The Abortion Debate Containment Thread - Put abortion sperging here.

  • Registration without invitation will be until July 4th, and we are reforming account penalties.

    MalwareBytes has, again, blocked both the .net and .cc domains for the Kiwi Farms. Complain to them, not me.

gang weeder

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 12, 2022
Fitting for someone who takes the piss out of everyone. En garde. My proof is my cock, for I have sired children. What proof of being pro-life do you have, save for debating transsexual miscreants who are terrible at statistics?

I have none, that's why I'm here spending so much time debating the dregs of society to no point or purpose. To fill the gaping black hole in my soul.
 

Uberpenguin

Flightless Bird Agriculturalist
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Oct 16, 2019
I have none, that's why I'm here spending so much time debating the dregs of society to no point or purpose. To fill the gaping black hole in my soul.
Is that also why you want to rape and eat little bitty babies? To fill the gaping black hole in your soul? Because a very reliable source told me you want to rape and eat little bitty babies.

Anyways, if you realize that then why not go do something else? The modern world needs actions, not opinions. We have Twitter, there's no shortage of opinions.

The bar's never been lower either, it's honestly fucking shameful. You've got single mothers throwing away their multiple hundred dollar dyson vacuum cleaners that turn out to be clogged; they do this regularly. Even guys will throw out $200 power tools when 90% of the time the contact in the on/off switch is just dirty. These are basic 5-10 minute fixes. You usually don't even have to take anything apart or solder, just use basic fucking reason before sending your plastic shit off to some landfill and ordering more.
Then people wonder why corporations are bending the middle class over a barrel and the environment is going belly up.

If this is what we've resigned ourselves to, then who gives a shit about abortion? Unless people are willing to step up and take back their own destiny the next generation has no hope anyways.
 

Mark Antony

Race-mixing baby raper eating rich man's carcass👑
kiwifarms.net
Joined
May 6, 2022
Is that also why you want to rape and eat little bitty babies? To fill the gaping black hole in your soul? Because a very reliable source told me you want to rape and eat little bitty babies.

Anyways, if you realize that then why not go do something else? The modern world needs actions, not opinions. We have Twitter, there's no shortage of opinions.

The bar's never been lower either, it's honestly fucking shameful. You've got single mothers throwing away their multiple hundred dollar dyson vacuum cleaners that turn out to be clogged; they do this regularly. Even guys will throw out $200 power tools when 90% of the time the contact in the on/off switch is just dirty. These are basic 5-10 minute fixes. You usually don't even have to take anything apart or solder, just use basic fucking reason before sending your plastic shit off to some landfill and ordering more.
Then people wonder why corporations are bending the middle class over a barrel and the environment is going belly up.

If this is what we've resigned ourselves to, then who gives a shit about abortion? Unless people are willing to step up and take back their own destiny the next generation has no hope anyways.
Nice numbers, boyo! But can your statistics stand up to this?
Godsend.jpeg

💪🧠🏆👌
 

PenneHead

Princess
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 23, 2021
"I care about children so much that I'll deny them a chance to find their happiness in the world by killing them before they're born."

Do you think we should murder all our orphans, too? They're "unwanted", after all-- that's why they're in need of adoption.

As a matter of fact, what do you propose we do to fix this "failing system"? What resources do we need? How much time do you think it'll take to solve these issues?

I was part of a pro-life organization that saw to several initiatives aimed at supporting single mothers in particular as to help them but also make keeping the child a more attractive option.

I think about that and compare it to you just talking about how the world isn't perfect so we should kill children before they're born to "spare" them. You never mention these issues for the sake of fixing them, even if for the ones that are already born.


Because they're primarily about abortion-- that and birth control overall are what they're known for. That's what the organization was established for.


Are comatose patients not human? Are you not human when you're asleep? Is it possible that chimpanzees are human?

