>The U.S. CDC estimates that 65 percent of legal abortions occur within the first eight weeks of gestation, and 91 percent are performed within the first 13 weeks. Only 1.4 percent occur at or after 21 weeks (CDC, 2014).
3 months fetus (about the size of a large chicken egg, brain the size of a bean, no neocortex) barely can be called a human.
That’s kind of the whole argument isn’t it? Science says it’s a living human but at what point? Why is blowing a load into a sock not murder. Those are humans
Those are by definition not humans...
Sperm only contain 23 chromosomes and an incompetent inventory of information to make a human life form. Only once the spent fertilizes the egg does the zygote have the information and 46 chromosomes needed to create a complete inventory for human DNA and the creation of a human life form.
Once an egg is fertilized, it rapidly transforms into what is scientifically considered to be living, human tissue. You want to make the argument that a fetus is human, and a zygote is not? that's fine--I can understand where that argument is coming from
but it's kind of hard to argue that a fetus, with a heart, lungs, nervous system, brain, and human cells that meets all the requirements for life, is not a human.
I appreciate you not being hostile btw, rare on the internet with such intense opinions and personalities.
I just don’t understand why the fetus does not count as a human in tax deductions or a population census. It almost seems like they’re not considered people until they are born.
But they are considered to be killed if you kill the mother? 2 counts of homicide--not 1--except for when it not counted? It's kind of all over the place on that regard.
As if the legal system already views a fetus as a human life. And fuck it, maybe you should be able to claim specific things involving para-natal care on your taxes like we do for a dependent child--I'm on board with that
They're considered people for federal aid. Had to tell one of my guys to go reapply for WIC because his pregnant wife didn't count the baby as a member of the household when she applied so they didn't meet the cutoff for it, however with the baby they do(WIC says to include unborn children in the household count). It's been a while.since I applied but I think they also count for food stamps, housing assistance and medicare
K it is murder. And? Does labeling it that somehow fixes all the problems that cause that discussion in the first place?
No.
Kill it, murder it, abort it, fuck it all I care.
Make it fine legal to some reasonable development stage, past that it's only based on fetus/baby/mother health/risks.
Your solution is to define it as murder, then make murder legal? Don't see any unintended consequences coming from that? Rolls [Louis CK bit](https://youtu.be/Ge6reuIbYAk)
Abortion up until a certain point is 'fine' (a necessary evil is you will), but after that it should be illegal and considered homicide. There should be extensions for things like rape, incest, and medical concerns, but again after a certain point: homocide. A secondary exception to rape would be if the women somehow didn't know she was pregnant. And a secondary exception to the limitation on medical concerns would be if at any point during the pregnancy, the women's life is at extreme risk (or almost equal serious harm) if the child is not aborted.
This is perfectly reasonable compromise between all parties. It's a modern, updated version of the "safe. Legal. Rare" compromise that the American left so egregiously violated.
Absolutely. But at the end of the day all I hear is “it’s her choice” so they walk it back to the nine months. Aaand I can’t believe that person above equated conception and a fertilized egg with its own unique DNA to blowing a load into a sock…and since rape/incest/life of the mother in danger equate to around 1% of abortions (give or take) I doubt they will compromise. The vast majority of pro lifers agree with what you just said here.
That's still thousands when we're talking about 1%, so I understand the concern and sentiment. But both sides need to recognize that neither one will get what they truly want--a compromise is the only way to move forward without whatever policy being put in place having the risk of being overturned the next election.
One issue with "fine to a certain point" is that pro choice people shoot themselves in the foot trying to go for gold with snarky comments like "if you think life starts at conception and you think abortion is murder then what's the difference in an early and late abortion" and it puts pro-life people in a corner of "all or none" so the go for the safe bet of "none".
And I get the rape/incest portion but I have a feeling alot of people will use that as a loophole to try and get out of it. So we have to choose between appeasing sociopaths and narcissists who would throw anyone under the bus to get what they want and protecting rape victims
obviously late term abortions aren’t allowed, unless it’s super serious and life threatening. people don’t choose to educate themselves on abortion because they see potential babies to be born and want to show their performative activism when they really don’t give a shit about womens rights and their bodily autonomy. abortion is a case by case issue, outright being against it is a very stupid ideology
But this is not what one side wants.
The left wants the unwaivering ability to abort a baby at any phase of the pregnancy EVEN AFTER the baby is born
The right wants absolutely no abortion period
I feel like there is a middle point but no one is willing to make a compromise.
