Anti-abortion is just right wing NPC

That strawman you've constructed sounds like a little bitch. The argument against abortion is an argument against the government restricting abortion, not about the people doing it. When it comes to the government getting involved in medical services, they should be facilitating, not limiting access. Medical ethics exist and doctors who do unethical procedures aren't doctors anymore, the government does not have the same accountability, knowledge, or training, and should not be involved in health services at the patient level for this reason.

First a fetus is not an actual human and second having a child is something that both parents should agree with. You can't force a woman to keep the unborn child if she doesn't want it.

foetus is a human. Its that its not a baby. Theres no such thing as unborn babies

Because people who make poor decisions knowing exactly how they could impact the rest or their lives deserve to suffer the consequences if they come to fruition.

no, they dont. U dont get to infringe on somebodys rights

>U dont get to infringe on somebodys rights
That's where you're wrong

BUT MUH ADOPSHUN CLINICS WILL L00K AFTER ALL TEH BABIEZZ

This is a very thin reason to allow government control over medical services provided to patients.

The correlation between Christians being pro-life and Christianity also being full of rampant pedophiles is no coincidence.

Why risk upsetting a kid's parents when you can just go to town in an orphanage ran by your colleagues.

>NPC

Attached: 1538733142121.webm (202x360, 370K)

Meanwhile the pro-choice party lobbies for full government control of medical services provided to patients through regulation of healthcare services...interesting.

abortions should only be allowed if you can prove you where raped

were*

How can you call this a human being?

abortion is a correct response to unwanted pregnancy and in some cases (genetic defects, low IQ parents) it should be compulsory.

no, thats where u r wrong

cuz its parents were human
cuz it carries human genes

I didn't, but you just did

no, it should be allowed until the foetus develops enough brain to feel pain, which is like 3rd trimester

I am not quite sure if I understand your argument. Are you saying the goverment should not be allowing abortions or that they shoud not restrict it because they don't have the expertise to have any say in that topic? I guess that kinda what the goverment does on all topics. I mean when is the goverment ever really an expert in any topic. They sure are not experts in drugs and still feel free to restrict them as they wish. And wouldnt medical ethics hinder you from doing abortions as a doctor? At least thats what the Hippocratic oath is telling them quite literally. "Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. But I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art."

Yes, you don't really believe that the health care market should be this unregulated, do you? This is not really working for anyone except a handful of people who can afford it.

Im against abortion. But there is an argument that can be made for abortion up to 1.5years after birth. Any other point of view ends up being hypocritical.

Attached: depositphotos_51588835-stock-photo-fun-bee-with-stack-of.jpg (749x1023, 61K)

Attached: 07w02.jpg (320x240, 48K)

Why would anyone be anti abortion? The less future liberals this world has to deal with the better.

Yes, professional medical doctors with years of training in ethics and professional standards and modern techniques should be deciding medical services, not legislators who are directed on one side by the corporations they're supposed to regulate and on the other side by voters who don't know anything about it, just their feelings on the matter. I don't think people's feelings or special snowflake religion should decide what treatment I receive when I go to the doctor, I want my doctor to decide that.

Looks like one of those alien slime toys

Ayy

Attached: Alien_Egg_Slime_1024x1024.jpg (800x800, 37K)

Accept it alive

Does it also stick to the wall if you throw it?

Who is the special someone that gets to decide and how many people end up getting fucked by an overloaded, of course not instantly petfect system?

But not every dotoctor has the same opinion on those topics? And it is a question of legallity, how will you go about that if only your doctor is to decide what is right and what is wrong. What if one of the doctors is just a psychopath (as i am sure some are) and supports abortion even tho he knows its neither ethical nor reasonable? I mean yea sure what you are saying makes sense, if we assume that every doctor has the same opinion on every topic and ever doctor is a wholesome ethical good human being. But thats quite unrealistic isn't it? And unpractical I mean their must be some kind of legal ground on which you move as a doctor, we can't just trust blindly in them, some of the unethical humans in history were doctors. Kinda weird to just trust in somebody ethically just because he does a certain proffesion

Do you need permission to make kids?

Yes it is.

because the child is not to be made responsible for his parents retardation. Maybe he rises up to be a wonderful productive member of society and will not end up in a gender studies class, who knows

>Does it also stick to the wall if you throw it?
Does anything?

>If you're pro-life you're giving government control of healthcare services, ha!
>Jk guys the healthcare market is too unregulated and needs government control!!1!
Nice.

>the lump of cells made his parents have sex in the first place

Trust me, it won't know

my pants do

no you dont need permission? Where are you going with this? A 10 year old does not have "permission" to live either, that does not mean its totally legal and okay to kill it? Not quite sure what you mean by that question

Good weed

I support abortion because more black babies get aborted than white babies.

Attached: FB_IMG_1555675641274.jpg (1102x480, 62K)

>"""Killing""" a fetus is bad and shouldn't be allowed despite it possessing virtually no human qualities despite it's genetic makeup
>Killing animals in an cruel industrial manor for a bucket of chicken is perfectly okay, though

I'm not even a vegetarian but pro-life faggots are hypocrites

Who's bodily autonomy are we talking about here? The mother's or the infant's?

So your pants are alive?

So then you don't need permission to undo it until it isn't a parasite anymore

mothers. Foetus doesnt have the right to use somebodys body without their consent

They're both the mother, until they aren't

No they're just as slimy as a slime alien toy

So things that stick to the wall are not alive?

Ahh, planned parenthood has entered the thread.

Treblinka

If kicking a pregnant woman and causing a miscarriage is considered murder then abortion is murder, too. People are so fucking dumb. You don't get to choose if it's ok or not. Hypersexualization is destroying the West, and murdering fetuses because you can't manage your "bodily autonomy" should earn you a trip to a death camp.

Attached: 20190421_145522.png (655x572, 303K)

Good weed is pretty live fam

gestapo

Attached: gestapo bazinga 1469806507252.png (859x492, 213K)

But we should trust a priest or politician? Not sure what you are trying to argue but I'd side with doctors more often than others, especially when it comes to medical things

So all slimy things that stick to the wall are non life forms?

Attached: 1552990834283.jpg (960x832, 105K)

yes, it's murder. but a good form of murder. when the military kill people is that murder ?

