Abortion is unethical and should not be allowed BY ANY circustances

[areayes]

Well, my point is you should be able to kill your baby until it's not ethical to do it.

It's not unethical for a mother to abort their child because it's as ethical as having a child. You are trying to antagonize child and mother to justify this when that never happened.

I didnt really understood ur argument + you didnt awnsered me.

Morals > life btw

Its literally not ethical killing a human being.
How is killing a baby ethical?

 

[taai]

I didnt really understood ur argument + you didnt awnsered me.

Morals > life btw

Its literally not ethical killing a human being.
How is killing a baby ethical?

Well, i base my argument coming from the point that you don't decide wether you are born or not, it is always someone else's decision. you don't really have the right, capacity to decide, to be born as an egg - sperm, ovum - so to me there no ethical discussion in abortion. you are never ever "asked" for, it is your moms right to abort you as much as to bring you to life, its her body allowing yours to suckle on her juice.

 

[monecel]

I agree for most cases, though in the case of severe dysgenics I think it should be permitted. Where someone has missing pieces of their genome and will suffer for life. Racemixing could count though you could just deport them all

 

[Mess]

You cant use seeing futurr as a argument because thats impossible dumbass negro,

You cant fucking see the future

You cant use superpowers and claim it as a argument

"If you could see the future and you d know he is a school shooter"

Tf is this argument

A big indicator of low IQ is that they cannot handle hypotheticals and basic inference. I’m done arguing with sub80s who just completely disregard my points, in favour of creating his own image.

 

[areayes]

Well, i base my argument coming from the point that you don't decide wether you are born or not, it is always someone else's decision. you don't really have the right, capacity to decide, to be born as an egg - sperm, ovum - so to me there no ethical discussion in abortion. you are never ever "asked" for, it is your moms right to abort you as much as to bring you to life, its her body allowing yours to suckle on her juice.

Your literally contradicting your self nigga, your saying the mother can kill you because you dont decide to born, but also said its not ethical if your mom decides to kill you when your out of the womb.

And i asked you what the fuck is the difference of a baby in a womb and a baby outside and u keep fucking avoiding it

 

[areayes]

A big indicator of low IQ is that they cannot handle hypotheticals and basic inference. I’m done arguing with sub80s who just completely disregard my points, in favour of creating his own image.

Alright bro, OBVIOUSLY id rather abort the kid that would eventually make a school masacre.

But guess what nigga, you cant use this as a argument since you cant see the fucking future.

 

[taai]

Your literally contradicting your self nigga, your saying the mother can kill you because you dont decide to born, but also said its not ethical if your mom decides to kill you when your out of the womb.

And i asked you what the fuck is the difference of a baby in a womb and a baby outside and u keep fucking avoiding it

I don't think it's contradicting. It's pretty much my point. Maybe I'm not being cleared but I just finished my shift and my brain is fried I can't remember tbh. I think abortion is ethical and OK for the mom to decide.

The difference in the womb is that the baby has an umbilical cord

 

[areayes]

I don't think it's contradicting. It's pretty much my point. Maybe I'm not being cleared but I just finished my shift and my brain is fried I can't remember tbh. I think abortion is ethical and OK for the mom to decide.

The difference in the womb is that the baby has an umbilical cord

NAh bro, are you tryna ragebait or sun


UMBILICAL CORD nigga


How does umbilical cord makes it ethical/okay to kill someone and its not okay if u dont have one

GIve me a good explanation bcs theres genuinally no way ur that low iq

 

[taai]

NAh bro, are you tryna ragebait or sun


UMBILICAL CORD nigga


How does umbilical cord makes it ethical/okay to kill someone and its not okay if u dont have one

GIve me a good explanation bcs theres genuinally no way ur that low iq

wanna guess where u are lil bro?

 

[areayes]

View attachment 4433330wanna guess where u are lil bro?

js give me a explanation bro, i genuinally want to understand how your 3 neurones works

 

[jester]

Exept if the women life is at risk/she has to pick who will live.

shut up nigga

 

[Xinyue]

Shut the fuck up. I'll abort all my hoes' fetuses because insemination isn't to make a bitch pregnant but to make her understand she's all mine.

 

[areayes]

Shut the fuck up. I'll abort all my hoes' fetuses because insemination isn't to make a bitch pregnant but to make her understand she's all mine.

