General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Hale Bopp
LADbible Stories
comments

Comments by "Hale Bopp" (@halebopp4747) on "Why I Give Abortions | Minutes With | @LADbible TV" video.

@BoboTMC It’s life, not potential life. I’m also not a utilitarian, I don’t value individuals based on their “impact” on the world.
31
@winkblue6851 It’s there, otherwise there would be no need to “remove” (murder) the individual in the womb. And believe it or not the ideological fabric of the society around me does very much affect me
17
@Varkhal218 Actually, it is. A unique individual with their own DNA soon to progress from the pre-natal stages to birth. Your desperate attempt to dehumanize the individual doesn’t change this, and your deliberate ignorance of this fact doesn’t make abortion anything less than murder. Dehumanization as a justification didn’t work for the Christchurch shooter, it didn’t work for the Nazis, and it won’t work for you and your eugenicist buddies.
10
@deadbunnys Cry me a river with that hard strawman
9
@theinternettrashcan I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but calling a statement stupid and ignoring my question isn’t an actual criticism. Try again.
8
@freddiehandley278 Do you believe that children should be murdered for the crimes of their fathers?
8
@video_games1557 I don’t believe all life is sacred, and don’t prioritize animal lives above the benefit of mankind. I am well aware for the multitude of reasons one may have to murder their own child, no different from there being a multitude of reasons one may have to murder anyone else. I’ll address each motive you mentioned and explain why it doesn’t justify the murder. “Contraceptives fail” this doesn’t take away the innocence or the sanctity of life from the individual, so it’s still murder. “When the kid has a debilitating genetic disorder” I’m not a eugenicist, I don’t think people should be murdered just because they may have a life with more difficulties and challenges to overcome than the average person. “When a younger girl has been raped” I don’t believe the child should pay the consequences of the actions of the father, and I don’t believe that how they were conceived invalidates their life in any way. “When a girl would die if she gives birth” this is probably the most valid pro-choice argument, despite this taking up less than .5% of legal abortion cases. In this instance I hold that if the child will die during the process regardless, then it is not an act of murder if the woman brings the death of the ill-fated person earlier to save her own life. In the case where the child will survive, then I don’t know. If it were me, I would die for the sake of the life of my child. “When a girl has a mental disorder and she cannot handle a child” Invalid, as the child can survive with the care of someone other than their biological mother. I never stated nor implied that pregnant women don’t deserve life, rather the contrary.
7
@theinternettrashcan You completely misunderstood what I asked. I asked if you share the same sentiment you hold with the act of abortion as you do with the act of rape, such as concluding if you are against it you only shouldn’t carry out such an act yourself.
7
@video_games1557 I don’t think that every life matters, but I believe that every innocent person deserves the right to be alive. I don’t understand what you mean by “vegan are killing organisms like a meatgrinder”, I know that English is not your native language so I would like to explain what you mean by that. I believe that if a young woman is impregnated in an act that was consensual, I believe that they should face the responsibility of their actions and raise the child with whoever gave her the child. I don’t believe in freedom, and reject it as an abstract idea. I never said abortionists are movie villains, but murderers are detestable people and I will never condone their actions or sympathize with them.
6
Pray blessings upon your mother for not murdering you, I am happy for you and I hope you live a long and fruitful life.
5
How can you bless what God has cursed?
5
@p44doyle44 If the so-called medical procedure entails the murder of innocent people, then yes. None of the other procedures you listed entail the murder of innocent people.
5
@p44doyle44 A human in pre-natal stages of development is also a human. Please look into human biological development.
5
@video_games1557 1. Like I stated before, I don’t believe all life is sacred. Exclusively innocent human life. All life, including human life, is a mass of cells. 2. I don’t use dependence as an object of value in human life, to follow this logic you propose consistently and without special pleading it would lead one to conclude that it is acceptable to kill coma patients. 3. Skin cells don’t qualify as individual human life, so this is irrelevant. 4. False assumption fallacy. I don’t value babies for the same reasons you do, projecting your own values onto me is illogical. But in your statement past the assumption I don’t really understand what you are trying to convey, can you elaborate on it more? To be frank I’m gathering a weird eugenicist vibe
5
@Hassanthehorse Abortion is murder. Your argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy and ad populum fallacy doesn’t change that. I never said all life is sacred, exclusively innocent human life (I have stated this view multiple times). My view is only inconsistent when you make a strawman to buttress that idea, which you did. The rest of your comment is meaningless rambling that isn’t worth addressing, please find a better justification of mass murder or keep your ramblings to yourself. Thanks
5
@theinternettrashcan Why shouldn’t they be compared? What is the distinction?
5
@theinternettrashcan Being aborted isn’t a choice. Do you think depressed people or people who have been abused physically or sexually should be euthanized?
5
@theinternettrashcan I never said that, and you didn’t answer my question. Red herring and strawman fallacies. Let’s start that over and try again.
5
Because she either believes in gender theory or is trying to pander to people that do.
4
@p44doyle44 It’s not about my condemnation either. It is God who decreed that thou shalt not murder, not I.
4
@p44doyle44 How do you qualify personhood? You also don’t understand what law is theologically and ethically. Murder is defined by God by his laws and statutes, not the laws and statutes of man over 2 millennia after his established decrees. Asking me to adopt is also another Red Herring fallacy.
4
What does she fight? Unborn children? Lol
4
@video_games1557 I never said you were a eugenicist. I’m well aware of the various diseases that people may suffer, but I don’t believe that people should be murdered because of the length of their life or the hardships they face. If you seriously think that’s an issue then you should leave it up to the individual if they should take their own lives or not instead of making that decision for them. Many people who suffer from such diseases don’t regret their lives. I don’t forgive people for murder and never will, I leave it to my creator to have such mercy. But many people who murder their own children aren’t repentant for what they do, and God’s judgement will be upon these people.
4
@video_games1557 Cells aren’t individual organisms, they are the composition of an individual. This is why if you cut someone’s arm off but don’t kill them it is called inflicting injury instead of murder or killing. And last I checked, the bacteria on my hand from touching a doorknob doesn’t develop into an individual human organism. I don’t care if a woman brings death upon herself in her endeavor to murder her own offspring the same way I don’t feel sorry for a serial killer who gets his eye gouged out in a fight with one of his victims. I think innocent people matter, which is why I am anti-abortion.
4
Interesting. Say, do you share this sentiment with rape?
4
@Meh-sn5kj You also do notice that when I present these analogies, it is to ask for a distinction, right? The whole point of presenting them is either so they can be proven false and a rational and ethical distinction between these actions can be made, or to demonstrate this individual as incapable of making an ethical distinction and therefore using faulty reasoning.
4
Wait until you find out about Josef Mengele
4
Good. Probably the only positive thing about American public school is that they draw a small line from teaching their students to partake in one of the most horrific genocides in human history. Too bad this will probably change if it hasn’t already
4
I absolutely agree with your final statement. The individual that you conceive is not your body, and you have no right to murder them.
4
How?
4
@p44doyle44 How do you qualify healthcare? Not how the original Hippocratic Oath would define it, presumably.
4
@p44doyle44 1. That’s not an answer to my question. Immediate Red Herring fallacy. 2. A fetus is, biologically, a living and functioning organism. How do you qualify self sustaining? Is a newborn baby self sustaining?
4
@nightcorebeatzx8652 As if plenty of women can’t be and aren’t anti-abortion? Your assertion and lack of actual criticism, argument, and refutal makes it seem like your reply was a sexist dogwhistle more than anything else, and it certainly doesn’t make you seem like the brightest bulb either. You should probably make an argument or just stop replying.
4
@p0lyblank Reported for sexism. Enjoy having your channel taken down!
3
@KenzieTawili How do you qualify what a baby is? Either way it’s the murder of a human individual. Murder is a detestable act no matter the stage of development the victim is in.
3
@KenzieTawili Every multicellular organism, including you, is a clump of cells. You are also made out of tissue. It is literally a living being by biological definition. Ask any authority on the subject. An individual in pre-natal stages of development is a unique living being. You frankly don’t know what you are talking about.
3
@thesimplegospel3529 A human in the pre-natal stages of development is a human being in every sense of the word. I do have compassion and empathy, which is exactly why I don’t follow your utilitarian ideology that you just projected onto me.. I don’t believe “suffering” (even assuming you can both qualify and quantify, which you can’t because it’s an abstraction) should be reduced at all costs. “The pro-lifers are completely impervious to the suffering of pregnant women and girls. They dehumanize them, lie about them and completely fail to acknowledge the true extent of their suffering and difficulties or the dangers that they might be in” Irrelevant strawmanning. I very much acknowledge the significance of birth. You stating otherwise is more strawmanning. And conception is the starting point of human life both biologically and biblically, and I can flawlessly defend this factual position if you provide an actual criticism of this position that isn’t fallacious on it’s face. Plenty of people in hospitals are entirely dependent on other individuals for life, and after they are ceased being cared for they die. You’re once again projecting your ideology onto me, I don’t believe in the fictitious “right to bodily autonomy” you mention, especially when it blatantly contradicts my view on murder. It’s not control over your body, it’s control over your ability to murder your own child. You’re once again strawmanning and rambling about this crowd of people in your imagination instead of addressing anything I said.
