This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - N/A
Pages: 1 ... 242526 2728 ... 261
751
« on: May 15, 2016, 10:42:24 PM »
Too lazy to take right now, everyone I've ever done was ISTJ though.
752
« on: May 15, 2016, 07:45:12 PM »
Shit would never happen at an NFL game.
You're right. Instead we get this.
God bless the USA.
753
« on: May 15, 2016, 07:43:15 PM »
>advocating moral relativism
>not realizing that means we can just tell you to shut the fuck up and not give a shit about you or fundies' crying
>implying I care about any of this
A lot of time I argue for the sake of arguing. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if drinking while pregnant was legal or illegal. Same with abortion.
translation: i got fucked
At least you're rough when you do it. I don't like it done gently.
754
« on: May 15, 2016, 06:50:59 PM »
>advocating moral relativism
>not realizing that means we can just tell you to shut the fuck up and not give a shit about you or fundies' crying
>implying I care about any of this A lot of time I argue for the sake of arguing. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if drinking while pregnant was legal or illegal. Same with abortion.
755
« on: May 15, 2016, 06:11:30 PM »
756
« on: May 15, 2016, 06:04:08 PM »
No, because there are none. Murder is not inherently wrong.
Killing something that isn't human, but will become human, is not wrong.
In fact, you're doing it a favor.
The very fact that since humans were smart enough to think, they attempted to find ways to prolong their life, attempt to create elixirs for immortality, create religions with beliefs about an everlasting afterlife, use science and medicine to increase life's longevity says otherwise. Not everyone subscribes to not existing being preferable Verb, so most would say not existing is terrible. First of all, "who I ask" doesn't matter. It's fucking immoral.
And secondly, the difference here that, somehow, you're still failing to grasp, is that an aborted fetus will never be a human. It begins and ends as a woman's body part. A fetus victim of FAS will grow up into a person. And the deformities that the mother inflicted on it while it while it was a fetus will be inflicted on it while it's a child.
It's no different than destroying your liver with alcohol before you donate it to someone else. "But AT THE TIME, it was my liver." That doesn't matter, because you knew it wouldn't just be your liver for very long.
That person should have complete free rein to do that while it is his, so... But I digress, on this same note, would you be against a woman who has hereditary disorders from procreating as well? a sizeable amount of the populace equate it to murder. And they are ALL wrong.
 le objective morality meme, well spooked.
757
« on: May 15, 2016, 05:50:35 PM »
Which is nebulous as all fuck, whereas the consumption of alcohol is a direct harm. There is no "potentiality" there--if you drink while pregnant, you ARE harming your unborn child. You are sure, but as a fetus, it isn't considered human yet, which is one of the reasons why abortion is free game. Since it's not considered human, it shouldn't be afforded the same rights and protections as a human.
But it will be a human.
But it will be a human so murdering it is bad so abortion is wrong. You seeing the parallels yet in your argument?
758
« on: May 15, 2016, 05:39:21 PM »
Which is nebulous as all fuck, whereas the consumption of alcohol is a direct harm. There is no "potentiality" there--if you drink while pregnant, you ARE harming your unborn child. You are sure, but as a fetus, it isn't considered human yet, which is one of the reasons why abortion is free game. Since it's not considered human, it shouldn't be afforded the same rights and protections as a human. No, I'm not. I'm talking about reality. Preventing a fetus from being born isn't immoral, it's no different than never having sex in the first place. Well, that depends on who you talk to, because a sizeable amount of the populace equate it to murder. Forcing someone to not only be born, but born with a serious birth defect, is evil. When you have an abortion, you're only affecting your body part. A human being isn't even in the equation. When you get drunk at bars while you're pregnant, a human being is definitely involved. The baby will be born, and they will have a a birth defect. The human being isn't even considered human at this point, which is what I am trying to drive through. It doesn't matter that the fetus will become human, at the point of pregnancy it is not given the same rights as humans and as such should not impede on the woman's ability to do what she wants with her body.
759
« on: May 15, 2016, 05:10:48 PM »
There's no cherrypicking, you're literally comparing apples to oranges. It's the difference between smashing a fertilized chicken egg and modifying the egg so the baby chicken is born a monstrosity. You're focusing on the now. Right now, the fetus is a part of the woman's body. Later, it won't be. So you can either do no damage to the fetus, or only damage the fetus. Drinking while pregnant doesn't only damage the fetus, an abortion does.
This really isn't hard.