Definitely, being "human" is much more fundamental than bearing metacognition.
Dude literally just kill them or send them to h China. As micheal Jordan once said “fuck them kids.” 💀
 

Zero Day Defense

Includes Rumble Pak (tm)
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Why do so many people in this thread think having fewer humans on this planet is a bad thing? We're overpopulated as hell already.
What the hell are you talking about? Just because some countries in Africa have "a lot" of people, doesn't mean that developed countries running below the standard repopulation rate aren't heading for bad things in the future. Population doesn't work the way you're acting like it does.
 

gang weeder

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 12, 2022
Why do so many people in this thread think having fewer humans on this planet is a bad thing? We're overpopulated as hell already.

Should we just start exterminating undesirables then? I mean. If "having fewer humans" justifies murder as a means of combating "overpopulation."
 

Bani

Pocket Clown
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Aug 10, 2017
The fiscal conservatives will just put a cap on the number of children welfare pays for.

That's not the question at all. We don't kill homeless people just because they're mentally ill beyond repair, permanent fried drug addicts, suffer through horrible weather and are constantly subject to violence, robbery and rape. Euthanasia is a crime in the US.

If a fetus is a person, intentionally terminating a pregnancy (abortion) is murder. If a fetus is not a person, abortion is up for debate.

I think the better question is does anyone have the right to determine whether or not a child's life is worth living? I don't believe so.

But if you shoot a pregnant woman you will probably be charged with two murders. Is it a life or not?

Unless you're male, then you have to sign up for selective service and can be drafted.

Not true. Prisons severely restrict bodily autonomy. Being legally locked in a mental institution severely restricts bodily autonomy. We have laws restricting what substances you can put in your body. It's illegal to have sex with certain people (like children or vegetables). Euthanasia is illegal. In many places you have a duty to retreat before you can legally defend yourself.

With that said, abortion is a complicated issue. At what point life begins is an issue that needs to be defined. I feel both sides of the political aisle refuse to do that because they want this wedge issue around.
What would the criteria be for a who makes the cut for the 'cap' and who doesn't? That's just another way of deciding which babies matter and which don't. Seems contradictory to say all children's' live are equally valuable in one instance and not in another.

And you could credibly make the argument that while the government doesn't waltz up to homeless people and euthanize them, it condemns them to death via neglect and criminalization. In fact, the medical and public safety costs created by homelessness far outweigh even generous estimates of what housing them would cost. However, homeless people are still people in every legal sense while fetuses are not. In that same vein, whether or not crimes committed against pregnant women are considered to be against two individuals varies greatly across municipalities, and generally such fetal personhood bills are passed with the ulterior motive of lending legitimacy to anti-choice rhetoric. Again, fetuses don't have social security numbers, they aren't counted in census data, they aren't considered dependents, etc. In the eyes of the government, you do not exist without that documentation, and one legal exception created to persecute crimes against pregnant women does not change that. Now, does that mean that people without legal documentation (like invisible children in China) literally don't exist? Obviously not. My purpose in pointing out the issue with documentation is that the government cannot regulate that which it does not acknowledge the existence of.

The draft has been rendered obsolete by a combination technological innovations and the sheer size of the U.S. military dwarfing literally every other force on Earth. It's extremely unlikely that the draft will ever be reinstated in our lifetimes. You signing a piece of paper saying that you might potentially have to give up your autonomy in the unlikely event of a draft is not remotely the same as every woman in the country (even ones under the age of 18 ) being required to risk their lives to bring a fetus to term should they concieve. Which do you think is more likely, an accidental conception, or a draft in the age of drone strikes? Selective service should be abolished as well. People should be able to choose whether they risk their lives for others-- that goes for drafted men and pregnant women.

Are you seriously trying to argue that not being able to molest children is a restriction on your bodily autonomy? Again, children are people in every legal sense. By sexually assaulting them, you violate their autonomy because they cannot give informed consent. I understand the discussion here is mainly about the U.S., but there are several first world countries were drug use is not a crime-- only drug trafficking. Speaking of crimes, prisons restrict your autonomy as a punishment-- you technically sign away your autonomy the moment you commit a crime. Is getting pregnant on the level of a crime in that sense, in that it's a "punishment" you subject yourself to the potentiality of when you have sex or get raped? I don't think so.