3
@itsmeforreallyx5410 My mention of impact was directed exclusively towards the original person I was responding to. I have repeated and made clear multiple times that I’m not a utilitarian. I don’t believe in this pure hedonism you express and don’t have any obligation whatsoever to sympathize with or condone an act of murder because it brings the murderer happiness and preserves their original life plans. The biological life you mention is absolutely life, in all senses. I don’t believe in the idea of the soul or incarnation of souls. An individual in the pre-natal stages of development is not a phantom life, but a physical, real, and authentic life. I am willing to defend and justify the life of innocent people regardless if their existence is an inconvenience to others or not. “Pro lifers pretend to have empathy as their reason for saving unborn life but really it’s just a cold human being trying to force their beliefs on others in a kind of dictator like fashion” useless strawman, form an actual argument please. I do have empathy for rape victims and people who give birth to a child who is disabled, this doesn’t mean that I emotionally reject all logic and consistency to enable them to murder their own children. “Or for the unborn baby that will probably end up with many psychological issues when they’re born into awful situations that could have been prevented via safe and legal abortion” Very disturbing and sickening statement. If you actually think about what you just said and realize it’s ramifications, this is a justification of suicide and mass murder of the homeless and disabled if you consistently follow this line of logic. If I have empathy for another person, I don’t wish death upon them to prevent their suffering. I believe that all innocent life should be kept, even if it includes suffering that is an affront to your detestable utilitarian ideology. You should probably seek a mental health professional before you carry out a mass shooting against an orphanage or disability home
3
@itsmeforreallyx5410 I never said that, you’re strawmanning again and not paying attention to what I am saying. My issue with abortion is that it is a direct act of murder. A deliberate act of taking the life of an innocent person. “Because surely if the only thing that can save a woman’s life is an abortion and you take that from her, then you’re murdering the woman” if you had actually taken the time to read anything I have said you would already know and understand my position on this. I am neutral in this regard but if the woman dies during birth this is not an act of murder as it is not an act of murder as it is not the deliberate act (There is no act, and it is not the deliberate intention to bring death upon the woman) of taking the life of an innocent person (the life isn’t taken as the lack of act, and it is lost). My position is entirely non-contradictory. You think it is contradictory because you haven’t been paying any attention nor have you thought about the ramifications of what I am saying, not to mention the case you bring up is less than .10% of abortion cases in the U.S. if not globally. “Do you remember being in the womb?” No, I also don’t remember being asleep or having an endoscopy. Does this make it acceptable to murder people during their sleep or while they are having an endoscopy or similar medical procedures under anesthetic? “It doesn’t hurt or traumatise [sic] a fetus to be aborted yet it can hurt or traumatise [sic] and even destroy an already living human with feeling and emotion” First off the act of dismembering, sucking out, or otherwise suffocating a human being in the pre-natal stages of development does very much hurt them. Once again, I’m not a utilitarian. I don’t believe that an innocent individual should be murdered if they can’t feel anything or inconvenience other people.
3
@Wera_loves_loscamp Hilarious that you do exactly which you accuse me of doing. Both the mother and the individual in pre-natal stages of development are human beings and I never gave one’s life more value over the other. Where do you get your silly hierarchy of “priority” from? I believe both have a right to live as innocents, I don’t believe one gets the right to murder the other over desire or convenience. How can you label me cruel when you endorse genocide, infanticide, filicide?
3
@Wera_loves_loscamp So the hierarchy and justification for the existence of human beings is measured by these things? Should people without friends or family be euthanized? Do they have less worth as human beings or should they be treated as lesser if not?
3
@Wera_loves_loscamp “Anti-abortion isn’t about saving lives, it’s about controlling women and their futures” Elaborate. Particularly on how anti-abortion isn’t about saving lives. You can make an argument that being anti-abortion is controlling women not to make a choice, just as being anti-murder is controlling people from shooting up mosques, movie theaters, churches, etc. and anti-thievery is controlling people not to steal.
3
@Wera_loves_loscamp How do you qualify what a person is? How does dependence on another individual invalidate an individual’s life? Do you support executing coma patients by chance?
3
@Wera_loves_loscamp For your own sake, refrain from the petty insults. I know that you may be used to using them in place of any meaningful argument but I can see through it. But to your point at the end of your rant, “You cannot compare a coma to a fetus.” Yes I can and I just did. It seems to be a good comparison considering you have yet to refute it. “A person is someone after birth, a child who now has a relationship with their parents” Very interesting, bizarre, and curiously convenient definition I’ve never seen anyone use outside of an abortion debate. Is this to imply that orphaned children or people who’s only mother died during child birth are subhumans in your silly hierarchy that you’ve established? Also, what do you mean by “someone”? Would not normally ask but it seems that circular reasoning would be an imminent answer.
3
@Wera_loves_loscamp “It’s not your pregnancy, therefore you don’t have a right to dictate wether someone should terminate it or not” Meaningless statement dependent entirely on your own personal conception of what “rights” are. I can and will do everything in my power to dictate that people shall not murder.
3
You can see the same thing in U.S. soldiers. Murderers always have their acts catch up to them mentally
3
She has said absolutely nothing you can’t hear from any other pro-choicer. People need to watch ultrasounds of abortions instead
3
Why in the cases of rape and incest? Should a child have to pay for the crimes of those who made them?
3
How you call a mass murderer empathetic because they are on the verge of tears at the mere thought of women being encouraged not to murder their own children would be hilarious if it was not so disturbing
3
Why the limit on children? Also how would this prevent abortion when a man can have sex with promiscuous strangers and not get found out? If your goal is to reduce population and abortions, then why not forcefully sterilize women? Then limit on abortions and population is an absolute guarantee. There are reversible sterilization procedures for women. Your solution sounds like a much larger headache than just removing abortion’s legal status and giving incentive not to get one illegally by charging it as murder and providing the same punishments entailed.
3
@theinternettrashcan You support abortion as an alternative to having a child be in foster care, why not euthanasia? What is the distinction? You seem to have lots of trouble understanding how questions follow from what you say, as well as the questions themselves.
3
@Meh-sn5kj You just asked a loaded non-question. Explain how my analogies are false.
3
Think about what you just typed for a minute and see if you can find out what the pamphlet is actually talking about
3
@dejavu8477 What exactly do you think life is? How do you qualify it? There is both a biological and philosophical definition of what a life is, and it begins at conception. You believe in quality over quantity, huh? Do you take this approach to euthanasia outside of the womb? For example, do you think homeless people should be rounded up and murdered because of the suffering that they go through? Do you believe that life is only worth living when it is easy and pleasurable? Are you so strong in this conclusion that you believe that people should not even have the chance to determine that question for themselves? Very questionable ethics you are trying to peddle here.
3
It’s merely a return to the ancient world where prostitutes dashed their own children with rocks or struck at their stomachs, as well as sacrificing their own children to Baal. Real progress is found in obeying God, not by rebranding ancient sinful actions such as murder and sodomy as progress in an imaginary manmade spectrum. Sorry to burst your bubble.
3
She didn’t really say anything that hasn’t been addressed and refuted years before this boring video was ever made. Can you tell me anything she has said regarding abortion that is rational or consistent? Because otherwise it seems that you only like it because she reaffirms your worldview, and I’d hate to assume.
3
You’re extremely wrong. Read the original hippocratic oath. The life of the individual does not belong from the mother’s and is distinct. Abortion isn’t and never was healthcare. Killing an innocent human being is murder and not healthcare.
3
@sarahbennett7823 There is absolutely nothing in this video that I haven’t both already heard and already refuted years before watching this video. The fact that our schools should have to teach children about safe sex is already a symptom of 2 things: 1. That our society is promiscuous, something that shouldn’t be. (Especially when a common and poor criticism I receive in response to my anti-abortion position is the claim that the world is overpopulated). And 2. That there are 0 statutes in place that penalize this promiscuity and any murders that result from it. “Women die from not having access to abortion” unless you’re referring to septic pregnancies, this isn’t a problem. Murderers should not feel safe in their acts and any harm they receive is harm they have brought about themselves. It is very much a genocide, the murder of individuals isn’t basic healthcare. So much that it was forbidden in the original hippocratic oath. You obviously didn’t even absorb anything I have said this entire time, as you have never addressed any of my arguments with constructive criticism. You have only responded with multiple Proof by assertion fallacies. I personally suggest that you refrain from replying to any comments until you learn how to construct and articulate opposing arguments that don’t solely rely on multiple fallacies.
3
@sarahbennett7823 Majority of your reply is complete deflection and red herrings but I’ll respond anyways. I see you haven’t taken my advice of ceasing to reply until you figured out what you’re even typing. I know much about why a woman might choose an abortion, and I’ve already refuted the legitimacy of every instance you have mentioned and will proceed to do so again. People are allowed whatever the Lord God grants them. “Just because you don’t personally believe it’s right doesn’t mean everyone has to live by that rule”. I never said otherwise, I can’t stop people from doing what they want including mass murder unless I put myself at risk of death or torture. This isn’t vindication of your position, acts remain heinous and unjustified because I prove them as such in accordance to propositional logic and in accordance to the laws and statutes of God. I know that safe sex has accidents, accidents aren’t vindication of murder. If you decide to have sex one should be well aware of potential consequences or they shouldn’t do it. “Women who are married for years might want an abortion.” And it continues to be unjustified as the act of putting an innocent individual to death. “Women might not be able to afford the abortion.” I would say good, but rather I presume you didn’t mean what you typed as this statement is irrelevant and not an attempt at appeal to emotion or justification, I think you meant “some women may not afford to raise the child.” If this be the case, there are a multitude of solutions that don’t entail murder such as leaving the child in the care of someone else wether it be putting them up for adoption or leaving the child at a fire station. “Pregnancy might pose a risk to the mother” then the solution would be to monitor the pregnancy. The single and only valid complication I have heard is that of the septic pregnancy, which is mentioned in this video. From what I know, the child usually dies before the pregnancy becomes a risk to the mother. In this case it is not an abortion and instead a removal of the individual’s remains, which isn’t murder. There may also be the case in which both the woman and child may die, and if a serious risk is presented to the mother and the child’s death is guaranteed, then I remain neutral on the position. “The baby may have sever [sic] complications in which abortion would be the proper action” I’m not a utilitarian/eugenicist and killing innocent people on the basis of these philosophies is murder. There are SO many reasons for abortion, all of which you mentioned I have already known and refuted, and all of them with the sole exception of the septic pregnancy (which is neutral) are unjustified and invalid. “You’re so pro life but you don’t even value the life that’s already here, the mother” Both lives are already there. Both are living beings, and I care about all innocents. A mother should be cared for during and after her pregnancy for the sake of both lives, and if the mother is not innocent (such as conceiving the child from adultery or prostitution) then for the sake of the child. “But you’re the same kind of person to shame a mother who actually went through with the pregnancy and now can’t afford to properly care for a child, because they aren’t being responsible even the the [sic] responsible thing was to have an abortion.” On top of the blatant strawman fallacy, murder is never a responsible decision. “People get pregnant by mistake” I never said otherwise, and this is typically a part of most reasons to get an abortion. Once again not a source of vindication for your position. “And not everyone can or wants to carry a baby to term and give it up for adoption.” Elaborate, unless this is another one of your beloved proof by assertion fallacies. Now that I have responded to all of your deflections and red herrings, why don’t you address my refutations? Or better yet, refrain from commenting until you know what you’re talking about?