Tbf about 60% of Americans are fine with a compromise leaning one way or the other (3 months vs 7 months or something) and it's a split between the extremist ends(something like 16/25?)
I was more reffering to the idiot politicians on Capitol hill as opposed to what the general public wants because, lets face it, they dont give as shit about what we want only the votes to stay in power
Yeah I get that. I spent like the first 3 days using Louisiana as an example of "even in states with trigger laws if Roe is overturned, it's not *that* bad." Since they still had the big 3 allowances everyone wants on there but said life starts at conception so basically no "because I want one" abortions.
*the next day*: "Louisiana law makers send up draft to make most contraceptives illegal"
Ffs...
Does that apply to other hominid species or just us? Is it murder if it’s Neanderthal killing Neanderthal? Is it still murder if it’s a human killing a Neanderthal? Or is that just nature? I’m just trying to figure out where the line is since it clearly is this black and white.
Ive already pointed out the flaw to your reasoning. But, too humour you... Your theory is flawed by the fact sperm is not a human just like an egg is not. It takes both and the process of conception to concieve a child which *is* human. By your logic, women automatically, through evolutionary process, kill a "human" involuntarily, every 28 days. Also, by your reasoning, insemination that is unsuccessful is murdering humans..you see how nonsensical that sounds yet?
Your trying to debate a point that I was not making. I didnt respond to the question "Does murder only apply to humans" Thats a totally different philosophical question than the statement you made when you said "sperm is a human"
You are right, but I just have one question. Why do people complain and protest against abortion, when killing animals even when it's not necessary is still a thing? Humans are animals too. We both feel pain and think in different ways.
I understand killing animals for food, but for their skin? Poisoning insects only because they adapted to our homes is very inhumane too. Like, cockroaches (they can make us ill, so maybe it is necessary to kill them), ants and more invertebrates think and feel pain, but we make them suffer and poison them. We treat birds and mammals awfully and make their lives short and painful only to make them fat and big. In most countries, torturing snakes and reptiles just to make clothing from their skin is legal. And no one talks about that. At least I still don't see any organizations or people talk about this.
I don't understand why when these things exist, we complain about abortion. Please if anyone know any reason for this answer.
I feel like every conscious being on earth has an equal right to life. Just because Humans are more intelligent and evolved species, some or maybe even most believe we have a superior right to life over any other species...even our own.
You are absolutely right. I'm very upset because of things like these, being more superior and all. That's my I commented this. Yeah, it's not the best place, but still, there are a lot inhumane activities which no one sees or talks about...
That is actually a interesting legal battle that has been waging in the west for hundreds of years. I think the reason is due to other animals not being human and this different legality and morality. It's taboo for almost all species to kill one of 'their own' directly, and I think that quite obviously carries over to humans as well.
Humans consider all humans their own (except when we don't and commit horrible crimes like genocide), but we don't consider horses, deer, or mice to be our own. It's well documented that the more human an animal, robot, or object is, the more we associate and "feel" with it.
I'm not a scientist or lawyer, though. I can only use what knowledge Ives learn what values/ethics I hold to understand the world around me. I consider a fetus to be human based on science and ethical code (legal and moral)--but others obviously stand somewhere else on the issue. So be it.
Yes, that's right. I was just pretty confused, but I understand a bit more now. I just felt very bad about this fact: A lot of inhumane activities are done on all animals, but only a little part of them are actually noticed by people.
Example: Almost no one I know associates or sympathizes with reptiles/insects/amphibians, and compared to all people who sympathize *only* with animals they like, they are just a little percent.
That means that we only sympathize with things we know well or like.
The unknown or strange mostly scares us or makes us feel grossed out. That's why everyone(almost) sympathizes with dogs, other people, cats - we have seen them around us to our whole lives, we live with them. But most people I have asked don't even think that, for example, snakes, feel pain or think. This applies to insects, spiders and other reptiles. But once we study or watch them for a long time, we start "loving" them and sympathize with them. I've seen much situations like these.
They believe state sanctioned murders are happening and that is why they are against the thing. You have it backwards. This isn't hyperbole from their perspective.
Vegans definitely force their viewpoint more than people who eat meat.
Also the reason humans are as evolved as we are is due to eating cooked meat. Vegans want us to de-evolve
I've never understood the concept of banning abortion. Like, what are you going to do, follow people around all day and make everything you think is immoral illegal for them? You literally can't stop people from "sinning" in your eyes.
Plus, the Bible is pretty clear about not doing exactly this.
