-->
@YouFound_Lxam
So you're not against all contraception.
Abortion
Posts
Total:
114
Ok but Amber is 100% TWS right? He was also very pro abortion whilst being a screeching lunatic about everything else. I mean he was pro abortion is a screeching lunatic kinda way also. But at least he was correct on that one.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
..I still stand for pro-life. If anyone would like to discuss, I am open to it.
If you truly stood for pro-life, you would expand your mind to be more omni-considerate of humanities current circumstances on Earth and what led us into this mess were in and how to get out of it.
Keep your busy body nose out pregnants women bodily business, unless they give you their consent to stick you nose there.
Otherwise I consider you a sic-n-head virtual rapist.
Sperm cell is biologic life as is egg cell.
A fertilized egg is human fetus organism of the pregnant woman, and a not as yet a born-out individual human ---with its life giving the umbilical cord--- not yet severed.
1} fertilized egg > gastrulation taking place https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554394/#:~:text=Gastrulation%20is%20an%20early%20developmental,multidimensional%20structure%20called%20the%20gastrula.
2} at some point beyond gastrulation consideration of non-breathing { non-self inspirited } fetus{ organism of the pregnant woman } begins >
3} pregnant woman { a mother to become } with a non-breathing { non-self-inspirited } fetus/baby >
4} still attached to the now mother, with new-born-out and breathing [ self-inspirited } on its own, via muscles, that, are sometimes encouraged to begin, by a slap on the butt ---' Babies who are apneic and/or floppy often receive stimulation in the form of rubbing the back, patting or flicking the feet, or, in the old days, slapping the butt (sometimes while held upside down by the feet! '..... >
5} cord severed and fetus/baby is now, for the first time a truly breathing { self-inspirited } human individual, that naturally looks too suckle teat for its nutritional purposes that specific target immunity
..." Oxytocin, often referred to as the “love hormone” or “bonding hormone,” is a key player in this intricate process. It surges during labor and breastfeeding, helping to foster feelings of trust, emotional attachment, and maternal instincts. "...
.." A specific type of antibody found in breastmilk, IgA, protects infants from infections. When breast milk coats the baby's oral mucosa, nasal cavity, Eustachian tubes, and GI tract, the IgA binds to bacteria and viruses at that surface preventing them from entering the baby's system."
.."Immunoglobulin A is the most well known immune factor in human milk. In its secretory form, SIgA, it is the most plentiful antibody in human milk. It constitutes between 80-90% of all immunoglobulins present in milk."...
.."Breastfed babies have fewer infections and hospitalizations than formula-fed infants. During breastfeeding, antibodies and other germ-fighting factors pass from a mother to her baby and strengthen the immune system. This helps lower a baby's chances of getting many infections, including: ear infections."..
Humanity is currently in an overpopulation situation with the number of humans, their standard of living, and operating systems that are non-compatible with a longer term existence on Earth without unnecessary suffering on the increase with only more to come.
-->
@ebuc
Sperm cell is biologic life as is egg cell.
Yes, sperm is alive and it dies if it doesnt reach egg. Sperm is necessary for human life.
Humanity is currently in an overpopulation situation with the number of humans, their standard of living, and operating systems that are non-compatible with a longer term existence on Earth without unnecessary suffering on the increase with only more to come.
Christians dont believe in overpopulation since it contradicts their teachings against abortion. Resources on Earth are obviously limited.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
->@<<<Amber>>>There was nothing "legal" about the extermination of the Jews. It was a military occupation and eradication of groups of people the tyrant dictator didn't like. There was no one to stop him until the US and Russia got involved.In Germany in WWII, Nazi's were leading politically. That means they could establish laws in Germany. Since it was permitted for Nazis to kill Jews, by Germany's standards it was legal.
Cite the German legal statutory law then. I'll wait, for 5 seconds, because you can't.
Also, what happened in Germany in WWII has absolutely no comparative value to the abortion topic.Apparently, it does, because that's how far our conversation got.
