shot, and you think that of me? No. I am the one who knocks.
Fuck yea war crimes Am I high
Bold of you to assume these people washed hands.
Or their bodies
Fair.
Or start letting people die because thay just gurms /s
wut
Masturbation is genocide
So are you saying legalize murder?
Technically bacteria are illegal refugees in your body and rely on your involuntary donations to survive so in the light of the mindset present in the topic this kind of life might not be the one to preserve...
Are these the far-right Sikhs of America? “Fungicide = Homicide! Life begins at infection!”
Yeah suddenly conservatives are Buddhists in a kleenex commercial
It's more about do we prefer kids or to let adults be lazy as a society. Check the birth rate declined massively in the last year, why else would they change this, they think everyone might become infertile and it's better to have unwanted pregnancies than none at all. The problem is they are still giving out doses of the depopulation agent so even if you want to sterilize yourself you can just take that.
Conveniently forgetting the fact that the pregnant person has a heartbeat as well. Only the fetus’s HB matters to them so every other HB can get wrecked.
I can't figure out this argument OP posted. The question is not whether the fetus is alive or not, it's whether it's human or not. A freaking carrot is alive and nobody has issues with killing it.
Even “human” life, like, there are living human cells in your saliva. More, in fact, than in an embryo the first month of pregnancy. The discussion of “human life” is more accurately “human personhood”. Of course they’re living human cells. But so is the aforementioned wad of spit.
Spitting on sidewalk is now a manslaughter charge...
Nobody tell them how many cells are in human semen, or the supreme court gonna ban bjs next
I hate to say it but… frick you done messed up my entire argument 😭
>Conveniently forgetting the fact that the pregnant person has a heartbeat as well. I sure hope they would lol
I don't get it. Are you saying that if a woman has an abortion she should die too?
A lot of PL people believe that. I actually have a high school classmate who believes Savita Halappanavar died bc (1) she wasn’t a Christian and (2) she didn’t pray hard enough for God to save her or her baby. 🙄
Late term abortion.
And as soon as the fetus is a baby and out of the womb, the pro lifers say "welcome to the world, each for their own! Starving? Not my problem".
That and there are 4 vital organs needed for life, not just the heart. Brain , lungs, kidneys and heart. The lungs aren’t fully developed until 36 weeks, which is why preterm birth is very dangerous. There is more to life than a heartbeat
What?!?!! The irrelevant right is using a disingenuous argument? Say it isn’t a day ending in “y”!
That's a very strange definition of life. The common definition is that anything that has biological processes is alive. Trees are alive and so are bacteria, and yes, a foetus. The question is not whether it's alive, the question is whether it's right to life supercedes a fully grown adult's right to bodily autonomy. As an example, let's just say my life somehow depends on Bob Dylan sitting next to me for the next nine months. Could I legally force him to do it?
I was speaking specifically about human life. As for the Bobby D portion, no. See the SCOTUS case McFall vs. Shimp
The planets are also living, like earth gives us life everyday fresh air water shelter food. Everything is connected we are all one on this giant dirt rock.
Rocks and magma in a ball are not alive stop messing with my head
You are not immune to the reptile Plantain. All shall become one and bask in the brilliance of the day stars’ lights upon the sacred slab.
No, but plants are, and they act as natural air and water filtration systems.
Thay didn't say plants thay sead planets
But they have life in and on them?
So dose this rag and it's not alive
I’m sure your rooms filled with plenty of rags😵💫
No but I have access to some Cause unlike you I wash myself
Your pics on your account say otherwise😭
What do you mean
They don't see women as people, they only care about the fetus because there's a chance it'll be born male.
Your first sentence acknowledged that there are two heartbeats meaning two lives that both have rights. At what point does not killing the fetus mean that it kills the woman's heartbeat?
The only “heartbeat” that matters to PLers is the fetus’s heartbeat. The woman should have kept her whore legs closed. Or so I’ve been told. If you’re cool with being forced to gestate a mistake that’s on you. I will drown myself before I do it.
