The hypocrisy of abortion not '' being murder ''

[pateuvasiliu]

A pregnant woman wants to give birth and raise a child, you ruin it, essentially violating her bodily autonomy without her consent - one story.
.

I also violate your bodily consent if I punch you in the face. And I won't get 7 years for that.

- - - Updated - - -

He essentially performed a medical procedure on her (a chemically induced abortion without her consent) that is what the crux of this is about.

Your kidney is just a bunch of cells to the person who wants to harvest it right?

No, not really. I can't live without my kidneys.

[Revi]

Yeah. And I agree with that.

What I disagree with is this violation being seen as anywhere near as bad as force feeding someone heroin or beating them up.

Forcing an abortion factors in though. Just because a woman can chose to abort her own child, doesn't mean anyone else are free to abort it if they want.

Serious poisoning + forced abortion is pretty bad. Physical pain then and there isn't the only thing that matters, I think taking someones future child from them is as bad or worse than beating them up.

[May90]

I also violate your bodily consent if I punch you in the face. And I won't get 7 years for that.

If you punch me in the face in a way that will ruin all my plans and cause an extreme emotional and physical distress lasting months, then you very well will.

[Tasttey]

No, not really. I can't live without my kidneys.

So you're cool if they leave you one right? You can survive with only 1 kidney.

I mean come on, the organ harvester is trying to make money, this guy was trying to save money. Neither one of the victims will die, they're just a bunch of cells, its no big deal.

[pateuvasiliu]

If you punch me in the face in a way that will ruin all my plans and cause an extreme emotional and physical distress lasting months, then you very well will.

The emotional pain should be irrelevant. It's the same emotional pain a man feels when his kid is aborted and he wanted that kid. And he gets nothing for his pain.

The physical distress is nausea and pain. Things like infertility and death are so incredibly rare I have higher odds of killing you with that punch ( i.e. small )

[pateuvasiliu]

So you're cool if they leave you one right? You can survive with only 1 kidney.

I mean come on, the organ harvester is trying to make money, this guy was trying to save money. Neither one of the victims will die, they're just a bunch of cells, its no big deal.

Well, let's see. To take my kidney you'd have to:

1. Capture me
2. Knock me out ( poisoning )
2.5 Not knock me out and operate on me while I'm awake, which would likely cause shock and death
3. Mutilate me

All 3 pretty big crimes, with #3 being permanent damage that endangers my life.

So not really comparable.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think you understand what assault and battery is.

Why, enlighten me, by all means.

[May90]

The emotional pain should be irrelevant. It's the same emotional pain a man feels when his kid is aborted and he wanted that kid. And he gets nothing for his pain.

The physical distress is nausea and pain. Things like infertility and death are so incredibly rare I have higher odds of killing you with that punch ( i.e. small )

The man doesn't own the woman's body, the woman does. So yes, the man's emotional pain here is irrelevant. If the woman does something to the man's body without his consent that ruins his life, then she will get just as big a sentence.

Guess what, if I give you some poison without your consent that seriously alters the functionality of your organism for a while, I'll just as well go to jail. This isn't about the fetus or abortion, it is about you violating someone else's body and, with it, damaging their life significantly.

[Skulltaker]

There's no child here. Its rights are null.

And abortion pills killing you? Come on, how rare is that?

But without the interference, it would have been. You are missing the point. An abortion always destroys at least one existance. If you force it on someone, that's two.

Ruining your life doesn't mean that you are clinically dead. But as I've said befor, abortions put an imense stress on the female reproductive organ (so do miscarriages, btw.) It is very well possible that she will have trouble concieving another child, or won't be able to at all. That, in turn, could ruin or prevent further relationships. And all of that because one mouthbreathing retard didn't use a 2€ condom, because he has the intellectual capability of a sponge. Damage to a person, by the law, is far bigger then actual physical harm. People who get beat up suffer way more then the actual injury. Soldiers can return from war completly whole, but still ruined, and never recover from the things they experienced.

Of course, she could be fine. Time will tell. Anyhow, we also punish potential harm done, and that's quiet severe. Now stop making a fool out of yourself, use your brain, think of the consequences that little actions may have and turn all that energy into persuing some real injustices instead of made-up ones.

[pateuvasiliu]

You keep ignoring those posts instead of answering your very own hypocrisy. You already said this guy committed a crime, what crime do you think he committed?

Poisoning someone.

But it differs from poisoning someone with something that is intended to kill or permanently damage.

And it should be treated as such.

- - - Updated - - -

The man doesn't own the woman's body, the woman does. So yes, the man's emotional pain here is irrelevant. If the woman does something to the man's body without his consent that ruins his life, then she will get just as big a sentence.

Guess what, if I give you some poison without your consent that seriously alters the functionality of your organism for a while, I'll just as well go to jail. This isn't about the fetus or abortion, it is about you violating someone else's body and, with it, damaging their life significantly.

The emotional pain isn't from whose body it is, though. It's from ending a life they cared about.

[Deleted]

Man poisons woman, goes to jail. Next thread MRA mental cunts.

[pateuvasiliu]

But without the interference, it would have been.

If I start going to the police academy and you shoot me you don't get increased punishment due to me being a cop.

What could have been doesn't matter. Or shouldn't.

Else abortion would be murder.

[Revi]

The emotional pain should be irrelevant. It's the same emotional pain a man feels when his kid is aborted and he wanted that kid. And he gets nothing for his pain.

The physical distress is nausea and pain. Things like infertility and death are so incredibly rare I have higher odds of killing you with that punch ( i.e. small )

Emotional pain isn't irrelevant in law. Otherwise harassment wouldn't even be a thing. And rape would only be a problem if physical injury was caused.

[Raelbo]

Why are you punished for killing something which has no rights, again?