"Our" conversation? LOL! Delusional much?
No. It has no comparative value. Mass genocide of a particular class/group/heritage of already born persons a particular political party doesn't like =/= the personal liberty right of females to abort a pregnancy.
There you go again with the use of a misnomer. A pregnancy is not a child.Is it a fetus?
yes, it is a fetus. Fetus =/= [a] child.
If so, what does the word fetus mean?Fetus: Offspring
Offspring =/= [a] child
A fetus is in utero.
Educate yourself for fucks sake:
According to various data sources like the Guttmacher Institute and CDC, before RvW was invalidated, less than 1.2% of all abortions performed in any given year happen when the fetus is viable.Cool. Your point is?
I'm more educated than you are on the subject, as both a female and an adult with experience in the academics of the subject matter whereas you are not.
Yet forcing a female to be your personal incubator to satisfy your feelings of morality is less morally wrong????Unless it's a case of rape, no one is forcing the woman to be an incubator of a human life.And in a case of rape, it's not me forcing them, it's the rapist. And like I said rapists should be castrated and killed.
When the states have passed laws banning abortion, it forces females to become state sanctioned incubators.
And? Every cell within the human organism meets the same basic biological criteria for life as the zygote, blastocyst, etc. Same for gametes too. Skin cells too, and each time you go out in the sun and get burned, you're terminating a living human cell(s).Does my skin cell have the potential for growing into a child?Yeah, they are not the same at all.
Point flew over your head like a 747.
When they all meet the same basic criterion for biological life, yeah, they are exactly the same, ignoramus.
And if the pregnancy is a risk to the life of the female, it is self-defense and survival of the fittest to terminate the pregnancy. She can always try again.Glad you brought this up. Do you know there is literally a 0.005 percent chance that an abortion will ever be necessary to save the mother. There is only one case where it is absolutely necessary. And in those cases, I think we can make exceptions obviously.
And yet that's exactly why less than 1.2% of all abortions have been after 22-24 weeks you ignoramus.
And the majority of all abortions have been before 14 weeks gestation, the majority of those before six weeks.
Really? A defective fetus at 3 months with the high probability of killing the pregnant female is a dangerous way to determine the value of the pregnancy???Yes, a defective child at 3 months old with the high probability of killing the mother is a dangerous way to determine the value of the human being.
You make no sense here.
Again, ignoramus.
-->
@Amber
"Human rights begin at birth." So with that said, that should end all debate about abortion. It does not matter if a human fetus could survive outside the womb, if the mother wants it dead she should be able to kill it.
-->
@sadolite
It does not matter if a human fetus could survive outside the womb, if the mother wants it dead she should be able to kill it.
I agree Sad. These evangelical nutters get their nose out of old Biblical texts, nor keep their busy body nose'es out of pregnant womans bodily business, when no consent is given for them to stick their nose in there. I call that virtual rape of the pregnant woman.
..." If a sperm penetrates the egg, fertilization results. Tiny hairlike cilia lining the fallopian tube propel the fertilized egg (zygote) through the tube toward the uterus..."..
Zygote is not a child. A child is a born-out human individual that inspires air-oxygen the expires carbon dioxide
..." The cells of the zygote divide repeatedly as the zygote moves down the fallopian tube to the uterus. The zygote enters the uterus in 3 to 5 days.
In the uterus, the cells continue to divide, becoming a hollow ball of cells called a blastocyst. "...
In the uterus, the cells continue to divide, becoming a hollow ball of cells called a blastocyst. "...
A blastocyst is not a child. A child is a born-out human individual that inspires air-oxygen the expires carbon dioxide.
.." Gastrulation is a critical process during week 3 of human development. Gastrulation is an early developmental process in which an embryo transforms from a one-dimensional layer of epithelial cells, a blastula, reorganizes into a multilayered and multidimensional structure called the gastrula. "..
A one dimensionsal or three dimensional blastocyst is not a child. A child is a born-out human individual that inspires air-oxygen the expires carbon dioxide.
