Abortion

I live in LA and right now, they are trying to pass a bill outlawing all abortions with the exception that it was cause by rape or incest and if it jeprodizes the mothers life.

Why is the government compromized mainly of white, old men who represent a small amount of the population. I don't think men should be able to make laws governing what a woman does with her body. I see early term abortions as getting rid of some very unwanted cells growing in ones body. What if I don't have the means of raising a child, what if I don't have the time to take away  from school to go through a few months of hell only to give up a child who makes me exponentially uglier and looser, what if I'm a crackwhore who would only make the child grow up the be fuck up and have a horrible, depressing life like all those /b/tards. I'm really scared that this law will be passed seeing how I live in a backwards, uber consevative state.

And also, North Caroline (maybe South I forget) is trying to pass a bill to ban all abortions that don't jeprodize the mothers lifes. WTF?

>>200

I thought you were against murder, hypocrite.

>>196

There is literally no way to respond to the rest of your post without repeating myself. Unlike you I don't need to reassert my position over and over and over until it's magically made true.

does it matter? world doesnt need no more people, and fetuses can't say no, or defend themselves!

>>80


Good! IF they can't keep their legs closed and want an abortion badly enough, let them murder their child the HARD WAY!

>>203

I rest my case.

There just admit it fetus are human but we will kill them anyway out of convenience, just stop being hypocritical and try to make baby murder sound like some altruistic higher goal of giving the woman rights over her body, news flash, the fetus is NOT her body.

>>205

News flash, the fetus is connected to her body and uses her for sustenance.

>>204

How about the guys keeping their legs closed too?

>>205

This isn't the issue, child.

>>207

This is. If you're going stop women from making the choice to abort, no matter how you feel about it...then why don't you make it so that men can't have sex without concieving? If we were talking about a man's right- this would be an entirely different matter and so-called "pro-lifers" know this.

It fails so hard that I don't even feel like addressing it. The fetus isn't what people call "human" and it doesn't matter how many times you shout "baby murderer" you still don't get to dicate what some woman does with her womb.

The problem with the abortion movement is that you don't want compromise, you want control. You can shout out loud about what you think is a human or not, but the woman is going to do whatever she wants to do and the West isn't going to adhere to a policy that has all the dressings of communism.

>>208
communism? what the fuck. get out, please.

>>209

think about what he's saying about nationalising people bodies and compare it to china's communism and you'll see he's right

a prolifer shouting "murder" has the same effect as when a vegetarian shouts "murder" at some guy eating me. human life isn't important, shit LIFE isn't even all that important. we literaly rape our planet everyday and you people are worry about babies that we as a society don't even take care of?

GET A FUCKING CLUE ALREADY

>>211
You think that the planet is more important than the life upon it?  GB/2 MARS

>>206

So why can't a woman kill her infant children and get away with it? They are still just as dependant on adults for sustenance, just the means are different.

>>208
"People" didn't consider blacks as being human either.
"People" thought it was just fine to go around the world and colonize everyone elses land.
"People" didn't think women should vote.

Just because "People" don't consider the fetus to be human doesn't mean its true.

>>210
News flash ever hear about China's forced abortion policy, you know one child etc.? Yup opposing baby murder = communism O.o.

>>211
Again that's fine, just state that though, don't give people BS about oh noes woman's rights, just say it out loud we want to kill the babies of poor people cause they are going to grow up and ruin my country club some day.

>>213
I LIEK TO EAT BABY UNBORN FETI YUM YUM

>>213

"People" didn't consider blacks as being human either.
"People" thought it was just fine to go around the world and colonize everyone elses land.
"People" didn't think women should vote.

Newsflash!  The religious establishment was ALL in favor of these things.  Go read a damn history book.

>>215
How is that relevant?

>>215

Like >>216 said, what they heck does that have to do with anything? The point is a lot of things that "people" said were right at one time were not, abortion being no different.

