So abortion is now illegal in Alabama...

Jun 4, 2013
7,488
775
Everyone should have rights to their own body. I don't think it's for anyone to decide other than the woman if she wants to have the kid. At the end of the day, it's not really all that unnatural in a way. The woman's body often decides for itself whether to abort the offspring at any stage of the pregnancy. Very intricate cellular conditions have to be met because the woman's body is damn hostile to the offspring naturally.

Plus, for fuck sakes, a fetus isn't anything near a baby. Look at it this way, two hospitals are burning one with people and another with fetuses. I'm damn sure everyone here would save the people instead of the fetuses. You can do this thought experiment comparing a children's hospital to a retirement home, which you'll get different answers, but I'm damn sure people would save a retirement home versus a bunch of fetuses too. I think the fetuses would consistently lose here.

The potential for life is everywhere. Is jerking off murder? Is the morning after pill murder? This gets too ridiculous, really. Everyone should have ultimate authority over his/her body. The state shouldn't come in and order any woman to birth a child. This shit just gets ridiculous.
A baby is compromised of genetic material that isn't just hers. If a man and a woman are responsible enough to have sex together then they are equally culpable for any resulting consequences. Saying it's a woman's body completely absolves the male of his responsibility. Saying it's a woman's body is ensuring that a divisional line is placed between male and female from the start. A woman's body doesn't decide to abort, a healthy mother is not likely to just lose her baby randomly. There's a low probability and life is very adaptable.

Your thought experiment is absolutely rubbish, it works from the presupposition that there is a dichotomous choice that people are required to make, context be damned. What about a hospital full of Nazi's and another with foetuses? We're empathetic to someone who is closest to us, that's basic psychology. If there is boat full of Mexicans and a boat full of Asians and you're forced to make a decision in a retarded and irrelevant thought experiment, you're going to choose the boat full of Mexicans. That doesn't mean that the Mexicans are intrinsically more human than the Asians.

Jerking off isn't murder because an egg hasn't been fertilised, a morning after pill prevents or delays ovulation. It doesn't get ridiculous, you just clearly don't understand the issue, and it's about the babies body. Yes the state absolutely should intervene to prevent murder.
 
Reactions: CJRK
Jun 4, 2013
7,488
775
Everyone should have rights to their own body. I don't think it's for anyone to decide other than the woman if she wants to have the kid. At the end of the day, it's not really all that unnatural in a way. The woman's body often decides for itself whether to abort the offspring at any stage of the pregnancy. Very intricate cellular conditions have to be met because the woman's body is damn hostile to the offspring naturally.

Plus, for fuck sakes, a fetus isn't anything near a baby. Look at it this way, two hospitals are burning one with people and another with fetuses. I'm damn sure everyone here would save the people instead of the fetuses. You can do this thought experiment comparing a children's hospital to a retirement home, which you'll get different answers, but I'm damn sure people would save a retirement home versus a bunch of fetuses too. I think the fetuses would consistently lose here.

The potential for life is everywhere. Is jerking off murder? Is the morning after pill murder? This gets too ridiculous, really. Everyone should have ultimate authority over his/her body. The state shouldn't come in and order any woman to birth a child. This shit just gets ridiculous.
Why would a woman's body be hostile to life when evolution designed it for that purpose? Educate yourself.

 
Jun 12, 2012
7,627
4,019
Denmark
I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. It's a human life with a greater risk for complications until it can develop into a more robust human. There has to be a line at some point, and your 12 week mark is far more arbitrary than the mark of when an egg is fertilised.
Can I please have a source for your 80% naturally aborted rate? Everything I've read has it at 10-20%. Regardless, your argument makes no sense and seems to be predicated on emotion targeted at religion rather than any ethical or biological considerations.
10 - 20% is the miscarriage rate. Most natural abortions occur prior to people becoming aware they're pregnant. The 12 week mark is in essence arbitrary but everything that has to do with life is on a sliding scale. So when you pick a non-arbitrary point like conception, you decide to take away people's right to decide about their own bodies because you have a need to set a clearer demarcation. People who wouldn't want to go through a pregnancy or shouldn't go through one, will be forced by law to do so, ONLY because some people have an emotional need to set the demarcation earlier. With 12 weeks you can still slip up, contraceptions can fail and so on and you'll have a reasonable opportunity to change the situation. People will have sex no matter how much people moralize about it. So 12 weeks is the limit I would set. It's arbitrary but still a better choice than at conception.
 