There needs to be a line of text added into the Bible...' the religious nutters are always with us '.....
-->
@ebuc
Life begins at conception, a Zygote is life. All human life within a mothers womb breaths oxygen and expels carbon dioxide via the umbilical cord once established at about 3 weeks.
-->
@sadolite
Do you remember when you were in the womb? What language did you think in?
-->
@FLRW
No I don't remember being in the womb nor do I remember much of anything before 3 years of age. I was a useless pile of shit that served no fucking purpose until at least the age of 8. Started doing chores at age 8. My existence served utterly no purpose before that. I was just a massive drain of resources that was kept alive for some inexplicable reason. I would have died long before age 8 if not for people feeding me and keeping me alive. Beats me why they did that.
-->
@sadolite
Hey Dude, you are one of the smartest people on this site.
-->
@FLRW
Na, don't think so. I just don't over think shit. In the end life is about choices and their consequences. All people make life choices, very few even think there is a consequence to go with that choice. You will hear those people often say why me or I am a victim, it wasn't my fault. Mind you though there are exceptions to everything. For example, a person is sleeping in bed and a air plane crashes threw the roof and it kills them. That person legitimately got screwed and is a victim./
-->
@sadolite
Life begins at conception,
An unfertilized egg cell is life as is sperm cells before a zygote exists.
a Zygote is life.
Never in my life have ever stated otherwise. Some people appear to get me confused with other peoples comments.
A zygote is not fetus or a baby or a child.
All human life within a mothers womb breaths oxygen and expels carbon dioxide via the umbilical cord once established at about 3 weeks.
A zygote expels carbon dioxide? I didnt know that. Oh I see, your saying after three weeks a zygote expels carbon dioxide.
A fetus/baby is not a child. The fetus baby is an organism of the pregnant woman. Only the pregnant woman gets to say what happens to her fetus, fetus/baby as long as it is attached to her via the umbilical cord and inside of her.
Until she gives consent to other sticking their nose into her bodily business, --aka virtual rape-- she is the only person who has the responsibility of what happens to the human fetus/baby inside of her. Simple.
Evangelical nutters been fighting planned parent hood, abortion pills, contraceptives for years. Evangelicals are obs0lete, illogical, lack of common sense critical thinking pathways in regards to many societal issues.
Until she gives consent to other sticking their nose into her bodily business, --aka virtual rape-- she is the only person who has the responsibility of what happens to the human fetus/baby inside of her. Simple.
Evangelical nutters been fighting planned parent hood, abortion pills, contraceptives for years. Evangelicals are obs0lete, illogical, lack of common sense critical thinking pathways in regards to many societal issues.
-->
@sadolite
@<<<Amber>>>"Human rights begin at birth." So with that said, that should end all debate about abortion.
Why? Once the fetus is born abortion goes out the window along with the bathwater and placenta.
Abortion becomes a NON-ISSUE upon birth.
What a truly uneducated ignorant position to take/interpret from what I wrote.
It does not matter if a human fetus could survive outside the womb, if the mother wants it dead she should be able to kill it.
Yet again with another uneducated ignorant position, rather, strawman argument.
-->
@Amber
Human rights begin at birth. Not any time before that.
-->
@sadolite
That has got to be willful ignorance on your part.I was just a massive drain of resources that was kept alive for some inexplicable reason.
Beats me why they did that.
Not surprising given what you said about cats.
-->
@Best.Korea
It would still be the product of the mind, no matter how great the mind is. So still subjective value thing.
Not if the being holding the authority for morality is all powerful and the ultimate authority.
Society determines which morality is most popular and most valuable to most people.
So in Nazi Germany, it wasn’t wrong to hunt down Jews?
Needs of the many vs few.
You cannot logically explain why goals of few outweigh goals of many. Simple math about what weighs more.
Neither weigh more. EVERYONE is equal and created in the image of GOD.
So a dichotomy choice between healthy person and severely ill person makes it obvious who you should produce, no?
