Pro-lifer argument: "what if your parents decided to abort you?!"

[thatmikeguy]

If someone kills an unborn child that the woman wanted without touching her, should that be murder or assault as far as the level of punishment?

[Endus]

It's not, and I could argue that those are the same arguements of pro baby murder, because I see that shit in these threads every day.

Not honestly, you couldn't, no.

But then, you phrase pro-choice as "pro baby murder", which means you're not here to engage honestly, but to try and push propaganda and lies.

Implying that's not a straw man argument in that comic.

I could literally quote people in this very thread or others making identical statements. For example, on the "moocher" comment specifically, gaze upon this;

You are acting like a moocher and a thief. What makes you think you are entitled to other people's earned wealth? Answer: you are not!

Attribution removed because this isn't about shaming the poster or trying to dig up old nonsense, but you can run a search and find it if you want to check my work.

Meanwhile, feel free to dig up, like, any that match your nonsense.

[Aurgjelme]

I never ceases to impress me how backwards the US is in these questions. Its no wonder you have actual sharia states popping up inside your borders.

[The Stormbringer]

Do you remember being born? Sucking on a bottle or your mom's breasts? Most people can not remember anything about their childhood before age 2. Does that mean you are not a person until you do?

Yeah, basically. At a certain point little kids just kind of 'turn on', advancing from a curious little critter wandering around and absorbing as much new data as it can, to something that can actually question its environment and think about it. Once consciousness really takes off and starts trucking along, that's when you're a person. Before then you're basically just a particularly smart learning animal that has the potential to become much more.

Think of it this way, if you were always at the stage before you can start really remembering things and questioning your environment, would you be a person? Or would you just be a clever, hairless monkey wandering around forever?

EDIT: In case it's not clear, this isn't me advocating for killing babies and toddlers, because I know someone is going to claim I am. This is just saying that you're not really a person at that point, you have the potential to become one.

[Ghostpanther]

Just because organs are present does not mean that they are fully developed, my grape vine has buds on it, doesn't mean I can make wine tomorrow.



Yes. The important word being 'some'.

Just like 'some' pro-lifers think that murdering doctors and bombing abortion clinics is a good thing to do and should be celebrated.

The number of people thinking that there should be late term abortions for reasons other than medical necessity are miniscule.

You are referring to maturity. A human male on average, does not reach their full physical maturity until about the age of 28. But the grape bud is the beginning of the fruit which is to come.

I agree they are among the minority. But a crack in a damn, if not fixed, can result in larger hole and flooding downstream.

[The Stormbringer]

Being declared brain dead does not mean the person is no longer a person because cases like this do happen. https://www.lifenews.com/2016/01/12/...from-the-coma/

"The doctors THOUGHT I was brain dead"

Found the issue for you there, chief. It wasn't that they were brain dead and magically got better, it was that the doctors misdiagnosed things. A human that becomes genuinely brain dead isn't a person anymore.

[Ghostpanther]

Yeah, basically. At a certain point little kids just kind of 'turn on', advancing from a curious little critter wandering around and absorbing as much new data as it can, to something that can actually question its environment and think about it. Once consciousness really takes off and starts trucking along, that's when you're a person. Before then you're basically just a particularly smart learning animal that has the potential to become much more.

Think of it this way, if you were always at the stage before you can start really remembering things and questioning your environment, would you be a person? Or would you just be a clever, hairless monkey wandering around forever?

EDIT: In case it's not clear, this isn't me advocating for killing babies and toddlers, because I know someone is going to claim I am. This is just saying that you're not really a person at that point, you have the potential to become one.

I see your point. And you certainly have a right to your opinion. I just happen to disagree with that stance. My life as a person begin when I was conceived.

[Thrundi]

I see your point. And you certainly have a right to your opinion. I just happen to disagree with that stance. My life as a person begin when I was conceived.

How many cells ?

[Ghostpanther]

"The doctors THOUGHT I was brain dead"

Found the issue for you there, chief. It wasn't that they were brain dead and magically got better, it was that the doctors misdiagnosed things. A human that becomes genuinely brain dead isn't a person anymore.