3
Nope
3
@freddiehandley278 False and ridiculous statement.
3
@kn9300 Do you know how classification works? Beings aren’t categorized by their brain activity, just as a person with brain death in a coma is still a human being, or even a deceased person would be considered a deceased human, the status of being deceased or braindead doesn’t make them less than/not human. The purpose of my use of the unborn elephant analogy was to convey the concept of qualification of beings in the pre-natal stages if development. You also initially conceded that an individual in the pre-natal stages of development is a living being, so the legal definition of death in your jurisdiction is irrelevant. Since you obviously don’t abide by the common scientific definition of what a human is, both in the current scientific paradigm and otherwise, how do you define what a human is?
3
@shikiira4185 1. You do not determine wether someone else’s life is worth living or not. That isn’t justification for murder. 2. You very likely don’t even believe the crypto-eugenicist slogans you are rambling out. A person’s right to live isn’t determined based on their utilitarian worth. Otherwise it would logically follow that you would advocate for the mass euthanization of homeless people, orphans, mentally disabled people, depressed people, poor people, etc.
3
@nightcorebeatzx8652 How is that relevant?
3
@nightcorebeatzx8652 By the way, having to be in general discomfort for about a year isn’t justification for murdering someone.
3
Do you share this sentiment with mass shootings?
3
Why is she a hero?
3
Do you think foster children should be euthanized?
2
@chazer0075 Why don’t men get a say in abortion? Do you also take this “If you don’t like it then don’t do it” to rape as well? I have a funny feeling that you don’t and you mainly use it as a verbal crutch to suggest that people shouldn’t be held accountable.
2
@chazer0075 That’s not what I asked. Read again. If a father gives a woman a child unknowingly, why should he not have a say? Is the child not his if he brings it into the world unknowingly?
2
@chazer0075 That’s not what I asked. I am talking about an unplanned pregnancy that a man knows about. He didn’t know as in he didn’t willingly impregnate her or know that he did.
2
@chazer0075 That’s a deflection and not an answer to my questions. Read and answer instead of making proof by assertion fallacies.
2
You should repent for murdering your own child lest you suffer God’s wrath upon you.
2
@neahmarie9750 How should other people’s lives be decided? How can you make that ethical statement? Are you an objectivist or subjectivist?
2
It’s not health care. Read the original Hippocratic Oath and take a biology class.
2
@marajesty311 Elaborate as to how it isn’t. My case is clear because abortion is the murder of a human being in pre-natal stages of development almost always with the mother’s consent. How is murdering somone’s child caring for them? Also, where did you find that definition of medicine?
2
Why? Explain.
2
Interesting theory. Do you have any proof?
2
How is she strong?
2
@emeraldcelestial1058 More empty words and meaningless claims. You say there is nothing to argue because you can’t, you don’t even know how to qualify or validate your own statements.
2
@KenzieTawili I never asked for how you define a child, I asked how you define a baby. What do you think a fetus is? A fetus is a human being in pre-natal stages of development over 8 weeks of conception. They aren’t guilty of any crime deserving of death as far as I’m aware of, so this would make them innocent. Killing innocent individuals is murder.
2
@boodiddleydum927dumdiddley4 I have to repeat myself because you don’t pay any attention and refute arguments I never make. You have yet to defend your position that an individual in pre-natal stages of development isn’t a human individual. Make your moronic ad-populum arguments somewhere else, I’ve already addressed this exact statement multiple times. You never tried to make me see how flawed my thinking is because you’ve never addressed anything I have said with an actual argument. You finish your final statement with another irrelevant strawman. Why don’t you pick up a book or two and find out what “faulty reasoning” is?
2
@bittermochi259 I never once invalidated people who are married and have health risks, what are you talking about? And to clarify, I think using hormonal contraceptives to prevent serious health issues is fine, but they should be under a prescription so it isn’t put into the hands of people who want to have casual sex. Rest of your paragraph is just strawmanning and complaining about the policies of people I have nothing to do with. I’m also not an individualist, have no idea where you got that impression.
2
@bittermochi259 I don’t think what you say is statistically correct at all, and vaccination is entirely unrelated to the abortion argument. Unless you know anyone who isn’t getting vaccinated with the intention of contacting and spreading anthrax (assuming the imaginary anti-vaccination person in your head accepts the germ theory of disease), your deviation is pretty intellectually dishonest at worst and extremely irrelevant at best.
2
@bittermochi259 Sorry if I struck a nerve, but your response is non-sensical. “There are under a prescription given by the doctor” ok? I never stated otherwise. If you think I am hypocritical and are willing to assert such then you should probably back it up instead of announcing a sentence later that you’ll be scuttling away.
2
@anitaremenarova6662 I generally don’t care about what women do with their bodies unless it comes to my partner, which is why nobody is talking about it. We’re talking about abortion, the mass murder of innocent people. Pay attention
2
@boodiddleydum927dumdiddley4 I never said you believe what I believe. I’m clarifying my statements while attacking the inconsistent and fallacious beliefs of my opponents. The reason I keep having to state my beliefs again and again is because my opponents do the exact same thing you accuse me of doing.
2
@boodiddleydum927dumdiddley4 Very interesting fantasies floating around in your head. Perhaps one day you’ll climb back down to reality and have a discussion with pro-lifers or anti-abortionists and actually refute their positions instead of giving them positions in your head that they don’t actually have.
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp To the contrary, I have regard for all innocent life regardless of age or status. Unborn individuals aren’t the bodies of their parents. But I am in favor of controlling people, I think we should control people from committing murder and various other crimes.
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp “The mother’s life is worth so much more” How do you measure that exactly? What makes you say this? And I’m not policing the bodies of women, I am criticizing your poor (almost nonexistent given that you haven’t even yet attempted to justify your made-up hierarchy) justification of genocide, infanticide, and filicide. Nobody gets a free pass to murder based on who they are.
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp In which country/state legislature? That’s also a strawman fallacy because you presume that I am supportive of the decisions of this vague unnamed justice system you reference, which I have made clear that I do not. Men providing abortions should also be charged for murder. “Banning abortion won’t stop it, just make it more dangerous” continuum fallacy. Banning alcohol in the prohibition didn’t stop it’s production, but it stopped alcohol from getting into the hands of countless people. Makes it more dangerous? Good. You shouldn’t be safe when trying to murder someone.
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp How so? They can’t survive independently from other people, which you previously stated as a justification to murder individuals in the pre-natal stages of development. “They have lived actual lives” elaborate. “A fetus is not as important as a person” how do you qualify personhood?
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp It is murder. I have established this various times with elaboration and all few attempts that were made to refute it collapse. Just like you don’t refute the analogy I made between the individual in pre-natal stages of development and the coma patient despite pointing it out. I have qualified that people in the pre-natal stages of development are 1. Human beings and 2. Living, functioning multicellular organisms and 3. Innocent of any crime or wrongdoing justifying their death. This would mean that the act of “terminating” them is an act of murder. This has never been refuted and you won’t likely even make an attempt.
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp I’ve just proven the positive. Unless you refute what I said your statement is meaningless and false on it’s surface. It’s like saying “Oxygen isn’t a gas”
2
@Wera_loves_loscamp You haven’t said anything to begin with. You just repeat your false statement despite it being refuted. I can’t stop you from being a moron if you really want to, and that’s fine. But for your own sake and the sake of others keep your unintelligible worldview to yourself instead of wasting other people’s time. If you decide to grow up and actually refute what I have said that is also welcome.
2
@tobiasunbekannt3541 I’m not a eugenicist/utilitarian, so no. Also an inconceivable hypothetical.
2
@plank8989 My opinion on this issue may appear one-sided due to the fact that I require logical consistency on these topics, and that I do not find any pro-abortion/pro-choice arguments to be effective/consistent. “And of course, every single person will respond with wanting to save it…” Negative. The pro-choice response is usually to deny the baby’s humanity and life; denying that it is a baby. You can see this response multiple times in this comment thread alone, ignoring every other thread I have discussed in. “…but you are lacking any connection with the impact that this decision will make on the person that will need to take care if it.” I have already considered this long before I ever saw this video. I have come to the conclusion that personal burden is not justification for murder. Would it be murder if a woman who became poor decided to murder her 5 year old disabled child who is expensive to take care of be justified in this act? “Do you wish for the baby to be born from a crack addict hooker that decided to start prostituting without using a condom?” If the child is conceived, then yes. I’m not a utilitarian or eugenicist, I do not think this child should be murdered based on who his parents are or what the child should have to deal with growing up. “Do you think that they would have a pleasant life growing up in such a place?” No, I don’t. This isn’t justification for their murder. Otherwise you could use this murder justification to murder homeless people and people in Ghettos. “What kind of mental effects would this cause as well as behavioral changes?” None that would warrant their murder. “What about the millions of children rotting their childhoods away in adoption centers?” I don’t think they should be murdered either. “Why do you think they got there?” Multiple reasons, none of them justifying their murder. “So many kids grow up in families that are unable to financially support themselves which results in the child lacking education, possible health problems if there has been malnourishment and/or a lack of proper hygiene and in most cases, quite a lot of emotional and psychological issues.” Yes. Do you think any of these people would request that you murder them? Why don’t you go visit people who have grown up in the various conditions you have listed and ask if they would like to be killed? Would you support the systematic genocide of homeless people, orphans, and the mentally/physically disabled? I have a funny feeling that your answer is going to be different when the demographics mentioned are in a later stage of development rather than inside the womb. My simplistic approach of being anti-murder and not supporting eugenics/utilitarianism, despite your claims of idiocy, are consistent with my ideological foundation and address all the demographics you have listed. You then proceed to make another utilitarian/eugenicist claim that my response is the reason for negatives. I would have to respond, why don’t you prove this claim? Abortion isn’t good, and it certainly isn’t necessary, no matter your silly fallacies of composition. I don’t care about your opinion that the poor, needy, depressed, injured, and dejected should be put to death for the crime of suffering. Back it up with consistency and reason. Much like you don’t care about my opinion that the aforementioned people have a right to live and shouldn’t be murdered. I instead back my opinion up, and I don’t believe asserting it without doing so will ever make you think any different.
2
@bethankrzowski4553 It’s not a sentiment. It’s the truth. And you do notice the reason that I bring it up is because the very murderer in this video has sensationalized this woman’s unfortunate passing to justify mass murder?
