Abortion is wrong

[soc]

unless the mother's life is in danger. Saying a woman has power over her body is simply playing to the liberal crowd - it doesn't take into account certain realities. What if pregnant women abuse their bodies and the result is deformed or disfigured children?

Point is, there is a thing called accountability - you have power over your body but not over a child's body, which is why pregnant women should be responsible and not abuse their bodies. A child will suffer permanent scars on account of your stupidity.

But the idiotic leftist crowd is only interested in being more feminist than all feminists put together - they don't consider the ramifications of all this. Abortion is wrong, since a potential human being is being put away. A human being is more important than an irresponsible woman's need for control over her body.

[DDR]

To bring a child into an unwanted enviroment or into a family that cannot sustain him/her is more wrong that to get rid of a bunch of underdeveloped cells.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

I couldn't give a damn shit about the lives of slimeballs that have anatomical similarity to a fish embryo, especially over a woman's control over her body.

Take your fucking cross and prolapse your anus with it, shitwad.


P.s. I love abortion.

P.s.s. Fuck you troll.

[soc]

To bring a child into an unwanted enviroment or into a family that cannot sustain him/her is more wrong that to get rid of a bunch of underdeveloped cells.

Then don't be irresponsible.

[soc]

I couldn't give a damn shit about the lives of slimeballs that have anatomical similarity to a fish embryo, especially over a woman's control over her body.

Take your fucking cross and prolapse your anus with it, shitwad.


P.s. I love abortion.

They have the potential to become fully human, fish embryo doesn't. That's the difference.

p.s.
Name calling is uncalled for.

[DDR]

Then don't be irresponsible.

No birth controll system works a 100%, so doesn't matter how responsible you're if you have a bad luck strike.


They have the potential to become fully human, fish embryo doesn't. That's the difference.

p.s.
Name calling is uncalled for.

Everytime I wank, I kill thousands of potential human beings? Am I a genocidal maniac?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

They have the potential to become fully human, fish embryo doesn't. That's the difference.

Who fucking cares? An embryo or even a foetus in it's developmental stage is not remotely comparable to a human.

A sperm cell has the 'potential' to become fully human as well. Are you going to put a stopper on your testicular chambers and declare masturbation to be murder?

Take your freakish natalist crap and shove it up your arse.


p.s.
Name calling is uncalled for.


Neither is calling a woman 'irresponsible' for having control over her fucking uterus, you slimeball. You're a sexist prick that values the 'potential future' of a god-damned wombic sea-horse over the real, existing present and future of a living, breathing woman, and you want to express that politically. That's more repulsive to me than any insult I have aimed at you.

[Eleutheromaniac]

…the idiotic leftist crowd…


p.s.
Name calling is uncalled for.

LOL wut? That's enough feeding the trolls for me today.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

LOL wut? That's enough feeding the trolls for me today.

Considering how the account's name is 'soc', I wouldn't be surprised if this was a certain banned member's idea of a joke.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Can we perform late abortions on reactionaries?

[human strike]

Abort trolls.

[Remus Bleys]

Can we perform late abortions on reactionaries?Of course.

OP, what is the point of this thread? Do you think you will convince us with rampant sexism and sexual puritanism?

[Sasha]

OP, what is the point of this thread?

death by admin i presume....

and unless they actually start to "debate" I will abort his ass sooner than later.

[RedSunrise]

In my humble opinion ;)

I think it would be easier in the abortion debate to simply pick the middle ground. Why not unsure generous simple to enter adoption/child care facilities post-birth? And remove abortion?

What this does:
It gives everyone women a choice on whether they want to keep the child or not, but doesn't step on other peoples toes.

I am most certainly anti-compromise, but this seems like a trivial point to the atheist since it is just a bunch of cells WHO CARES?!?!? If it dying doesn't matter, should it being alive matter?

Random extra: If we are all animals anyway, what does it matter if we have post birth abortions? (at the age of 30) Nihilism woot ;)

[Sam_b]

Why not unsure generous simple to enter adoption/child care facilities post-birth? And remove abortion?