So you’re promoting eugenics?
Reducing pain of born people, improving quality of life of born people, reducing death rates of born people...
So if someone has bad quality of life, and they are in pain we should just kill them? And I’m not talking about letting them die. I’m talking about killing them. Against their will. Cause that’s what abortion is.
Thats irrelevant to this debate, but there are observable truths, which are closest to objective truth there is.
Is that statement you just made objectively true?
We know by tautology that women have more liberty if they have a choice to have abortion or not. We also know by statistics of death rates, liberty, life expectancy and many other, that legal abortion benefits.
Doesn’t answer my objection.
That goal is not really achieved.
It literally is. Millions of lives are saved.
That goal is not really achieved. It just makes most of those women have unsafe abortions instead safe.
Should we just give serial killers body armor to protect them from police bullets?
Murder is wrong. Just because it won’t stop doesn’t give a justification for allowing and protecting it.
You would be forcing women to give birth by denying them of abortion. Its not "you or rapist".
In any other case it’s their choice so no. In the rape cases is the rapist choice so no either.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Not if the being holding the authority for morality is all powerful and the ultimate authority.
No, it still applies same logic, that morality would be a product of its mind, thus depend on mind.
So in Nazi Germany, it wasn’t wrong to hunt down Jews?
Sure, I think it was wrong due to lowering quality of life, and majority was even clueless about.
Neither weigh more. EVERYONE is equal and created in the image of GOD.
We have already discussed this mathematical problem. If two persons are equal, then two worth more than one.
So you’re promoting eugenics?
I am promoting abortion, which is proven to increase both quality of life and life expectancy. Its simple.
So if someone has bad quality of life, and they are in pain we should just kill them? And I’m not talking about letting them die. I’m talking about killing them. Against their will. Cause that’s what abortion is.
Many people who are in great pain prefer death over life, thus harm caused by birth is greater.
Is that statement you just made objectively true?
As much as you trust your eyes. Of course, there are people who dont trust their eyes. Heh.
Doesn’t answer my objection.
It does. I dont really plan to play this forward backward game with you. Either claim either bye.
It literally is. Millions of lives are saved.
Show a source that says banning abortion saves lives. We know that ban kills people by reducing life expectancy.
Should we just give serial killers body armor to protect them from police bullets?Murder is wrong. Just because it won’t stop doesn’t give a justification for allowing and protecting it.
If your goal isnt to stop abortions or reduce their number significantly, then ban is pointless. What now?
In any other case it’s their choice so no. In the rape cases is the rapist choice so no either.
Its also your choice, since you choose to force woman to give birth by denying her of abortion.
Things can have multiple causes. Thats how "if, then" works. If you deny woman of abortion, then she
is forced to give birth. She is forced by your action of denying her a safe abortion. Simple enough.
I'm so glad the Georgia shooter wasn't aborted. God had a plan for him.
-->
@Amber
Cite the German legal statutory law then. I'll wait, for 5 seconds, because you can't.
I don't need to.
"Our" conversation? LOL! Delusional much?No. It has no comparative value. Mass genocide of a particular class/group/heritage of already born persons a particular political party doesn't like =/= the personal liberty right of females to abort a pregnancy.
It actually has a lot in common.
Nazis don't want Jews in their home (earth) therefore they exterminate human lives with genocide.
Certain women don't want the child that they helped to conceive consentingly, therefore they exterminate the child.
And for rape cases, that's a whole different argument that we are currently discussing.
Also yes, it is a human being.
It is a human life, but we are about to go over that in one of your responses, so I'll save that for this bit.
yes, it is a fetus. Fetus =/= [a] child.Offspring =/= [a] childA fetus is in utero.Educate yourself for fucks sake:
The definition of Fetus:
Unborn Offspring
Can we at least agree on that, then I can go somewhere with it?
I'm more educated than you are on the subject, as both a female and an adult with experience in the academics of the subject matter whereas you are not.