2
@bethankrzowski4553 I never claimed that one is more important than the other. Not even once. To the contrary, I think both are equal and that neither of them should have their life taken by another. I never said I’m omniscient or that I know everything. Your statements are mere projection. However the is a creator who made this world, and he declared that mankind shall not murder lest they bring their own blood upon their own heads. Go ahead. Flee. Proverbs 28:1.
2
Read the original hippocratic oath. You don’t murder or kill for your patients. Murderers shouldn’t have a role in healthcare.
2
Very creepy comment
2
Subjectivist nonsense. If morals are all personal then how can you make the assertion that an individual can’t apply their moral judgement to others? I can’t prove this at the moment of course, but I have a funny feeling your whole appeal to legality fallacy at the end doesn’t apply to 1776-1860’s America or Nazi Germany.
2
@GrimReaper553-f2s “incest cause [sic] the baby could be deformed and life expectancy for a baby with siblings or relatives as parents leads to many health issues for the baby” Then why not support abortion for disabled babies in general? A eugenicist/utilitarian philosophy isn’t justification for murder. “Rape cause [sic] the psychological trauma. The mother may take it out on the baby. Save the baby from the dangers of that mom going through psychological trauma” You don’t save someone by murdering them. And you yourself stated a simple alternate solution instead of murder, so why support it anyways?
2
Why is she brave?
2
You can’t bless what has been set apart for destruction. Pray for her to repent so you can bless her
2
It is rare for murder to not catch up to people’s conscience. It’s why so many U.S. soldiers end up committing suicide, and she may do the same thing as she grows older.
2
The whole “clump of cells” euphemism/pejorative has been debunked countless times. All multi-celled organisms are clumps of cells including you and me. These are functioning individual human organisms i.e. human beings. With your pathetic verbal sophistry out of the way we can now dissect and respond your comment. Yes, of course people who are against murder are not going to receive utilitarianism as a justification for mass murder. If you don’t like that, you can either form an actual argument or put up and shut up. Either one is beneficial to everyone involved.
2
@becky14 Accoridng to what? Your hedonist ideology that’s already been refuted countless times? Your comment also has nothing to do Wesley’s statement. You never refuted that murdering a baby isn’t healthcare.
2
Do you have the same opinion on the subject of mass shootings?
2
@theinternettrashcan If it needs to be put that simply, yes.
2
@AM-su6je I never implied so. You are projecting this sentiment onto me. Provide a real criticism or don’t comment.
2
She is pandering to people who understand and believe in gender theory.
2
Who is she fighting? Babies? Give me a break lmao. She enjoys getting money from the delusional mistakes of young women who think murdering their children will liberate them, and behind those crocodile tears is someone who doesn’t give a shit if her client kills herself if they regret and can’t handle the guilt of murdering their own children. She won’t regret any of it until she feels the weight of God’s wrath or receives the truth.
2
Reminiscent of many of the perpetrators of the worst atrocities in human history, such as the holocaust. Just because you have conviction doesn’t mean you are correct, smart, know what you are talking about, or justified.
2
@kimberlycallus3170 It’s a mental health issue. People should understand that abortion is murder and treat it as such. Telling a psychiatrist that you are thinking about hurting someone will get you psychiatric help rather than prison time, at least in my country and this is the way it should be.
2
You aren’t very bright. The pamphlet is taking about women who either already have children and have had an abortion, or women who have an abortion but want children in the future.
2
@dejavu8477 Just because other people tell lies to prevent the murder of others doesn’t make you bright. The people handing it out wouldn’t know, they don’t necessarily have to.
2
@dejavu8477 Their whole plight is to prevent mass murder, which is respectable. It accuses nobody, and presents an unproven statement to deter some people from murdering their own children. How is it damaging?
2
@dejavu8477 I know that it isn’t, which is why it is not my tactic on here. In which scenarios do you think murdering a child is an acceptable behavior?
2
@dejavu8477 Do you think people in unloving and unsafe environments should be euthanized? Are you a utilitarian? Why does the time at which the child is murdered matter?
2
False dilemma fallacy.
2
Imagine if someone said the same thing about Brenton Tarrant, James Holmes, or any other crazed mass murderer. The only difference is that you are permitted by the status quo to view people in the pre-natal stages of development as subhuman.
2
@UlyssesHaq 1. No, because it’s biologically impossible 2. No, because it’s biologically impossible 3. Yes 4. Usually yes, and the fetus isn’t her body. 5. Yes, murder doesn’t qualify as appropriate health care.
2
@UlyssesHaq When a pregnant woman has a miscarriage that hasn’t been consciously induced then it isn’t murder, the same way if a man slips off a cliff and falls to his death isn’t a murder or suicide. Murder is a valid and important argument. The fetus can be a child depending on what you qualify as such, but is in every way a human being. To say otherwise is just twisting language to declare someone in the pre-natal stages of development as subhuman or inhuman. And of course the baby poses a health risk, most things do, such as walking across a street. Meaningless argument.
2
@saramarie5164 If you have an ethical/moral system that values innocent human life and seeks to protect it, then you have every reason to step up and say that it should not be legal for women to murder their own children. Men should take responsibility in raising their children and should have a legal obligation to do so. Do you share your sentiment that the abused, impoverished, orphans, etc. should be murdered at any age? Are you at the very least consistent with your utilitarian slogans?
2
How can you bless what God has cursed?
2
@username---------- There are some who have repented such as Bernard Nathanson. Don’t give up hope on someone no matter how heavy their sins are unless they blaspheme or apostatize into polytheism. Those who don’t repent will have God’s wrath upon them. Continue to pray for these people to stop or curse them to death if they absolutely refuse repentance.
2
Do you feel the same way about Adam Lanza?
2
@BeeseChoard Your first question is a false ultimatum. Also, your dehumanization tactic in calling a human being in the pre-natal stages of development a “clump of cells” has been refuted countless times. You are also a clump of cells. To avoid coming off as deceitful you should instead refer to the unborn as they are, innocent people. You say that the adoption and foster care system in America is so fucked up that it would be heinous for you to even dare put a child there, but is it not cruel to murder a child? I would rather one go through the foster care system than be murdered. I empathize with your mental and physical health issues, but they aren’t justification for murder. I’m also not a eugenicist, murdering someone because they may suffer or have a risk of bringing suffering to other people isn’t justifiable. Nobody is asking you to take care of a child. There are next to no situations in which abortion is ethical. I never said nor believed that people generally choose to murder others, especially their own children, out of brief personal whim. Just because their reasons may be multiple, and may be complex, doesn’t mean they are valid reasons. “A child can face extensive mental and physical issues because of the problems their parents have.” This doesn’t make their life invalid, and it doesn’t mean that they are better off dead. Do you regret your life? Do you wish you were never born because of the struggles you have faced? No matter your answer, why would you make the decision for someone who can’t yet communicate with you? Why do you advocate for eugenics when it could be used as a (false) justification to kill you too? Does your husband not consent to your sterilization? “Still, it is absurd that I have to consider invasive surgery in order to function without constant fear and anxiety.” Please pardon my bold question in advance, but is having instruments physically enter you to tear apart/vacuum out your own offspring, or taking a pill that suffocates your own offspring (which they can survive) and having their dead body leak out of you not also invasive procedures? “Your arguments about the morals and ethics of abortions are extremely harmful to anyone who can get pregnant.” Please elaborate on this statement without mention of your health conditions or similar. How would my ideas be harmful to a healthy woman? “I know you will not change your mind, but just consider what others have to deal with” I always do. I have had hours of debates with admitted eugenicists, and have heard every argument under the sun in favor of it. I maintain and conclude that eugenics is fundamentally contradictory to my religion and any moral/ethical/philosophical system that has any value or regard for general innocent/human life.
2
What is life? A fetus is living by definition.
2
@TheLegendOfRandy Red Herring and false analogy fallacy.
2
@TheLegendOfRandy Also fancy seeing you again. I see that your inability to form rational discussion (as well as being made a laughing stock because of it) doesn’t stop you from spouting the same old fallacious bullshit 😂
2
@sarah-jadesmith113 Self-admitted advocate for murder suggests that pro life people are basket cases. Hilarious. I suggest admitting yourself to a mental hospital to prevent you from harming yourself or others.
2
How can you bless what God has cursed?
2
@kn9300 They are very much human. Is the child of an elephant in the womb not an elephant? I don’t know of any sane individual that would say a human in pre-natal stages of development isn’t a human.
2
@kn9300 You claimed that an elephant in the pre-natal stages of development is not qualified as an elephant if it does not have brainwaves. You are conflating the classification of an entity with it’s status, and in the case of the person, you are using this conflation as a tool to dehumanize when it is illogical to do so as an entity’s state is independent of it’s classification (For example, a dead human). An individual in the pre-natal stages of development is absolutely a human life distinct from a sperm, egg, or decomposing corpse, in that it is a functioning organism. Your final statement is flawed and self-defeating, as it would not only qualify people in permanent comas or indeterminate comas as inhuman/subhuman, but it also characterizes a gaining of consciousness future-tense as a qualify of human life, thus humanizing an individual in pre-natal stages before brain development.
2
@kn9300 No, this is a qualification error on your part exclusively since you have never differentiated an entity and it’s state until now. You never used the term “elephant life” or “human life” in contrast with “elephant” or “human”. As of right now I believe that’s deliberate in an effort to dehumanize a human in the pre-natal stages but if this is not the case then I apologize for this conclusion. A human in the pre-natal stages of development is absolutely a functioning organism, and it is alive because because an organism is literally defined as living. You admit that a human in pre-natal stages is both a living being and a human, so how is it not a human life? Your differentiation is absolute nonsense, as a human fetus is indeed human as you have already stated. Your final statement is self-defeating and if you did not mean what you said then it is in your error of being unable to articulate your concept. It also dawns on me now that you never answered my question, what do you qualify as human life? Because it is apparent in this conversation that it is not only exclusively based on your personal whim but is also self-contradictory.
2
@shikiira4185 “It’s stupid to compare someone already living to the life of someone who hasn’t been born.” How so? How do you determine this value? Is it the quantity or quality of life experience that is measured? Why should I take on your belief of this experience hierarchy and endorse executions of people based upon it? “An unborn child is alive, but hasn’t lived…” distinction without difference. Why should someone have to experience “the unfairness of this world” in order to avoid being murdered? How does one exactly experience this vague unfairness? Again you spout more utilitarian and psychological hedonist nonsense. Would you rather be dismembered or suffocated than to grow up poor yourself? You don’t really seem to realize the actual implications of what you are talking about, especially when you use vague assertions of worth based upon experience.