Just awful. You've forgotten the main thing here which is a woman has a right to control her own body.

[RedSunrise]

Just awful. You've forgotten the main thing here which is a woman has a right to control her own body.

Agreed.
Just wondering if an animal's body inside of an advanced chimp's stomach is worth stepping on peoples toes about.... (Not a serious argument just thinking out loud)

[helot]

A woman's body is not the business of the husband, the father, the state or yours! It is her own business. Besides, is this not also a matter of public health as well as one of women's rights? Banning abortion does not stop abortions taking place but instead renders them far more dangerous.

[soc]

As expected, leftists simply bark like rabid dogs, no different from the right-wing nuts. Woman has the right over her body ... what if her child is born disfigured because she abused her body during pregnancy? Will that be okay with you?

There is a limit to everything. Freedom should be tempered with discipline.

[helot]

In that situation then how about we force vesectomies on men when they reach a certain age? It has been proven that the older a man is the lower quality of his sperm and thus the hugely increased risk of various medical problems for the child. Would you support this?

[RedSunrise]

There is a limit to everything. Freedom should be tempered with discipline.

Someone said that to me the other day:
"Government should enforce moral law."
I said, "What moral law should rule over all others?"
He responded, "The only right one."
Confused I said, "Which is the only right one?"
Paraphrased response, "The one I believe in."

[Bolshevik Sickle]

Emotionally, abortion is wrong. Logically, sometimes it's neccessary.

[Halert]

Emotionally, abortion is wrong. Logically, sometimes it's neccessary.

But, you agree that under no circumstances abortions should be restricted
And that it is the choice of the woman and the woman alone right?

[Red_Banner]

With the proliferation of protection and birth control, there is little excuse to have an abortion now except for rape.

Abortion shouldn't be abolished by making it illegal, but you can reduce the amount with better education, better access to contraceptives, and improving the socio-economic conditions.

"The fight against abortions must be carried on not by persecuting the mothers, who resort to abortions often at great risk to their own lives, but must be directed towards eliminating the social causes that have made it necessary for women to resort to abortions."-N. K. Krupskaya

[roy]

With the proliferation of protection and birth control, there is little excuse to have an abortion now except for rape.

you know birth control/protection doesnt always work, right? and no one needs an 'excuse' for abortion, its called having control over your own body. its really funny how you start off like this then put a quote at the end about not persecuting women.

[Bolshevik Sickle]

Emotionally, abortion is wrong. Logically, sometimes it's neccessary.
But, you agree that under no circumstances abortions should be restricted
And that it is the choice of the woman and the woman alone right?

Right.

[Sam_b]

With the proliferation of protection and birth control, there is little excuse to have an abortion now except for rape.

Women don't need 'an excuse' (or rather to excuse themselves to men like you) for taking control of their own bodies.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Everytime I wank, I kill thousands of potential human beings? Am I a genocidal maniac?

Yes, please stahp for the sake of humanity, you brute.

[A.J.]

To bring a child into an unwanted enviroment or into a family that cannot sustain him/her is more wrong that to get rid of a bunch of underdeveloped cells.

You're pre-supposing the existence of the bourgeois nuclear family(a merely transient phenomenon, which will inevitabley be consigned to the museum of antiquities) as being the preferable, if not only, mode of child-rearing.

During socialism-communism child-rearing will have become the responsibility of society as a whole rather the private matter of a monogamous heterosexual couple. This will be achieved via the creation of extensive child-care facilities(creches, nurseries, kindergartens etc.). Leaving Women free from the burden of having to bring up children and thus able to pursue a whole range of other interests.

Abortion, therefore, will have lost any economic rationale behind it. Moreover, whether a child was 'wanted' by their biological parents will be rendered an irrelevance.

IMHO, the liberal "Womens right to choose" argument derives from bourgeois individualism and selfishness.

[Comrade Jacob]

Free abortions for all!




(That means I disagree)

[Red_Banner]

Women don't need 'an excuse' (or rather to excuse themselves to men like you) for taking control of their own bodies.