You have freewill to do whatever you want, wont change the fact its unethical and its the same as murder a grown adult/a child

 

[Xinyue]

You have freewill to do whatever you want, wont change the fact its unethical and its the same as murder a grown adult/a child

Ethnics have no place in today's world

 

[bourgeoizyzz]

(Change my mind)

Not to be a redditor, but I don't think life is precious. It's just one less asshole walking around

 

[areayes]

Not to be a redditor, but I don't think life is precious. It's just one less asshole walking around

THis is not how society works, if so i could js start killing everybody and not be charged for it since its js few less assholes walking around

 

[taai]

js give me a explanation bro, i genuinally want to understand how your 3 neurones works

When you are in ur mombs womb you have no capacity of will, you can't decide whether you are going to be born or not, not because I think you should but because you can't. Now, who is then the one that decides other one is born? The mother who has a womb. therefore she should also be the one to decide you should not be born. You could say that wombs are factories of babies and women are the boss of the factory.

Then once you are born, you have a basic animalistic will, we could say it's just unconscious functioning, but you could be removed from your mother and live as you would with her.

 

[bourgeoizyzz]

THis is not how society works, if so i could js start killing everybody and not be charged for it since its js few less assholes walking around

 

[notagreycell]

Exept if the women life is at risk/she has to pick who will live.

Whats wrong with abortion its literally made to get rid of some clumps of cells for women who accidentally got pregnant

 

[IAMNOTANINCEL]

what if the baby is ltn? lets be real its life will be worthless

No such thing as a "ltn baby"
Everyone has a wide skull with perfect ratios and forward growth before they start puberty and get malnourished

 

[areayes]

When you are in ur mombs womb you have no capacity of will, you can't decide whether you are going to be born or not, not because I think you should but because you can't. Now, who is then the one that decides other one is born? The mother who has a womb. therefore she should also be the one to decide you should not be born. You could say that wombs are factories of babies and women are the boss of the factory.

Then once you are born, you have a basic animalistic will, we could say it's just unconscious functioning, but you could be removed from your mother and live as you would with her.

saying that a baby can be aborted up to the last second because it doesnt yet have its own will and has a umbilical cord is a completely flawed and inhumane argument nigga, lak of will does not eliminate rights, babies and incapacitated people still have a right to lif the fetus is not the mothers property and reducing it to a productof a body treats a human being as an object near birth the baby is almost fully develiped can feel, respond and is already a human living being


killing it at this stage would be homicide/murder , the moral obligation to care for those who depend on you exists even without consentand ignoring it is logically inconsistent and ethically wrong . human being does not stop being human just because it cannot yet decide and no one has the right to turn a life into property of their own body

 

[IAMNOTANINCEL]

Absolutly wrong, any human no metter what stage of development has the right to have rights.

The fetus/embryo inside the women belly has human rights and has the same worthy as anyone

(Hes a human living being)

What are human rights and worthiness? Where are they aside from existing as abstract ideas in your head only and not in actual physical reality (that are literally just based on nothing actually as it seems)?

 

[areayes]

When you are in ur mombs womb you have no capacity of will, you can't decide whether you are going to be born or not, not because I think you should but because you can't. Now, who is then the one that decides other one is born? The mother who has a womb. therefore she should also be the one to decide you should not be born. You could say that wombs are factories of babies and women are the boss of the factory.

Then once you are born, you have a basic animalistic will, we could say it's just unconscious functioning, but you could be removed from your mother and live as you would with her.

Your also using your own princips as a argument and that cant be used as an argument

 

[areayes]

Whats wrong with abortion its literally made to get rid of some clumps of cells for women who accidentally got pregnant

this therm clump of cells doesnt exist, its a living human being.

+ your also a clump of cells

 

[notagreycell]

this therm clump of cells doesnt exist, its a living human being.

+ your also a clump of cells

No a human is human after being born before being born you are still a clump of cells developing

 

[areayes]

What are human rights and worthiness? Where are they aside from existing as abstract ideas in your head only and not in actual physical reality (that are literally just based on nothing actually as it seems)?