2
@shikiira4185 You have presented a wall of waffling and have answered none of my questions. On what basis should experience determine the value of an individual? You have never scrutinized or requested my viewpoint. Since you admit directly that an unborn child is a functioning human individual guilty of no crime, killing it would be unjustified and thus murder. Your only attempted justification is the assertion of this value system that you have never elaborated on despite my clear and straightforward questions about it. I’m not a eugenicist or utilitarian. I don’t think people should be executed for suffering or living in poverty. I asked for qualification and definition, not examples. Socrates made this distinction over a millennia ago. I never said that I believe all children should be born. I made a statement that killing a child in the womb is unjustified and thus murder. Can you answer my questions instead of deflecting this time?
2
@nightcorebeatzx8652 I don’t have to stop it when your representatives will. God’s wrath will happen to murderers regardless. The pain of childbirth is less than a tickle compared to hellfire.
2
@nightcorebeatzx8652 It is murder. Just because I don’t deem someone’s suffering as a murder license doesn’t mean that I don’t care about them. “Move on” from what? Lol
2
Lovely anecdotal evidence. If this silly story were to actually come from reality, this “friend from HS” should repent for murdering her own child.
2
Your reality in dreamland. Your imagination.
2
Hey, murder is murder. People have all sorts of different motives for taking an innocent person’s life and it is also easier for some than it is for others. This isn’t a source for vindication. Just because it can be difficult doesn’t make it positive, a right thing to do, something that people shouldn’t criticize, etc.
2
How can you bless what God has cursed?
2
@e.pluribusunum7916 How does caring about a select group of people make someone a hero? That New Zealand mosque shooter did basically the same thing and she has probably killed more people than him.
2
@e.pluribusunum7916 They don’t cover personhood in public school lol. How do you qualify what people are?
2
@e.pluribusunum7916 Since when is personhood covered in biology? I’m not asking what a person isn’t, I am asking what a person is. Drop the red herring bullshit. You aren’t even close to as clever as you think you are.
2
Ok. Why? How do you define bodily autonomy?
1
@p44doyle44 Just noticed your reply since you didn’t @. Do you believe that autonomy is an inherent positive? How do you define what a right is?
1
@grimmsby3011 Considering it’s been 4 days without any replies I don’t think this individual is actually interested in having their mind changed. Also great observation as there are many comments like this one, that will make vague and almost meaningless assertions. Scrutiny and analyzation is the most dangerous tactic towards pro-abortion ideology.
1
@p44doyle44 Reasons why not? You’re arguing on the affirmative, so the burden is on you to provide reasons. So you state autonomy is an inherent good. How about the autonomy to kill anyone you want? Do you believe that James Holmes had a right to shoot up a movie theater? Or is autonomy only a good thing when women murder?
1
@p44doyle44 I never said they are the same. If you believe that James’ doesn’t have the right then that is imposing upon his autonomy, which you stated was an inherent good. This means your statements collapse upon themselves under this ridiculous, vague, subjective, and completely abstract notion of autonomy.
1
@p44doyle44 An egg is not necessarily a future chicken. That’s a conflation of a gamete and a being in pre-natal stages. An equivalent would be a chick developing in a fertilized chicken egg, and that is a live chicken.
1
@p44doyle44 You’re also employing multiple red herrings and strawmanning.
1
@p44doyle44 There is a biological definition of life but of course it is of the subject of philosophy. You have employed no philosophical basis for your arguments and have no established theory of ethics, so it is indistinguishable. What is the differentiation between autonomy and anarchy and how are they mutually exclusive?
1
@p44doyle44 That’s a thought-terminating cliché. I’m not closing myself off to a change of opinion. You are trying to silence rational dialogue of your own volition. Why?
1
@doodledee3348 I literally got notified of this one
1
She won’t find any peace in Hell! You should hope she repents and stops murdering people
1
@noufiiii2082 Education has helped me. I oppose the mass murder of innocent individuals because of what I have learned. Provide a criticism.
1
@baylichelsea1041 Where did you get these statistics? Also, injury and mental illness isn’t murder vindication. Please try again.
1
@baylichelsea1041 Also forced kidney donation isn’t analogous. Abortion is explicitly an execution of an individual that one has given life rather than refusing to give to an individual aid. Probably the closest analogy you could get to kidney donation would be killing someone you donated your kidney to in order to get your kidney back.
1
Murder is very much the business of a healthy society. Just because I’m not the one being murdered does not mean I should accept it.
1
@simply_a_human How about you stuff your red herring and make an actual argument?
1
@simply_a_human I know you want your blatant emotionally manipulative red herring to be an argument, but it isn’t. Who said I don’t care about the lives of children after they are born? I don’t think anyone deserves to be butchered or suffocated to death because their life is difficult, and you are suggesting some pretty heinous things when you refer to this eugenicist slogan. “The fetus is not going to understand what’s going on when it’s aborted.” Even if this were completely true (It isn’t, human beings in the fetal stage of development respond to harmful stimuli), this isn’t justification for murder. This notion suggests other very heinous things that I have a funny feeling you would view as unethical. Do you think it is acceptable to murder or otherwise mutilate comatose people? They can’t feel anything and don’t understand what is going on around them. Again with your bullshit red herrings, who said I don’t advocate for changes in the foster care system? It’s entirely irrelevant either way. Think out your next reply and read it over to make sure you aren’t resorting to further emotional manipulation tactics subconsciously.
1
@simply_a_human Your comment is the one that got filtered lol
1
@simply_a_human Suggesting that lives with challenges should be taken from those who suffer is a eugenicist slogan. “It needs to remain a right.” It isn’t, never has been, and never will be, a right. You don’t have a right to murder no matter how many excuses you make up, or how big your victim complex is. Do you genuinely believe that further development equates to worth as a human being and who has more of a right to live, or is this another slogan? “Clump of cells” is also a euphemism. Any multicellular organism, including you and me, is by definition a “clump of cells”. You are using this term to dehumanize the individual in pre-natal stages of development. Clearly not recovering, you say? Since when was this a factor in butchering people who are unable to respond to stimuli? With the circumstances you have already established in an attempt to justify mass murder, you have unwittingly implied that your comatose mother could be murdered without justification. Please take a minute to think of and reflect how sickening these attempts at justifying murder are when you apply them to other scenarios, and perhaps you would realize that abortion is murder. “Pro-choice doesn’t mean that person is going to always have an abortion.” I never said nor suggested this, and that was never the point. Suggesting that people should be murdered for having “shitty genetics” is literally eugenics. Once again, murdering people because their life may be unpleasant isn’t a justification. And just to test your consistency, do you support rounding up and “terminating” the homeless and disabled? I have a funny feeling you don’t. The safety of the mother is the least of my concern when she is attempting to murder her own child.
1
@Rjnoonekares How exactly do you manage to misquote me when what I said is literally right above your comment? In your favor I’ll assume you’re just not very smart rather than the alternative of you trying to peddle manipulation tactics. The safety of the mother is of course my concern, as is the safety of all innocent individuals. But the moment an individual, including the mother, starts to make murder attempts then they are forfeiting the benefits of innocence. Their safety is no longer a priority when they are committing murder. You are also committing a red herring fallacy in the remainder of your reply. Form an actual argument and reply again. If you continue to misquote me or use fallacious reasoning I will conclude you are intellectually dishonest and won’t bother responding.
1
@Rjnoonekares By removing both the context in which these words were said, as well as half the sentence these words were in, you are both misquoting and misrepresenting what I said. This is the last time I’ll bother addressing your inane misquoting problem. Either form a real argument or log off lol
1
@Rjnoonekares To buttress the fact that I’m not being exclusionary to mothers, as your misquote suggests. Form an argument.
1
@Rjnoonekares On top of this, you’ve established that you’re a moral subjectivist. It then stands that there is literally no reason to waste my time talking to you about ethics, especially given that you are intellectually dishonest. Moral subjectivism is crypto-nihilism, and you only conclude right and wrong based on your feelings rather than any actual basis.
1
@marajesty311 Proof by assertion fallacy
1
@marajesty311 By who? How do you qualify healthcare?
1
@marajesty311 How is the extermination of a human being medical care?
1
@marajesty311 That’s proof by assertion. How is pregnancy an illness?
1
@marajesty311 How is pregnancy an illness or injury?
1
@marajesty311 How is it medical if it does not deal with illness or injury?
1
@marajesty311 What do you think medicine is?
1
@marajesty311 Also how is filicide and infanticide improvement of health?
1
@maxpulido4268 Multiple issues with triage and it’s applicability to abortion, the first being that it is not an inherent aspect of abortion. A mother may be capable and can afford to raise their child but still decide to murder it instead. The second is an appeal to nature fallacy that may arise (I say “may” because I am unsure of your intent of mentioning this, wether it be to justify or to explain a viewpoint separate from your own).
1
@maxpulido4268 Why is there only one person and how did you come to this conclusion? Why is there only one justifiable reason? It is murder, and murder does not have an exclusively legal definition. “No one in any western country” why are we using western countries as the standard here for abortion’s legal definition? Are you a white supremacist by chance?
1
@darcymr353 The babies in the womb. You know, human beings in pre-natal stages of development? Ever go to high school?
1
@darcymr353 If you did, you would already know the answer to that question. The “it” is a human being from the very beginning of their existence, which is conception
1
@darcymr353 Because it has all of the necessary biological traits of a living being.
1
@darcymr353 Yes they are. Lol
1
@darcymr353 That’s news to me. Where did you get this information, exactly?
1
@darcymr353 I’m not taking your word for it. I’m asking you to provide where you got this information. I’m not going to go digging to make your argument for you
1
@darcymr353 That’s a deflection. Answer my question and respond with where you got your information
1
@darcymr353 Answer the question and stop deflecting, please
1
@darcymr353 Well I don’t know which high school you went to or which textbook you read, however for the sake of continuing discussion let’s assume you’re absolutely correct. For all intents and purposes, I’ve conceded. This would move the point of which a blastocyst is when a human life begins, which is still going to be long before a woman will know a child is inside her and not change anything about abortion or that there is an individual human being inside the womb.