Im sick of sexism from people like you.

What, I can't talk about these matters because I was born with different genitalia?

Yes they have control over their bodies, but be sensible and responsible about it.

[Hrafn]

Im sick of sexism from people like you.

What, I can't talk about these matters because I was born with different genitalia?

Yes they have control over their bodies, but be sensible and responsible about it.

... Why the fuck aren't you restricted yet?

[Red_Banner]

... Why the fuck aren't you restricted yet?

Why should I be?


Is it wrong of me to ask society to be responsible about their sexuality and use birth control?

[Hrafn]

Why should I be?


Is it wrong of me to ask society to be responsible about their sexuality and use birth control?

Birth control is the most wonderful thing since sliced bread. But holy fuck you're sexist. You demand that women have restricted control over their bodies, and then claim you - as a man - face discrimination because you're not allowed to be sexist. Go go go Team Mens' Rights - defenders of patriarchy, uniteeeee!

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Birth control is the most wonderful thing since sliced bread. But holy fuck you're sexist. You demand that women have restricted control over their bodies, and then claim you - as a man - face discrimination because you're not allowed to be sexist. Go go go Team Mens' Rights - defenders of patriarchy, uniteeeee!

Woah.

[Red_Banner]

Birth control is the most wonderful thing since sliced bread. But holy fuck you're sexist. You demand that women have restricted control over their bodies, and then claim you - as a man - face discrimination because you're not allowed to be sexist. Go go go Team Mens' Rights - defenders of patriarchy, uniteeeee!

I make no such demands.

I ask, not demand, that they restrict themselves.

[Hrafn]

I make no such demands.

I ask, not demand, that they restrict themselves.

Don't play around. You said, quote, there is little excuse for abortion, unquote. You're condemning abortion in the modern day, declaring it something illegitimate and wrong.

[Red_Banner]

Don't play around. You said, quote, there is little excuse for abortion, unquote. You're condemning abortion in the modern day, declaring it something illegitimate and wrong.

:confused:

Maybe I had a poor choice of words?

Maybe I should have replaced excuse with need or reason.

[Hrafn]

:confused:

Maybe I had a poor choice of words?

Maybe I should have replaced excuse with need or reason.

Regardless of your wording, the fact remains. You're against abortion except for in cases of sexual assault. That means you, effectively, don't think that women have the right to their bodies. When confronted with this fact, you claim you are being discriminated against, that you are a victim of sexism, due to 1. being a man and 2. not being allowed to control womens' bodies.

[Red_Banner]

Regardless of your wording, the fact remains. You're against abortion except for in cases of sexual assault. That means you, effectively, don't think that women have the right to their bodies. When confronted with this fact, you claim you are being discriminated against, that you are a victim of sexism, due to 1. being a man and 2. not being allowed to control womens' bodies.

I don't want to control womens bodies.

"You're against abortion except for in cases of sexual assault."

No, I recognize that pregnancies not caused by rape are easily preventable.

[Hrafn]

I don't want to control womens bodies.

"You're against abortion except for in cases of sexual assault."

No, I recognize that pregnancies not caused by rape are easily preventable.

"Little excuse", again.

And still, that's my main issue. My main issue, you have yet to try to argue against.

[Red_Banner]

"Little excuse", again.

And still, that's my main issue. My main issue, you have yet to try to argue against.

I'm not interested in playing games with you.

[Hrafn]

Then, maybe, you should consider stop being a sexist.

[The Feral Underclass]

Woah.

It's spelled 'whoa'.

[The Feral Underclass]

With the proliferation of protection and birth control, there is little excuse to have an abortion now except for rape.

Abortion is a form of protection and birth control.


I don't want to control women[s].

No, you just want to judge them.

[RedMaterialist]

Abortion is wrong, since a potential human being is being put away. A human being is more important than an irresponsible woman's need for control over her body.

If abortion is putting away a potential human being, then all abortion would be wrong. You can't make exceptions for rape or the health of the mother. In both cases it would still be taking a life.