>you don't get to choose what to do with your body if it isn't okay for other people to hurt you

That's a fallic stretch

The problem with second trimester abortions is that babies regularly survive birth at that time, meaning that you could just have a c section and give the baby up for adoption instead of having an abortion.

No you can get some pretty slimy life forms

Laws don't stop anyone from doing anything. Regulations do. I trust the ethics of a doctor with a license and a practice and Yelp reviews and a standing in my community over a congress person who was literally given the regulations on a piece of paper by the people who are supposed to be regulated. Do you really think that's the better system?
>I can't tell the difference between a market that's regulated to deliver services and a market that's regulated to restrict delivery of services.
I know.

What about a fetus makes it non human and thus able to be murdered without consequence? Asking so I can exploit the law in order to kill other legal non humans.

>meaning an unnatural third party could cut you open and place your parasite in a specialized medical device and bam, its self sustaining

Lel

Why are you pretending to care when a human is murdered without consequences? Are you a pacifist? A Buddhist? I think you're arguing from a dishonest position.

>allow it in certain cases
>this means they put a number of months on it

Abortion is murder, and should only be allowed if the mother's life is in danger as a result. This is generally known to be the case early into it, and it should be treated as self defense, a highly unfortunate justifiable homicide.

Rape is not an excuse to kill an innocent, nor is one's own shitty upbringing or financial status.

>a fetus is not human

100% lie, you dont give birth to potatoes you moron

>having a child is something that both parents should agree with. You can't force a woman to keep the unborn child if she doesn't want it.

Oh, you dont want the child you created? alright, you want to be a selfish prick. So, you rather KILL IT, than adopt?

So the ability to stick to a wall is not relevant in determining life or not?

Attached: 1551702176273.jpg (291x400, 36K)

Then get to work and find good parents for all those babies. Problem solved. Why can't people just be concerned about the choices they make? People constantly try to tell you how you should live and what to do. And you better agree or we will force you to. The older I get the more i desire to get far away from the mainstream. It's all shit.

It is literally part of another human that is keeping it alive by choice

no, that's where you are wrong

Why are you pretending to care who lives and dies? I think you're arguing from a dishonest position.

I mean, don't get me wrong, i'm all for killing babies
It's just that the idea that women get to decide over their own lives makes me feel kinda nauseated

It isn't innocent it's a leech

it is not a parasite by definition. A parasite feests of his host by damaging him. A parasite does not have any positiv purpose for the host, it is just damaging. A baby has a purpose by securing the on going of the species. Anyways thats kind of a retarded logic, if you dont need permission for something it is totaly okay to undo it. Does not make any sense, ur parents did not need permission to make you, still i dont have the right to undo you.

*Theybies

Many, many people die every day for more trivial reasons, user. Why are you so focused on the unborn? I think you're signaling
Like this.

before i became a father this kind of shit never bothered me, after being the father of 2 children, this just saddens me, how can you not feel sick seeing this undeveloped human being struggle and die in front of you?

No its to determine if the alien or the fetus alien can stick to a wall better

Attached: PKBC2bu.jpg (336x245, 13K)

incorrect

>why can't everyone just do what I think

Try going outside

your arguments r weak

>had sex knowing pregnancy was a possibility
>got pregnant
>"excuse me, I didn't consent to having this life inside of me, kill it."

Completely reasonable, makes perfect sense; actions should forever be detached from their consequences, silly me.

foetus doesnt have the right to use somebody elses organs without consent, bitch

I think the host literally decides if its beneficial.

How do you support a warmongering government? Are you really against murder of innocent people or just when it wins you points with your religious friends?

>people with opposing viewpoints are NPCs

The Left can't meme.

>i disagree

Do tell

Imagine being this retarded.
>"It's murder if i don't like it, but ok if i do"

Gee, i wonder what happens when you let people who can't manage their own lives decide how to manage other peoples lives, too.

Attached: Screenshot_20190228-184032.png (720x1280, 1.12M)

what a horrible argument lol, you're literally implying pro lifers and tree hugging peta hippies are one in the same

The funny thing is, your argument "virtually no human qualities despite it's genetic makeup" is just an excuse to kill.

What about your uncle in a coma? He has no "HUMAN QUALITIES" in that state, so, can we kill him?

yes, it is reasonable. Consent to sex isnt consent to pregnancy and consent to pregnancy isnt consent to staying pregnant. U dont consent to die every day u wake up, or drive, when fatal car crashes r a possibility. U consented to dying, right? Why r u still alive?

Is this a fetus or groot?

Attached: Chillin.jpg (323x409, 23K)

>I changed my mind

Make all rape cases 100% verified and we will talk

They lie to girls and say it's a blob and it can't feel and its no big deal. That is the part I have a problem with. Everyone should see this, before making any decision

You mean pulling the plug? Do you not know that happens all the time? For a variety of reasons?

foetus is not a parasite, its a gene vessel. Adn abortion isnt about what a foetus is or isnt. Its about consent

yay, boomer meme thread

What about mosquitoes?

>undeveloped
Key word. Do you feel the same for a animals babies? How about a some duck eggs, chicken eggs? Point is it's not your choice and has nothing to do with you directly. So, what the fuck is your problem, exactly?

Oh, I must be on the wrong thread

Dumb fuck, my point was it's not my place or yours to tell people how to live their life, faggot.

>they have to so I can sleep at night

No one cares about your hangups

>implying I voluntarily support a warmongering government WITHOUT the threat of coercion
>implying im religious
>you interpreted this from my statement, stating I am bothered by an under developed human forced to die in an abortionist's hand?

Attached: 1273726811871.jpg (418x384, 19K)

>everyone should kill and gut an animal before they eat meat
>everyone should go to war if they're going to send kids to war
>everyone should watch an abortion before they have one
I mean...where do you stop? A doctor is responsible for making sure their patient is educated about the issues, right? Otherwise why not do away with the college of medicine and replace it with an elected political body controlled by the insurance companies? Oh wait.