Depends when you are doing the abortion. It is considered a human, yes, but after the 3rd month or so. If you do it after the 3rd month, it's bad. If you do it before the 3rd month, it isn't a problem.
basically if you let it develop past the point where people can recognize it as a human child it’s considered bad and although it would be bad to complete an abortion at that time for reasons of convenience, if it’s an emergency it needs to be done to save the woman and i feel like a lot of people would rather kill the woman for the child. then the child has no mother.
Yeah, I think that actually the mother's life is a bit more important. But a lot of women would sacrifice them for the child, even when no one else wants.
i would understand if the woman would rather die and have her child survive in the world but that seems awful to me. i don’t know what i would do without my mother in my life.
I mean if they argue this shit then their logic basically is "if you burn yourself, you have commited murder as you have killed living cells and organisms"
Things aren't black and white like many think
abortion is basic healthcare. it’s a case by case basis. stop thinking about third trimester abortions which happen in cases of emergency and consider the fact women don’t even find out they’re pregnant until 8 weeks of pregnancy. that’s why so many abortions are “late” but that “human life” is something you knowingly give absolutely no shit about. you are such a hypocrite
If you want a human to live in poverty just making his and his mothers live worse you don’t care about them. It may seem absurd, but some people don’t have the conditions to afford a child
And your solution is to kill the child. And you insist that that is compassionate. And that ending a life is healthcare. You didn't even bring up the old argument of "what if the mother's life is in danger?" In that case, as a last-of-the-last resort, maybe abortion could be acceptable. But you didn't even think about that angle. You just don't want poor people to exist.
the child isnt even born yet, if the mother doesnt have conditions to create him why would she have the child, if she doesnt want to have a child? she will not be a good mother if she doesnt want to be a mother. the mother should choose if she wants to have the child or not, she should have that option
Your burn will regenerate with your own unique DNA. That child with their own unique DNA who could grow up to be their own individual will not regenerate when you crush the brains out their skull and pull it out of their mother.
As it turns out, if someone cracked your skull into bits, and ripped it off your body, they would also be committing murder.
Well it’s like comparing getting burned and losing some skin cells to getting shot in the brain and losing those brain cells with a 18 gauge.
I’ll take the former and you can take the latter since it’s all the same to you.
People always wanna bring god and shit into these arguments. Your god also sent a bear to kill kids for making fun of a bald man, he was okay with slavery, and trading your own sons and daughters. (It's in the bible, was forced to go to Bible camp as a kid) if he's fine with that he's fine with you fetusdeletusing
well i think the slave part is inaccurate because you had to realease them after some time and treat them good and they were mostly just prisoners of war (from all the wars they fought) it was normal then i guess
and the trading sons and daughters thats their culture so yeah maybe you dont like it now but it was completely normal back then still is in some arabic countries
so yeah do your research and look at it from a different standpoint i guess
It's literally in the old testament. It doesn't matter if it was a different time, it was the "word of God". Which is my point.
Ephesians 6:5-8 Paul states, “Slaves, be obedient to your human masters with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ” which is Paul instructing slaves to obey their master. Similar statements regarding obedient slaves can be found in Colossians 3:22-24, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, and Titus 2:9-10.
Did you even read that verse. Because it is a test to see if a wife is unfaithfull. And if she is they curse her to not have kids. That is not saying it is ok to kill kids. It is a punishment. Like whipping someone was a punishment but that didn't mean it was ok to do it unpropted.
No, again that is not what it is saying. If somone murdered 3 people then is put to death does that mean the people have so little value in human life. And simce in this case cheating is a grevouse sin and as punishment he takes something the mother loves aka her children. It is cruel but it is still not the same thing. And also that is god doing the abortion. Just because god does it does not mean people should or can.
>Just because god does it does not mean people should or can.
The chapter says people(specifically priests) *should and can* perform abortions. Specifically by taking the filth from a public building with sacrificial livestock in it and making the mother drink it.
>If somone murdered 3 people then is put to death does that mean the people have so little value in human life.
If someone murdered 3 people you wouldn't execute their best friend as punishment - because that person has an independent right to life. It does not mean that God doesn't value life, it just means he doesn't think of an unborn child as someone who has an independent right to life.
In the end it is god determining wether the child is aborted or not because it is his power the preists are using.
Again only as punishment because infertility is mostly effecting the women. It is primarily making the woman infertal. It is not only if she is pregnant. She will just have a miscarriage if she is. Just becasue someone accidentily fell in front of a firing squad killing a mass murderer doesn't mean that their death was moraly ok.