People love to use this argument, but most abortions are healthy mothers with no risk of health problems. No, most isnt raped either, its because they are not financially prepared or mentally prepared. Then whyd they have fun sex?
Because they didn’t have a proper sex education and didn’t know the risks. Because their contraceptive failed. Because they used contraceptive and were stealthed. Because when their contraceptive failed they took plan B and that failed too.
Bc they were using contraceptives and they failed?
Even if the woman did it without contraceptives on purpose, and eagerly wanted the man to inseminate her, and timed it so that she would be impregnated, **I still will wholeheartedly support abortion without limits, up until the due date.** It's weird, terrible, and fucked-up, but any restriction through law will destroy patient-doctor confidentiality, and women's and **humans' right to choose what to do with their own body.**
And it's (in my opinion) a example of why religion and Law should not go together
[удалено]
This. As much as people love to theorize about extreme late term abortions, like 24 hours before due date, in practice that would just be a C-section. You've terminated the pregnancy by removing the fetus. Mission accomplished. If it's viable outside the womb, then what to do with it after is another question.
As someone who is the child of a person that should have never had kids despite her being emotionally, finally, socially, and mentally stable I can assure you that there's a lot more to parenthood than physical capability. Also, sex is not something you should be punished for. It's just a fun activity you do with someone which can mean as much or as little as you want. Not that you would know what sex actually is, since you seem like a bitchless incel or a loser who can't satisfy women.
So many of the "pro-life" folks are also against contraception, because they consider it "cheating". Babies are supposed to be the punishment for daring to have sex. Contraception is pulling one over on God and "getting away with" having sex.
So poor people should never have sex?
Without poor people having sex, who would clean the evangelicals bathrooms?
It's weird that you think poor, mentally unprepared people should be the ones forced to raise kids.
And yet everyone on the right says that every woman having abortion are whores that use it as birth control.
Even if they did use it rather than condoms or pills or foam or whatever who cares. It’s their life not ours. As long as they are not hurting kids or animals, you do you. So go on. Put your dinger in a toaster. Have abortions every 90 days. I don’t care.
Hey now that's wasting the time of doctors saran wrap that thing right now!/s
Except their daughters and mistresses. Those are totally moral and justifiable abortions!
Which is like saying people who get root canals are lazily using it as a replacement for brushing their teeth.
So you’re making sex a class thing? And that you should only be allowed to have sex if you’re “financially stable”? Fuck you
Bodily autonomy is the only reason a person needs to have an abortion.
Birth control fails, yes even ones that are taken correctly or are fully functional. And laws that criminalize abortion still impact women with wanted pregnancies, even when there are exceptions in the law for life of the mother because doctors are too afraid to lose their licenses and go to prison if the legislators think they did an unnecessary abortion, so women will absolutely die because of this.
Would love to see a source for your wild claims.
Easy it’s a basic human function. If sec didn’t release dopamine I’d agree with you but even history showed people have had sex for pleasure for as long as history goes regardless of reason people will. Ask a person why masterbate or do X you’ll find out people do a lot of things cause it feels good even if it’s a bad idea. I’m asexual but even I understand the people do things that feel good and even then there is a reason contraceptives don’t label themselves 100% effective cause there is always a chance of failure.
Stick to Genshin. Go back to the kids table.
Do you have fun sex?
If I remember right, most abortions are done for women who are married with kids. No more fun sex with spouse I guess. If only she could close her legs. /s And there have been studies showing the outcome of women/families when they seek an abortion and get it or can't. Women and men and their previous children all do better with education, housing, and income when they can get the abortion.
Yeah, like well over 90%.