The point is most of these Pro-lifers are religious freaks.

>>218

That still makes no sense, so religous people supposedly supported slavery, colonization and keeping women from voting in the past all of those wrong things, so now if they support to right to life for the unborn this means what exactly?

And I say "supposedly" because if you even bother to read a history book you will see that it was infact religious people who brought an end to all those evils anyway.

>>219

THIS MEANS THEY ARE WRONG YOU FUCKING IDIOT. And "religious people" didn't bring an end to shit. You really need to read more.

>>220
everyone doubts god once in their life. you only hear the famous people say it.

>>220
No this means you fail at understanding anything at all and throwing in religion yet again which has no bearing on this argument:

Slavery was allowed because blacks were labled as non human. But it was wrong.

Women were not allowed to vote because they were not considered fully human or equal to men. That was wrong.

Colonizing the lands of other people was allowed because they were considered lesser humans. That was wrong.

And just like that abortion is allowed because the fetus is considered not to be human. This is also wrong.

Do you get it now or are you still getting your panties in a not over zomg religion!!!111!

BTW take your own advice and read more, religious people does not necessarily = white people. Ghandi was very religious, he ended colonialism in India.

You're an idiot, Abortion's mainstay has nothing to do with whether or not the fetus is human. That's YOUR arugment, not ours. Our is about choice- doesn't even matter what subjective term you've got for the fetus.

>>222

Don't bother trying to pull a Ghandi.  America is not predominately Hindu.

Interestingly, the call for people to be more concerned about those who are currently living, and working to improve health and living standards, can often make the entire abortion debate a moot point.  People are less likely to have abortions when they are well educated, affluent, and feeling comfortable with their lives.  By embracing a more egalitarian approach to social issues, many of the 'moral' problems that people tend to complain about, such as abortions, are rendered less and less important, because people do not take actions that are considered to be devient by one group or another when they are successful in the overall society that they have been raised in.  Deviency by its scientific definition tends to arise when one can not succeed given the opportunities presented to them in their current overall society.

If you are opposed to abortion, but are willing to let things such as health care, legislations that hold corporations to a higher level of standards, enviornment protection, and pretty much a large number of the other standards that are the exact opposite of what is on the current administration's agenda slide, then you can not make your argument for being pro-life based upon any sort of moral issue.

Many people who are pro-choice, except for the most extreme members of that group, would be happy if there were no more abortions, because of sufficient education, and readily available birth control and emergency contraceptives.

If you are not willing to go the full mile to support equal rights to work, sustinence, shelter, pay, entertainment, and opportunities, all that supporting a pro-life agenda shows is that you are seeking a way to punish people who do not live up to your moral standards.  Because no action takes place without some measure of self benefit, as described by the rational actors theory, one must assume that you in some way see people being able to control the number of children that they are bearing as a threat to your own welfare.  Is it because, deep down, you believe that if someone has more children than they were intending, they will be stretched further, thus not allowing them to allocate sufficient resources to each child?  This isn't an unrealistic reason for being pro-life, even if few will admit it - for those who are willing to punish people by denying them abortions, and who restrict themselves due to culture or creed from having many children, it means that their children will have greater opportunities in life, as more resources can be devoted to their upbringing, giving them better education, opportunties, and chances to get ahead in life.  Ultimately, anti-abortion legislation can be seen as a small part of a much larger movement by the WASP (that's White Anglo Saxon Prodestant) portion of the society to provide themselves with additional advantages, while repressing people of other cultures and social classes.

Do you think that this is an unreaslistic assumption?  Remember, institutionalized racism and other forms of institutionalized discrimination can take place with very few people actually having discriminatory feelings.  Just by buying into the propaganda, you are supporting such discrimination - just look deep down, and ask yourself, why ARE you so concerned with what other people do?  You are not concerned for no reason - saving 'innocent' people is not a rational decision, because ultimately other people are competition for limited resources.  Please examine the reasons for why you feel the need to be a prick about something that does not affect you, and then see if you can identify in truth what it is you want to accomplish.

no you are wrong

Hey, here's an idea. Let's ban abortion and force the anti-abortionists to pay for the kids schooling, healthcare, accomodation and feeding costs. Anti-abortionists don't get the point until it happens to them.