Well thats nice that you trust in your docotor do decide, but even if my doctor told me "Na fam i swear it no biggi at all to abort the baby 7 Month in" I would be like well alrighty, off with the baby, big all knowing mighty doctor said so. I mean we need laws if you like that or not, and we also need a legal ground for this discussion. I am not saying that I am pro Life and that we need to ban abortion, but to say that we should not care to make a law for it and just leave it to the doctor who is treating you seems kind off uthopical and unrealistic. I a perfect world I guess, but in our world I like me some laws and definitions what people are allwoed to do and what not, espacially when it comes to ending live or continuing it

And if the female doesn't consent to a gene vessel we can remove it just like a penis. Another gene vessel

That's literally the law. You don't get to abort anytime you like. The only ones that believe that are retard anti-abortionists.

OH GOSH YOUR POINT

Well, they pull the plug for a reason, like, theyre going to die.

Lets pull the plug because I want to. He will wake up in a week, but I want him dead, can we kill him? He doesn't contain "human qualities".

u dont understand what a gene vessel is, but yes - its your body and u can do whatever u want with it, including not lending it, or its parts to others

>my point
You're a faggot.

equating mosquitoes to human life

ya, life is life, but we are human, we are no insects, something is wrong if you value an insect over a human life.

Useing used car sales tactics on anyone is shitty. Support their tactics if you like.

Thats exactly how the conversation goes

So you believe laws stop psychopathic, unethical physicians, but regulating their practice won't work? That's backwards from how things really are, user. When you say "just leave it to the doctor!" you're leaving it to someone with a decade of experience and training who knows your exact situation, whereas you want laws to decide your treatment - that makes no sense. Clearly it leads to less effective care.

Another dipshit trying to say a chicken has more or equal value to a human life

Danke

>wahhhh

Not an argument

That's why we have medical ethics, user. You don't get a medical license and just do whatever you want, and if that's you, then laws won't stop you. Regulations and oversight will make sure you aren't a doctor for very long though.

When making a medical decision, all facts should be known to the person prior to agreeing to any procedure. Hideing or deceiving the patient should be discouraged. IMO

A vessel that imparts or carries genes?

>openly states desire to murder people
>is this pacifism?

I'm an opportunist, dearie, so I don't care whether nigger and other low value offspring are purged from existence

I don't value any life over another. If a fucking animal wants to jump off the cliff, I'll watch it jump. Not my place to tell others what to do with their life. You fuckin pro life people are hippocrates. Save the babies and kill them when they do things I don't like when they grow up. What a bunch of faggots you really are.

You can't be pro-life and for a capital punishment at the same time. No one here is pro-life. Just ask the Christians what they think of radical Muslims.
The only reason people label themselves pro-life is because they're stupid enough to believe such a position is "moral" and cannot be attacked. Except that we know they don't really give a shit about people after they are born and thus pro-life can only be recognized as a futile attempt of religious cucks trying to force everyone to live like they do.
Abortion is legal because PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK. It is also legal because of a simple principle that it is better to do it safely rather than with a fucking coat-hanger. It's a complete non-issue and I'm quite surprised such a movement has traction in America.

This

It is, user. There are professional standards you have to follow if you want to be a doctor. If you want to regulate medical services start there, not congress.

organisms carry genes, not organs

the fetus did not take that right u dense motherfucker i mean how retarded can one be? You live in this weird idealistic bubble totally seperated from reality. Obviously the fetus cant ask for consent you genius, the fetus did not put itself there, i didnt violate any right by just taking something, it was put there by the very people who are now saying "well this is kinda unpleasent, i did not remember to give my consent to a baby? I mean sure sex leads to babies and I had sex with full consent without protection knowing fully it can lead to a baby. But it really did? No No i did not give my consent to that." By your logic rape vitctim should also be jailed for rape because the rapist didnt give consent to sex either. The fetus was put there einstein it was not violantly taking the position, it was put there by the father and the mother. Jesus how stupid can one be

>I'm an opportunist, dearie, so I don't care whether nigger and other low value offspring are purged from existence
>t. mainstream conservative

I like chickens better then you. I'd save a chicken before I would you. So yeah, that's correct. Chickens are good people.

Attached: 1552788136608.jpg (540x540, 89K)

Im not.
jews

You're not really worried about whether innocent people die though, be honest.

So if i beat off into a sock and throw it in the trash does that make me a stone cold killer?

>cigars carry tobacco, not cigarettes

Genius

well no. Biology decides what a parasite is and what not. Even if somebody says "no no body i swear the tick and the lyme it gives me are suuuuper beneficial, it aint a parasite it is a buddy of mine brah" it would not make the tick less of a parasite by defenition, it would just make the host more of a stupid fuck

What does completely informing / disclosure to the patient of what's going on have to do with congress?

What about them? They're also backwards religious fucks and should not have a say in legislature.

If at any point a fetus' death is considered murder, so to should abortion. Women shouldn't get to choose if it's ok or not. They couldn't manage their sex life, what makes people think their shouldn't be consequences? Send idiot whores to labor camps.

Attached: le-56-face.jpg (300x300, 48K)

Yes. Mods.

>I'm an opportunist, dearie, so I don't care whether nigger and other low value offspring are purged from existence
>t. mainstream liberal

?

it violates womans right to bodily autonomy by being in her uterus without her consent. It didnt have to verbalize a query - its the mother that has to agree to it, or not.

And yet if the person wants to keep lyme disease, literally it is their choice not to see a doctor.

argument from analogy fallacy

Ok, judge little cock. Let's find what you do wrong in life and do the same to you. You hippocritical massive faggot.

>trips of truth

I was responding to this
>If you want to regulate medical services start there, not congress.

>if doing it without consent isn't okay, then doing it with consent isn't either

What gradeschool logic

>send people to camps

Oh yeah real humanitarian

It's more like they are the Shariavangelical Right's ANTIFA...., only more fanatical.

That's what you (or the person I replied to) was suggesting. Congress should decide what medical services the patient can get.

>I named a fallacy

Kalvin?

>congress knows better about medical services than people who provide medical services

Phew

>i deflect by greentexting irrelevant shit

>I can't defend my murderous stance so I have to dehumanize those I want to kill

Rape babies are innocent. otherwise, I should have the right to kill you (innocent in this regard) because OP is a faggot. OP being a faggot and me posting about him is between me and OP.

human beings are inconvenient well into adulthood, and 99.999% of the time, you consented to having it by spreading your legs / sticking your dick in. If you really wish to take such a eugenic approach, neuter the dumb and defective before a third party is involved.

