So you would be ok with a mother getting a late abortion because she doesn't feel like having the kid?

Not to parrot what Turkey said, but isn't your entire ideology based around consent? If the baby is already alive, why is it you don't think it's wrong to kill the baby without its consent.

I just got done typing up a nice long lovely response to that question.

That's not your choice to make though; abortion completely removes all agency from the individual fetus -- even to later take their own life if they choose -- and aren't you all about consent? If being conceived was the greatest offense you can imagine, wouldn't the preclusion of any further consent on your part be a similarly heinous offense?

No, I'd say it's the moral equivalent of putting somebody back to sleep after accidentally waking them up. You're merely fixing the problem that you just caused.

As a fetus, you can't consent to anything--neither birth nor your conception. Given this reasonable antecedent, my position has always been that it's not up to us to decide whether an unborn child wants to be conceived or not. That's not something we can just assume. It also cannot be assumed that the unborn don't want to be conceived, and this is where a lot of people have trouble with my philosophy, because they don't fully understand the nature of the position.

Contrary to what the average person may believe, anti-natalists make no philosophical assumptions on the opinions of the unborn--because to assume anything would be to impose our will, which would contradict the philosophy itself. We do not assume that the unborn wish not to be conceived. If I had ten kids, I can be reasonably certain that each and every one of them would all appreciate having been born. This doesn't actually mean anything, though, because as I just said, the point is not to assume what the child would want at all. It is not up to you, and the choice to not have children is not the same thing as assuming none want to be born. I hope you understand that, because it'll save us a lot of time discussing that boring crap.

The unborn is the state of literal nonexistence; conception is the imposition of existence, or the crime.

Abortion is the apology. It can (crudely) be described as a violation of consent, but it's as much a violation of consent as, say, knocking over an antique at a museum and sheepishly putting it back into place, even though you're technically not even supposed to touch anything. The point is, the vase looks a great deal better on the pedestal than it does on the floor (and that's where it's supposed to be anyway), so you can probably afford to place it back at the cost of some dignity.

Would it have been better to not be so clumsy in the first place? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean you can't clean up the mess to the best of your ability.

abortion completely removes all agency from the individual fetus -- even to later take their own life if they choose

I take umbrage with this line, because it rather blithely glosses over the idea that suicide is 1). only governmentally-sanctioned in a select few small European countries, and 2). assuming it were legal, it would likely be only available for adults considered mentally healthy enough. Especially in the West--we're not just going to allow little 8-year-olds to kill themselves.

So you live 18 long years--your life fucking sucks, and you've been through nothing but shit, yet you've developed a long series of intimate relationships with your friends and family. Now, even though you hate life enough to kill yourself, you feel emotionally chained to these third parties who should, in all fairness, be totally irrelevant in your own personal decision to end your own life--but you nonetheless cannot do it because of them. Because you know they'd all be crushed emotionally, and you don't want them to be affected that way by your sweet release.

There's also another problem. Having the right to make the personal decision to off yourself would be nice thing and all, but it doesn't undo the original sin: having been born in the first place. You can arrest a murderer, but you can't bring his victim back to life. Likewise, you can kill yourself, but you can't undo your birth. There's still a moral crime being committed there that's not being accounted for--because it can't be accounted for. It can only be avoided.

Keep in mind I'm only for abortion in only a few circumstances.

This'll go nowhere, then.

Quote from: Verbatim on February 12, 2017, 03:30:16 PM

Quote from: challengerX on February 12, 2017, 03:27:58 PM

Quote from: eggsalad on February 12, 2017, 02:20:51 PM

There's nothing wrong with humanely killing babies

um

Same as abortion.

The difference with abortion being that a fetus isn't a baby.

And both aren't "people" in any morally significant way.

Is trump /ourguy/?

can this meme /die/?

that's not guaranteed to work though. Have you seen these protesters? Some of them literally chain themselves to others. They won't move unless some physical contact between them and the car happens.

yeah, that's the idea

see, by the tone of your first post and how i interpreted it, i had assumed you were against this

Quote from: Antinatalist Superstar on February 12, 2017, 02:34:52 PM

what does "due care" entail, though

gently and mindfully running them the fuck over with your car

or, you know

slowing down, honking, calling out from the window, etc.

Reposted from Bungle:

http://www.cscmediagroupus.com/2017/02/11/tennessee-passes-bill-allowing-people-hit-protesters-blocking-roads/

Tennessee just made it legal to injure protesters who are blocking roadways and other rights of way.  The bill, introduced Wednesday and which easily passed the senate Friday, renders someone who runs over a protester who is blocking the street free from civil liability, so long as the driver was exercising ‘due care.’

The bill was likely in response to The Memphis Black Lives Matter rally last July, which shut down the I-40 bridge with hundreds of protesters refusing to leave. Traffic could not go across, including the parents of a very sick baby.

I don't have a huge problem with this, to be honest. I have faith that BLM et al. can come up with more efficacious and less disruptive forms of protest. it seems to me that making people late for work (or worse) over such a dubious cause with such nebulous end-goals is only ever going to make people less and less sympathetic towards you--and perhaps such stupid behavior should be subject to a degree of blatant disregard.

Now, if only they were protesting something like marijuana criminalization. Then I'd actually get my license specifically to run over some potheads--with due care, of course.

Tasty

According to this, It's from the alpha build of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Wildlands.

I'm not sure how we'd even know, unless someone has in-person friends or family here. That's the scary part.

right idea, wrong demographic, etc.

actually scratch that, im missing quite a few halos. weird cuz i thought i had more.

the only ones we need are 02B, 26 DE, and 26 LE (never happening)

and purest feeling

i agree with you almost entirely, but i'd put with teeth beneath pretty hate machine and i'd put hesitation marks above the slip

with teeth has some killer cuts, like all the love in the world, you know what you are, the hand that feeds, and right where it belongs (one of his best songs ever)

but it also has a couple of his worst songs ever, with some of his worst written lyrics ("i got my arms that FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP / i got my head on a spring...") and a few so-corny-they're-good lyrics ("i think i'm losing my grip / but i can still make a fist..."), which only get worse on year zero, which is also probably my least favorite LP

the good still overweighs the bad on with teeth, but i still find it one of his more overrated records in general

Meh

Just watch out for Eat Me, Drink Me. Easily his worst album--even by his own admission.