May 19, 2013
1,497
1,167
No, not wasting time on stupid cunts like you. Move to Poland or something
Wow your intellect is amazing. You and only you has the intellect to decide with complete certainty when somebody is and isn't human.
 
Last edited:
Jun 12, 2012
7,627
4,019
Denmark
Wow your intellect is amazing. You and only you has the intellect to decide with complete certainty when somebody is and isn't human.
No I'm actually arguing the opposite, that no one can make a clear decision on that and setting it at conception for emotional reasons is wrong. As I've said you're dumb as fuck and clearly should have been aborted. Now go drink yourself to death and try not to impregnate someone along the way
 
May 19, 2013
1,497
1,167
No I'm actually arguing the opposite, that no one can make a clear decision on that and setting it at conception for emotional reasons is wrong. As I've said you're dumb as fuck and clearly should have been aborted. Now go drink yourself to death and try not to impregnate someone along the way
If nobody can make a clear distinction shouldn't setting it at the very start be the best thing to do then given that we are talking about an unborn baby here?

As for the second part of that. Why are people from outside Britain/Ireland so bad at slagging/trash talk. That's neither witty nor all that insulting. You've been on these British based forums for years now. Have you not picked up anything? Surely you can do better than that given how intelligent you are?
 
Jun 12, 2012
7,627
4,019
Denmark
If nobody can make a clear distinction shouldn't setting it at the very start be the best thing to do then given that we are talking about an unborn baby here?

As for the second part of that. Why are people from outside Britain/Ireland so bad at slagging/trash talk. That's neither witty nor all that insulting. You've been on these British based forums for years now. Have you not picked up anything? Surely you can do better than that given how intelligent you are?
Let me quote myself: "People who wouldn't want to go through a pregnancy or shouldn't go through one, will be forced by law to do so, ONLY because some people have an emotional need to set the demarcation earlier. With 12 weeks you can still slip up, contraceptions can fail and so on and you'll have a reasonable opportunity to change the situation. People will have sex no matter how much people moralize about it. So 12 weeks is the limit I would set. It's arbitrary but still a better choice than at conception."

I don't care what goes for good slagging out there on the Atlantic trash islands these days
 
May 19, 2013
1,497
1,167
Let me quote myself: "People who wouldn't want to go through a pregnancy or shouldn't go through one, will be forced by law to do so, ONLY because some people have an emotional need to set the demarcation earlier. With 12 weeks you can still slip up, contraceptions can fail and so on and you'll have a reasonable opportunity to change the situation. People will have sex no matter how much people moralize about it. So 12 weeks is the limit I would set. It's arbitrary but still a better choice than at conception."
I don't think anybody has the right to say when somebody is and isn't a human. Therefore with this I am against saying ok at 12 weeks you are now a human.

A girl I know has had three of them. While she was there on her second one there was two school children on their fourth and second respectively.

Abortion isn't something that is being used in the way you are suggesting it is. It is being actively encouraged by women on the left as some kind of show of strength. A show of female empowerment. Even the 12 week arguement is being moved away from. They introduced basically abortion on demand up to six months in Ireland as a starting point. From being completely illegal to up to six months at request. Can anybody really make the arguement that a baby who can survive outside a womb is not a baby?

Look at what's happening in some states in America with NY recent legislation or Vermont. Hell you even had a governor come out and say abortion even after the baby is born should be a discussion between a woman and her doctor. There is no way to look at that as anything other than infanticide.