Even if human rights and human worth exist only as abstract ideas, they are essential for the functioning of society, concepts like laws, contracts, or money also do not exist physically, yet they directly shape our behavior and maintain order and without principles that protect life and dignity, society would collapse into chaos, because there would be no foundation for cooperation, respect, or justice herefore, even if they are “just ideas,” they have real and concrete effects, and denying them would be denying the very possibility of an organized and secure society

KIlling, robbing, raping is also abstract ideas

 

[areayes]

No a human is human after being born before being born you are still a clump of cells developing

After the second week the embryo fills all the minimum requirements to be considered alive:

Organization, Metabolism, Growth, Reproduction, Responsiveness, Homeostasis, Evolution.

whats defines us as humans is the dna in our cells/genetic code and since any embryo hss cells they are biologically scientifically human living beings.


And no, clump of cells is absolutly wrong biologically saying

 

[taai]

saying that a baby can be aborted up to the last second because it doesnt yet have its own will and has a umbilical cord is a completely flawed and inhumane argument nigga, lak of will does not eliminate rights, babies and incapacitated people still have a right to lif the fetus is not the mothers property and reducing it to a productof a body treats a human being as an object near birth the baby is almost fully develiped can feel, respond and is already a human living being


killing it at this stage would be homicide/murder , the moral obligation to care for those who depend on you exists even without consentand ignoring it is logically inconsistent and ethically wrong . human being does not stop being human just because it cannot yet decide and no one has the right to turn a life into property of their own body

But the body is a material thing and it owns the baby like literally; let's figure out the abortion validity threshold: what's the earliest you can cut the umbilical and the baby survives without long term consequences? 7 months? What's the max age for abortion? 5 months? And it's probably that because of the mom safety.

Like I told you, I think considering even an embrio that can't live on its own a human that should have it's "rights" when someone has already pre decided for it to be brought to this world is trying to paint humans as some kind of superior order being than animals.

in reality, what really makes us humans and able to participate in ethics, society is not present at that age, you aren't much more than a pet. And not even that. Then if you told me it is ok to kill a baby for no reason then since it's a pet: no, and I don't think you should kill a pet for no reason neither.

The thing here is that if the mom is free to do whatever she wants, it is only the reason for it that should be judged in any case.

 

[areayes]

But the body is a material thing and it owns the baby like literally; let's figure out the abortion validity threshold: what's the earliest you can cut the umbilical and the baby survives without long term consequences? 7 months? What's the max age for abortion? 5 months? And it's probably that because of the mom safety.

Like I told you, I think considering even an embrio that can't live on its own a human that should have it's "rights" when someone has already pre decided for it to be brought to this world is trying to paint humans as some kind of superior order being than animals.

in reality, what really makes us humans and able to participate in ethics, society is not present at that age, you aren't much more than a pet. And not even that. Then if you told me it is ok to kill a baby for no reason then since it's a pet: no, and I don't think you should kill a pet for no reason neither.

The thing here is that if the mom is free to do whatever she wants, it is only the reason for it that should be judged in any case.

Lemme correct you

Embryos forfills all the requirements to be alive.

Organization, Metabolism, Growth, Reproduction, Responsiveness, Homeostasis, Evolution.

And since they have cells and this cells has human genetic code/dna in them its biologically saying a HUMAN living being

What defines us is not our social skills but our dna.

I am saying the biological and literal thing.

 

[areayes]

But the body is a material thing and it owns the baby like literally; let's figure out the abortion validity threshold: what's the earliest you can cut the umbilical and the baby survives without long term consequences? 7 months? What's the max age for abortion? 5 months? And it's probably that because of the mom safety.

Like I told you, I think considering even an embrio that can't live on its own a human that should have it's "rights" when someone has already pre decided for it to be brought to this world is trying to paint humans as some kind of superior order being than animals.

in reality, what really makes us humans and able to participate in ethics, society is not present at that age, you aren't much more than a pet. And not even that. Then if you told me it is ok to kill a baby for no reason then since it's a pet: no, and I don't think you should kill a pet for no reason neither.

The thing here is that if the mom is free to do whatever she wants, it is only the reason for it that should be judged in any case.

Claiming a fetus can be treated however the mother wants because its nside her body or not yet viable is completely wrong lol , a fetus is not the mothers property ts humanity does not depend on survival outside the womb and the mothers freedom does not erase her moral obligations taking the life of someone dependent on you is never morally neutral no matter the reason



Consciousness also doesnt makes a human a human, like i proved u before.

