SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Varx]

So I guess you have no empathy for smoker, or a walker jaywalking and getting run over by a car ?

Well depends on context.

The smoker is fully aware he'll get cancer so no...

The jaywalker is on their phone and not paying attention, then no obviously natural selection is a beautiful thing.

A mother who run after her toddler who ran across the street, or a guy who's in a hurry because his wife is in labor getting hit by a car, of course.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not murder since it isn't a life form yet. It doesn't even have brain activity until the 6th week of it's development, and even then it's incredibly rudementary. The fetus' brain doesn't start taking over functions of the body until roughly the start of the second trimester.

It has a complete unique DNA code from the process of conception. It is a complete life form yet. The thing is that is has to develop. And unfortunately we're not plants who can gestitate In dirt.

[Specialka]

Well depends on context.

The smoker is fully aware he'll get cancer so no...

The jaywalker is on their phone and not paying attention, then no obviously natural selection is a beautiful thing.

A mother who run after her toddler who ran across the street, or a guy who's in a hurry because his wife is in labor getting hit by a car, of course.

So yeah, you have issues living in a society. No need to display your issue here.

[Skulltaker]

I'm typing fast on my phone so no I'm not paying too much attention to all my grammatical mistakes, you really that petty?

Maybe you should spend less time on your phone and get an education first, befor you try to comment on complex biological concepts, that'd save you a lot of stress and public riddicule.

Honestly, there are plenty of articles online you can read that's educate you greatly on how human reproduction works, I'd reccomend you give one of those a spin befor you try to argue your bullshit.

[Varx]

So yeah, you have issues living in a society. No need to display your issue here.

What issues. People who smoke do so knowing they can get cancer. You gonna feel bad to a guy who sets his hand on fire for the lulz?

[Endus]

There's no such thing as a safe abortion technique when it results in the death of a baby.

Abortions don't result in the death of a baby. By definition.

Um no, an extreme is an extreme, not a rule. Don't put words in my mouth.

I'm not. Those were your words. If you support exceptions for rape, your opposition to abortion is 100% predicated on a hostility to women in general, and their sexual independence in specific.

The alternative is that you think children of rape aren't actually people and can be freely killed by anyone, ethically speaking. It's a lot easier to assume you're just a liar than that you're so wildly disturbed you think the latter is true.

"I want to kill someone because" is an acceptable reason to commit murder? Of course not.

Abortion is, again definitively, not murder. Your statement can be filed right alongside militant vegans who claim eating meat is "murder". Same bullshit emotional argument, to ignore reality.

I don't care about your personal beliefs. If you think abortion is "murder", you're a liar. It's that simple.

But the reverse applies in this scenario because "my body". That's just an excuse radical feminists spew because of lack healthy values and not wanting to adhere to the consequences of your actions.

What "consequences"? If you get the abortion, those "consequences" aren't consequences any more. Your argument is literally the same as Saudis arguing that women can't drive, because you deny them the right to learn to drive, and thus women don't know how to drive and can't learn so they'd be unsafe. When the problem originates with your oppression, and nothing else. You're the one trying to force consequences upon women.

[Skulltaker]

It has a complete unique DNA code from the process of conception. It is a complete life form yet. The thing is that is has to develop. And unfortunately we're not plants who can gestitate In dirt.

Nope. A complete set of unique DNA doesn't make you a complete life form. Again, a fertilized chicken egg has the same. But it's still, for the moment, just an egg.

[Varx]

Maybe you should spend less time on your phone and get an education first, befor you try to comment on complex biological concepts, that'd save you a lot of stress and public riddicule.

Honestly, there are plenty of articles online you can read that's educate you greatly on how human reproduction works, I'd reccomend you give one of those a spin befor you try to argue your bullshit.

Lol...

I know exactly how human reproduction works my dude I promise.

The rift between us is that you don't consider an embryo a human being because all the silly reasons you've listed.

[Endus]

What issues. People who smoke do so knowing they can get cancer. You gonna feel bad to a guy who sets his hand on fire for the lulz?

In this context, there's a cure for lung cancer, and you're the guy arguing that it shouldn't be given to anyone who smoked, because they should "live with the consequences".

That's how utterly horrendous your position is.

[Varx]

Abortions don't result in the death of a baby. By definition.



I'm not. Those were your words. If you support exceptions for rape, your opposition to abortion is 100% predicated on a hostility to women in general, and their sexual independence in specific.

The alternative is that you think children of rape aren't actually people and can be freely killed by anyone, ethically speaking. It's a lot easier to assume you're just a liar than that you're so wildly disturbed you think the latter is true.