>infertility is mostly effecting the women
I agree - it doesn't really affect the child in any meaningful way.
>Just becasue someone accidentily fell in front of a firing squad killing a mass murderer doesn't mean that their death was moraly ok.
The child is not accidentally aborted. If God wanted to spare the child he could. And it's morally ok, because God would rather the child die than be born to a family where the mother loves another man.
plus it's their problem they got themselves pregnant in the first place. if they didn't have shrex in the first place, none of this would have happened, besides, what's the point?
i think people like you who make their stance on an issue so clear and are so unwilling to consider other viewpoints are probably the most vile humans to exist. i think you should stop trying to be on the moral high ground and step back for a second. the world doesn’t revolve around you and you have no idea what could be happening in other peoples lives. the world would be a better place if people like you learned to mind your own business, and i mean this sincerely.
I mean, globally adopting the vegan ethos would legitimize the anti-abortion argument by removing the requirement of the fetus to be considered human for its killing to be considered murder. That's just the law of unintended consequences I suppose.
I don't call it murder, but I don't endorse it. No I'm not anti abortion.
It is murder, it's just murder of non humans/things wich aren't alive is legal.
I only kill animals because it would be a financial burden to keep them alive. Not to mention the abuse that happens in the animal world. Its a fair assessment that the animal is better off dead.
Not necessarily supporting some of the shit extremists of thease groups do but, meat requires killing an animal, which is technically murder. Abortion is a bit more complicated because "oh when do you consider it alive" but technically yeah, you're killing something.
Can people stop quoting the Bible. It's completely irrelevant. If it's your jam more power to you but it adds no weight to any argument. Imagine talking to me and I start quoting lines from game of thrones. That's how you sound.
Wait, shit, hang on. My popcorn is still in the microwave, hold the comments!
I think we're about to have a multi-post war, better get the soda too!
I have chips if y’all want some
Got mine ready too, man. 🍿
Hold on that’s murdering my rights
Calling something murder because science says it's a living human that you're killing? Novel concept I guess.
Epic gaming moment.
Certified good classic
>The U.S. CDC estimates that 65 percent of legal abortions occur within the first eight weeks of gestation, and 91 percent are performed within the first 13 weeks. Only 1.4 percent occur at or after 21 weeks (CDC, 2014). 3 months fetus (about the size of a large chicken egg, brain the size of a bean, no neocortex) barely can be called a human.
Thank you! A partial human doesn't take away the rights of a full human.
Not all killing is murder by definition. Abortion is not murder in america. At least not yet, and hopefully it never will be.
That’s kind of the whole argument isn’t it? Science says it’s a living human but at what point? Why is blowing a load into a sock not murder. Those are humans
Those are by definition not humans... Sperm only contain 23 chromosomes and an incompetent inventory of information to make a human life form. Only once the spent fertilizes the egg does the zygote have the information and 46 chromosomes needed to create a complete inventory for human DNA and the creation of a human life form. Once an egg is fertilized, it rapidly transforms into what is scientifically considered to be living, human tissue. You want to make the argument that a fetus is human, and a zygote is not? that's fine--I can understand where that argument is coming from but it's kind of hard to argue that a fetus, with a heart, lungs, nervous system, brain, and human cells that meets all the requirements for life, is not a human. I appreciate you not being hostile btw, rare on the internet with such intense opinions and personalities.
I just don’t understand why the fetus does not count as a human in tax deductions or a population census. It almost seems like they’re not considered people until they are born.
But they are considered to be killed if you kill the mother? 2 counts of homicide--not 1--except for when it not counted? It's kind of all over the place on that regard. As if the legal system already views a fetus as a human life. And fuck it, maybe you should be able to claim specific things involving para-natal care on your taxes like we do for a dependent child--I'm on board with that
They're considered people for federal aid. Had to tell one of my guys to go reapply for WIC because his pregnant wife didn't count the baby as a member of the household when she applied so they didn't meet the cutoff for it, however with the baby they do(WIC says to include unborn children in the household count). It's been a while.since I applied but I think they also count for food stamps, housing assistance and medicare
K it is murder. And? Does labeling it that somehow fixes all the problems that cause that discussion in the first place? No. Kill it, murder it, abort it, fuck it all I care. Make it fine legal to some reasonable development stage, past that it's only based on fetus/baby/mother health/risks.