Hey man, I'm just as sick of the abortion debate as you are, but the point at which life begins HAS been defined. Again, the entity arbitrating this issue, the U.S. government, gives you a social security number when you're born. Boom. That's when your life begins as far as the government is concerned. If you're gonna call abortion murder, you better start issuing documents to zygotes.
 

ChikoForce

Let's fuck and suck!
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Should we just start exterminating undesirables then? I mean. If "having fewer humans" justifies murder as a means of combating "overpopulation."
When the Titanic sank, the people in charge had to leave some people behind so others could live. Are you saying they all should've died because that would've been "fairer?"

Also, I find it hilarious that so many of these so-called "pro-life" people support the death penalty. If your argument against abortion is that it's "murder," supporting the death penalty is kind of a contradiction.
 

Zero Day Defense

Includes Rumble Pak (tm)
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
The draft has been rendered obsolete
The draft has been adjudicated constitutional since WWI. It was employed twice since then. Its current obsolescence is avoiding the point that not only does most every man render themselves liable to it when they turn 18, but that the government has been considered well within their right to make such a mandate, and they've exercised it. You're suggesting that the viability of this argument has to do with factors completely outside of it.

Furthermore, putting aside that laws are regular restrictions to bodily autonomy (that they're meant to prevent the violation of another's bodily integrity is absolutely irrelevant to that fact), "bodily autonomy" isn't even an absolute right (Roe's verdict sought to balance that idea with the right to prenatal right, and accordingly invented the concept of trimesters; European countries have restrictions on abortion-- and that a woman likely wouldn't perform a second or third "trimester" abortion outside of a medical emergency is irrelevant to the law restricting it except in such a case).
 

gang weeder

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 12, 2022
When the Titanic sank, the people in charge had to leave some people behind so others could live. Are you saying they all should've died because that would've been "fairer?"

Are you comparing the world's condition of "overpopulation" to the sinking of the Titanic?

Also, I find it hilarious that so many of these so-called "pro-life" people support the death penalty. If your argument against abortion is that it's "murder," supporting the death penalty is kind of a contradiction.

Do you think the death penalty is ever justifiable under any circumstances, ever?

If not, then it clearly has nothing to do with abortion.

If so, explain why people who believe that murdering innocent children is wrong are making some kind of contradiction when they also support the death penalty for heinous criminals such as child rapists.
 

ChikoForce

Let's fuck and suck!
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Are you comparing the world's condition of "overpopulation" to the sinking of the Titanic?

Why is "overpopulation" in quotations? We are overpopulated. That fact is indisputable. I'm not comparing overpopulation to the sinking of the Titanic, necessarily. I'm saying that sometimes it isn't possible to save everyone.

Do you think the death penalty is ever justifiable under any circumstances, ever?

If not, then it clearly has nothing to do with abortion.

No, I don't think the death penalty is ever justified. The government should never have the power to kill living people.

If so, explain why people who believe that murdering innocent children is wrong are making some kind of contradiction when they also support the death penalty for heinous criminals such as child rapists.

I'm saying that, if your argument against abortion is that it's killing people and that's wrong, then supporting the death penalty under any circumstances is hypocritical.

Also, lol, fetuses aren't "innocent children." They're basically parasites. Are you gonna cry when a man jerks off or when a woman has a period? Because those sperm and eggs could become human someday too, y'know.
 

gang weeder

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 12, 2022
Why is "overpopulation" in quotations? We are overpopulated. That fact is indisputable. I'm not comparing overpopulation to the sinking of the Titanic, necessarily. I'm saying that sometimes it isn't possible to save everyone.

Okay, so you brought up the Titanic for no reason. In that case I'll repeat myself and maybe this time you can actually answer.