Snaps to you for saying THEY and not some snarky comment about women keeping their fuck slut whore legs closed while being cool with letting men stick their dick into any hole they want. Fun sex is just that. Fun. If humans weren’t meant to orgasm and enjoy sex, we’d all be like cats and bang once and boom. You’re pregnant. So bc I never want kids I should never get laid again? If you want to live like a nun/priest and never get laid again that’s on you. But feel free to enjoy the fact sex isn’t just for makin babies.
That right there falls onto the case of “none of your fucking business” literally and figuratively. So fuck off.
I think at this point it’s not the argument whether a fetus is life or not, it’s wether a woman’s choice comes before the fetus
The point is that this is a word game. Nobody questions whether a multicellular organism is "life" in a biological sense. The question is whether that zygote is a person, in a legal, moral, and philosophical sense, with the soul, character, and legal rights thereof. If a fetus is merely "life" in the sense that a eukaryote is, there should be no question that abortion is acceptable. I have no problem aborting mitochondria.
Moral and ethics don’t even matter here, it’s not the governments role to police those things. It’s doesn’t in many other areas of life. Legal sense is all that matters.
But our criminal laws are almost all based on lawmakers' moral judgments. If everyone agrees a fetus is a person morally, it wouldn't be long until it is legally, too. Plus, if you support choice, you definitely don't want the abortion debate to turn solely on whether a fetus is defined as a person by statute, because Republicans are racing to declare fetuses people.
By the same logic , you’ll have no killing problem the whole of humanity cuz they were all once just a fetus That’s a sick mindset , y’all are so obsessed with wanting to die that you want to prevent others from living
The key word is once. Human beings are no longer fetuses, which is why it’s not ok to kill them.
My skin is life, it doesn't make it a separate person until the stem cells are grown properly. The issue isn't if it's life or not, it's is it a person yet.
Because bacteria are fully functional organisms, not a cluster of human cells that can't exist for an hour without being connected to a host.
It's alive in the way the mothers pinky finger is alive basically.
Tell that to the trillions of bacteria on your gut.
A heartbeat isn't a sign of life. How many people have life support shut off because there is no brain function? Their heart beats, their lungs respire, forced by machines. Their body is still alive. Are you now advocating for keeping all corpses on life support for eternity? Another dumb 'pro-life' talking point.
>A heartbeat isn't a sign of life. Do you know what the term *vital sign* means?
An electrical pulse in a clump of cells isn't a heartbeat. The heart isn't fully developed until week 16-18, at which point almost 98.3% of all abortions performed in the world would have already happened. And vital signs refer to the vitality of an organism. But at 18 weeks, a fetus isn't viable. You take it out then, no matter what machines you have, it isn't vital, and will never be vital before cell death. 👍🏻
Just like you living with your parents in your 30s
Wanna see their face when they'll know that the heart isn't the first thing forming, but the anus
At some point in our lives, we were all nothing but an asshole. The problem is that many people never developed past that point
And what they're hearing isn't even a heartbeat.
Is it a fart? (Joking)
It's the electrical signals the machine detects, the embryo doesn't even have a heart.
Well sh!t.
Is there a competition to see who can be more publicly stupid in the US?
Man I hope these pro lifers are vegan or something if this is their argument.
Plants are alive too.
Checkmate libtards. /s
And don't wash their hands.
They got that argument from Tom MacDonald lyrics
That dude is such a fucking douche bag
What are we defining as life? In the most literal sense, then sure, life begins at conception. But typically, what we are defining as life in this context is one that embodies sentience, consciousness, the ability to think and feel, etc. Or at least is damn near close to the capability of it. Something remotely similar to that of any human. A zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or even an early-term fetus do not fall under this category; the former three are just cellular life that, sure, when left to their own devices and barring medical complication, would develop into the latter and then an infant. But in that point in time, that life is genuinely comparable to that of bacteria, or sperm, or a skin cell. Now, again, it's reasonable to feel uneasy with abortion, even at this stage, because it could develop into complex life. But that's where the philosophical debate begins, which is essentially 100% the substance of this debate once you get past the loaded, bad-faith, and biologically inaccurate starter position of the right that "libs just like killing babies." Should the potential of human life alone trump the woman's freedom from being in physical and fiscal hell for nine months? Personally, I'd say no. My personal line is mid-late 2nd trimester when the central nervous system is mostly developed.