We need to go back to shaming and condemning whores, not praising them / generally giving them the attention they want. Of course, that means half of the internet would die because we'd have to slap social media and ban pornography, and frankly there's a lot of people who feed into 60s era free love degeneracy and gen X would go on to be the most aborted generation in human history. Liberals are born, conservatives are made, and it's a societal issue you can't escape from regardless of how many we toss in a blender. Either that or we take a page from the muslims and just behead any woman who kills our unborn child until they submit to the will of man.

You're a lump of cells right now. Address overpopulation - kill yourself.

unborn children are not parasites, it is a symbiotic relationship between mother and child - she carries, takes care of and nurtures it, and in exchange, she performs her evolutionary drive and function of passing on her genetics, her proverbial message to the future. If you really want to kill parasites, advocate your right to execute welfare recipients without trial.

based honkposter

to be entirely fair, you just replaced one appeal to authority with a string of others. We generally trust ourselves to know what's right and wrong, and insist our systems comply. Some of us can learn better, most seem unable.

...

overpopulation is a meme. its only a problem in 3rd world lol

REPLY TO ME ALL FAGGOTS

choice is correct, no choice censorship, bad

It's a numbers game for the religious. Aborting means less Christians or what have you. They want to increase their fold right? Why do you think Catholics are against contraception?

This, lol. Most western countries suffer from negative natality

how can we call u a human being when you too came from that at a point in time?

consent to sex isnt consent to pregnancy. Foetus doesnt get to use womans uterus without her consent

yea I am not. I never said I was, like I said at the beginning, i am not even really pro life, I am just saying that the pro-life position is in my opinion way more logical than being pro choice. And I guess some of the arguments here were showing this pretty good "Ah well the fetus did not have consent to use the mothers womb" please how dense and retarded can a position be if this unlogical shit is counted as an point in an argument. Abortion is killing a developing live, said live would probably develop in a human being and therefore you are doing unethical shit by killing it. If you wanna do that please be my guest, do what ever the fuck you can live with, but this notion by pro choice bitches that they are somehow on the ethical side of the argument because "MAA BODY MA CHOICE, WOMEN ARE HOLY WOMEN CAN DO NO WRONG, WHAT FEMALE DOES WITH FEMALE BODY CANT BE UNETHICAL" is just stupid beyond understanding. You are doing unethical shit if you were to lazy to use protection got preggo and decided to be like "ah fuck it, dont wanna, kill it" live with it, stop lying to yourself that you are doing some kind of reasoanable ethical feminist decision, you are killing a live, no life with it

Symbiotic. Lol.

Name something a baby does for mom that she doesn't have to decide she wants.

This guy knows

Where do you draw the assertion that I'm pretending, or that I'm dishonest? Life is precious, innocent life moreso. Those who are an enemy to life though and cannot be convinced, they make a choice and forfeit their own precious nature.

leeches choose to latch on for blood. There's a better argument in your statement for culling pension recipients than there is for killing the unborn.

>Killing is not bad
Gee I wonder which bot managed to shit out this string statement.

idgaf mate

Here let us modify this statement so it can appeal your religious taste
>Killing heathens is not bad

fuck pol threads nigga

Attached: 1546951343781.jpg (1125x1266, 267K)

carrying her genes/legacy. all women want that even if they don’t want to admit it. all humans naturally want to create progeny. its how animals are and we arent special really lol. unless they have shit genes they ye they shouldnt be having babies

quite sure you are trolling. If not i feel bad for you. The mother gave her consent by having unprotected sex. Its like pictures in public. You cant go to time square and later sue some chinese chick for being on her picture. By going in an public space of that size and fame you gave consent to being seen and probably being on some picture. By having unprotected sex you gave consent to the possibility that some kiddo is growing in your belly. If you cant understand that, than i cant help you either.

it isnt consent to pregnancy but one must accept the risks that come with sex. if you dont have the iq to put a fucking condom on or use birth control then u prob shouldnt be having sex lol

Appendectomy is murder!

It could live on its own if just cut out and connected to a buch of tubes!

Bursting and causing sepsis is its choice as an organism!

Haha fuck this entire thread

yes they can just go and not see the doctor. Just like women, they can just go and not see the doctor. But not seeing the doctor does not make the tick less of an parasite. You are just beeing a dumb motherfucker, the tick is still a parasite. Dumb motherfuckers dont decide what is a parasite and what not, biologicsts do

false equivalence. are you really comparing an appendix to a fetus? how fucking retarded are u user? need to go back to grade school do we? or u must still be in grade school huh

>women want what I say not what they want
>literally has to ignore post and design an explanation to disagree

joo mad

no, she hasnt. U dont have to go back in time to stiop participating in sth thats still happening
U agreed to die by driving. Why r u still alive?

>are you really comparing a lump of cells to a lump of cells??

no, 1 doesnt have to accept risks. U agreed to dying by walking across the street, since cars crashing into pedestrians with fatal results r a risk. Why r u still breathing?

Symbiosis implies physical benefit

Your jewery is so damn weak

LMAO. appendix is a part of you. has your cells. a fetus has unique dna bc of recombination, and has both yours and mothers but at the same time has its own. holy shit go back to school ahahaha oversimplifying it so ur small brain can comprehend

>i named a fallacy retard fool idiot

Top debate

i literally answered ur question, u were asking lmao, why tf do u think females get innately horny? evolutionarily wise? brainlet lol.

>the fetus imports cells from outside the mother

Lol kek lmao dude fam

No, that is your DNA and thus your body, your choice. A fetus has its own distinct DNA from the moment two cells come together and create a zygote.

she consented by opening her legs, and regardless of what barriers were in place, did the only one solitary thing in this world that makes a baby.

no arguments to be found here

you only need around 50 IQ to understand a basic cause and effect hard wired into your genetic code.

Otherwise, if I take a gun and intend to kill you but I don't, instead just blowing your hand off, I should get away with assault with a deadly weapon because I didn't consent to you being hurt. I'd have a hard time winning that in court just like a woman has a hard time saying she didn't want a baby if she did the only thing in the world that makes one, generally on purpose.