 

[taai]

Lemme correct you

Embryos forfills all the requirements to be alive.

Organization, Metabolism, Growth, Reproduction, Responsiveness, Homeostasis, Evolution.

And since they have cells and this cells has human genetic code/dna in them its biologically saying a HUMAN living being

What defines us is not our social skills but our dna.

I am saying the biological and literal thing.

Ok, but the embryo cannot become alive on its own, sure, you are a homo sapiens sapiens but being a human is not just being a homo sapiens sapiens.

Then I ask you, what is being a human then?

 

[taai]

You claim no human should decide over the other human life but I think that's flawed because you don't decide being born.

 

[IAMNOTANINCEL]

Even if human rights and human worth exist only as abstract ideas, they are essential for the functioning of society, concepts like laws, contracts, or money also do not exist physically, yet they directly shape our behavior and maintain order and without principles that protect life and dignity, society would collapse into chaos, because there would be no foundation for cooperation, respect, or justice herefore, even if they are “just ideas,” they have real and concrete effects, and denying them would be denying the very possibility of an organized and secure society

Cool way to not answer the question

KIlling, robbing, raping is also abstract ideas

Robbing maybe as ownership is also not something that actually exists. Not raping and killing tho lol obviously wtf are u saying

 

[areayes]

Ok, but the embryo cannot become alive on its own, sure, you are a homo sapiens sapiens but being a human is not just being a homo sapiens sapiens.

Then I ask you, what is being a human then?

Literally awnsered you, human beings is basically your dna code.

Also like i said be4 because he cant live on its own it doesnt make him not a human or alive, if so newborn babies would not be considered alive since they need to be feeded, to be cared 24/24 and cant live on its own

 

[taai]

Literally awnsered you, human beings is basically your dna code.

Also like i said be4 because he cant live on its own it doesnt make him not a human or alive, if so newborn babies would not be considered alive since they need to be feeded, to be cared 24/24 and cant live on its own

They are alive. They aren't just really a full human yet. A human life is just like the history of our species. Neanderthals aren't humans but they were necessary for humans to exist - as also the homo sapiens sapiens. A baby is to a human life what a neanderthal is to human history.

 

[areayes]

You claim no human should decide over the other human life but I think that's flawed because you don't decide being born

"You think" doesnt make it correct buddy.

"You dont decide to be born, so no one can decide about your life after birth.” ts reasoning is flawed because not choosing to be born does not eliminate a human beings rights. No one chooses to be born yet all humans have the right to life and protection once they exist just like babies, incapacitated people, and people in comas

 

[areayes]

They are alive. They aren't just really a full human yet. A human life is just like the history of our species. Neanderthals aren't humans but they were necessary for humans to exist - as also the homo sapiens sapiens. A baby is to a human life what a neanderthal is to human history.

Biologically EXTREMALLY incorrect, please stop giving up things that goes into ur head and use actual sources and ACTUAL things and not something nat just come into ur mind bro.

Theres no full human,

If so children and babys also aint full humans since they are not fully developed as a "human"

Your absolutly going against all studys, biology science saying "fully human"

 

[taai]

"You think" doesnt make it correct buddy.

"You dont decide to be born, so no one can decide about your life after birth.” ts reasoning is flawed because not choosing to be born does not eliminate a human beings rights. No one chooses to be born yet all humans have the right to life and protection once they exist just like babies, incapacitated people, and people in comas

Ok, but if you look better you see what we really disagree is not really abortion but the idea of the mother should kill the to be human in her womb.

That is why I ask you what is a human to you, because then we can actually tell where the line is from your idea.

 

[areayes]

Cool way to not answer the question

Robbing maybe as ownership is also not something that actually exists. Not raping and killing tho lol obviously wtf are u saying

Im literally awnsering you with the same logic YOU are using, saying ethics is a abstract thing and doesnt exist and just is in our minds.

Dont u agree raping and murdering IS incorrect?


use your extra 4 neurones and correlate this to my argument

 

[areayes]

Ok, but if you look better you see what we really disagree is not really abortion but the idea of the mother should kill the to be human in her womb.

That is why I ask you what is a human to you, because then we can actually tell where the line is from your idea.