>>227
Or neuter poor people.

>>228
you are poor (in intelligence) let's start with you.

>> 226 Please examine the reasons for why you feel the need to be a prick about something that does not affect you,

Probably has something to do with killing little kids.  THAT'S What's got anti-abortinists angry.  It's called empathy, and if you were almost aborted you'd understand. 


But you make some good points;  people who can't support their kids would have some problems.  I'd gladly pay, to be honest with you, to keep someone alive on a personal level.  Like, if my sister wanted to abort and I had the means to support a kid I would contribute to that. 

But on a societal level, it makes no sense, because all those unwanted kids do tend to clog the system. 

So in other words, it's too complicated an issue to resolve down to "You're being mean!", "No, you're being mean!"

I guess abortion could, in many cases (except the "oops! Honey call the fetus flushers!") be acceptable as sort of a form of just natural death... you know, cutting your losses when it would likely kill you otherwise.

Probably has something to do with killing little kids.  THAT'S What's got anti-abortinists angry.  It's called empathy, and if you were almost aborted you'd understand.

What fool? Didn't he just say: "Protecting the innocents" isn't very valid. These aren't "little kids" with personalities, words or even feelings. Is the seed of a tree, an actual tree? NO. Same with humans. You're just scared of reducing us to precisely all that we are: Highly intelligent carbon based lifeforms.

What you don't understand is that your point of view is as subjective as if it's right to kill in war, or if it's right to make war in the first place. If you can't outlaw war, or poverty or anything else that supposedly "kills innocents", then what makes you think abortion should be outlawed? Give it a rest already- if it doesn't affect you- then don't worry about it. If you want to live around people who care about this issue so much then move to a state where you don't get a choice.

But don't sit here and imply that everyone should live under this rule because of your subjective, convienant and mutable sense of morality.

>>231 These aren't "little kids" with personalities, words or even feelings

Eh, you don't know that.

>> if it doesn't affect you- then don't worry about it.

That's a great idea.  People are getting gunned down in the street; doesn't affect me, I'm inside.  People are dying of this strange new disease.  Doesn't affect me, I don't have it. 

The primary reason why I'm against abortion is because it leads to some seriously scary shit; what if someone decides that anyone with an IQ below 130 doesn't have "personalities, [significant] words, or even feelings"?  I mean, it's highly possible, think how genetically engineered mental supermen would look at us. 

Don't sit here and imply that everyone should live under this rule because of your subjective, convienant and mutable sense of morality.

>>232

"Eh, you don't know that."

Eh, yes I do. I certainly have a better idea than you do. Your entire point of view is based on the possibility that they might, MAYBE have a personality or feelings. The thing has feelings in the same way a cow has feelings right before you hit it with an air gun and butcher it raw. It's not human until it looks up at me with those huge eyes that scream: Protect me! Until then, it's a seed. I.E - just a growth.

"Gun down in the street blah blah blah"

I'm sick of this argument. It doesn't apply. Stop using it. The "slippery slope" argument is the same one they used with vaccines and airplanes and spaceships and indoor plumbling and computers and democracy. It's a dumb attempt at ignoring the facts that abortions, like these other inventions, aren't going to completely destroy society like you *think* it will. People have been aborting their pregnancies since before the middle ages- *pats self down*...hm....I don't FEEL like society has been destroyed. Anyone else?

And then there's the classic "Throw his words back in his face." tactic...Great going, fuckhead!

Except for one thing: I'm not implying that everyone should live under "this rule"...I'm saying there should be a CHOICE. Don't like abortion? Don't have an abortion. Think you need one because there's no fucking way you can raise a kid and turning him over to the state is a fate worse than death? Then do have an abortion.