If women are to be considered human, they must understand the human concept of abstinence. Otherwise, they're just dumb, humping animals who cannot be held accountable like the rest of the dumb animals, and should likely have a myriad of rights taken away to accommodate this harsh reality.

Wow abortion good so nice

Attached: 23 weeks.jpg (600x437, 230K)

I'm not anti-abortion but if you can't at least admit it's the most selfish act a human being can commit, and that it's an act of murder that denies the most basic right of all - the right to exist - then you're not intellectually mature enough to make the decision to do it and you shouldn't be arguing about it.

bc u made a fallacy and u failed to address it :/ make a good analogy next time?

no, she didnt consent, as evident by her saying she doesnt want the pregnancy
u clearly need more than 100iq to understand basic consent laws

>imports cells outside the mother
>what is a sperm cell

????

and u lose the debate

that's unfounded and ignores all circumstance, that's just a shitty opinion to have user

We don't CALL it murder because you don't go to jail. Yes, that's all true. It's still her body and choice to be as stupid with as she wants.

We have to learn to live with things we don't like. Its called growing up

low iq retards love to kill babies but wont admit it kek at least fucking admit it. u cant claim the moral high ground anymore and u cant deny tht u enjoy killing ppl for the sake of hedonism. i totally understand its ok.

O 4 u of corse

Something mom chose to take on

Nope

sym·bi·o·sis
/ˌsimbīˈōsəs,ˌsimbēˈōsəs/
nounBiology
noun: symbiosis

interaction between two different organisms living in close physical association, typically to the advantage of both.
a mutually beneficial relationship between different people or groups.

only implies physical contact, not so much physical benefit. That said, human beings with your genetic code are a physical benefit, but lets use your definition anyway. Once they're 6, you have 12 years of free labor (more if you raise them to be a mommas boy who doesn't leave home) and if they really like you, they will take action to ensure you can die peacefully and gracefully, extending your life by several years when you have to retire.

she also chose to take on the risks of having a baby. oopsies

yep

no

Actually, I decide the benefit to myself. Not you. Fancy that

nice

the purpose of driving is getting from point a to point b, not dying. The literal purpose of sex is to reproduce. If I put a gun to my head and pulled the trigger, than I agreed to die, your example is just stupid. And even tho it is stupid, I will take the bait. If you drive right into a Wall and die, nobody is charged, not the wall builder not the car builder not you. Because you consentet to dying by driving straight into a wall, nobody is at fault but you. If you have sex unprotected and get preggo (THE VERY FUCKING THING SEX IS FOR BTW) you consented to possibly getting pregnant and nobody is to blame but you and your partner and for sure the kid is not to blame and to put in some position where he is somehow responsible for entering your body without permission. Your argument is stupid, your position is stupid, your example is stupid, all about this is stupid. In your logic every baby is some kind of uterus rapist and already using someone else without consent, eventho there is no other way of getting born. All babies are evil uterus rapist that enter the uterus without consent, very smart point indeed

>everything I said so far turned out wrong

She consented when she opened her legs. Nowhere else in life do you sign a contract, and then say "Actually I'm not going to fulfill my end of it"

You cannot withdraw consent after the fact, and you cannot crash your car into a busy walkway consensually and waive responsibility because you did not consent to hit the resulting school children. Yeah your speedometer might have read 106 MPH, but damn it, you're just a teenage girl having fun!

how.
>everything u said is wrong bc I SAID SO
ok

>sex is a binding contract

Fuckin lol

Love how dweebs tear apart any comparison then make these quantum leaps to prove their stupid opinions

This could apply to children that can't feed or care for themselves at all yet. It is the mother's decision to feed it. So I guess we are just killing babies now. No matter the age. We are living in an age of degeneracy.

Oh, I was only suggesting that as a patient, you should have ALL the information so you can make an informed decision. The decision part was already decided in the 70's - Rowe v Wade.

no, thats not the only purpose of sex and it still doesnt matter. Sex isnt pregnancy, so consent to sex isnt consent to pregnancy and consent to pregnancy isnt consent to remain pregnant. Foetus doesnt get to use her uterus without her agreement.

And you decided it by opening your legs. Either way, i'm not letting you manipulate the definition of symbiosis any further to win your argument, as your choice of benefit is not a requirement. the crocodile does not pick which teeth the plover bird services.

>this thing that makes human life isn't important
Love hoe degenerates tear apart basic tenants to a functioning society so they can have a little fun while it burns.

>this could apply to something completely fucking different
>think of the children

Do you ever get retrained, updated in how to jew?

So is blowing me after I buy you dinner. Kek'ed my ass off.

He can pick none by snapping his mouth shut, you are not correct

Yes and those people should be forced to have kids and let raise them. Ahurr

or they could use fucking birth control. Ahurrrrrr

unprotected sex equals possibility of getting pregnant. Never said sex equals pregnancy.

So if I am having a kid (espacially for you i even consentet to having it) and I take it home with me but I dont feed it at all, i dont take care of it at all, it is slowly dying. Is this totally acceptable? Because yea sure I consentet of giving birth and having a child, but i never gave consent to feed it, to take care of it, to keep it alive. How am i responsible for something I did not consent to? Feeding is not equal to giving birth? How am i in any way responsible, I did not consent to feeding it. By your logic this would be totally reasonable and not evil because the parents never did give consent to taking care of it, they just gave consent to having one and taking it home with them.

>It moves so it must be a human
Retard

>you don't have to see the benefit of something to spend money on it

That is exactly how it works, you know. What benefits me is at my discretion, as is happiness, contentedness... The whole gambit

Wave your magic wand and make everyone do that. I'll wait.

there's various examples where the 'host' has less choice in the matter, and a woman can choose to not have babies by snapping her legs shut.

Plenty of people looking to adopt, user. a woman can drop off a baby with no identifiers at a police station and walk away, if the state hasn't decided them unfit already.

Hurry fetuses, I mean self sustaining humans, are getting made every second. You wouldn't want them to suffer

if u take your kid home, u agree to the risk of being robbed and murdered, so u should kill the kid right away, since u both agreed to its death

>can
>may

But who says will? You are planning for things that don't exist idiot

if u dont cosent to parenthood, u relinquish parental rights. If u dont consent to keeping it, u give it up for abortion. If u carried the pregnancy to term, u r now responsible for the child.