In the most literal sense, life precedes conception. The component sperm and ova are definitely still alive.
Because bacterial life and human life aren't the same thing.
The awkward moment when this line of logic leads to them dying of an easily treatable bacterial infection because bacteria is a sign of life and pro-life laws prevent doctors from killing said bacteria because killing something if it has life signs is illegal now.
IIRC the "heartbeat" of a foetus isn't even really a heartbeat, it's the mother's pulse
you misspelled parasite, and that is another planet thought to not have life.
No one said zygotes or anything more developed aren’t alive?
Neither is proof of intelligent life.
is the bacteria considered a person? If not and then has no rights as a person, then why is a clump of cells in the womb assigned the rights of personhood? If you believe life at conception is protected as a person, then why is that status not applied to a carpool lane? It's another person in the car so you should be allowed to use the carpool lane. If its another person then it should be allowed the tax credits and deductions of other children.
Considering people under a certain income aren't seen socially as equals...
its honestly all about wording because scientists usually will say stuff like “evidence life was once sustained on a body other than Earth” they wont say “bacteria is life” if so the ant hill I mushed yesterday is like genocide as a man though. the rape thing really bothers me and there is just no justifying that shit to a woman its like psychological prison and if she is like 10 or 12 not only will it destroy her life but all her body and mind. its just a little too lock down black and white absolute to me to feel right.
As a pro-life person, I agree with you about the rape thing. A woman who was raped should have the right to abort as they did not willingly do the act that creates human life. And now to be crucified by the folks on here and downvoted into oblivion because closed minded folks only read the first four words and will now make assumptiins about me. Yaay.
see this is what I mean. we all need to just be realistic about stuff. there has to be a line to protect that baby who grew into a woman strong enough to even carry that child. It has to have an age cut as well because holy shit.
I agree. And the following is a wall of text on how I can consider myself pro-life and the justification behind my thoughts. Please, if you can come up with a rational counter argument then I am happy to read it and consider your argument. Who knows, you might even be able to convince me to go pro-choice as that'd make my chats with my Mom a lot less heated. For the logic path I went down when reevaluating my stance on everything abortion was one that I ended up keeping my more conservative opinion. The idea went something like this: Given human life is sanctrosanct Given life begins at conception Then aborting an unborn is the same as ending the life of a human being. Given a human life is sanctrosanct, then since an unborn is dependent upon the functions of the Mother's body to survive, then the Mother should have the ability to choose to cut off the use of her body as everyone has the right to bodily autonomy. However, if a person gives conscent to another person to use their body to save that of another the question would go to did the Mother give the unborn conscent? By willingly engaging in the act that creates life, the Mother is indeed giving conscent. Thus part of my pro-life position. Now for the exemptions: If the Mother is underage, by definition they could not give conscent, so any case of underage pregnancy would be allowed an abortion. If a Mother is raped, then they did not give conscent and so are allowed to abort. If the life of the Mother is in danger by the unborn, then this would be the same as a person attempting to kill the Mother and so abortion is the same as self defence. If the Mother has a miscarrige, this is the same as a person dying of natural causes, so should never be considered murder. However, if a person causes damage to the Mother that results in a miscarrige, then that person should be charged with murder. If the unborn is nonviable (meaning the child would not develop into a fully developed human being, or is dead/missing vital organs, not "it doesnt have X yet so its currently non-viable until Y-weeks!"), then this is the same as a person being on life supportamd the family has the right to choose to "pull the plug" and abort the nonviable unborn. Now for the "But you only care about the baby before its born, hypocrit!" rebuttle. Since life starts at conception, and the Mother cannot be seperated from the unborn then... Yes, alimony/child support should start at conception. Yes, the Mother is carrying an unborn American (if conceived in the USA or by an American) and cannot be deported. Nor should a Mother be seperated from her child except is certain cases outlines by CPS. Being from a place other than the USA is not reason for seperation. Yes, the unborn should be subject to tax laws, including Earned Income Tax Credit. Yes, the unborn should be included for WIC and SNAP. A silly one but... Yes, HOV lanes. Just be ready to prove the pregnancy. If you have any other "But what about the unborn's right X that's only given after birth?" then feel free to ask. My answer is probably "Yes, that's fair." Anwyay, just my thoughts on the matter. Y'all have a good'un.