You may be ok with putting that 12 week mark on it but there are countless people out there who want it further. Some who even want it all the way up to delivery day. Again we are talking about an unborn babe here. Surely it's best to put the line right at the very start rather than people looking back in one hundred years when we have a greater understanding of all this and realising how barbarically we treated our unborn.
 
Jun 4, 2013
7,488
775
10 - 20% is the miscarriage rate. Most natural abortions occur prior to people becoming aware they're pregnant. The 12 week mark is in essence arbitrary but everything that has to do with life is on a sliding scale. So when you pick a non-arbitrary point like conception, you decide to take away people's right to decide about their own bodies because you have a need to set a clearer demarcation. People who wouldn't want to go through a pregnancy or shouldn't go through one, will be forced by law to do so, ONLY because some people have an emotional need to set the demarcation earlier. With 12 weeks you can still slip up, contraceptions can fail and so on and you'll have a reasonable opportunity to change the situation. People will have sex no matter how much people moralize about it. So 12 weeks is the limit I would set. It's arbitrary but still a better choice than at conception.
A natural abortion is a miscarriage and is included in the 8-20% percentage that seems to be unanimous.
Life isn’t arbitrary and that point is clearly delineated by the point of conception. At that point it isn’t about the mother or fathers body. There is a third party. That isn’t an emotional point, that’s the biology.
People who don’t want a pregnancy shouldn’t have sex, and if they do then they have to accept the consequences. It’s not about wants, it’s about the facts and doing the right thing (which is not to needlessly end life).
 
Reactions: CJRK
Jun 4, 2012
28,112
18,615
I wonder if they're choosing now in the event the GOP loses the Senate/Executive next year and RBG retires and gets replaced by a 40-something liberal.
I don't think RBG will ever retire, unless she is bed ridden. She is more concerned about her own personal achievements than what is best for the Supreme Court in terms of maintaining a presence that shares her views. She also seems to be fucking indestructible. :lol:

Diagnosed with colon cancer at the age of 66...didn't miss a day of work while undergoing chemo and radiotherapy. Beats it.
Diagnosed with pancreatic cancer at the age of 76. Basically the most lethal form of cancer there is, with about a 95% mortality rate. That was 10 years ago.

Had to have a stent fitted in her heart at the age of 81.

Last year at the age of 85 she falls, breaks three ribs and while being treated is found to have lung cancer.

She's now back at work, aged 86 and has somehow got through colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, heart problems and lung cancer. She'll probably be on the Supreme Court in 10 years time having had a brain tumour, triple bypass and been bitten by a rattlesnake.
 
Last edited:
Jun 4, 2012
28,112
18,615
It irritates me that every person who disagrees with murdering a baby is automatically assumed to be some religious nutjob.

I'm an atheist and I can tell you I detest abortion and it ain't because it goes against some make belief sky daddys wishes. No it's because I'm not a fucking shit human being who supports murdering babies.
It's not a baby at 6 weeks. I would reduce the time that abortions are allowed up until, as some of the late terms ones that are legal are absolutely killing a baby. But this is not the case for the vast majority of abortions, which are done by taking a tablet and involve ending the development of what might become a child but might be "self aborted" by the woman's body anyway, and has no pain receptors, no brain stem connected to a central nervous system etc etc.

But you never change anyone's view on this topic it seems, so I don't want to get into a long discussion on it. The science is there for anyone who is interested to read up on it and do so objectively and without simply deciding to go down the confirmation bias route.
 