1
@darcymr353 Sorry, I didn’t see your responses. Can you provide a medical journal or study that elaborates on the beginning of homeostasis at 24 weeks?
1
You have zero understanding between the difference of active and passive. Pregnancy is not an active, forcing people to use their bodies to save another person is (such as forced kidney/liver donations for example). Abortion is active, it is an action of deliberately butchering or suffocating an individual human being. “Body autonomy” is a euphemism. Nothing more. It is equivalent to referring to mass deportation and genocide of minorities as “ethnic autonomy”.
1
I don’t know what you mean, but I will happily explain why people are pro-life, anti-choice, anti-murder, anti-abortion, or whatever you want to call it. People are usually opposed to abortion because they place some value on the lives of innocent human beings, and won’t compromise it in the name of hedonism and/or utilitarianism.
1
Most likely to do with some weird Gender pronoun schtick
1
Well said!
1
@kG-rv1ck It’s assault. If you don’t understand the difference between a Gamete and a functioning human organism in the pre-natal stages of development then leave the screen and go back to middle school.
1
@emeraldcelestial1058 It’s a return to ancient Greece where prostitutes murdered the children they conceived with rocks. You aren’t advancing and you don’t live in a healthy civilization, your entire life is a lie.
1
@emeraldcelestial1058 I never called all women prostitutes, pay attention. It’s a valid equivalency exclusively differing the method used to murder the individual.You’re projecting when you call my worldview atavistic. The rest of what you said isn’t really worth responding to because it’s just angry, meaningless rambling. Please form an argument
1
Same way Chris Kyle was a legend, I suppose. Murdering innocents is an easy way to earn idolization, apparently. It’s like how Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold have followers
1
@KenzieTawili Yes, it biologically, scientifically, and ethically is. Look up “Human pre-natal development”.
1
@King_WhiteWolf I’ve never come across an actual pro-lifer or anti-abortionist that doesn’t believe that life begins at conception. It’s the single most consistent view, believing otherwise is usually special pleading and I have never found someone defend such positions rationally or with a sound basis.
1
@bittermochi259 It depends heavily on individual to individual, the pro-life/anti-abortion movement isn’t a monolith. I am personally against contraception because I believe it enables and encourages casual sex.
1
@boodiddleydum927dumdiddley4 You’ve given no valid reasons, I checked again and I couldn’t find a reason you gave for your support of abortion that wasn’t immediately fallacious on it’s face. Most of the content of your 2 initial comments were complaints about a groups or situations that had absolutely nothing to do with the discussion (irrelevant) and assertions about my positions that were blatantly false (strawmanning) or that you haven’t proven (such as the accusation of my logic being “nonexistent”.) “Those are my beliefs and sometimes during discourse things come up that may not follow a straight line” I’m fine with multi-faceted discussions, but what you brought forth were complete irrelevant deviations.
1
@bobsalamone9798 Brilliant refutation of an argument I never made for a position I never agreed with. Please read what I say before you respond next time please
1
@boodiddleydum927dumdiddley4 That’s a big fat non-argument if I’ve ever seen one. You have yet to prove any of my statements invalid. I will happily accept if I am wrong about anything, especially when it comes to abortion so I have a consistent worldview. If you can refute any of my statements, please do.
1
@alis.2368 Re-read my comments. You accuse me of being a “racist Karen” so prove it, I never said anything racial if even anything related to race this whole time. If you had actually read and comprehended what I said to you, you would realize that 1. The individual in pre-natal stages of development isn’t a “future-to-be-person” but rather a person from conception (not a single person has been able to successfully refute this point, when valid counter-arguments are presented to theirs they either deviate or just don’t respond) 2. I’m not a utilitarian or eugenicist, I don’t care what a person will be until they are. If you think the world is in need of a genocidal cleansing then try to perpetrate it yourself and get shot by the police.
1
@boodiddleydum927dumdiddley4 “Your facts are wrong” I would love to know how, considering you haven’t refuted a single one of my statements. “92% of abortions are done at or before 13 weeks” And? It’s already been established previously that life begins at conception (You never argued against this or refuted this) so this statement is just an irrelevant non-argument. “Fetuses are almost continuously asleep, any response to stimuli they give is from subcortical non-conscious origin and they don’t have pain perception until 20-30 weeks” and? Given it’s already established that human beings in pre-natal stages of development are living individuals (You didn’t refute this, and I can’t recall you even trying) then wether or not they are unconscious or can feel pain is irrelevant. But if you use this as a justification for murder then it would logically follow that we can now mass murder people in comas and people who have CIPA. “I notice that you never said anything in response to @Gemini because you don’t have an answer” I did, scroll up and read. “Go help somebody support their child and pay their medical bills” Non-argument. Please actually read and comprehend my comments then respond without the fallacious reasoning that I have refuted dozens of times.
1
@Wera_loves_loscamp How so?
1
@katrinasammons1448 If you don’t understand how the English language works, I guess you could call me anti-abortion. Doesn’t matter either way, your inability to understand semantics is only a weak verbal crutch to be kicked out from under you even when I go along with it.
1
@Ant_Dawgg I don’t own any animals. But in the hypothetical that I did, your act of killing my dog wouldn’t be positive but it is not an act of murder. My morals and ethics are completely consistent, you just don’t pay any attention and presume aspects of them instead of asking so you don’t understand them. I do have the common decency to tell people that they shouldn’t be going around and murdering other people. Please find a justification of this event of mass murder happening in the country then get back to me, otherwise do everyone a favor and stop wasting everyone’s time with your poor understanding and inability to formulate solid or meaningful discussion.
1
@Wera_loves_loscamp Elaborate
1
@Wera_loves_loscamp How is my initial comment antithetical to anything I said? You also answered none of my questions.
1
@zalanchaba “So you are having arguments on the internet (how redundant) about your views and believes [sic], and you can think what you want, just don’t force it on others” I can and will disseminate my worldview to whoever I please. You also do exactly the same thing yourself, so it’s pretty bizarre and weak to argue that this is a negative and shouldn’t be done (for whatever reason, if any). “If someone is choosing to abort your fetus that is none of your business and it is wrong to take the moral high ground without living in their shoes” It is very much my business such as someone running around murdering people you don’t view as subhuman is your business. I don’t have to be in the murderer’s shoes to determine that what they did and do is a problem. I’m almost positive you don’t take this same approach with Jeffery Dahmer or Charles Manson for example. “Women often times have to choose between two bad situations and choose the lesser one” So tell me, what is this silly false dichotomy that you made up that an ambiguous amount of women have to go through that justifies murder? “You might say they don’t have the right to be God (I would never say that, because nobody can be God.), but following your advice (What?) would that make you God for saving one, and thus giving life?” What a silly and incoherent argument that you decided to have with yourself. Nobody can be or is God, which is why I would never humor such a ridiculous debate in my life. “If you are against abortion, how many orphans do you care for or families do you feed?” Completely irrelevant. I have no religious obligation to do either of these things nor is this a valid argument. It’s a fallacious deflection. “Or you only care about the topic enough to write internet comments, point the finger, and play the moral high-ground” When have I pointed the finger or took the moral high ground? Also as an example of this fallacious reasoning I also propose a question to you: What have you done about murder in your community? Have you arrested or implicated any murderers? “A child is probably worth a billion times more in your eyes considering how much a fetus is worth” All human beings are equal in religious value if they are measured the same sins and belief. A sinless Christian man has the same value of a sinless Christian child. If I care about a subject I am not obligated to dedicate my life to it. Do you run a shelter for battered wives and homeless people? You must because you probably care about both of these issues, right?. “Listen I am not saying I am perfect because I don’t do these things either” Then why are you using them as a measurement of validity? “But I’m not shoving it down stranger’s throats either.” How do you qualify that exactly? Because I am nearly certain that you do the exact same.
1
@tobiasunbekannt3541 I’d be surprised if you genuinely think otherwise. Do you eat meat? Did the life of John Wayne Gacy matter?
1
@mnp572 It’s been a month since I commented so I scrolled up this thread and don’t really see what you are talking about. I likely briefly mentioned it in this discussion because a promiscuous culture can (and has) corrupt the ethical foundation of a nation, cause more abortion, promote a perverse lifestyle, etc. which are very much things that impact my life on a daily basis and do concern me. There is nothing wrong with sex in itself and it plays a rather minor role when discussing abortion.
1
@mnp572 Because mass genocide of innocent people is reflective of a nation in disobedience to God. Living in a nation where mass murder is considered an acceptable practice will usually mean (and it does in this case) that the people are corrupt which does effect me. Having a risk that my partner will murder my child does effect me. Now I will ask you a question of similar stupidity so that you may see the reflection in another context: how does someone else raping people effect your life? Not purely rhetorical. I would like you to give an answer.
1
@Devi_ka I don’t care about what you believe and I don’t owe you any respect for your clueless belief system. God commands us not to take innocent life, and the lives of those who aren’t innocent can be taken without punishment from God. Your appeal to legality is also moronic, as that same logic can be used to justify any kind of genocide or prejudice by any government figure in history. A human in pre-natal stages of development is an individual, and if you disagree then refute it. Explain why I don’t have a say in the murder of innocent human beings. Abortion doesn’t save lives, and it has taken millions. Your fertility clinic is both a red herring and a strawman. If you have nothing beyond proof by assertion, then stay under your rock.
1
@snailart14 Sorry, but I view human lives as worth more than livestock. Can it for someone who will fall for your manipulation tactics.
1
@ssri8108 Your comment is riddled with psychobabble and fallacies. “In the medical field people do things that’s beneficial for the patient” and abortion is not one of them. A person in a temporary vegetative can’t be ethically killed. It would be murder, just like abortion. Also, I think it’s extremely revealing that you openly admit that a core foundation of your reasoning (or lack thereof) is eugenics. I don’t care about your secular humanism and crypto-white supremacist ideologies, and expressing your intention to use them as a justification and nothing beyond isn’t an argument or even a real statement. “If you cared about lives you would have…” I’m going to have to stop you right there. Not only are you proposing a red herring fallacy, but it is so inconsistent and filled with mental gymnastics that I will not even dignify your fallacy with a response beyond calling it out.