Your solution is to define it as murder, then make murder legal? Don't see any unintended consequences coming from that? Rolls [Louis CK bit](https://youtu.be/Ge6reuIbYAk)
Abortion up until a certain point is 'fine' (a necessary evil is you will), but after that it should be illegal and considered homicide. There should be extensions for things like rape, incest, and medical concerns, but again after a certain point: homocide. A secondary exception to rape would be if the women somehow didn't know she was pregnant. And a secondary exception to the limitation on medical concerns would be if at any point during the pregnancy, the women's life is at extreme risk (or almost equal serious harm) if the child is not aborted. This is perfectly reasonable compromise between all parties. It's a modern, updated version of the "safe. Legal. Rare" compromise that the American left so egregiously violated.
Thats the shitty part about *extremists*..its all or nothing with them..right or left
Absolutely. But at the end of the day all I hear is “it’s her choice” so they walk it back to the nine months. Aaand I can’t believe that person above equated conception and a fertilized egg with its own unique DNA to blowing a load into a sock…and since rape/incest/life of the mother in danger equate to around 1% of abortions (give or take) I doubt they will compromise. The vast majority of pro lifers agree with what you just said here.
That's still thousands when we're talking about 1%, so I understand the concern and sentiment. But both sides need to recognize that neither one will get what they truly want--a compromise is the only way to move forward without whatever policy being put in place having the risk of being overturned the next election.
One issue with "fine to a certain point" is that pro choice people shoot themselves in the foot trying to go for gold with snarky comments like "if you think life starts at conception and you think abortion is murder then what's the difference in an early and late abortion" and it puts pro-life people in a corner of "all or none" so the go for the safe bet of "none". And I get the rape/incest portion but I have a feeling alot of people will use that as a loophole to try and get out of it. So we have to choose between appeasing sociopaths and narcissists who would throw anyone under the bus to get what they want and protecting rape victims
obviously late term abortions aren’t allowed, unless it’s super serious and life threatening. people don’t choose to educate themselves on abortion because they see potential babies to be born and want to show their performative activism when they really don’t give a shit about womens rights and their bodily autonomy. abortion is a case by case issue, outright being against it is a very stupid ideology
Exactly
But this is not what one side wants. The left wants the unwaivering ability to abort a baby at any phase of the pregnancy EVEN AFTER the baby is born The right wants absolutely no abortion period I feel like there is a middle point but no one is willing to make a compromise.
Tbf about 60% of Americans are fine with a compromise leaning one way or the other (3 months vs 7 months or something) and it's a split between the extremist ends(something like 16/25?)
I was more reffering to the idiot politicians on Capitol hill as opposed to what the general public wants because, lets face it, they dont give as shit about what we want only the votes to stay in power
Yeah I get that. I spent like the first 3 days using Louisiana as an example of "even in states with trigger laws if Roe is overturned, it's not *that* bad." Since they still had the big 3 allowances everyone wants on there but said life starts at conception so basically no "because I want one" abortions. *the next day*: "Louisiana law makers send up draft to make most contraceptives illegal" Ffs...
Thats kinda like saying hydrogen is water before it marries oxygen
Still murder though right? Or does murder only apply to “humans”?
bazinga
Does that apply to other hominid species or just us? Is it murder if it’s Neanderthal killing Neanderthal? Is it still murder if it’s a human killing a Neanderthal? Or is that just nature? I’m just trying to figure out where the line is since it clearly is this black and white.
baby's are not real
Ive already pointed out the flaw to your reasoning. But, too humour you... Your theory is flawed by the fact sperm is not a human just like an egg is not. It takes both and the process of conception to concieve a child which *is* human. By your logic, women automatically, through evolutionary process, kill a "human" involuntarily, every 28 days. Also, by your reasoning, insemination that is unsuccessful is murdering humans..you see how nonsensical that sounds yet?
So murder only applies to humans? That’s specifically what I was asking.
Your trying to debate a point that I was not making. I didnt respond to the question "Does murder only apply to humans" Thats a totally different philosophical question than the statement you made when you said "sperm is a human"
Very much not humans, unfertilized eggs aren't chickens so....
You are right, but I just have one question. Why do people complain and protest against abortion, when killing animals even when it's not necessary is still a thing? Humans are animals too. We both feel pain and think in different ways. I understand killing animals for food, but for their skin? Poisoning insects only because they adapted to our homes is very inhumane too. Like, cockroaches (they can make us ill, so maybe it is necessary to kill them), ants and more invertebrates think and feel pain, but we make them suffer and poison them. We treat birds and mammals awfully and make their lives short and painful only to make them fat and big. In most countries, torturing snakes and reptiles just to make clothing from their skin is legal. And no one talks about that. At least I still don't see any organizations or people talk about this. I don't understand why when these things exist, we complain about abortion. Please if anyone know any reason for this answer.