Poleski

If you don't want to take care of the kid at all then you are free to put it up for adoption.

>because that's when it's a living, breathing human entity as covered by law and not dependant within a 20 second span on another body

ok I'm out you are obviously trolling

Okay Jordan Peterson, so we should be able to kill our teenage children when they start to piss us off.

And no, you don't have to see the benefit of something to spend money on it. You could very well just lose that money. Ever bought stocks? Ever paid to feed a kid in Africa? Don't want kids, don't do the thing that makes kids. It's not hard unless you're an animal drawn by instinct. The zebra does not choose what ticks or scabs the oxpecker goes for.

>its a choice
>that no one can say will happen

no, its not a matter when its living, i told u that. Its a matter of consent

so u admit u r trolling, since its your argument that u automatically agree to the risks of actions and the risk of living is being killed, so stop trolling

?

Completely different? No. There may no longer be a umbilical connection anymore. It is still the woman's choice as to the fate of the child. What if they decide not to feed it? Late term abortion supporters even go so far as to say the nothing but the birth canal conveys human life and that moments before it was not a human. In a world where contraceptives are so effective and easily obtained there is simply no excuse. Dont give me the rape shit either. The exception should not determine the rule, rape abortions are a very small margin. If your talking the less then one percent that could actually be cases where the pregnancy endagers the womans life, only then can a case be made. Even then the simple answer is; it is your choice to fuck 99.99% of the time. Do not condemn another for your actions.

its official, the faggots have taken over Yea Forums

Attached: D1BE7E27-8802-4E89-97D7-ED8FD5372E1D.jpg (782x652, 72K)

Every single response is oh okay X? Then Y!

You just keep coming up with different stupid things to argue with no interest in the original topic

If it depends on moms body, its her body. When it doesn't it isn't. Everything else is everything else and a topic for tomorrow

>well it may be different but its not different

birth canal doesnt make the difference between human or not. Birth canal makes the difference between a foetus and a baby

if she fucks, then she -does- consent to kids.
if she's retarded, then there's options what to do with that life. Just as I can't (and am not) advocating a singularity in the path, nor can you advocate a singularity, in your case, the meat grinder. I simply advocate that your singular path is the incorrect one.

Either that, or you're trying to factor for female stupidity by wantonly enabling it.

so when i am eating i am getting violated by my own shit ? I only gave consent to putting food in my mouth, i never gave consent to the natural and logical next steps that go hand in hand with putting food in my fucking mouth. Your position is just retarted, never have kids, quite your college, go and live in your idealistic bubble in which nothing is as it is and everything is depending on consent and not on logical thining and not being a fucking moron. I will sue my shit now for violating my consent rights, because i only agreed to putting food in my mouth and never gave consent to the consequences that come with stuffing my fucking face

>if she fucks, then she -does- consent to kids.
and thats where u r fucking wrong, u retarded mongol

>if she fucks, then she -does- consent to kids.
False.

>telling me what I think and do

I know joo think your cock is all big and what, but don't be stupid

It depends on mom's body to breast feed. So should a mother be able to not feed her child if she can't afford formula? Her body after all?

Absolutely wrong

Yes. It's called putting the kid up for adoption because you can't afford it.

waaaahhh right wing bad, bernie good

Attached: 677A96DC-ACB4-49CC-A29F-492D3844119A.jpg (600x507, 22K)

Since I am not a faggot what's that fallacy called where you just keep equating what someone says to other scenarios?

It's not the mom's body and the DNA proves it. You're retarded.

You say 'it's parasitical', I assert its not. You then say 'it's not symbiotic', I assert it is, you say "it's not symbiotic by my perfectly tailored definition", and I still debunk you. But making use of analogies because your usage of a word is wrong somehow makes me off topic?

Sex without consequence is not a human right.

>may be different
>differentiating variable
>ftfy

Still not completely different as the post I was replying to stated it was.

oh, so shit is a person, let alone ALIVE? If u dont want shit then u shit it out. And if u r that concerned with the function, u have the right to try glucose diet, or to cause yourself harm. Argument from analogy fallacy. If u dont like how the life works u can try to change it or begrudgingly accept it. How can u change the digestive system? Cuz i can tell u how to change the state of being pregnant. I also cannot tell u how to make it so that the foetus doesnt die in the process, but the foetus doesnt get more rights than adults, including being able to use somebody elses organs, just like your children r not entitleled to your kindeys or liver, in case of a tissue match and their organ failure

>Sex without consequence is not a human right
Not him, but who said it was? There are many potential consequences to sex, and having to get an abortion is one of them.

>do the one thing that makes kids
>taught by liberal education since age 4 that it makes kids
>"B-but I didn't want them. Now I have a right to kill someone because I'm mildly inconvenienced."

how many times do u need to be told not only is sex not pregnancy, but also sex has more functions than reproduction?

>pregnancy is a mild inconvience
ayy lmao
>Now I have a right to kill someone
Correct.

It is the moms body. Having to cut her open proves it you dumb cow

So a few hours of labor and the birth canal conveys consciousness? Therefore abortion is humane if done beforehand?

while they didn't say it, the pro-choicers in general imply it awful loudly.

Not many people 'have to' get an abortion, and when they do, it's a consequence of something going wrong with the pregnancy, pregnancy in general being the consequence of sex.

It is parasitical. You have not unproven it.

You haven't disproven any of 20 different reasons

No one said it was a right. Just another dumb "assumption you had to make" while talking with yourself, so you can answer yourself

Another potential consequence of sex is getting a STD. Are you saying we shouldn't be allowed to have STDs treated, because that's the consequence?

strawman and false equivocation
no, i didnt say it conveys consciousness - go back to reading the single sentence i wrote to u

All talking point of any party is just NPC

How's that "not all muslims" thing going? Does it hold water with an international group of muslims, actively killing people and burning/defacing churches and Buddhist temples?
I'll stick to the right when it comes to preservation of life.