Yeah. They make a judgement call a lot at times and on occasion are wrong. Even medical science studies have at times, been questioned and caused researches to rethink their previous conclusions. But my stance is not based solely on what science says when a human becomes a person.

[Lollis]

You are referring to maturity. A human male on average, does not reach their full physical maturity until about the age of 28. But the grape bud is the beginning of the fruit which is to come.

It's nothing to do with maturity, its to do with physically being able to actually perform even basic functions.
Lungs for example do not even have the basics of development until around 26 weeks which is one of the big reasons for the 24 week cutoff date in many countries, and most abortions happen WAY before that.

And grape buds can die and on occasion just do not grow properly at all.

[Ghostpanther]

How many cells ?

You need a lesson on the birds and bees?

- - - Updated - - -

It's nothing to do with maturity, its to do with physically being able to actually perform even basic functions.
Lungs for example do not even have the basics of development until around 26 weeks.

And grape buds can die and on occasion just do not grow properly at all.

We all can die and functions cease at any time during our existence.

[Lollis]

You need a lesson on the birds and bees?

- - - Updated - - -



We all can die and functions cease at any time during our existence.

K, cool. Your point is?

I see your point. And you certainly have a right to your opinion. I just happen to disagree with that stance. My life as a person begin when I was conceived.

Should the surviving twin be charged with murder in cases of twin absorption since one person kills another person?

[Eveningforest]

I never ceases to impress me how backwards the US is in these questions. Its no wonder you have actual sharia states popping up inside your borders.

I mean, just skim through the last page or two of this thread and you see abortion being referred to as infanticide and Planned Parenthood as a murder clinic. One almost has to wonder if it's supposed to be parody. Unfortunately, it isn't. The US is a fascinating mix of different cultures with puritanism still deeply rooted in some of them.
It's both fascinating and horrifying at once.

[Hyral]

Yeah arguments like that are ridiculous. They imply that the value of life is quantifiable by convenience, basically the same view pro choice has about it. If someone is ok with being aborted that doesn't suddenly make the murder right.

All arguments based on emotion are silly in the end, for both sides.

[Ghostpanther]

K, cool. Your point is?



Should the surviving twin be charged with murder in cases of twin absorption since one person kills another person?

Humans, even after they come out of the mother's womb, are developing and will continue until the day they die. Like the old saying, you are never too old to stop learning.

Should a 2 year old be charged with any crime if they grab a gun and somehow shoot another person? As strange as that sounds, it actually has happened. Maybe not at 2, but they were a toddler.

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

It's going to be epic when boomers and boomer larpers drop dead

We’ll still be stuck with the radical religious nutcases trying to keep religion, Christianity specifically, in the law. We can’t even get “In God we trust.”, off our currency and it out of our pledge.

[Ghostpanther]

I mean, just skim through the last page or two of this thread and you see abortion being referred to as infanticide and Planned Parenthood as a murder clinic. One almost has to wonder if it's supposed to be parody. Unfortunately, it isn't. The US is a fascinating mix of different cultures with puritanism still deeply rooted in some of them.
It's both fascinating and horrifying at once.

The US is not the only country which has many pro life citizens.

[Jorlen]

Should the surviving twin be charged with murder in cases of twin absorption since one person kills another person?

Children can't be charged with murder because they don't know what they are doing. Abortionists and criminally charged killer do know what they are doing. I should not be responding to this moronic statement : (

[Frogguh]

Recognizing that pro-abortion people are immoral dickbags is not solely the domain of the religious.

[Endus]

The US is not the only country which has many pro life citizens.

And? It's the only developed country with any appreciable support for the religio-fascism of pro-life movements. That there are religio-fascists in some other countries is not an argument that we should allow them to institute religious law that punishes those who disagree with that sect's religious views.

Which is what you're arguing, with pro-life.

This is a religious idea. It is not rooted in science or biology or reason. You make faith-based assumptions, and then demand that everyone else be beholden to those same assumptions, and you're completely unable to justify them on any internal merits, because they're not based on merit, they're based on faith.

It's true even for those who claim they aren't overtly religious. It's still a faith-based, magical-thinking concept. Those are fine for determining what things you want to do, for yourself, but they have no business being used to try and control the actions of others.