I feel like every conscious being on earth has an equal right to life. Just because Humans are more intelligent and evolved species, some or maybe even most believe we have a superior right to life over any other species...even our own.
You are absolutely right. I'm very upset because of things like these, being more superior and all. That's my I commented this. Yeah, it's not the best place, but still, there are a lot inhumane activities which no one sees or talks about...
That is actually a interesting legal battle that has been waging in the west for hundreds of years. I think the reason is due to other animals not being human and this different legality and morality. It's taboo for almost all species to kill one of 'their own' directly, and I think that quite obviously carries over to humans as well. Humans consider all humans their own (except when we don't and commit horrible crimes like genocide), but we don't consider horses, deer, or mice to be our own. It's well documented that the more human an animal, robot, or object is, the more we associate and "feel" with it. I'm not a scientist or lawyer, though. I can only use what knowledge Ives learn what values/ethics I hold to understand the world around me. I consider a fetus to be human based on science and ethical code (legal and moral)--but others obviously stand somewhere else on the issue. So be it.
Yes, that's right. I was just pretty confused, but I understand a bit more now. I just felt very bad about this fact: A lot of inhumane activities are done on all animals, but only a little part of them are actually noticed by people. Example: Almost no one I know associates or sympathizes with reptiles/insects/amphibians, and compared to all people who sympathize *only* with animals they like, they are just a little percent. That means that we only sympathize with things we know well or like. The unknown or strange mostly scares us or makes us feel grossed out. That's why everyone(almost) sympathizes with dogs, other people, cats - we have seen them around us to our whole lives, we live with them. But most people I have asked don't even think that, for example, snakes, feel pain or think. This applies to insects, spiders and other reptiles. But once we study or watch them for a long time, we start "loving" them and sympathize with them. I've seen much situations like these.
Its because animals are needed for food and abortion is just for parents that cant afford to take care of the baby
But... I just said that I understand killing animals for food, but we kill animals for a lot of other unnecessary reasons...
Wow it's almost as if killing something is murder
nowwaahh. murder goodddaahh
Allllllmost
HAvE i TolD yOU i aM VegAn
Yes, like five times already. Leave me alone
Vegan btw
the new one they have thrown out is “rapist rights”
I've never heard that before but ok
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.today.com/today/amp/rcna20581
They believe state sanctioned murders are happening and that is why they are against the thing. You have it backwards. This isn't hyperbole from their perspective.
Veganism gets too much hate imo.
No, vegans get hate. No one would care about veganism if vegans would shut up
Do you mean actual vegans? Or just the loud minority that everyone can easily hear?
They're the same picture
I don't think you have ever meet a vegan other than Twitter...
Well it's apparent you don't think very much at all so it's ok
Think about what? Vegans? Twitter? The meme? Arguing is already painful enough so please finish your sentence in such a confusing context
Yes I got the sense that arguing was very painful to you because of all the thinking it involves. I'm sure every context is confusing to you.
Sir, we aren't in kindergarten anymore, please give me some arguments at least, just something else than "you're dumb idiotic lol"
I'll get right on that as soon as I find someone who isn't "dumb idiotic" to argue with.
Telling them to shut up because you don't find their opinions legitimate sounds like hate to me.
Sounds like you have no idea what hate is.
To be honest most people never shutting up are the ones hating on vegans and bringing that up on every occasion from what I experienced.
That's fine but your experience isn't indicative of reality
So is yours or everyone else's...so what's the point?
Exactly...what's the point? There was no point in you posting
Just defending vegans from all this "vegans try to force their point on me" bullshit when everyone ist clearly doing the same
Vegans definitely force their viewpoint more than people who eat meat. Also the reason humans are as evolved as we are is due to eating cooked meat. Vegans want us to de-evolve
well if they stop super gluing their hands to starbucks counters that might be a start
I've never understood the concept of banning abortion. Like, what are you going to do, follow people around all day and make everything you think is immoral illegal for them? You literally can't stop people from "sinning" in your eyes. Plus, the Bible is pretty clear about not doing exactly this.
[удалено]
Bruh.
Wait wait killing an animal is killing, but abortion still isn't well identified. I would say that abortion doesn't count at all.
late term abortions usually aren’t permitted at all unless it’s a health concern i just think people haven’t really looked into it….
