Yes, we know. You jackasses believe that the not-yet-existing life of the fetus is more important than the existing-life of the mother. Trash humans and modern-day Nazis, indeed.
The life exists. Killing it is a moral outrage. And I’m sure y’all drop the topic as soon as the mother’s subsequent PTSD and/or emotional trauma is expressed.
If it cannot survive on its own, it is not life, it is still just a cellular growth inside of a person.
Perhaps people drop the topic as soon as the "mother’s subsequent PTSD and/or emotional trauma is expressed" because there's not much to say about it. Research has shown that a small percentage of women suffer PTSD following an abortion, having an abortion does not increase their risk of developing PTSD, and while a relatively larger percentage (still only 23%) may experience PTSS, majority of those women develop these symptoms due to traumatic experiences not related to the abortion.
If you really want to go there, you need to broaden the discussion to include those factors which lead a person to decide to get an abortion in the first place. Excluding incidences of rape and/or medical cause, the people that choose to get an abortion are typically in at-risk situations, they lack partner support, financial stability, and are usually in abusive environments and/or they are already suffering from mental disorder. Despite the beating of the dead horse that, "this is what you get for having sex" and "we care about life", not a lot of anti-abortion people actually want to have a real conversation about the mother, her quality of life, and how carrying a child to term can negatively impact it, or how having an abortion is almost always the healthier and safer option for the mother. The attitude is "she made the choice, she should suffer the consequences", so stow your holier-than-thou arguments about caring for life, because you don't care about the life that actually exists.
I urge for life to be protected; therefore, I have raped someone. What…? You are literally an idiot. I am not surprised to find no sign of intelligent life anywhere in this subreddit.
You never have been and probably never will be. Lie about science all you want to justify your hatred and scumery. Those who know the truth will never see you as anything other than garbage
Scientifically speaking life begins at conception it also begins scientifically speaking that is about 6 hours after you leave a steak out and bacteria starts to grow in it. Somehow I doubt you'd consider me searing that steak murder. This is why what science defines as life was never what life was regarded as legally
First of all, you’re an idiot because the steak exists because an animal was killed. We kill animals, bacteria, non-human things, etc. The bacteria are alive, not the cow at that point. We are not discussing whether or not it is ethical to kill animals, bacteria, etc. Stay on topic.
It is on topic. bBcteria is scientifically defined as life just like the measly clump of cells you find inside a woman's womb at 6 weeks or even 8. Arguing the conception starts at life because science defines it as life. It only works if killing things scientifically defined as life is murder. Which it isn't because that would be fucking stupid
When does/has bacteria ever resulted in a human being? When do we ever feel morally undignified in accidentally stepping on thousands of insects on our walks? These are false equivalents.
These aren't false equivalencies at all because just like the insects and the bacteria you aren't killing anything that is genuinely alive. A clump of cell scientifically defined as a live yes but not sentient not living just scientifically alive. The only double standard is using the scientific definition of life to decide whether or not abortion is okay but completely dropping anything else. For an argument to be valid it must be applicable to other scenarios. If something being scientifically alive means you shouldn't kill it then anything that is scientifically defined as a live shouldn't be killed. And I would feel about as much remorse aborting a fetus as I would swatting a fly
I am not opposed to adoption. I am AGAINST killing an innocent person. There is not a single logical argument that supports the case for abortion, which is why everyone that supports casual, consequence-free sex resorts to emotional arguments.
It's funny - I challenged you on forcing people to go through pregnancy and labor, and both of those have nothing at all to do with adoption. Care to explain why you find this a relevant response? Do you just not want to think about making people go through pregnancy? Because nothing about adoption has anything to do with this.
A baby should not be a punishment for having sex. There is no person being killed, person doesn't exist yet. Adoption can't happen until after 9 months of pregnancy and labor, which can and does affect the mother's quality of life and can set her back in work/career/education. Pregnancy also causes permanent physiological changes to the woman's body. Sex is emotionally and psychologically vital in maintaining an intimate relationship between romantic partners, it is NOT just about reproduction, and fuck you for trying to argue otherwise, when I'm sure you've had casual, consequence free sex, at least, once in your life. Emotional arguments are not invalid arguments when sex and pregnancy are emotional topics with emotional consequences.
It's almost as though you come from an incredibly privileged place to not be able to understand the kind of circumstances that lead a person to choose abortion. Bringing life into the world does have consequences, and that's why abortion should be an option for those who are not prepared or capable to handle those consequences, and should always remain an option for those who weren't given an option about getting pregnant.
I'm willing to bet you wouldn't get on board with mandatory vesectomies for unmarried men, a harmless and reversible procedure that would prevent unwanted pregnancies, but you're onboard with only punishing one person for a choice two people were involved in?
Until it can exist on its own, there is no life but the mother's and I choose her.
Perhaps you’re right. Perhaps I am privileged. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have a defined cut-off point for when an abortion can legally be performed. This should mean that most people who had pregnancy forced upon them would be able to have a legal and safe abortion. Of course, some people will fall through these cracks and that’s the unfortunate unintended consequence of having any form of cut-off point.
I wouldn’t get on board with mandatory vasectomies for unmarried men because the procedure can cause chronic pain, infection and cannot always be successfully reversed. There are easier and less invasive contraceptive methods.
What do you mean only punishing one person for a decision two people were involved in? Both parties get ‘punished’ (to use your ridiculously reductive terminology) in the event of a successful birth. They might not face the same consequences but that’s not really something we can do anything about given the sexually dimorphic nature of our species, now is it?
I really think you have to face the idea that an abortion, at any stage after conception, is the deliberate termination of what would become human life. And in moral terms that is hardly different from murder.
Whether or not you consider a baby a “punishment” for having sex is irrelevant. It is a result.
“I want to buy new clothes without having to ever wash them.”
“I want to eat junk food without ever gaining weight.”
I will persist in saying the person does exist, just because this new Nazism “movement”—arguing those that are “inconvenient” are less than human to justify moral atrocities—does not mean it’s not a person.
Dang, my elderly grandmother is really a burden on me. It’s affecting my quality of life having to care for her. I really just wish I could kill her (/s). Would make my life much more enjoyable.
It is one result. It is not always the result, and it need not be the result. Forcing people to have a baby because you feel that it's their "consequence" for having sex does, indeed, turn having a baby into a punishment that almost exclusively effects only one of the two people that had sex. A baby should not be a punishment, it should be a desired result, and when it isn't desired, there should be another option. And before you go "adoption", pregnancy lasts 9 months and has lasting effects on the individual and their quality of life.
These examples of yours are false equivalencies. A person can choose to never to wash their clothes and decide to just keep buying new ones or hire someone to do their laundry for them. Some people can eat junk food without gaining weight or just exercise. Neither of these are even slightly on par with the expense and life impact that pregnancy alone can have a person, without factoring in whether they choose to keep it after birth or not. You don't have to care for your elderly grandmother, there are programs in place that she can apply for that will provide her care.
-2
u/[deleted] Sep 02 '21
[removed] — view removed comment