Should we just start exterminating undesirables then? I mean. If "having fewer humans" justifies murder as a means of combating "overpopulation."

I'm saying that, if your argument against abortion is that it's killing people and that's wrong, then supporting the death penalty under any circumstances is hypocritical.

So all you can do is repeat yourself, making the same nonsensical assertion over again without even the barest attempt at actually explaining the logic. Got it.

Also, lol, fetuses aren't "innocent children." They're basically parasites. Are you gonna cry when a man jerks off or when a woman has a period? Because those sperm and eggs could become human someday too, y'know.

The "parasite" logic applies just as well to infants. You could extend it all the way up until the child comes of age at 18, if you really took it to its logical conclusion. That entire time a child is a drain on the resources of their parents.
 

Netizennameless

Goosama Bin Laden
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
What would the criteria be for a who makes the cut for the 'cap' and who doesn't? That's just another way of deciding which babies matter and which don't. Seems contradictory to say all children's' live are equally valuable in one instance and not in another.
I am not at all saying it is a humane or correct approach, but it is a solution politicians are willing to implement.
And you could credibly make the argument that while the government doesn't waltz up to homeless people and euthanize them, it condemns them to death via neglect and criminalization.
disagree. They condemn themselves by not being responsible or caring for themselves. There is a large argument to be made that many of these homeless ate incapable of caring for themselves and belong in state hospitals. I would happily let my taxes fund that.
In fact, the medical and public safety costs created by homelessness far outweigh even generous estimates of what housing them would cost. However, homeless people are still people in every legal sense while fetuses are not.
the legal arguments which have defined this issue were fundamentally flawed and soon to be void. Nothing about this issue has been decided except that states will have the power to decide their own laws.
In that same vein, whether or not crimes committed against pregnant women are considered to be against two individuals varies greatly across municipalities, and generally such fetal personhood bills are passed with the ulterior motive of lending legitimacy to anti-choice rhetoric.
this is not an excuse for the fact that preborn infants are considered human beings legally at least some part of the time. That makes it a grey area at best, not settled like you claimed above.
Again, fetuses don't have social security numbers,
Neither do illegal immigrants but they are still people.
they aren't counted in census data, they aren't considered dependents, etc. In the eyes of the government, you do not exist without that documentation,
Lie. People without socials do get tax ids, and there are multiple legal immigration statuses that don't earn you an SSN. That is on top of the fact that many state governments issue drivers licenses to non citizens and even illegal immigrants.
and one legal exception created to persecute crimes against pregnant women does not change that.
the crime against the pregnant woman and the separate crime against the unborn person are entirely separate issues. What you are describing is unconstitutional sexism.
Now, does that mean that people without legal documentation (like invisible children in China) literally don't exist? Obviously not. My purpose in pointing out the issue with documentation is that the government cannot regulate that which it does not acknowledge the existence of.
FISA courts are a direct contradiction to this statement.
The draft has been rendered obsolete by a combination technological innovations and the sheer size of the U.S. military dwarfing literally every other force on Earth. It's extremely unlikely that the draft will ever be reinstated in our lifetimes.
This is retarded nonsense. It is unconstitutional because of gender discrimination regardless of how likely it is to be enforced.
You signing a piece of paper saying that you might potentially have to give up your autonomy in the unlikely event of a draft is not remotely the same as every woman in the country (even ones under the age of 18 ) being required to risk their lives to bring a fetus to term should they concieve.
you are right, it's not the same. A woman has a choice to not have sex, a man does not have a choice whether or not he will be compelled to risk his life in war. Stop pretending a woman doesn't have a variety of choices before ending a human life, it's insulting and infantilizing to women. With choice comes responsibility.
Which do you think is more likely, an accidental conception, or a draft in the age of drone strikes?
there is no such thing as an accidental conception. Pregnancy is an easily predictable outcome from having sex and anyone who claims to not understand this is either mentally disabled or lying.
Selective service should be abolished as well. People should be able to choose whether they risk their lives for others-- that goes for drafted men and pregnant women.
Women can choose to not have sex. I agree selective service should be banned, or at least apply equally.
Are you seriously trying to argue that not being able to molest children is a restriction on your bodily autonomy?
Technically it is, but i am arguing that certain restrictions on bodily autonomy are reasonable and make sense. I am not advocating for being able to fuck children. Pedos deserve the rope.
Again, children are people in every legal sense. By sexually assaulting them, you violate their autonomy because they cannot give informed consent. I understand the discussion here is mainly about the U.S., but there are several first world countries were drug use is not a crime-- only drug trafficking.
banning the possession of drugs is a restriction on bodily autonomy. As are drug testing laws.
Speaking of crimes, prisons restrict your autonomy as a punishment-- you technically sign away your autonomy the moment you commit a crime.
or choose to have sex, of which pregnancy is an extremely predictable outcome. Men don't get the choice of whether or not to support a child through child support, and i think that is fair, for the same reason. If you choose to have sex, you choose to accept the risks of having a child.