It's that fucking simple. I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice. That's what you dumb fucking idiots don't seem to get. You think pro-life means everyone else must be pro-death. How boorish! How so completely fucking retarded.

>>233
agreed. couldn't have said it better meself.

In order to get in the position to warrent an abortion you have to be irresponsible in the first place. My girlfriend and I have don't support abortions, and we've never needed one. Why? Because we practice safe sex. What's even worse is that someone who was being irresponsible by having unprotected sex when they didn't want a child is going to have an abortion, and kill a living being they brought to life because it's inconvient for them.

The child they brought to life, which they decided to 'abort' (which is a really PC way of saying murdering a living being, whether you consider children in the womb to be human enough or not to deserve life) is put to death for their own foibles.

In the end, I'm not quite sure if I support the freedom to do murders in the womb or not. I mean, should irresponsible people like that be having children in the first place? What I do know for certain is, that anyone who gets an 'abortion' done, except possibly in the case of rape, should be totally and completely ashamed of themselves. They are total and complete human scum.

>>233 It's a dumb attempt at ignoring the facts that abortions, like these other inventions, aren't going to completely destroy society like you *think* it will.

Stupid ass propaganda.  I think you're only capable of thinking in propaganda, anti-chan. 

Anyway, people have also been gunning each other down in the street for generations... does that mean we should support it?  I mean, hey, it hasn't destroyed society yet, has it?

Besides the fact that your post is full of fucking dumb ass propaganda, you do make one point:

"Think you need one because there's no fucking way you can raise a kid and turning him over to the state is a fate worse than death?"

This, I can understand.  This is the true reason abortions should be done; because there's no life for the fetus after birth.  What I oppose is your stupid ass "choice" argument, where "It's my body I do what I want!" Where abortions would be performed as a method of "Oops birth-control".  Why not have safe sex and all that?  Why do you want to shirk all responsibility for your actions?

Please don't respond with some insipid ass YOU THINK I'M PRO DEATH I'M PRO CHOICE.

I love how the laws say it's legal in case of rape or incest. But a fetus is a fetus amirite? It's not the fetus's fault how it was concieved. If you are taking the moral high ground, you have to be consistent all across, otherwise noone is going to take you seriously. No exceptions, either ban it outright, or legalize it outright.

THIS THREAD IS SHIT

>>236

"Stupid as propaganda"

Huh? Clarify, fuckwit.

"People have been gunning..."

This is the same thing as the "People getting gunned down in the street" argument. It doesn't apply. This isn't what we're discussing. So stop using it as an argument. It just doesn't work. 

"Your post is full of propaganda"

Again, what parts and why are you unable to refute anything I've said? How is saying "people should get a choice" or that "people thought vaccines and computers and guns and nuclear energy was a 'slippery slope" propaghanda? You know who considers choice as propaganda? COMMUNIST CHINA.

"Why shirk repsonsbility"

Having the kid anyway because you can't take the burden of your mistake IS, in fact, the easy way out. Good for you and your sense of "morals"- but statstically shown to be BAD for the kid.

Abortions aren't easy- only a man thinks this- a woman who's actually had one will tell you otherwsie. Having an abortion IS taking responsibility. Sometimes condom's break, sometimes people get drunk, sometimes lust overtakes rationale, we're HUMAN.

The debate you're having and the one I'm having are totally different: You're dictating how people should live. You are saying that they should live their life under a certain set of ideals (a program). YOUR ideals and by the way YOU see things. Because "Father knows best."

I'm merely saying however you live- you should be the one making the choices, you should take responsibility and do what you feel is best because you know what? You're not a fucking CHILD. You aren't a machine, you don't exist to pass down others ideals, you exists to pass down your own. No person throughout time has followed another group's program and they never will.

What's next? No more violent games? No more drinking? No more dancing? (Because dancing leads to sex)...no more choices?