I explained it. Please tell me where you failed to comprehend?

lol, what?

That's ridiculous.

Why? Because you lack the capacity to comprehend it? Your laughter doesn't make you look clever. Quite the opposite actually.

So something has rights, but only if you want it to?

1/10 for reading comprehension. No, that is not what I said. I explained the rationale. But yes, I do understand. Logic and reason are hard for you. So I'll try again using small words.

If a mother decides to carry a pregnancy to term, that foetus (thing with no rights) will become a baby (a thing with full rights). Thus, to all intents and purposes, killing the foetus is the same as killing a baby, but only if the mother has made a choice to see the pregnancy through.

It's not because the mother wants the foetus to have rights. It's because the consequence of the mother's choice is a human being.

A fetus only has rights if the mother wants it to? What about the father?

Like I said, it's not about what the mother wants. It's about the mother's choice to carry the foetus to term. And while that choice will often be tied to what she wants, the choice is actually a much bigger thing because it entails an actual commitment, pretty much the biggest commitment most people make in their lives. Only the mother can make that choice (for obvious reasons), which while unfortunate the father, there simply isn't any rational alternative.

No, that's moronic.

Honeslty, fuck off. You have no right to call anyone else moronic given the rubbish you continuously spew on topics like this one.

Murder is killing a person.

You wanting that kid doesn't make it a person.

And I never said anything about "wanting" a child. I quite specifically stated at the start of my argument: "If a mother has committed to bringing her foetus into the world".

Inherent in my argument are the requirements that a foetus has to exist already, and that it requires a commitment by the mother to carry the pregnancy to term. If you have those two things then you have, to all intents and purposes, a baby. If the foetus dies before birth because another person chose to end its life, please explain how that is any different to murder? If the foetus dies due to miscarriage, that is a tragedy (and many parents would feel the same about such a miscarriage as they would losing an infant). If the mother decides to abort, then one of my two conditions is immediately not met and the foetus can no longer be considered to be a future child.

Like I said, it really is very simple. I can't understand how you are incapable of following the logic.

[pateuvasiliu]

But without the interference, it would have been. You are missing the point. An abortion always destroys at least one existance. If you force it on someone, that's two.

Ruining your life doesn't mean that you are clinically dead. But as I've said befor, abortions put an imense stress on the female reproductive organ (so do miscarriages, btw.) It is very well possible that she will have trouble concieving another child, or won't be able to at all. That, in turn, could ruin or prevent further relationships. And all of that because one mouthbreathing retard didn't use a 2€ condom, because he has the intellectual capability of a sponge. Damage to a person, by the law, is far bigger then actual physical harm. People who get beat up suffer way more then the actual injury. Soldiers can return from war completly whole, but still ruined, and never recover from the things they experienced.

Of course, she could be fine. Time will tell. Anyhow, we also punish potential harm done, and that's quiet severe. Now stop making a fool out of yourself, use your brain, think of the consequences that little actions may have and turn all that energy into persuing some real injustices instead of made-up ones.

You again speak of emotional pain, fully ignoring the fact that men suffer from the same thing when a woman aborts.

[May90]

The emotional pain isn't from whose body it is, though. It's from ending a life they cared about.

It isn't from ending a life, nobody cares about the fetus. It is about the woman's plans to have a child being ruined, and about months of intense physical and emotional processes related to miscarriage.

Suppose you've always been fat, and it's been very painful for you emotionally, but now you finally started working out. After 3 years of intense workouts, you finally dropped a lot of weight. Then, on a dinner, I secretly pour a new scientifically developed mixture in your soup, which gives you all the weight back. What do you think would the judge have to say about that?

[Hotmail]

The guy doubled the dose when he found out that a failed attempt to induce a miscarriage might produce a mutant baby, so he's not entirely heartless.

Either way, forget the fetus - this is a violation of that woman's bodily autonomy, which is kind of akin to spreading itching powder in your partner's underwears. Seven years in jail would be SJW levels of stupid.

[pateuvasiliu]

1/10 for reading comprehension. No, that is not what I said. I explained the rationale. But yes, I do understand. Logic and reason are hard for you. So I'll try again using small words.

Wow you're so smart I bet you feel like a genius making fun of people on a MMO site's forum.

If a mother decides to carry a pregnancy to term, that foetus (thing with no rights) will become a baby (a thing with full rights). Thus, to all intents and purposes, killing the foetus is the same as killing a baby

No. It is not.

That's absolutely stupid. If I intended to do the police academy and you kill me day one you don't get the extra sentence of killing a cop. What could have been doesn't matter.

Honeslty, fuck off

Right back at you.

If this topic makes you so upset you can't control your precious emotions don't enter it.

[pateuvasiliu]

Poisoning someone is giving them any substance with any possible side effects with the intent to do harm. Seems pretty fucking clear here. Thanks for agreeing.

And battering someone means physical violence but slapping someone and jabbing them in the nose are different things.

[pateuvasiliu]

It isn't from ending a life, nobody cares about the fetus. It is about the woman's plans to have a child being ruined, and about months of intense physical and emotional processes related to miscarriage.

Suppose you've always been fat, and it's been very painful for you emotionally, but now you finally started working out. After 3 years of intense workouts, you finally dropped a lot of weight. Then, on a dinner, I secretly pour a new scientifically developed mixture in your soup, which gives you all the weight back. What do you think would the judge have to say about that?

And a man can't have plans to have a kid and can't suffer emotional pain after the kid is aborted?

[Revi]

It isn't from ending a life, nobody cares about the fetus. It is about the woman's plans to have a child being ruined, and about months of intense physical and emotional processes related to miscarriage.

Except the victim, who viewed it has her child.

I don't think we have to insist that unborn children are irrelevant and not worth considering in order to support abortion.