Jun 12, 2012
7,627
4,019
Denmark
Below is the reason to why there are so different numbers cast around regarding miscarriages. Half of all conceptions will be naturally aborted BEFORE there are any signs of a pregnancy.

https://www.ucsfhealth.org/education/conception_how_it_works/

Fertilization and Embryo Development
Following ovulation, the egg is capable of fertilization for only 12 to 24 hours. Contact between the egg and sperm is random.
Once the egg arrives at a specific portion of the tube, called the ampullar-isthmic junction, it rests for another 30 hours. Fertilization — sperm union with the egg — occurs in this portion of the tube. The fertilized egg then begins a rapid descent to the uterus. The period of rest in the tube appears to be necessary for full development of the fertilized egg and for the uterus to prepare to receive the egg.
Defects in the fallopian tube may impair transport and increase the risk of a tubal pregnancy, also called ectopic pregnancy.
A membrane surrounding the egg, called the zona pellucida, has two major functions in fertilization. First, the zona pellucida contains sperm receptors that are specific for human sperm. Second, once penetrated by the sperm, the membrane becomes impermeable to penetration by other sperm.
Following penetration, a series of events set the stage for the first cell division. The single-cell embryo is called a zygote. Over the course of the next seven days, the human embryo undergoes multiple cell divisions in a process called mitosis. At the end of this transition period, the embryo becomes a mass of very organized cells, called a blastocyst. It's now believed that as women get older, this process of early embryo development is increasingly impaired due to diminishing egg quality.

Implantation
Once the embryo reaches the blastocyst stage, approximately five to six days after fertilization, it hatches out of its zona pellucida and begins the process of implantation in the uterus.
In nature, 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's missed menses. In the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process as well, an embryo may begin to develop but not make it to the blastocyst stage — the first stage at which those cells destined to become the fetus separate from those that will become the placenta. The blastocyst may implant but not grow, or the blastocyst may grow but stop developing before the two week time at which a pregnancy can be detected. The receptivity of the uterus and the health of the embryo are important for the implantation process.

Reviewed by health care specialists at UCSF Medical Center.
 
Reactions: Strike
May 19, 2013
1,497
1,167
It's not a baby at 6 weeks. I would reduce the time that abortions are allowed up until, as some of the late terms ones that are legal are absolutely killing a baby. But this is not the case for the vast majority of abortions, which are done by taking a tablet and involve ending the development of what might become a child but might be "self aborted" by the woman's body anyway, and has no pain receptors, no brain stem connected to a central nervous system etc etc.

But you never change anyone's view on this topic it seems, so I don't want to get into a long discussion on it. The science is there for anyone who is interested to read up on it and do so objectively and without simply deciding to go down the confirmation bias route.
Your not a religious guy either and are to some degree at least against abortion. My point was that it is nonsensical to simply assume everybody who is against abortion are because of some religious belief. It's flat out wrong aswell.
 
Reactions: Strike
Jun 4, 2012
28,112
18,615
Your not a religious guy either and are to some degree at least against abortion. My point was that it is nonsensical to simply assume everybody who is against abortion are because of some religious belief. It's flat out wrong aswell.
Agreed, but I am not against abortion, I am against abortions that are of actual babies. Like @Dealt_with with pointed out, this is not a simple dichotomy, and unfortunately it is usually presented as one. It's always either "I support a woman's right" or "I oppose abortion" and people then try to pigeon hole you into one of these regardless of how nuanced your view is.

I do not think that an abortion before 12 weeks is remotely killing a baby. There is a reason why doctors tell potential parents not to announce a pregnancy until 12 weeks, which is that before that point about 1 in 4 of all pregnancies miscarry, and estimates put a figure between 50-75% of all pregnancies ending on their own before 5 weeks. Many women never even know they're pregnant before it is "self aborted" by the body.

That said, you abort at 24 weeks...and yes, you're killing a baby. You abort at 21 weeks, and chances are it is not a baby that could survive outside the womb on its own, but it is still a baby, and it will feel pain. Personally, I would lower the limit to 21 weeks at least, which is a big move in terms of what is accepted and in terms of people who would think it was a gradual attempt to remove the right. I would feel more comfortable with a limit of 18 weeks, as this is scientifically a good cut off point for when hormonal reactions to pain stimuli can be observed, and it is also way before any foetus could ever be viable.

I categorically reject the notion that an abortion at 2 months or 10 weeks is killing a baby.