Which as I said, your entire argument boils down to potentiality, which is the same shit pro-lifers use when they argue against abortion. Pro-lifers would argue you're not only harming the fetus but the potential life they could have had if they weren't aborted. If we cared about the potential, abortion along with drug use while pregnant would be outlawed. Our system already decided that autonomy should take precedence to the potential, so abortion is legal, and along with that, other acts that make sure a pregnant woman has autonomy should also be legalized.
760
« on: May 15, 2016, 03:03:30 PM »
I can understand it from a purely legal standpoint. Drawing comparisons to the abortion argument, it's been deemed that the woman's bodily autonomy takes precedence to an unborn child. Drawing from that same comparison, why should the woman be denied ingesting substances that she wants to if her autonomy is more important than the child? I'm honestly not in support of NYC's law, but can see the autonomy argument being even more of a shitfest when you say "x is allowed but y isn't."
Well there is a very clear distinction between forcing a baby to go through their life with fetal alcohol syndrome and other developmental disorders and not forcing that baby to go through anything. Maybe this is a by-product of mainstream adherence to the notion that non-existence is worse than any living condition.
imo, the end result of what happens to the fetus doesn't count as a variable because the argument is that a woman's autonomy should not be compromised because she is pregnant. Abortion deals with the woman having the autonomy to do with her body that surgery. Ingesting drugs is also an argument from autonomy. If the woman's bodily autonomy is more important than a fetus up to a certain point of development, there shouldn't be all this situational cherrypicking, because that just counters their original claim.
A woman, and anyone in the world, has complete bodily autonomy unless it affects other people. An abortion only affects the woman, because the fetus is a part of her body. Drinking alcohol and doing drugs affects the unborn child because you're not destroying the fetus by doing so. You're still letting it develop and grow into a human, but with significant physical and mental birth defects. That's the difference. I didn't think this needed explaining, but bodily autonomy only applies to affecting your body.
You just said it yourself, at the time of pregnancy the fetus is part of her body. Ergo, drinking while pregnant means she is only affecting herself at the time. This whole applying person hood to the fetus in one case but not the other is just silly. Shit man, I'm pro choice but this shit is just another one of the hypocrisies I hate about the whole thing.
And a human isn't part of her body. If there was an abortion procedure that hurt the fetus but didn't kill it, that would be no different. When the injury happens, it's happening to the woman's fetus, but long-term, it's an injury to the woman's child. An abortion is only an injury to the woman's fetus, because the child never happens.
This whole arguing "what ifs" about the child after birth is just the same shit the pro-lifers pull though. This whole shit about the child's future is irreverent because at the time of pregnancy, the only one affected is the mother because we don't provide the same human rights to a fetus. The fetus is part of the mother as far as we are concerned. Like Door said, we need to stop cherrypicking and decide whether the same human rights are given to fetuses or not. Anyhow, I got to go, so I won't be able to respond.
761
« on: May 15, 2016, 02:41:19 PM »
I can understand it from a purely legal standpoint. Drawing comparisons to the abortion argument, it's been deemed that the woman's bodily autonomy takes precedence to an unborn child. Drawing from that same comparison, why should the woman be denied ingesting substances that she wants to if her autonomy is more important than the child? I'm honestly not in support of NYC's law, but can see the autonomy argument being even more of a shitfest when you say "x is allowed but y isn't."
Well there is a very clear distinction between forcing a baby to go through their life with fetal alcohol syndrome and other developmental disorders and not forcing that baby to go through anything. Maybe this is a by-product of mainstream adherence to the notion that non-existence is worse than any living condition.
imo, the end result of what happens to the fetus doesn't count as a variable because the argument is that a woman's autonomy should not be compromised because she is pregnant. Abortion deals with the woman having the autonomy to do with her body that surgery. Ingesting drugs is also an argument from autonomy. If the woman's bodily autonomy is more important than a fetus up to a certain point of development, there shouldn't be all this situational cherrypicking, because that just counters their original claim.
A woman, and anyone in the world, has complete bodily autonomy unless it affects other people. An abortion only affects the woman, because the fetus is a part of her body. Drinking alcohol and doing drugs affects the unborn child because you're not destroying the fetus by doing so. You're still letting it develop and grow into a human, but with significant physical and mental birth defects. That's the difference. I didn't think this needed explaining, but bodily autonomy only applies to affecting your body.
You just said it yourself, at the time of pregnancy the fetus is part of her body. Ergo, drinking while pregnant means she is only affecting herself at the time. This whole applying person hood to the fetus in one case but not the other is just silly. Shit man, I'm pro choice but this shit is just another one of the hypocrisies I hate about the whole thing.