>well no one, but its imperitive so I can keep arguing

its not parasitic. Parasites feed on hosts for the cost of hosts health. The issue is consent, not thats a foetus

yes, hes saying being alive carries a risk of dying prematurely, so u agree to die right now.

not whats a foetus*

It feeds on the host to the detriment of its health. The issue is its no seperate entity and a woman controls her body

As many times as it takes you to form a good argument as to why I'm wrong. Ethics and morality are not popularity contests.

I get that girls just want to have fun and all, but you cannot bypass a core function because it inconveniences your ability to have fun. We're talking about the abortion side of things. If a woman really doesn't want kids but wants to be a public cumdump, she can get her ovaries removed or something. That is very much her body and her choice.

Nah, I'll kill any woman who kills my kids, born or not.

there's two bodies. If I stick my boot up your ass so deep you need surgery to dislodge me, you don't have a third knee.

its not detrimental to her health

Right wing isn't on that 9mo spectrum. There's 2 options on the right: not the government's job or abortion is flat out murder. Now you are either moderate, or left wing if you are pro eugenics (refer to radio interview with Northam).

Yes, it is.

See how you have to argue these little points to get back to your issue?

thats why u lost the debate. If u cant understand the rule of identity, u shouldnt be talking.
Sex isnt pregnancy and consent to sex isnt consent to pregnancy

no

>Nah, I'll kill any woman who kills my kids, born or not.
I doubt that's an issue for you incel.

see how u pile up all those issues and r surprised your arguments have this many holes?

Your boot isnt sucking nutrients from my bidy you angry dumbass

>not born kids
how many blues r red?

>I don't acknowledge things that hurt my worldview
I can see this has been a productive conversation

You said it implicitly, not explicitly. It is a view you hold, and the cage to your garbage perception of reality needs to be rattled.

Are STDs human? Even by the most radical pro choicer's perspective, does a non-human STD ever have the potential to become human? Are you an STD?

It moves without batteries, so it's alive.
I never said human. (You) injected "human" to what I said. Fruadian slip I'm thinking.

No. They are all solid. Only you have had to come up with a dozen X than Ys to keep it up

Sex is not pregnancy you are right. Sex however is the #1 cause of pregnancy. Therefore the latter should be considered when doing the former. Contraceptives are common and effective. Sex is also not an involuntary reaction, it is in an overwhelming majority of cases your choice to have sex. Why then are you so shocked and inconvenienced by pregnancy that you should be allowed to kill what, if not for your choices, would be a fully formed human child?

"foetus is a parasite" isnt a solid argument, as evident by your lack of evidence to support it

>the crow cannot choose whose cock to nibble

Yeah you are wrong. Things in a womans body, are hers

Health care isn't a right. Medical ethics don't exist: they are abstract, and science is incapable of dictating moral or ethics. That's part of being objective: i.e. it's cheaper to kill the baby if nobody wants it.

>Are STDs human?
Irrelevant, way to avoid answering the question. Are you saying we shouldn't be allowed to have STDs treated, because that's the consequence? Yes or no?

It does everything you said a parasite is.

#1 cause of fatal car crashes is cars, so by entering cars or living around them u agree to be killed.
It is considered - thats why u can get an abortion, if u get pregnant without agreeing to that.

no, it doesnt.

I'm a proud communist who's male lineage hunted down enemies of the revolution and chocked them to death with their hung 10-inch mongolian dicks. Abortion is evil and creates false consciousness among the proletariat, abortion only benefits the ruling class. Prove me wrong capitalshits, pro tip you can't

Attached: pistoletov.gif (480x270, 1.98M)

If you need a womans body to live, that woman can kill you. A mother who dies isn't charged with murder even though it was not the pregnancies choice

It hurts her and needs her to live

You don't understand cause and effect, which is why you lost the debate. I've already stated that sex leads to pregnancy. A -> B, not A = B. Women generally know A -> B, so consent to A is consent to A -> B, which implies consent to B.

Please address the crippling overpopulation problem and kill yourself.

It could be an issue, but I don't intend to bang a pro-choicer. If every woman is pro-choice, that makes me a volcel. That said, what's with people using incel as a replacement for virgin? As long as you can hold somebody down and rape them, but choose not to, you're technically not an incel.

it doesnt hurt her

Attached: 1555572915205.png (599x767, 148K)

If a pregnant woman miscarries she is not charged with murder

Dumb fucks

So every time you fuck a woman, you're fucking something with a dick. It's in her body, so it's hers.

You have a strange way of justifying your rampant homosexuality.

>As long as you can hold somebody down and rape them
How many GBP does it cost to get mommy to do that for you?

Yes it does. Every day. Go ahead all women are lieing about pain

Sex leads to STDs. Therefore consent to sex is consent to having STDs. Your argument is retarded.

Children also meet the criteria of "parasite"
Now you know why your parents hated you.

*pat on head*

Run along

cars lead to fatal car crashes. Being around cars is consent to die. Why r u still alive? Why havent u consented to the consequences of living in motorized areas of the world?
Not only is sex not only for reproduction, its hard to get pregnant, making the "risk" low" and it still doesnt matter, as u have to consent to pregnancy SEPARATELY. A=/=B, therefore consent to A =/= consent to B. Rule of identity, u stupid nigger. U lost, u can fuck right off the edge of my dick

Both sentences. I wrote we're questions. Both were punctuated with a question mark. I was asking for you to clarify your point. I still dont underatand the point you were making. Is the birth canal the defining factor in when something is considered murder and when it is considered legal abortion. Or were you just making statements to in no way further the discussion? Go back to grammar school, learn punctuation, then get back to me.

no, thats why yours hate u. Stop projecting. Children dont meet the criteria even harder than foetus

no, it doesnt

When they can survive without the mother, its not her choice. Before that it is. Deal with it

Gotcha

I'm inquiring deeper before an answer can be given, but if I was to fill in the blanks, the answer to my questions would all be a resounding no, and thus asserting your inquiry irrelevant. It seems you're asserting that I'm saying 'you cannot address consequences of sex', and you'd be wrong. I'm saying you address them responsibly, and abortion is generally not a responsible approach as you are killing an innocent person. I've already detailed the lone exception, in which it's justifiable homicide.

no, it was "what u mean is" attack. U were deliberately misrepresenting me. I meant what i wrote. And what u write is not what i wrote

aha! U admit u r wrong! Good.

if you consented to sex with somebody with STDs, then yes, you consented to having them.