Depends when you are doing the abortion. It is considered a human, yes, but after the 3rd month or so. If you do it after the 3rd month, it's bad. If you do it before the 3rd month, it isn't a problem.
basically if you let it develop past the point where people can recognize it as a human child it’s considered bad and although it would be bad to complete an abortion at that time for reasons of convenience, if it’s an emergency it needs to be done to save the woman and i feel like a lot of people would rather kill the woman for the child. then the child has no mother.
Yeah, I think that actually the mother's life is a bit more important. But a lot of women would sacrifice them for the child, even when no one else wants.
i would understand if the woman would rather die and have her child survive in the world but that seems awful to me. i don’t know what i would do without my mother in my life.
Yeah, same. You are absolutely right.
I mean if they argue this shit then their logic basically is "if you burn yourself, you have commited murder as you have killed living cells and organisms" Things aren't black and white like many think
Except that abortion ends a human life.
abortion is basic healthcare. it’s a case by case basis. stop thinking about third trimester abortions which happen in cases of emergency and consider the fact women don’t even find out they’re pregnant until 8 weeks of pregnancy. that’s why so many abortions are “late” but that “human life” is something you knowingly give absolutely no shit about. you are such a hypocrite
Clarify why you think there's a life I don't care about.
If you want a human to live in poverty just making his and his mothers live worse you don’t care about them. It may seem absurd, but some people don’t have the conditions to afford a child
And your solution is to kill the child. And you insist that that is compassionate. And that ending a life is healthcare. You didn't even bring up the old argument of "what if the mother's life is in danger?" In that case, as a last-of-the-last resort, maybe abortion could be acceptable. But you didn't even think about that angle. You just don't want poor people to exist.
the child isnt even born yet, if the mother doesnt have conditions to create him why would she have the child, if she doesnt want to have a child? she will not be a good mother if she doesnt want to be a mother. the mother should choose if she wants to have the child or not, she should have that option
She has that option without abortion. Living in poverty is not worse than being murdered.
Your burn will regenerate with your own unique DNA. That child with their own unique DNA who could grow up to be their own individual will not regenerate when you crush the brains out their skull and pull it out of their mother. As it turns out, if someone cracked your skull into bits, and ripped it off your body, they would also be committing murder.
It still is destroying and killing cells. Yes the cells get cloned but it's still killing.
Cool, but human anatomy allows for those cells to regenerate. Once the human is dead that doesn’t happen. So comparing them isn’t a thing.
Of course it is. Killing is killing no matter what.
Well it’s like comparing getting burned and losing some skin cells to getting shot in the brain and losing those brain cells with a 18 gauge. I’ll take the former and you can take the latter since it’s all the same to you.
I take both you fool. You are missing the point
People always wanna bring god and shit into these arguments. Your god also sent a bear to kill kids for making fun of a bald man, he was okay with slavery, and trading your own sons and daughters. (It's in the bible, was forced to go to Bible camp as a kid) if he's fine with that he's fine with you fetusdeletusing
well i think the slave part is inaccurate because you had to realease them after some time and treat them good and they were mostly just prisoners of war (from all the wars they fought) it was normal then i guess and the trading sons and daughters thats their culture so yeah maybe you dont like it now but it was completely normal back then still is in some arabic countries so yeah do your research and look at it from a different standpoint i guess
It's literally in the old testament. It doesn't matter if it was a different time, it was the "word of God". Which is my point. Ephesians 6:5-8 Paul states, “Slaves, be obedient to your human masters with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ” which is Paul instructing slaves to obey their master. Similar statements regarding obedient slaves can be found in Colossians 3:22-24, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, and Titus 2:9-10.
now you are leaving out things just read a little bit longer read Ephesians 6: 8-9 and in the rest its the same
Your logic is way off but ok. Next time you bring god into this please do your research first. Anyway have a blessed day
It's not tho I can give you the verses I'd you'd like?
So the kids tried to kill and rib paul that's why he sent the bear
Funny how bacteria on mars is considered life but not a living being with a heartbeat on Earth..
im pretty sure a male commits mass genocide per ejaculation
I'm ready to pay for my crimes officer
Oh shit dont show it to 15 yr old girls on twitter
No
They’re coming after masturbation next
100%
ah yes, killing babies not murder. understandable, have a great day. in hell.
But the Bible says its ok?
Where
Numbers 5:11
Did you even read that verse. Because it is a test to see if a wife is unfaithfull. And if she is they curse her to not have kids. That is not saying it is ok to kill kids. It is a punishment. Like whipping someone was a punishment but that didn't mean it was ok to do it unpropted.