with that said, i don't oppose exceptions for rape or incest.
Is getting pregnant on the level of a crime in that sense, in that it's a "punishment" you subject yourself to the potentiality of when you have sex or get raped? I don't think so.
I don't think it's a punishment at all. Most people change in ways they could have never imagined through being a parent. Ways that mature them and make them tougher far beyond what they could imagine they were capable of.
Hey man, I'm just as sick of the abortion debate as you are, but the point at which life begins HAS been defined.
this is being reversed and has never been settled.
Again, the entity arbitrating this issue, the U.S. government, gives you a social security number when you're born. Boom. That's when your life begins as far as the government is concerned. If you're gonna call abortion murder, you better start issuing documents to zygotes.
Conditionally, killing a fetus is already murder. This has extensive legal precedent. Miscarriage is going to make prosecuting abortions only work for the most egregious cases.

I will add that this is a horrible position for any woman to be in. Women don't often face the prospect of abortion lightly and many suffer silently for years afterwards. I have sympathy for their plight and I also feel women are being manipulated and lied to about how big of a deal abortion is psychologically. I've met 3 women who have told me their abortion story and none of them feel good about it. Obviously that is not the entire range of human experience. Just my views, maybe I'm wrong but i enjoy your willingness to engage.
 
Last edited:

Netizennameless

Goosama Bin Laden
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Why is "overpopulation" in quotations? We are overpopulated. That fact is indisputable. I'm not comparing overpopulation to the sinking of the Titanic, necessarily. I'm saying that sometimes it isn't possible to save everyone.



No, I don't think the death penalty is ever justified. The government should never have the power to kill living people.
So police shouldn't have the power to kill a mass shooter? The military shouldn't have the power to kill invaders?

I can agree with abolishing the death penalty in exchange for life without the possibility of parole.

1) Financially a life sentence is cheaper than the cost of automatic appeal and execution

2) it's not the perpetrators family's fault that the crime happened and they also are punished by their (guilty) family member being killed

3) I think the hell of prison is worse than the mercy of death. Personally i want the perpetrators to LIVE with the consequences of their actions.

4) our justice system is flawed and sometimes innocent people are convicted. You can't reverse death once it's been carried out. It's better to release an innocent person late and pay them damages than to execute an innocent person. Also showing mercy to people who would not do the same is an effective way to draw a contrast of character. It also changes hearts and minds sometimes.

I'm saying that, if your argument against abortion is that it's killing people and that's wrong, then supporting the death penalty under any circumstances is hypocritical.
I can agree with this, except to say capital murderers forfeit their right to life and that is understood before they commit to murder. I still think life without parole is a better option.
Also, lol, fetuses aren't "innocent children." They're basically parasites. Are you gonna cry when a man jerks off or when a woman has a period? Because those sperm and eggs could become human someday too, y'know.
Can i abort my ex wife for being a parasite? Can we abort welfare queens? No, that would be monstrous.