First of all, I was saying "Ok cool. What's your point" because it didn't hold anything to the current argument we were having.
Also, the fact you are a female doesn't help your Ethos in this debate.
And the other credentials are impressive. Why are you wasting your time with me then?
Looks like someone's not getting enough attention in the real world.
When the states have passed laws banning abortion, it forces females to become state sanctioned incubators.
Love the use of the terminology (sarcasm).
Wrong. It forces women to either:
A: Take responsibility for their sex life
B: Not murder a child that they had no control over conceiving (rape).
Just because someone commits an act of injustice does not give you the right to commit another worse injustice. Yes, killing a baby in the womb is worse than rape. It is murder.
Point flew over your head like a 747.When they all meet the same basic criterion for biological life, yeah, they are exactly the same, ignoramus.
Didn't fly over my head I understood clearly.
I was pointing out that yes technically by definition your skin cell is a living human cell.
But that cell:
1. Has your DNA (A fetus does not have only your DNA)
2. Your skin cell doesn't have the potential or criterion to grow into an independent living human being.
And yet that's exactly why less than 1.2% of all abortions have been after 22-24 weeks you ignoramus.And the majority of all abortions have been before 14 weeks gestation, the majority of those before six weeks.
Cool. Again, doesn't address my point addressing your point about saving the mother's life........
You make no sense here.Again, ignoramus.
It's still a human being??
-->
@Best.Korea
No, it still applies same logic, that morality would be a product of its mind, thus depend on mind.
Yes, I agree. But this mind is the ultimate mind, making the morality it produces an ultimate morality. An objective morality.
Sure, I think it was wrong due to lowering quality of life, and majority was even clueless about.
To the Nazi's?
We have already discussed this mathematical problem. If two persons are equal, then two worth more than one.
Problem is people aren't math equations. They're people.
If 0 = 0 then 0+0 = 0
See we have the same value.
I am promoting abortion, which is proven to increase both quality of life and life expectancy. Its simple.
All you needed to say was no to eugenics....
So, you are.
Many people who are in great pain prefer death over life, thus harm caused by birth is greater.
But some don't. The story of Job in the Bible actually lays this out very well.
But also, why would I trust my preference, if I am in pain? Because technically I am not a well enough functioning human being according to you to be considered productive because of those thoughts, so why would I trust an unproductive human according to your worldview?
As much as you trust your eyes. Of course, there are people who dont trust their eyes. Heh.
So yes or no?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
"Not surprising given what you said about cats." Cats are people too
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Yes, I agree. But this mind is the ultimate mind, making the morality it produces an ultimate morality. An objective morality
Ultimate mind, infinite mind.... its still mind, and morality it creates is still subjective. Morality depends on mind.
To the Nazi's?
The nazi obviously thought they were doing the right thing. I dont see what is your point here at all.
Problem is people aren't math equations. They're people.
If you cant express value in numbers nor logically, then you have nothing to argue with, at all.
If 0 = 0 then 0+0 = 0See we have the same value
Only if value of human life is 0, which means human life has no any positive value. Agree?
All you needed to say was no to eugenics....So, you are.
What do eugenics even have to do with this conversation, unless you think they improve quality of life?
But some don't. The story of Job in the Bible actually lays this out very well.But also, why would I trust my preference, if I am in pain? Because technically I am not a well enough functioning human being according to you to be considered productive because of those thoughts, so why would I trust an unproductive human according to your worldview?
Some dont, but some do. And pain caused to those who do is much greater than simple death.
If you think people in pain cant be trusted about not wanting to live, thats only your opinion.
I would prefer to die than to live in horrible pain every day. Harm of birth is greater.
So yes or no?
My eyes mostly tell the truth. Unless I am dreaming. So mostly yes, I would say. Does this help?
-->
@Best.Korea
Ultimate mind, infinite mind.... it’s still mind, and morality it creates is still subjective. Morality depends on mind
Not subjective to us. It’s objective to us, because we as a race don’t define it, but a higher power does.