Abortion is, again definitively, not murder. Your statement can be filed right alongside militant vegans who claim eating meat is "murder". Same bullshit emotional argument, to ignore reality.

I don't care about your personal beliefs. If you think abortion is "murder", you're a liar. It's that simple.



What "consequences"? If you get the abortion, those "consequences" aren't consequences any more. Your argument is literally the same as Saudis arguing that women can't drive, because you deny them the right to learn to drive, and thus women don't know how to drive and can't learn so they'd be unsafe. When the problem originates with your oppression, and nothing else. You're the one trying to force consequences upon women.

You clearly don't have respect for life so just stop.

[Endus]

Nope. A complete set of unique DNA doesn't make you a complete life form. Again, a fertilized chicken egg has the same. But it's still, for the moment, just an egg.

How about chimeric people? They've got two (or more) sets of unique DNA. Are they two people? Can they vote twice in elections because of those two sets of DNA? Can one claim the other as a "dependent", for tax writeoff purposes?

Or is this, like you said, just more anti-scientific bullshit being spewed by religious extremists who seek to harm women?

[Specialka]

Lol...

I know exactly how human reproduction works my dude I promise.

The rift between us is that you don't consider an embryo a human being because all the silly reasons you've listed.

You mean biology ?

[Skulltaker]

Lol...

I know exactly how human reproduction works my dude I promise.

The rift between us is that you don't consider an embryo a human being because all the silly reasons you've listed.

First of all, I'm not your dude, not your buddy, not your bro, or whatever. Fuck off with that.

Second of all, apparently not, because you still insist that an embryo is a human being. It isn't. It's a lump of cells.

[Varx]

Nope. A complete set of unique DNA doesn't make you a complete life form. Again, a fertilized chicken egg has the same. But it's still, for the moment, just an egg.

No it's a chicken in the earliest possible stage of life, which happens to still be in the same egg shell.

Once again, the moment it turns into a carrot then you have an argument

[Endus]

You clearly don't have respect for life so just stop.

Given that I respect women, and you're only posting here in pursuit of subjugating them and restricting their basic human rights, no.

You continue to lie to push your extremist religious agenda and the open bigotry it is based upon, and I'll post the truth that exposes that to everyone else. Every time.

[Varx]

In this context, there's a cure for lung cancer, and you're the guy arguing that it shouldn't be given to anyone who smoked, because they should "live with the consequences".

That's how utterly horrendous your position is.

Wth what???? That made no sense what so ever. Obviously if there's a cure it should. Lol wtf

[Ivanstone]

No it's a chicken in the earliest possible stage of life, which happens to still be in the same egg shell.

Once again, the moment it turns into a carrot then you have an argument

A carrot has a completely unique set of DNA. Plants even combine their DNA to propagate.

[Varx]

First of all, I'm not your dude, not your buddy, not your bro, or whatever. Fuck off with that.

Second of all, apparently not, because you still insist that an embryo is a human being. It isn't. It's a lump of cells.

That will turn into a fully functional HUMAN BEING and not a play station 5, my dude.

[Endus]

First of all, I'm not your dude, not your buddy, not your bro, or whatever. Fuck off with that.

Second of all, apparently not, because you still insist that an embryo is a human being. It isn't. It's a lump of cells.

They like to confuse the terms "human" as biologically descriptive of the genetic composition of the cells with "human being" which is a legal term more or less interchangeable with "person".

If I wank off into a handkerchief, the sperm cells in that handkerchief are "human". They're not "human beings". Despite being living cells. This isn't actually confusing, but if they use the terms incorrectly, they can confuse people into misunderstanding reality, sometimes.

[Katchii]

Wth what???? That made no sense what so ever. Obviously if there's a cure it should. Lol wtf

BuT PoEpLe ShOuLd LiVe WiTh ThE CoNsEQueNcEs Of ThIeR AcTionS!

What happened to that argument?

[Fugus]

Regardless, this isn't about political party it's about what's morally right.

Morally right as decided by what?

Science says that abortion is morally right.

The problem with common sense is that it isn’t common with many people not knowing or flat out ignoring important parts but if you know about the stuff and don’t ignore the important stuff then it agrees with abortion as well because science agrees with it.

And though I may risk an infraction for saying this and I am not trying to make a religious debate but even the Bible supports abortion. So who’s morals are you going by?

And a federal abortion ban will be even less effective than their outlawing of weed as not everyone likes to smoke but most everyone likes to fuck for pleasure.