2) if you were the one being aborted, would you still support abortion? Support the fact that you never get a chance to live or breathe, simply because of somebody's preference?

Oh GOD. This MAY just have given me cancer. I'm pretty sure it did.

As a pro-death individual, I think I'd respect my parent's choice to not force me into life, as if life is the greatest goddamn thing in the whole godless world. They shouldn't have conceived me to begin with, sure, they should have been more careful during sex, sure, but only because of two or three external factors unrelated to my fucking existence.

If someone was gonna buy me lottery tickets, but did so by stealing my money, and then changed their mind and returned what they stole, I'd be a pretty fucking happy camper.

You would "despite it"? I don't even know what that means.

If you meant, "You'd think I'd spite my parents for trying to abort me, but I don't..." Yeah, that's probably what you meant.

No, I wouldn't think anyone with a rational brain would be all that upset over the prospect of being aborted.
Well, that's not a "prospect", but you know what I mean.

Quote from: Rocketman287 on September 14, 2014, 12:01:48 PM

1) so killing someone is ok now?

2) if you were the one being aborted, would you still support abortion? Support the fact that you never get a chance to live or breathe, simply because of somebody's preference?

1) That's not the claim I was making. I'm saying it isn't innately, inherently, in-and-of-itself immoral to end another human life.

2) If I was the one being aborted? That really is a non-question. I wouldn't have any experience or intellectual capacity to know about what I was missing out on. It's virtually the same as complaining about the fact that many potential persons have been lost because a guy wanks into a sock.

What a shame none of them will ever be able to live or breathe.

You don't believe every sperm is a person, and neither do I.

However when conception has happened, and a human being is developing (meaning its going to be like you and me), that's totally different.

As I said: deeming that future person as "inhuman" because people believe somehow that "doesn't look like a baby yet = not human" is just a cop-out.

As I said: deeming that future person as "inhuman" because people believe somehow that "doesn't look like a baby yet = not human" is just a cop-out.

And saying that you can't kill something just because "IT LOOKS TOO HUMAN" is just a bunch of emotional heartstring propaganda bullshit.

Quote from: Rocketman287 on September 14, 2014, 11:30:52 AM

if your parents were pro abortion, you wouldn't even be here to argue about this.

That really is a stupid thing to say. No one is "pro abortion". People are either pro choice, meaning that to some extent they support others' right to choose whether or not they have an abortion, or pro life, meaning that they oppose abortion in (almost) all cases.

You're making it seem like there's people who just love getting abortions and will end every pregnancy with an abortion. That is of course utterly retarded, since there's other and more preferable ways of preventing pregnancy.

There are only 2 choices really. Whether you think people deserve choice or not is irrelevant, I'm talking about abortion not freedom of choice.

It looks like a human because HOLY CRAP its a human baby. No duh.

So you're telling me that it looks human because it is human.

...As if anyone was trying to tell you anything different.

Patronizing prick.

By the way, this "right to choose" argument is really bogus. I'd have no problem with life itself if life itself was voluntary, so that's why I'm an anti-natalist. So, unless you declare yourself an anti-natalist, you can't make the "right to choose" argument. It's internally inconsistent and hypocritical to do so.

And I don't mean to change the subject or inject my philosophy into the discussion, but Jesus, that shit drives me UP the fucking wall.

Out of interest, if a person were to absolutely declare that his parents made the right choice - almost like an ex post declaration of consent - would that absolve the parents of any wrongdoing?

Basically, "it's not rape if she enjoys it." I think you know how that goes, but...

Basically, no. I don't deny that 90% of the population has basically "forgiven" their parents, never directly, but through... not hating their fucking guts or harboring any level of distaste for their choice to have them. You can do that, whatever, that's your prerogative, but that by no means makes any nonconsensual act justified.

If a thief steals your money, wins the lottery, and gives the winnings to you, making you a profit, are you angry at him? He could have lost, he literally gambled your money away. If he lost, he would have nothing to return. Personally, I would've stomped a mudhole in him, verbally or otherwise.

And that's your prerogative, as I stated, but really, recognize the basic truth that theft is wrong and realize that's just what he did.

^-- I hate when that shit happens.

I'm talking about people who are capable of full empathy, now. That is, 90% of the rational population.

There may not be an "objective moral truth", but as sapient humans with such a high capacity for construction, critical thinking, problem solving, so forth... I would say we're basically obligated to prevent suffering to the best of our ability. It's this type of high-minded ideal that furthers society and prevents nihilistic cunts from doing anything the fuck they want to do, when they have no right, according to this basic moral law that we have imposed for the good of sentient life.

I don't understand.

Are you saying moral truths exist for those who are empathetic?

I'm saying it would be in the best interest of the species to sort of impose moral truths. We can come up with these moral truths on our own by using empathy.

I don't want to fucking suffer and die.
She doesn't want to fucking suffer and die.

As well as I am able to perform, I am going to prevent anyone from experiencing anything that I wouldn't personally want to experience.

Yeah, the first trimester should be set in stone in regards to abortions. 24 weeks is too far.

Quote from: Rocketman287 on September 14, 2014, 12:30:36 PM

It looks like a human because HOLY CRAP its a human baby. No duh.

So you're telling me that it looks human because it is human.

...As if anyone was trying to tell you anything different.

Patronizing prick.

By the way, this "right to choose" argument is really bogus. I'd have no problem with life itself if life itself was voluntary, so that's why I'm an anti-natalist. So, unless you declare yourself an anti-natalist, you can't make the "right to choose" argument. It's internally inconsistent and hypocritical to do so.

And I don't mean to change the subject or inject my philosophy into the discussion, but Jesus, that shit drives me UP the fucking wall.

Name calling will get you nowhere kid. And also yes, they WERE saying it isn't human, because murder is wrong but abortion isn't "up to a point". That point is when they think there is finally a human involved, when in fact its a human being the whole time.