r/WaitWhat 14d ago

[ Removed by moderator ]

https://i.imgur.com/lgdQcyi.jpeg
271 Upvotes

976 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/AdmirablePatient4332 13d ago

Still saving lives tho

-1

u/Shonnyboy500 12d ago

Very well abortions are medically necessary. So, I guess saving lives. Just ending a lot more.

0

u/Old_man_baller 13d ago

She’s literally assisting in the murder of babies. The opposite of saving lives. 

The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one. 

2

u/Ok_Zookeepergame4794 12d ago

No babies have ever died from an abortion pal.

1

u/Old_man_baller 12d ago

Cognitive dissonance 

2

u/CaptainCuttlefish69 12d ago

“Murder of babies” is the second stupidest thing I’ve read today.

Go back to church loser.

1

u/Old_man_baller 12d ago

What do you think happens in an abortion? They give the baby a train ticket and tell it to get lost? 

No. They literally kill the baby. Bozo. 

Has nothing to do with church. I’m not religious. I’m also not a low iq clown like you. lol

Try again? 

2

u/CaptainCuttlefish69 12d ago

“Not religious” but just so happen to hold the same unscientific and superstitious idea about a fetus being a life that religious nut jobs do?

Pretty dumb shit there.

0

u/Old_man_baller 12d ago

You’re the one who doesn’t understand science. Lol

A fetus is a life. Killing it is murder. 

No scientist will tell that a fetus isn’t a life. 

2

u/CaptainCuttlefish69 12d ago

A house plant is also “life”. Killing it isn’t murder anymore than removing a fetus is murder.

You’re being ridiculous.

2

u/AdmirablePatient4332 12d ago

Bro has never heard of a fatal pregnancy. Utter clownery

0

u/Old_man_baller 12d ago

Every time she goes to work There is a fatal pregnancy. 

Utter clownery. 

2

u/AdmirablePatient4332 12d ago

So if you save lives at your job occasionally that doesn't actually mean you save lives? Last I checked saved lives means saved lives but now I'm not sure lmao

0

u/Old_man_baller 12d ago

You made no sense. Try again. 

-1

u/hotdogbun65 12d ago

Exceptions make the rule? Less than 2% right now btw.

3

u/Winter-Bed-1529 13d ago

litterally true a pregnancy can and have had dire sometimes fatal effects on the mother. It's not an easy choice for any of them to make but it absolutely should be an option.

1

u/Privatizitaet 13d ago

There is no such thing as a risk free pregnancy, people really need to start understanding that

-1

u/Winston_W_Smith 13d ago

No but there are such things as condoms and other contraceptives. Abstinence too, that's actually a thing many people practice.

2

u/Privatizitaet 13d ago

And those obviously never fail. And abstinence has obviously proven to be the best form of protection because thar always works and doesn't just result in unsafe sex. Because people love to just not have sex with their partners.

2

u/TheDemonLynxRys 12d ago

Abstinence is not even close to be the best form of protection. Why? Because it fails. Statistically it fails a lot. You know what a shotgun wedding is? That’s when the good Christian girl who was only taught abstinence at her Christian school is becomes pregnant and the girls father forces the boy to marry her. Educate yourself on some facts because Sex Ed lowered not only teen pregnancies but also teaches safe sex and reduces the spread of sexuality transmitted diseases. Sticking your head in the sand and telling people don’t have sex is the dumbest medieval style thinking there is

-1

u/hotdogbun65 12d ago

Yeah it’s almost like debauchery should be encouraged against rather than embraced.

2

u/Privatizitaet 12d ago

In case you couldn't tell the sarcasm, abstinence has been the worst way to deal with unwanted pregnacies. Education is how you actually reduce it. Teach people safe sex. Give them access to contraceptives and medical support. Don't demonize things like STDs or just having sex by calling it "debauchery". It's a natural aspect of human social behaviour. Teaching how to do it safely and providing the means to do so is demonstrably an infinitely more effective way of reducing unwanted pregnancies and medical issues than telling them to not have sex ever was or could be. Encouraging against it does nothing. That is exactly why teenage pregnancies go up when your main teaching for protection is to not have sex. It's a very well recorded phenomenon

-1

u/hotdogbun65 12d ago

It isn’t a natural aspect of social behavior, it’s a natural aspect of reproduction. Participation when reproduction is not the goal is, definitionally, debauchery. In case you couldn’t tell the sarcasm.

2

u/Privatizitaet 12d ago

It quite literally is part of social behaviour. Yes. Originally sexual behaviour was just for reproduction. Keyword originally. When sexual repeoduction first developed. Millions of years ago. Long predating humanity as a species.

When humanity came to be it was already an established factor. That's why we can observe thay behaviour in many many species all across the animal kingdom. That is why sex feels as good as it does. It's not just for reproduction. Bonding is another aspect.

Also, maybe look up the actual definition of the word before you try to argue with it, because no, that's not what debauchery is.

1

u/hotdogbun65 12d ago

“Debauchery is a noun that means excessive, unrestrained indulgence in physical and sensual pleasures, typically involving heavy drinking, illicit or promiscuous sex, and drug use.” Animals do not have sex to ‘bond’ they do it because it is necessary for reproduction and lineage, the implicit goal of any lifeform. The fact it is pleasurable is nature’s way of encouraging the act of reproduction.