This is why the lunatic right wing in the U.S. has to take the position that there are no exceptions to the prohibition on abortion.

[Quail]

It's not sexist to tell a man not to tell women what to do with their bodies. It is so easy as a man, who will never have to be pregnant and give birth (as I've said before, not exactly a walk in the park), who will never feel that fear that comes with a late or missed period, who will never spend their time agonising over whether their emergency contraception worked, etc... to declare that abortion is wrong or a bad choice, but if having a baby growing inside you was an actual real and terrifying possibility, your view might be very different.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

It's spelled 'whoa'.

Nobody likes the spell checka.

[RedBen]

A woman's body is not the business of the husband, the father, the state or yours! It is her own business. Besides, is this not also a matter of public health as well as one of women's rights? Banning abortion does not stop abortions taking place but instead renders them far more dangerous.
while i agree abortion should be available universally(for free), if my significant other got pregnant and aborted it without so much as letting me know what was going on, she'd be single real quick. it's her right but if i have a stake in it, it's my business to know.

[Sam_b]

Im sick of sexism from people like you.

What sexism? There's no such thing as sexism against men.

[NGNM85]

It's not sexist to tell a man not to tell women what to do with their bodies. It is so easy as a man, who will never have to be pregnant and give birth (as I've said before, not exactly a walk in the park), who will never feel that fear that comes with a late or missed period, who will never spend their time agonising over whether their emergency contraception worked, etc... to declare that abortion is wrong or a bad choice, but if having a baby growing inside you was an actual real and terrifying possibility, your view might be very different.

It might be, but I doubt it. Of course, I'm pro-choice. In general, I suspect that if men had to bear the potential consequences of pregnancy in the same way, and to the same degree, as women, the national conversation on this subject would be quite different. However, while this feels very compelling, it's worth noting that the pro-life movement is pretty evenly split along gender lines. The majority of American women identify as pro-choice, but pro-choice women only outnumber pro-life women by a fairly slim margin. (49%/45%, according to a recent national poll by Gallup.) So, while it may seem counterintuitive, the degree to which this issue durectly affects someone appears to play a much smaller role in shaping their views on the subject as one might think.

[helot]

while i agree abortion should be available universally(for free), if my significant other got pregnant and aborted it without so much as letting me know what was going on, she'd be single real quick. it's her right but if i have a stake in it, it's my business to know.


and if your significant other didn't mention it at all i'm pretty sure you're not very significant in her life :p

[RedBen]

and if your significant other didn't mention it at all i'm pretty sure you're not very significant in her life :p


shit after 5 years i hope i am! back the op, abortion is a woman's right hands down.

[Yuppie Grinder]

There are no rights or wrongs, there are people with conflicting interests. Nothing is sacred, there are only things people pretend are sacred.
I feel like a lot of people foolishly right off abortion without even trying it once.

[Tolstoy]

I say "More Abortions" go find Ceascaus corpse and fuck it, shitsipper

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

I'm neither for nor against abortion per se, but one fact that must be recognised is that a foetus is both living and human, if we're going by scientific definitions, so abortion is murder - what you're debating is whether it is justified, and in which circumstances.

Let's not sugar-coat things.

[Sam_b]

This argument has been dealt with literally hundreds of times. If we're going by 'scientific definitions' (of course, as usual with this sort of debater none are actually offered) then you're still wrong.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

This argument has been dealt with literally hundreds of times. If we're going by 'scientific definitions' (of course, as usual with this sort of debater none are actually offered) then you're still wrong.

A foetus is the offspring of two homo sapiens, thus it is a homo sapien. That's a rock-hard fact.

I haven't seen a single scientific definition of life (yes, I know that they vary) that does not apply to a foetus.

[NGNM85]

This argument has been dealt with literally hundreds of times. If we're going by 'scientific definitions' (of course, as usual with this sort of debater none are actually offered) then you're still wrong.

It depends on the gestational age of the fetus. A 12-week-old fetus is still a potential human being but by 26-28-weeks it has all the biological prerequisites.