1
@ssri8108 “A fetus when aborted is not viable and can feel no pain.” Neither can any other deceased life form. When you strip away the euphemisms your deflective statement is pretty dull. As for my religious ideology, you use a lot of “should” notions. Why? As for why I would not consider eugenics, it’s basis of what is desirable (the ubermensch) and undesirable (untermensch) is subjectivism, and unethical when used to justify genocide (Abortion, the holocaust, etc.). Why should a fetus with congenital anomalies be aborted? Do you also support the systematic extermination of the mentally and physically disabled in post-birth stages of development? “That’s the rule of obstetrics” That’s irrelevant. “I know I can’t change your opinion neither can you change mine.” That’s a thought-terminating cliche. I won’t indulge you in your anti-think. This is your verbal crutch after being called out despite initiating interrogative dialogue and making assertions against my claims. Think before you babble next time.
1
@a_grape_in_space1016 You don’t seem to really understand what killing even is. Killing is an action that causes death, not a lack of action. If it were a lack of action, then everyone would be responsible for killing because of a lack of perfect omniscience, such as not knowing when someone will have a heart attack that could be prevented by medical treatment for example. The idea of what killing is which you present is so ridiculous it’s almost comedic. Please think about these concepts for more than 5 minutes.
1
Why are you against abortion?
1
@Focused Studying Every multicellular organism is a clump of cells lol, this includes you. Would you find it acceptable if someone were to kill you during a state of unconsciousness?
1
@meaniemaelily You don’t understand the basic theology of how redemption works, which is probably why you’re a pagan
1
@meaniemaelily Not really oppressive when you don’t have a victimhood mindset. And cult by it’s actual definition? Sure, most religions are. Your pejorative is meaningless
1
You should instead hope for God’s mercy and guidance instead of murdering your own child. Knowledge and blessings be upon you that you may never suffer to commit such a detestable crime
1
@sg9255. In your silly attempt to get a reaction (or whatever that was) you praise a being exclusively present in Abrahamic theology which is nonsensical when you say that God doesn’t exist. You should probably pick up a book or something before outing yourself on not knowing anything. Cheers!
1
@sg9255. You are, apparently.
1
@sg9255. Please, you advocated for mass murder long before you ever spoke to me which is why I even replied to your comment to begin with. I reply for lost sheep, not hogs. I have proven to the people who read my comments that abortion is murder, and all those who cover their eyes will have God’s judgement upon them. I always sleep well knowing that everyone will be held accountable. Repent and earn God’s favor for your own benefit, I am pleased either way.
1
@sg9255. Re-read what I said before replying with your silly non-statements. You just repeated everything I’ve already refuted lol
1
@sg9255. I never would be mistaken that you take this conversation seriously, and have went as far as to have stated the contrary. Perhaps you’re in need of some reading lessons. Is English your first language?
1
@KytexEdits Do you share this sentiment with euthanizing the homeless and impoverished? Very questionable ethical principals you are presenting. If you think the point of life is to live in a pleasure dome bubble of hedonism, and that murder of individuals outside of this pleasure dome is “mercy killing” then I suggest you start with yourself. You won’t always be happy and you will eventually face trials in your life. But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that you are being intellectually dishonest and don’t actually believe what you are saying or realize it’s implications.
1
@KytexEdits Believing that a childhood isn’t worth having if it isn’t “good” or “stable” is hedonism. Why do you think that murdering people is no longer acceptable after they are born? I also find it depressing that you are a disabled individual who advocates for eugenics. I understand that you may struggle to enjoy your life, and if you truly believe that it is not worth living then you are capable of ending it. That is a choice. You should not be murdered before you are even able to make such a decision, and just because you feel this way does not mean that people in similar circumstances to you should be murdered. I don’t believe you should have your life taken by others or yourself unless you have committed a crime that warrants it. I hope that you repent and reject the heinous suggestions of eugenics, and live the life that you have as best as possible. Your life is worth living and you shouldn’t be murdered, and the same goes for all of those who are disabled or in other painful circumstances.
1
@KytexEdits That’s a thought-terminating cliche. I am trying to get you to reason your value system. Also, you did not answer my very important question about why murder is acceptable up until a particular point in development. In addition to the previous question, I also ask what it means to “live”.
1
Not her body.
1
Why?
1
What about the lives of the innocent people in the pre-natal stages of development?
1
Win.
1
@theinternettrashcan Cite when I said that pro-choicers are monsters and that I would rather the child be sent through the foster system to be abused. You have also never answered my questions. If you think you have, cite your answer.
1
@CyanideSunshines What are you rambling on about? Spit it out
1
“Not about what you believe”, huh? So what is it about? What you, yourself believe? Utilitarianism? Ethics in general come from belief. I’m more curious about this than your regurgitated utilitarian bullshit.
1
“The mass murder of innocent people and weeping over a piece of paper presenting alleged misinformation was reasonable, but simple gender theory is where I draw the line!” Lol
1
@maxpulido4268 How the fuck would it follow that I call you a pragmatist for endorsing genocide? I would probably be quicker to call you a lunatic than a pragmatist
1
@maxpulido4268 Proof by assertion. “Does the law see it as a human being? No.” What fucking law are you talking about? “Does the Bible? No.” Yes it does. If you think otherwise, explain. “Do I? No.” Why not? How do you qualify what a human being is? You seem to be more full of yourself rather than passing off as having a coherent ideology and ethical system.
1
@maxpulido4268 Yes I have. Kermit Barron Gosnell. It’s also illegal under most circumstances in multiple countries such as KSA. What is a soul and what god do you believe in? At what point in development do humans obtain souls? You also are conflating human being and personhood, which are 2 distinct things. How do you qualify personhood?
1
@maxpulido4268 What a waste of time
1
@maxpulido4268 It’s unhealthy to waste time with anti-intellectuals who think they can peddle beliefs by trying to be witty. You don’t actually believe any of these words you type out. Exodus 21:22-25 clearly states that inducing a miscarriage i.e. abortion is to be punished. Multiple verses describe life’s formation to take place in the womb such as Job 31:15. There are 0 verses that describe that the breath of life is given at birth. As for legality, you’ve made an assertion of this vague “law” and haven’t clarified what it even is or why said law is valid. I have brought up examples of criminal punishment for abortion globally. You also never mentioned morality. You describing personhood as “a featherless biped” is reflective of both your misunderstanding of Plato and the question he was asked, as well as your painful inability to be funny. You’ve been refuted on pretty much every level and I won’t be wasting any more time talking to you.
1
Do you feel similar about Brenton Tarrant you disturbing weirdo?
1
Boo hoo
1
@angelasmith6946 You’re welcome! :D
1
@angelasmith6946 Don’t worry. I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt in that regard.
1
Great. More money in her pocket
1
A queen Jezebel.
1
I have no sympathy for a woman who gets herself killed trying to murder her own child. What country are you from?
1
@ILovePink-x1v I think your idea implied of what being pro-life is ridiculous. If you struggle to understand basic semantics and context of what that is, then you can just call me anti-murder. I don’t think I’ve referred to myself as pro-life in the entirety of my 200+ comments in this comment section, but it doesn’t really matter. And of course I think all people should be held accountable for their actions. Women aren’t special and they aren’t entitled to murder whoever they want. Please wake up to reality if you think otherwise.
1
@ILovePink-x1v I never said I don’t see myself as pro-life, and I also never said that I think women who murder their own children deserve to die for it. “It’s terminating a fetus by the way” and? Euphemisms aren’t an argument lol. Your analogy in your next sentence is also completely incomprehensible. You’re also presenting a false ultimatum in your final suggestion. I don’t believe people should be murdered because they have potential to suffer. It’s like suggesting that people should be killed for walking down a street because they have potential to be raped or assaulted. Ridiculous.
1
@ILovePink-x1v You don’t seem to understand basic distinctions
1
@kimberlycallus3170 Your entire comment translated: “Decriminalizing murder puts murderers in a more healthy position where they don’t have to deal with the consequences and can seek help and relief”. What a grand revelation. You have just realized the entire point of criminalizing an act. And no, legalizing mass murder doesn’t save lives. I’m also not a utilitarian either way.
1
@kimberlycallus3170 I don’t know about your country, but in mine people with homicidal thoughts can receive psychiatric care and this is the way it should be. You don’t solve murder by suggesting it as an option for a solution to problems.
1
@kimberlycallus3170 Getting psychological help isn’t illegal, at least not here. “Should” is an ethics statement. What should be isn’t necessarily what is.
1
I hate to break it to you, but God doesn’t bless mass murderers. Take Adolf Hitler for example, his neo-pagan empire collapsed and he killed himself. She should repent before God’s wrath comes upon her in either this life or at the throne of God’s judgement.
1
@pregnantleggies3696 Ok? And?
1
Hopefully due to the idea of how many innocent people she has murdered
1
I would never trust my life in a doctor who murders people to begin with lol
1
@gst9325 Interesting… People can do illegal things? Then why don’t we legalize everything if people are going to do it anyways?
1
@gst9325 I didn’t ask what illegality is, I asked why anything is illegal. What is the benefit of making something illegal if people can do it anyways?
1
@gst9325 Same as all other forms of mass killings. Why make any kind of mass killing illegal?
1
A whole lot of assertions with no elaboration
1
Hey buddy, can you cool down a little bit and explain how overturning abortion’s status of being constitutionally protected is somehow allowing Christianity to “poison” the country? How does it violate 1A?
1
The common slogan said by the ignorant to the murderous
1
@miminotbovered2857 Do you think it is acceptable to starve newborn children to death by refusing to feed them?
1
@miminotbovered2857 That’s not what I asked.
1
@miminotbovered2857 “Some cases yes” that’s all I needed to hear. To be perfectly honest, I think ideologies in which starving a newborn if you don’t want it is an acceptable practice reveals the ideology to be both very questionable and very sketchy. Under what circumstances is it not acceptable to starve a newborn to death other than wanting it to survive? How about we take it a step further and ask, do you think beheading innocent newborn babies is acceptable in any circumstances?
1
How and why?
1
@Katelyn_sensei Your entire comment is under multiple false assumptions. I do volunteer and be a solution, and none of my arguments are composed of ad-hom. If you think otherwise, please cite a single one that is clearly ad-hom. When even once were said insecurities pin-pointed? You seem to be making a lot of this up as you go along to be totally honest. And I study real theology and philosophy by actual theologians and professors such as Gordon Clark. I don’t need to read some silly book made by some dipshit scam artist lmao. Provide a real refutal or do yourself a favor and turn off the computer/phone.