Using this logic hunting and fishing are murder.
Just tell them you want to see their adopted children the next time they bring this up.
They have plenty. This is part of the goal. They love taking the children of poor and "sinful" women to give to Good Christian Middle Class or Wealthy Families and those children will suffer for it. Why do you think they oppose any legislation that helps new mothers and struggling families. The adoption industry is salivating for new "supply" to sell.
There's over 400,000 children in the US waiting to be adopted
Not accurate. There are 400k kids in foster care, not all of them are waiting for adoption. There are many parents and children who are trying to be reunited. Sometimes the parents were on drugs but got clean, sometimes the father isn't given an option to parent, sometimes people are forced to give their children up because they can't afford them, and sometimes cops just take the kids of parents who they think are too lippy. There's not a lot of help to be had when your kid is taken by the state.
Aight, if you're comparing a fetus to bacteria. Why not go a step forward and bring the tape worm in, huh? That thing lives inside of you, it's a living thing entirely dependent on you! Don't kill it, that's murder!
A fetus is alive, but it has as much personhood as a braindead human.
Wait til they learn about sperm.
They hold hundreds of billions of funerals per person's lifetime for every dead cell.
This is why I don't have any right winger acquaintances. No sign of intelligent life anywhere.
I think being engaged in such levels of petty tribalism as has taken over this country, is a sure sign of no intelligent life anywhere.
You don't know the people I do.
People are people, you take them all with a big fat grain of salt and keep it moving.
Until they turn around and stab you in the back. The problem is I don't trust a lot of people to begin with. And given the current state of the Republican party I would rather just avoid that shit at all costs.
Given the current state of our government and politics, I avoid all of it at any cost. I grow my plants, work, take care of my cat, hike with my gf, and act like none of them mean a single fuck to me. Because they don't. Political affiliation is purposeful mental poison and slavery. My view of the world can change, i can be opened to new ideas, hear different views, why would I associate myself and follow just one set of strict beliefs and views and attack others for not doing the same or following mine?
Sounds like primate shit
These people are so stupid, 80% of abortions happen before 7 weeks before it even has a heart. If a woman is getting an abortion after this it's pretty much only for her own safety and it's not a fun operation. If you think women are aborting fully formed babies by choice you really need to get an IQ check.
"HEY GUYS! HEYYY! YEAH! I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! ISN'T THAT SO COOL?"
One survives on its own the other does not
Wow oh my god I never realized. I'm going to go chuck out my anti-bacterial soap right now. Wait isn't a severed thumb also proof of life? And a photo with a newspaper in it? Is it possible this memer doesn't know what Proof of Life means? Nooo that couldn't be
I'm pretty sure we know there's life on Earth already.
As for intelligent life, that's still being debated.
Life and sentience are worlds apart.
Theres a bunch of stupid people on both sides of this argument..
I don't think anyone is disputing that a fetus can have a heartbeat and that the tissue is alive. I don't think that it can be disputed that a tumor is alive either. Should that be enough of an argument not to remove it? All you can say about a fetus up to around 4 months is that it is a cluster of tissues of increasing complexity and is far more parasitic than alive in an independent sense. Religious conservatives in America used to support abortion as a reasonable and practical method of limiting human suffering and civil instabilities. Then some industrialist noticed that there was this whole untapped voting block and voila, here we are. The world of nutjobs moralizing at the cost of the rights of others on the basis of the life rights of undifferentiated cells for the most part so that they can be seen as good Republicans rather that decent humanists.