I feel genuinally talking with someone that has down syndrome.

I literally awnsered you 10 times that a human is something that has HUMAN dna in their cells and this is literal the most correct thing biologically and scientifically saying.

Dead humans are also considered humans even tho they are dead, what defines us "humans" is the dna in our cells that has HUMAN dna in it

 

[AscensionMan98]

Exept if the women life is at risk/she has to pick who will live.

Abort the non white babies, dont abort the white babies, simple.

 

[taai]

Biologically EXTREMALLY incorrect, please stop giving up things that goes into ur head and use actual sources and ACTUAL things and not something nat just come into ur mind bro.

Theres no full human,

If so children and babys also aint full humans since they are not fully developed as a "human"

Your absolutly going against all studys, biology science saying "fully human"

Biology doesn't really define what is a human. Give me a textbook biological definition of humanity, there isn't really because biology talks about species, organism development, development stages, and so on.

You are answering a philosophical question and debating ethical values with just biological facts then decline the material fact that a baby is owned by the mother womb and physically depends on his umbilical cord life force suckle.

 

[areayes]

Biology doesn't really define what is a human. Give me a textbook biological definition of humanity, there isn't really because biology talks about species, organism development, development stages, and so on.

You are answering a philosophical question and debating ethical values with just biological facts then decline the material fact that a baby is owned by the mother womb and physically depends on his umbilical cord life force suckle.

I feel arguing with a religious person using religion to argue logic



Holy shit nigga go to school

 

[areayes]

Biology doesn't really define what is a human. Give me a textbook biological definition of humanity, there isn't really because biology talks about species, organism development, development stages, and so on.

You are answering a philosophical question and debating ethical values with just biological facts then decline the material fact that a baby is owned by the mother womb and physically depends on his umbilical cord life force suckle.

There is no philosophical thing to define us as humans,

What DEFINES us humans is the fucking dna in our fucking cells that has human genetic code in it fucking low iq nihger

 

[areayes]

Biology doesn't really define what is a human. Give me a textbook biological definition of humanity, there isn't really because biology talks about species, organism development, development stages, and so on.

You are answering a philosophical question and debating ethical values with just biological facts then decline the material fact that a baby is owned by the mother womb and physically depends on his umbilical cord life force suckle.

Chat gpt

Being human isn’t defined by what you are doing or whether you’re conscious at the moment. Humans are defined by what you are biologically — your species, your DNA, your body.

Consciousness, language, reasoning, and culture are capacities humans have, but not requirements for being human. Even a person in a coma, a newborn, or someone asleep is fully human, because humanity comes from what you are, not from what you’re currently experiencing or doing.

If you want, I can make an even shorter one-line version that’s easy to remember. Do you want me to do that?




Now get the fuck out and accept you brutally lost the argument,


Abortion is unethical and id murder.

 

[taai]

There is no philosophical thing to define us as humans,

What DEFINES us humans is the fucking dna in our fucking cells that has human genetic code in it fucking low iq nihger

Yes, in fact what being a human is - mind, consciousness , reason - is probably one of the biggest topics discussed in philosophy. Biology can only define you in an organism way, you belong to the homo sapiens sapiens species.

 

[taai]

Yes, in fact what being a human is - mind, consciousness , reason - is probably one of the biggest topics discussed in philosophy. Biology can only define you in an organism way, you belong to the homo sapiens sapiens species.

Paste that into chat gpt niggero

 

[taai]

I will strangle you with my own hands

 

[areayes]

Yes, in fact what being a human is - mind, consciousness , reason - is probably one of the biggest topics discussed in philosophy. Biology can only define you in an organism way, you belong to the homo sapiens sapiens species.

Lemme break your argument in half.

If so people in anesthesia/coma are less humans because they dont have consciousness.


Absolutly no, now stfu

 

[IAMNOTANINCEL]

Im literally awnsering you with the same logic YOU are using, saying ethics is a abstract thing and doesnt exist and just is in our minds.

You just agreed with me and yapped about it being essential to society working so ig the only thing left which you didn't answer is wtf it's all based on. WHY is everyone just magically worth something and the same and WHY do we "have" rights?

Dont u agree raping and murdering IS incorrect?

No, but it's also not correct, it just is because there is no correct or incorrect