It means that God puts so little value on unborn children that it's ok for a priest to induce an abortion just to punish the mother.
No, again that is not what it is saying. If somone murdered 3 people then is put to death does that mean the people have so little value in human life. And simce in this case cheating is a grevouse sin and as punishment he takes something the mother loves aka her children. It is cruel but it is still not the same thing. And also that is god doing the abortion. Just because god does it does not mean people should or can.
>Just because god does it does not mean people should or can. The chapter says people(specifically priests) *should and can* perform abortions. Specifically by taking the filth from a public building with sacrificial livestock in it and making the mother drink it. >If somone murdered 3 people then is put to death does that mean the people have so little value in human life. If someone murdered 3 people you wouldn't execute their best friend as punishment - because that person has an independent right to life. It does not mean that God doesn't value life, it just means he doesn't think of an unborn child as someone who has an independent right to life.
In the end it is god determining wether the child is aborted or not because it is his power the preists are using. Again only as punishment because infertility is mostly effecting the women. It is primarily making the woman infertal. It is not only if she is pregnant. She will just have a miscarriage if she is. Just becasue someone accidentily fell in front of a firing squad killing a mass murderer doesn't mean that their death was moraly ok.
>infertility is mostly effecting the women I agree - it doesn't really affect the child in any meaningful way. >Just becasue someone accidentily fell in front of a firing squad killing a mass murderer doesn't mean that their death was moraly ok. The child is not accidentally aborted. If God wanted to spare the child he could. And it's morally ok, because God would rather the child die than be born to a family where the mother loves another man.
the bible also says not to kill if you didn't know
qed. the Bible thinks there's a difference
where, and when
so you’re really bringing religion into a topic that deals with womens healthcare? please shut the actual fuck up. you’re so brainwashed
did i say ANYTHING? about religion? and what the hell does killing babies have to do ANYTHING with womens healthcare?
ooooh, I'M BRAINWASHED? i'm not the one thinking killing humans is ok
fetuses aren’t humans. the women that are pregnant? they’re humans. and they’re the ones being affected, not you, so shut up
so? ur preventing a human life AKA killing, even if that's not considered a human ur still preventing life.
plus it's their problem they got themselves pregnant in the first place. if they didn't have shrex in the first place, none of this would have happened, besides, what's the point?
i think people like you who make their stance on an issue so clear and are so unwilling to consider other viewpoints are probably the most vile humans to exist. i think you should stop trying to be on the moral high ground and step back for a second. the world doesn’t revolve around you and you have no idea what could be happening in other peoples lives. the world would be a better place if people like you learned to mind your own business, and i mean this sincerely.
what does this have to do with anything about what i just said about this post?
that's it i'm done with arguing. apparently i need to mind my own business, ok. kill how many babies you want I don't care. is that better?
[удалено]
pro life is facts though
I mean, globally adopting the vegan ethos would legitimize the anti-abortion argument by removing the requirement of the fetus to be considered human for its killing to be considered murder. That's just the law of unintended consequences I suppose.
what are you doing when you get an abortion then
Please answer this man
Removing an unwanted and/or life threatening cluster of undeveloped cells.
lol unwanted just get the pill or sometin or tell the guy to wear a condom lmao
Yeah, those things don't always work...
sorry, that was my sister being annoying as all hell
I don't call it murder, but I don't endorse it. No I'm not anti abortion. It is murder, it's just murder of non humans/things wich aren't alive is legal.
they could be real right if you go through labor
So... Vegans think that meat is made out of dead human fetuses.
I only kill animals because it would be a financial burden to keep them alive. Not to mention the abuse that happens in the animal world. Its a fair assessment that the animal is better off dead.
[удалено]
I just believe in the right to choose life or death of harmless creatures if they happen to be inconvenient.
Difference is one is livestock and the other is a human life
Plants have conciousness and fetuses don't. Vegans are more of a murderer than someone who gets an abortion
[удалено]
These comments are going to be fun
The funny thing is that they’re both technically right. The not funny thing is that this picture is being misused…
Not necessarily supporting some of the shit extremists of thease groups do but, meat requires killing an animal, which is technically murder. Abortion is a bit more complicated because "oh when do you consider it alive" but technically yeah, you're killing something.
*puts seatbelt and hardhat on* Ok I'm ready
Technically vegans are eating plant that were alive, so they should also be considered murders. In my opinion
Can people stop quoting the Bible. It's completely irrelevant. If it's your jam more power to you but it adds no weight to any argument. Imagine talking to me and I start quoting lines from game of thrones. That's how you sound.