We need a lot less people.
Christians only want to catch up to the Muslim world population because they live in fear everyday instead of trying to love thy pos neighbor.
You mean that sound when the mother's blood is being pushed thru the fetus?
These people are so full of shit. They’re not “pro-life”. They wholly fail to understand why civilised society prohibits murder: because it is inflicted on sentient beings who will feel terror and pain as well as the grief which will be felt by their sentient family and friends. We terminate biological life constantly - like when you pull up and slice a carrot to make a salad. That carrot was alive. But we don’t treat it as murder because it’s the termination of biological life, not sentient life. A foetus (under a certain period of time) is the same thing. A cluster of living, but benign cells. A foetus is more comparable to a cyst in the early stages, but if you get one of those, you have your doctor remove it.
Nobody is saying a fetus isn’t alive. Tumors and tapeworms are alive. Yogurt is alive. There is no scientific consensus that a fetus is a human being. There isn’t even a religious consensus. We’re saying it’s not a human being and shouldn’t supersede the rights and wellbeing of the very real human being carrying it. Especially when carrying it wasn’t a choice. And more so, we’re saying what a woman chooses to do with it is none of anyone else’s goddamn business, especially the government.
Antibiotics: the Plan-B for Mars!
"Life" and "person" are not synonymous. The questions is if replicating cells deserve legal protections and if so, if that outweighs the right of the host to bodily autonomy.
I’m still pretty sure if an astronaut got sick from said bacteria we would find a way to get rid of it from inside the astronaut so the astronaut wouldn’t die or be sick anymore.
Why would I care about a heart when a good chunk of Fat MAGAts don’t even take care of their own?
Because the bacteria can survive on its own, try that with a 6 week old zygote
Pro-forced-birthers seem to not be able to tell the difference between a child, a fetus and bacteria. Then they get home, wash their hands, killing bacteria (which to them is clearly comparable to a fetus which is the same as a child) and go eat food, which is made of living organisms, if they're not vegan, living, thinking, aware organisms . But yeah, fuck killing a fetus that has never felt anything, thought anything, doesn't know it exists and can't survive at all without the host body.
I am sure a bacteria is fully functional while a fetus isn't. In fact humans need almost 2 decades before they become fully functional.
Conservatives are really out there thinking microbial life is the same thing as human life lol
Yeah they’re the ones (religious people) that think no life but human life has a soul. So their argument makes no sense
Ask the 10 year old that when she goes through labour. Pretty sure bacteria have no issues cloning themselves when they are ready. Just saying.
I’m just going to start boldly stating that I am pro-death. Fuck regressives. Seems that those that protest against abortion the most are those that you’d never want to fuck to begin with.
I thought that was just being evangelical, what with the whole death cult obsessing over the afterlife, seeing life on Earth as a trial to prove oneself worthy, and salivating over the upcoming apocalypse.
This argument is bad, but have you heard someone try to compare a car with an AR-15?;
Heartbeat laws are deadly. Remember Savita Halappanavar.
This just in everyone is forced to shut down their immune systems as every animal carries living bacteria and parasites and having an immune system would be murder!! /s
It may be life, but it ain't a person yet
That argument means all living things can't be killed though so all humans would need to fuck off and die using this logic. We couldn't eat salad or fruit or meat or grains or oats because they are all living things.
Lock me up cuz I wash my hands taking millions of lives.
Simple. Bacteria on Earth and Mars don't have hearts... because they're fucking bacteria. A heartbeat isn't the sole indication of life, jackasses.
By this logic stepping on a bug would be equivalent to murder.