Different user here. To the left, questions are accusations in their minds. Asking questions they don't have a pre- recorded answers to, is considered combative hate speech.

They don't fetus does. Not disproven, true. Medical removal of parasite

thats not true

Hey, if I have the money to pay mommy to hold a girl down so I can rape them, I'm still not an incel.

What are you playing to an audience? You got dumb enough i know I am right.

no, they dont. U havent proved u r right, so u r not

Better let the doctors know to stop treatment then.

i ant hear u over your autistic screeching

Cry all you want, but a convincing argument can be made (children = parasites)

Attached: 1514210564955.png (363x320, 195K)

Have seen this four times today. Has to be the same dumb bitch posting

U ant ear hat?

>abortion is generally not a responsible approach as you are killing an innocent person
This is where we disagree then, having an abortion is the responsible approach when you are pregnant and do not wish to be.

not based on facts and not to rational ppl

ive seen u repeat foetus is a parasite, so u must be retarded

jokes on u

As a part of moms body that causes her pain and removes nutrients to survive, thats what it is

Please explain the difference that you "feel" differentiates the two.

gj defeating your argument.
>part of her body
>shes her own parasite
>aging is the proof, as it hurts to live then

It can't survive physically seperate from mom, like a human

i dont need to explain my feelings, but i can show facts why im correct. Emotional appeal is convincing and doesnt ahve to be based on facts. Emotional appeal doesnt work on every1, but works on some

Its actions cause unique pain attributed to it alone

It dies when removed from moms body, unlike a human

It doesn't eat through a mouth, like a human

if i stub my toe, thats parasite?
Unique pain makes it so

Mom has to increase her intake to survive, as it leeches nutrients

>u have to eat more to sustain having fingers

Ok, I'll start.
Children are parasites because...
1) they can NOT survive for very long without a host (after birth)

Attached: 1533894890079.gif (224x313, 1022K)

Mom has to adjust her lifestyle, take vitamins, use heating pads special cushions from the drain and discomfort it causes

I haven't violated rule of identity, I just understand how linear cause and effect works. You cannot be prompted to consent to pregnancy if you don't have sex (or at least a sex stand-in IE artificial insemination). Being around cars is not a linear progression to death, or even a statistically reliable one (whereas pregnancy from sex is statistically reliable). If I know there's a sniper on the road, or there's one road where drunk driving is legal, or maybe there's one road where there's excessive potholes, I avoid those roads, or I in practical terms, consent to the damages. But yeah, if you get into a car and operate it, you must be ready for the consequences of injury inside that vehicle. If you take your car off of jumps and kill 3 innocent people (passengers, but not actually people in your mind because your car, your choice), you will be prosecuted.

The point remains, nothing you can do will -ever- give you the right to murder an innocent person. You want to kill legally, become a cop or a soldier and only kill within those specific confines.

Once it is removed, all these effects disappear and it dies

Learn to take responsibility for your own actions and hmu again

u dont know what a host is

Okay, in that case can we agree that only people who's pregnancy or risk of life threatening bodily harm from pregnancy, which is of no fault of their own, should be allowed to have abortions?

cause and effect r not logic rules and they r still irrelevant

hmu once u understand how consent works

Since it can't survive outside moms body, unlike a human. Since moms body supports it, like other parts of her body that she owns and controls

And since it causes so much discomfort she can ask a doctor to remove it, which kills it. Mom is fine

If a car crash is your fault, can you not get your wounds treated?

No more pain, no more nutrient deficiency

no, cuz if the mother withdraws consent, the foetus is no longer allowed in there - the foetus is now violating her consent and her bodily autonimy. Its her body and she doesnt have to justify what she does to it to any1

STDs aren't people. Your argument is invalid, but you do have the right to choose not to treat an STD.

It's a human life. If you don't want a kid, put them up for adoption after birth, presuming the string of preventions between getting one or both parties fixed, contraceptives, birth control, and morning after pills all failed.

2) when the children become adults they seek out a new host. Welfare, WIC, free health care, and absolutely in capable of becoming a hunter / gatherer. A new host must be obtained in order to propagate the species.

dude - u r not allowed to live, cuz living is a consent to fatal cosequences of events that may happen to u

Just like a human mom lives. Just like a parasitic growth the cells die once removed. And the host lives a better life

u still dont understand what a host is

kek'd audibly. thanks for that brother

So its a parasite, by any and all definitions

>in capable

Only anthropomorphized by idiots who need to argue

If your negligence causes a fatal crash should you suffer consequences?

Who don't make choices for others

Attached: 1394877753610.gif (198x257, 884K)

Because people are their own, except for scummy jews

>#2
host1
/hōst/

noun
1.
a person who receives or entertains other people as guests.
"a dinner-party host"
synonyms: party-giver, entertainer, hostess
"the host greeted the new guests"
2.
BIOLOGY
an animal or plant on or in which a parasite or commensal organism lives.

>STDs aren't people
Never said they were, but that's irrelevant to the question.
>you do have the right to choose not to treat an STD.
And you have the right to get it treated.
>It's a human life.
And?
>If you don't want a kid, put them up for adoption after birth
Or get an abortion before birth.

Also parasites

You should learn the rules of grammar before tackling the rules of logic. :^)

Who would die without a host

Nice catch. Can't understand why you don't get a fuckin' job

Why they continue to feed and pain is the only way they know, like the fetus. All it knows

Already do, not that you took the time to ask the unborn for their consent.

So we should remove them. For a better hosts life

Less pain and bullshit

is living a negligence?
R the consequences prison time, or not being able to get medical treatment?

so parents dont fit that definition

Because they embody the definition of a parasite

And won't stop until the hist dies

rules of logic r more important and my grammar is fine

>And?
Another point we disagree on it seems. I hold that human life is inherently precious.

why cant u get laid? Or friends?

Even though it will kill their dumbasses too

Because they are stupud and baser driven

A non thinking parasite

no, u dont as evident by u thinking the use of uterus should be consulted with the foetus, not the mother, i.e. the owner of the organ

Eat that you jew cow

So children DON'T live off their parents or care givers?
Infants pay for everything. Theys kangs

Fetus didnt ask to use uterus