The nazi obviously thought they were doing the right thing. I dont see what is your point here at all.
Not only thought, but knew. According to your subjective worldview, what the Nazis did wasn’t wrong. They deemed it right. Therefore it was right. Because the society determines the morality correct?
Only if value of human life is 0, which means human life has no any positive value. Agree?
I only used 0 to represent the human life being completely equal with all other human life.
What do eugenics even have to do with this conversation, unless you think they improve quality of life?
Well if you have a subjective material worldview, then yes it does improve quality of life. Survival of the fittest. Eugenics is the best way to achieve that.
I’m not advocating for it. I am 100% against it because I believe it’s a moral evil. But you can’t say it’s evil and you’re advocating for abortion on the basis of quality of life. That’s literally eugenics. And when I confronted you you didn’t deny it.
My eyes mostly tell the truth. Unless I am dreaming. So mostly yes, I would say. Does this help?
Just yes or no? One word answer.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Not subjective to us. It’s objective to us, because we as a race don’t define it, but a higher power does
You dont define my morality either. So is my morality objective to you? It still depends on mind.
There is no "objective to me". Something either depends on mind or it doesnt. There is no 3rd.
Not only thought, but knew. According to your subjective worldview, what the Nazis did wasn’t wrong. They deemed it right. Therefore it was right. Because the society determines the morality correct?
Again, what they did was wrong according to my and the standard of most other people. Most people disagreed.
I only used 0 to represent the human life being completely equal with all other human life.
If 0 is the only number to represent value of human life, then human life has no value. Simple.
I think maybe "infinity" would be more suitable to your case than 0, just a suggestion. 0 is worthless.
Well if you have a subjective material worldview, then yes it does improve quality of life. Survival of the fittest. Eugenics is the best way to achieve that.
If you say so. I dont really plan to extend this debate to eugenics. Why is eugenics bad?
Just yes or no? One word answer
Some questions cannot be answered with yes or no. Mostly yes isnt a complete yes. Its just mostly yes.
You dont define my morality either. So is my morality objective to you? It still depends on mind. There is no "objective to me". Something either depends on mind or it doesnt. There is no 3rd.
Morality depends upon a mind to understand it. Not the origin of it.
If morality is subjective, then the origin is our minds. If morality is objective, then the origin is a mind greater than ours for it to be objective TO US.
Again, what they did was wrong according to my and the standard of most other people. Most people disagreed.
According to this worldview though, the fact that you disagree doesn’t change the fact of it being wrong or not. Because ultimately it wasn’t. It was different space time matter, eliminating other space time matter.
And morality is subjective right? So that would mean whether you think it’s right or not, ultimately it would only be wrong to you, and would hold no ground against anyone else.
If 0 is the only number to represent value of human life, then human life has no value. Simple. I think maybe "infinity" would be more suitable to your case than 0, just a suggestion. 0 is worthless.
Thank you for the correction. Yes infinity would be a better ideal for this case.
If you say so. I dont really plan to extend this debate to eugenics. Why is eugenics bad?
Because you’re killing people……
Some questions cannot be answered with yes or no. Mostly yes isnt a complete yes. It’s just mostly yes.
Ok so let me ask it a different way then. Are there objective truths in the world?
-->
@Best.Korea
Forgot to tag
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Thank you for this debate. You prove to be a bigger challenge than most other pro life people here.
Still, we cannot debate forever. Ultimately, we disagree on values and nothing can be done about that anyway.
-->
@Best.Korea
Of course. This was an eye opening debate that challenged me and I think an overall really productive conversation.
Thank you for being apart.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
If morality is subjective, then the origin is our minds. If morality is objective, then the origin is a mind greater than ours for it to be objective TO US.
The subject is the perceptor. A greater mind is still a subject, no matter how much you trust it.
If god can say that 1+1 = 3 then logic does not exist and there is nothing to debate because debate is just as null as math. If god cannot create and maintain contradictions then 1+1 = 2 doesn't come from his mind, it is objective.