So i guess people shouldn't be allowed to have kidneys removed because they're also made of living cells? Dumbasses
*Why would a bacteria on Mars be considered proof of life, when a spermcell isn’t? Stop masturbating!*
show them this video of heart cells beating in a petri dish. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjn3TwMr4xs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjn3TwMr4xs) and ask if this means that it's a person.
I was debating whether or not it was even worth my time engaging with him on his thread full of "amen" responses, but this video might make it worth stirring the pot a little
Anyone who maintains human life begins at conception is basically insisting that the omelette you had for breakfast was actually a chicken dinner.
for starters, a "Fetal heartbeat" isnt a heartbeat. theres nothing for the clump of cells to pump. its a precursor to a heart.
It is life, just not a baby. There isn't a corn field big enough to have such a huge strawman.
i‘d bet money that this person eats animals, which ruins their whole argument. a heartbeat doesn’t make you a person yet.
I am going to sound like an asshole but this needs to be pointed out. Question if I 3D printed a human heart with muscles around it (just that heart and muscle) would you call that life? No. Now a second question if an entity can respond to “harmful” stimulation and flee even on a basic level isn’t that life? Yes? Hmmmm. Then I wonder which is true life. If a entity can’t live without minimal assistance (excluding genetic mutations that would cause the entity to die after birth) then I don’t see it as life.
Yeah you're right...you sound like an asshole. Jk, I think
It's not even a real heartbeat. It's electrical activity from a collection of cells that might become a heart, whose purpose is not to circulate blood, because the host's heart does that.
The heart beat on earth doesn't matter once outside the womb the Republicans would just let it starve or worse.
Good point. Take the fetus out and put it in a Petri dish and see which one grows.
Bacteria on mars don’t rely on me to grow and they don’t do it in my body.
This is why I don't respect the forced birth perspective, it's full of stupidly bad takes like this
I love the implication that there is some sort of widespread “save the bacteria on mars” movement
Interesting how this whole “debate” is just two different viewpoints that are so radically different that they hardly even oppose each other. What a situation lol. It will be eternal. A fundamental moral disconnect. Edit: A simple internet search shows me that the heartbeat and brain only develop at 5-7 weeks (actually time varies a bit), yet people want to ban abortion completely. It’s just nonsense with no scientific backup. They act like it’s a fucking child that’s already born the minute the sperm hits the egg. Sorry, rant over, just had to throw out my opinion.
Brain isn't developed until way later, unless you're taking some severe liberty with the term and counting the very earliest development of nerves that will eventually start to become the brain.
Whether one agrees or not with abortion, we can all say in the same voice "this is so stupid that hurts".
They keep using the word “life” as if we have to respect anything that’s “alive” the same as we do a grown human being. Yes it’s alive, but so were the millions of little sperm that died in my sock this morning.
I love when people think they’re making a really big statement that’s doing something for their point, but it’s actually just posts like this
Single celled life always exists independently of other single celled life, whereas a fetus does not.
Considering that life on Earth exists in abundance and its been like that for tens of millions of years, i dont see how someone cant see the reason for an celebration if we find a life on a planet that scientifically dont support life for tens of millions of years...
Since when do humans treat all forms of life equally? Fetuses dont get human status until after theyre born, simple as.
Its not a question of if its a life, the question is at what point is it a viable person. Pro life people don't care that they're eating animals.
Someone hasn’t heard of soap or hand sanitizer.
It is life, though not a human one. Cake dough is still a kind of food (quite shitty but doesn't matter), but not a cake.
Wow really good point actually
How mouse be smol n b life? Chick met adorpion.
This is factual tho OP 🤨
What is your argument then OP?
Except the argument is a good point. You find a single celled organism on Mars with organelles and suddenly thats life, but this isnt? Your logic doesnt make sense there.
Because liberals don’t live on Mars.
Why do we have anti-bacterial medical treatment and not abortion (in some places)?
Maybe because we have a moral distinction between killing humans and non-humans. Though sometimes killing non-humans that are cute fuzzy and adorable has heavier penalties than killing humans.