1
@Katelyn_sensei It seriously took you 3 weeks to come up with an ad populum deflection? Lol. I’m glad you took my advice but it looks like you need a bit more time.
1
@jinde75 Proof by assertion fallacy. Make an argument then reply again.
1
@saintshrooms9424 How is that relevant?
1
@darcymr353 Nope because a sperm cell is not a functioning organism.
1
@darcymr353 No, it isn’t.
1
Like Steve Green and Derek Chauvin were.
1
You’re not very smart.
1
How is she amazing? How can you bless what God has cursed?
1
That’s an appeal to privacy and a thought-terminating cliche. You do not believe that ideas (yours in particular) shouldn’t be forced upon others, otherwise you would openly advocate for all of the most detestable crimes mankind has to offer even beyond abortion. Do you believe that I should “mind my own business” when I see an innocent man being butchered to death?
1
God doesn’t bless unrepentant murderers. She is in serious danger of hellfire. If you think she is a good person then you should be praying that she repents lest she faces God’s wrath.
1
@linkeron1 Psalm 14
1
Probably because they don’t suffer a permanent mental composition fallacy lol
1
She’s brought it upon herself just like the soldiers who went to Iraq and Afghanistan. You can’t be a murderer and have a healthy mind or conscience.
1
Why?
1
@kn9300 Again, that depends on what you qualify children to be. Children is a vague term by it’s self.
1
@rtphotos4691 on terms of crimes against the state? No they don’t, and I never said they did. They do however commit crimes on both a religious basis (in Abrahamic religions) and most [CONSISTENT] morality bases. That’s why I use the term murder instead of killing to refer to the act of abortion.
1
@Elstefanorano No amount of pain is a justification for murder, I’m sorry. Very telling that you are willing to wish rape upon me though, a pain that you feel is so agonizing it warrants the murder of an innocent human being, for simply acknowledging that murder is unjust in such a situation. Makes me wonder what you would wish upon or do to others in order to gain pleasure.
1
Does the motive of a murder determine wether it is or isn’t so?
1
@largeshaftzac8027 “Body sovereignty” is nothing more than a euphemism
1
@largeshaftzac8027 You also don’t know the difference between passive and active sustenance and life saving. Being forced to donate a kidney would be an active measure not obligated to me. If I refused to donate my kidney to someone, I would not be killing them because their death is passive. If I was a woman and had a child in my womb, their living would be passive. Me deciding to execute them would mean their death is active, and I would therefore be murdering them
1
@largeshaftzac8027 “By pro life logic…” that’s a strawman fallacy and a generalization. Active and passive matters not only in the dynamics of abortion debate but in general ethics as well. Otherwise there is virtually no difference to refusing to donate all of your organs and murder, and we are both guilty for the deaths of countless people by merely continuing to live.
1
That is the most bizarre non-sequitur and condemnation of rape I have ever seen. Not that rape isn’t wrong of course, your reasoning is just extremely weird and nonsensical.
1
@shikiira4185 I directly addressed what you gave me. Again, I understand what a value system is. I am not looking for examples, I am looking for QUALIFICATION AND DEFINITION. 2 completely different things. Why should experience determine the worth of individuals? Why should I adopt this belief of an experience hierarchy? I understand that you are using experience as the value. I ask, why? Is someone older with more experience entitled to murder people of less experience? I never said that you stated such things. I’m saying it logically follows from your utilitarian ideology. “Preventing and ending are two different words and meanings.” Distinction without difference. How does it follow that they should be distinguished that preventing suffering is justification to execute and ending suffering not? How do you qualify purpose? I don’t refuse to acknowledge these things. I don’t respond to you bringing them up because they are completely irrelevant in a conversation about your silly experience value system. As for your question, yes I do. You don’t require justification to bring forth an individual into the world. Those two sentences do not contradict. “You say X is a negative. Therefore you think Y is a positive!” Ridiculous reasoning. I think women taking the lives of their own innocent children is murder, no matter what justification they try to use. You have yet to provide a basis for your value system and why it’s a universal.
1
@shikiira4185 If your definition and value system only has a measurement of 0 and 1, then it’s simply special pleading. You yourself admit that you only conceive this idea for the sake of murder justification and state that it has no other applicability to any other scenario. You also haven’t explained it’s basis and why one should adopt your crafted idea. It’s also begging the question and a definist fallacy. “Don’t apply your logic to mine!” Subjectivist nonsense. I of course will scrutinize your claims with my logic and what I know. If logic is individualist then why should anyone listen to what you have to say if we can all live in our own little bubble of right and wrong sculpted by ourselves? I would of course rather a responsible parent have a child than an irresponsible one. However like I said, I don’t follow your utilitarian ideology. I do not think we should murder children of the irresponsible parent to only achieve the desired outcome. If you think I should accept your value system and not criticize it, you have to sell it to me. Otherwise you are rambling to yourself. Negative. It’s not a contradiction. “Should” is a universal statement. For example, if a woman miscarries and I say the child should have been born, it is a statement against predestination and an attack on sovereignty. I am speaking under the conditions of what we are capable of controlling. There are more variables than A and B. I understand people’s attempted justifications, I’m saying they aren’t valid. Also, are you saying that people’s emotions operate above or below your value system? For example if 2 people are of equal value, may one’s emotions or want justify the extermination of the other? I do consider other people’s morals. This doesn’t mean that by considering them that I ought to deem them valid. More subjectivist nonsense supplemented by adhoms. Feel free to run away if you can’t handle the scrutiny. I won’t be losing any sleep over it.
1
No. Take a hike to some desolate corner of the Earth
1
@lewisbrown9773 Secularism is a joke
1
@lewisbrown9773 I don’t care. You’re not the object of validation and you never will be.
1
@lewisbrown9773 According to who?
1
@lewisbrown9773 Argumentum ad populum isn’t validation of your argument. I don’t see any problem with head coverings, but this as an example aside, I obviously favor religious laws by one religion because it’s mine. I don’t value the opinions of other people I don’t care about, I don’t mold my worldview for the sake of the convenience of others. It’s really that simple.
1
@nightcorebeatzx8652 I never said that anyone said otherwise, hence “as if”. You should probably learn basic English before ironically asking if i’m stupid. I also find it extremely funny that you remark that nobody will care as much if a man opposes abortion when there are currently male congressmen legislating abortion restrictions. Yes, a child should not be murdered for the crime of their father. If you have no actual argument beyond more sexist remarks, deal with it.
1
@nightcorebeatzx8652 I never said otherwise?
1
@ILovePink-x1v Delicious red herring fallacy with an appetizer of a euphemism. Bon appetit!
1
Excellent observation
1
@maxpulido4268 Wealth and health don’t ensure your safety and what will happen to you. God judges and controls the Earth, and she will suffer the consequences unless God sees fit to show mercy to her upon her repentance. Wealth and health won’t save you, and neither will your death.
1
Nah just fragile
1
Your grandmother shouldn’t have sought to murder her child.
1
@misstinahamilton5714 I only know what you’ve told me, and have addressed only such and never claimed anything else. No matter who you are or what your backstory is, you shouldn’t be going out murdering people.
1
@misstinahamilton5714 And what will reporting me accomplish? Not silencing me for sure, even if my account is somehow taken down for a comment with no hatred of any kind nor promotion of any heinous act. But if it was the only way you could vent your frustration with what I said then be my guest.
1
@misstinahamilton5714 I haven’t been ignorant towards anything and have had a consistent rational. I’m here to refute many of the disgusting ideas presented in the video and comments that attempt to justify and endorse a genocide in my country’s back yard that has been going on even before I was born, that could have killed me had my mother not cared about me. You already explained your mother’s circumstances, this doesn’t justify the murder of her child. Sorry for the long response time, I wasn’t notified of your reply
1
@misstinahamilton5714 I’m also not going to some echo chamber video where people circle jerk over ideas that I already have unless they provide more solid arguments that can help me either persuade people or make them uncertain in their crypto-eugenicist ideology. You people desire an echo chamber because you are afraid of people standing up to you and ripping apart your justifications.
1
@theyoutubeguy1 Thank God that the children she left behind weren’t murdered either! If she had not decided to attempt murder she would have lived out the rest of her days a much needed mother for her children. You shouldn’t thank God for the abortion holocaust, because you would be horrified to witness what he has in store as punishment for the people who partake in the mass murder of innocent people.
1
@misstinahamilton5714 Aside from a mass murderer trying to garner sympathy and justification for her murders
1
@Sirjackjack “Morality and medicine don’t always go hand in hand” Holy shit ok Dr. Mengele
1
@Sirjackjack Then it makes your statement immediately fallacious, which is worse. You don’t appeal to people by making nonsensical statements lol. Not everyone is as easily manipulated as you.
1
@KenzieTawili I assume none of us beheaded anyone, so are none of us allowed to criticize the Islamic State or say that what they have done is wrong? Lmao
1
@KenzieTawili I never said any of that. Also where did you get that statistic? How do you qualify “fine”?
1
@KenzieTawili Also noticed that what you just commented is a deflection from my other question. Have you been smoking ganja or drinking recently? Because that’s a first where I’ve had someone deflect from a question by responding to an argument from someone else and pretending that it came from me.
1
@KenzieTawili Cite the comment.
1
@KenzieTawili Re-read the comment chain if you don’t understand it. I’m not going to hold your hand after you reply nonsense after 4 days of your drunken stupor.
1
@KenzieTawili Re-read the comment thread if you want to know what I’m talking about. Pay attention
1
@e.pluribusunum7916 I don’t care about your experience dude. You just used a diversionary tactic and I’m going to call you out. Adults should not let cognitive dissonance overtake them. Again, you are making positive claims here and you still have not qualified what person is. I’m not going to hold your hand and prove your claims for you because I have already done the research and came to a different conclusion. Once again, since when is personhood a biological concept? Fetal viability has nothing to do with wether or not someone has personhood. I have a feeling you are throwing around philosophical terminology without actually knowing what it means. If you appeal to legality for that definition you are making a fallacy (which even has the name of the fallacy right there. Lol).
1
@e.pluribusunum7916 That isn’t an argument lol. You should ask your parents to explain it for you if you don’t understand basic English. However, I have made my questions clear repeatedly and you have never answered them.
1
Why?
1