762
« on: May 15, 2016, 12:15:41 PM »
I can understand it from a purely legal standpoint. Drawing comparisons to the abortion argument, it's been deemed that the woman's bodily autonomy takes precedence to an unborn child. Drawing from that same comparison, why should the woman be denied ingesting substances that she wants to if her autonomy is more important than the child? I'm honestly not in support of NYC's law, but can see the autonomy argument being even more of a shitfest when you say "x is allowed but y isn't."
Well there is a very clear distinction between forcing a baby to go through their life with fetal alcohol syndrome and other developmental disorders and not forcing that baby to go through anything. Maybe this is a by-product of mainstream adherence to the notion that non-existence is worse than any living condition.
imo, the end result of what happens to the fetus doesn't count as a variable because the argument is that a woman's autonomy should not be compromised because she is pregnant. Abortion deals with the woman having the autonomy to do with her body that surgery. Ingesting drugs is also an argument from autonomy. If the woman's bodily autonomy is more important than a fetus up to a certain point of development, there shouldn't be all this situational cherrypicking, because that just counters their original claim.
763
« on: May 15, 2016, 05:54:30 AM »
I can understand it from a purely legal standpoint. Drawing comparisons to the abortion argument, it's been deemed that the woman's bodily autonomy takes precedence to an unborn child. Drawing from that same comparison, why should the woman be denied ingesting substances that she wants to if her autonomy is more important than the child? I'm honestly not in support of NYC's law, but can see the autonomy argument being even more of a shitfest when you say "x is allowed but y isn't."
764
« on: May 15, 2016, 03:49:01 AM »
anime tiddies
jesus
Her boobs were stuffed with bombs or something in that episode if I recall correctly.
Explain mine.
I dunno fam sorry
765
« on: May 15, 2016, 03:46:00 AM »
anime tiddies
jesus
Her boobs were stuffed with bombs or something in that episode if I recall correctly.
766
« on: May 15, 2016, 03:38:52 AM »
oh
Oh, s4s has lied to me.
767
« on: May 15, 2016, 03:03:33 AM »
Bubble Buddy, a sentient being capable of language, killed a guy.
768
« on: May 15, 2016, 02:08:08 AM »
I get it.
Spoiler So you gonna tell what it's called so I can watch it? I dunno
769
« on: May 15, 2016, 02:05:46 AM »
770
« on: May 15, 2016, 01:54:44 AM »
Zen.
hi
Why are you up so late? Don't you have class tomorrow?
Done with classes for now.
771
« on: May 15, 2016, 01:51:50 AM »
772
« on: May 15, 2016, 01:39:18 AM »
You post a lot
Lack of classes during the summer + browsing s4s + drinking and smoking = extreme shitposting.
773
« on: May 15, 2016, 01:36:11 AM »
this board is so full of noobs. liek do you see this. OMG Kyle. LAWL, wtf LAWL omfg... like.. go see my new movie n stuff cause it like, it owns? hahaha kyle.
774
« on: May 14, 2016, 11:35:39 PM »
at this rate, your shitposts have eclipsed loaf
Fuck yeah, number one now.
775
« on: May 14, 2016, 11:35:19 PM »
Don't you hate it when you skip forward but you skip forward too much and they already fucking so you have to go back to see the crucial moment right before they start fucking
Yeah it sucks
776
« on: May 14, 2016, 11:28:07 PM »
and already fapped or don't feel like it, but you can't skip because the writer is known for including scenario-related content even in H-scenes?
777
« on: May 14, 2016, 07:50:26 PM »
sailed the sea without a compass. When his men began a rumpus, up spoke Christopher Columbus.
No more mutiny. What a time they had at sea.
Mr. Christopher Columbus he used rhythm as a compass. Music ended all the rumpus.
Wise old Christopher Columbus.
778
« on: May 14, 2016, 07:42:17 PM »
s4s
779
« on: May 14, 2016, 01:34:48 PM »
and that's what terrible about it
life should not have any meaning and what about those whose suffering derives from the paradoxical nature of existing in a meaningless universe? Considering as Camus put it, that just gives us the options of killing ourselves, deluding ourselves to believing a religion, or live in despite of the absurd acknowledging that it is absurd to do so.
780
« on: May 14, 2016, 02:19:24 AM »
It's you.
It was you all along.
nah, someone I'm in a call with.
Pages: 1 ... 242526 2728 ... 261
|
Show Posts
