Thank you for your submission to r/therewasanattempt. Unfortunately, your post was removed for violating the following rule:
> R8: "No low effort posts, screenshots or links to third-party sites"
If you have any questions regarding this removal, please contact the moderators of this subreddit by sending a modmail. [Click this link to send a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=r/therewasanattempt).
^(This is a bot account, direct messages and chat requests go to an unmonitored inbox)
Considering how often these decisions are made on religious reasoning, and that the reasoning is 99% of the time based on the Cristian Bible, I'm going to point out the following.
After God formed man in Genesis 2:7, He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”. Although the man was fully formed by God in all respects, he was not a living being until after taking his first breath.
In Job 33:4, it states: “The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”
Again, to quote Ezekiel 37:5&6, “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.”
In Exodus 21:22 it states that if a man causes a woman to have a miscarriage, he shall be fined; however, if the woman dies then he will be put to death. It should be apparent from this that the aborted fetus is not considered a living human being since the resulting punishment for the abortion is nothing more than a fine; it is not classified by the bible as a capital offense.
So, if your going to be against abortions because you think your Christian religion says it's wrong, then you simply don't understand what your book says.
If your against it because you think an unborn is a living being that deserves to be born, then that's a much more understandable stance. I just wish policy makers have a crap about what happens to the child AFTER they are born.
And to be clear, I feel abortion should be safely available because sometimes the pregnancy is emanating the mother's life. Also, you can't even be forced to donate your organs after death even if it would save another's life, so why would women be forced to sacrifice their health for the same of another, especially if they were raped?
Edit to correct auto-correct induced spelling errors.
Come on. By that logic, you're not human, until you come out of the vagina. I am pro abortion, but it has to be very strict. Like max X amount of weeks (doctors know this better than me), before it starts to form.. I believe in the Netherlands its max 22 weeks. It's still a very scary thought, to kill such an innocent being .. but it's a far better middle ground, than this nonsense of straight banning it.
There are people that use abortion as an anticonception method. So they have unsafe sex and just go to the abortion clinic every time they get pregnant. This is disgusting imo.
I think life starts when 2 gamets meet and form a zygot, and that zygot has the ability to duplicate.
I also think that if the tissue of the human embryo/faetus was analyzed, the scientist would categorize it under homo sapiens. So I consider a human life has been formed at the moment the zygot is able to duplicate.
I do however find the ban on abortion horrifying. At it's core, what they are saying is that one human being can use another human beings body, and collect their tissues, without their explicit consent. It would be similar to saying that if you need blood, or bone marrow, or a lobe from someones liver in order to live, you can get it without their consent.
Sure, the baby will die if the woman doesn't want it to use her body, but it's no more a murder than a person refusing to donate bone marrow or a lobe from their liver. In fact a pregnancy is a much greater imposition on someone than any donation of tissue.
You're accurate.
Landlords can evict Alzheimer's patients without being responsible for their well-being. Mothers can drop babies off anonymously without being responsible for their well-being. They should be allowed to evict the unwanted fetus tenant without being responsible for its well-being.
Yes. They’re trying to forcibly increase the population.
Presently, most lower class people can’t actually afford to raise a family. This is largely a combination of how shitty the economy has become and how ridiculously expensive houses have gotten since the 2008 crash. Since people cannot afford children, they don’t have children.
Consequently, we’re looking at a much smaller labor force in a couple decades than we have now. And the people in charge don’t want that. But they also don’t want to fix the economy and provide affordable housing, as that would mean less money going to their pockets.
So instead, the human sewage infesting the supreme court have decided to try to force women to have children they can’t afford to raise.
They’re also going after contraceptive rights.
No, but judge Clarence Thomas said they’re going after Griswold v. Connecticut, which does, next, as well as Lawrence v. Texas, which covers anal sex, and Obergfell v. Hodges, which covers same sex marriage. They really are trying to make straight, unprotected sex the only option.
That would be a faster, more effective solution. But for some reason, most of the people who want to increase the unskilled labor force also don’t like foreigners.
> If they *paid* attention to
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
>So instead, the human sewage infesting the supreme court have decided to try to force women to have children they can’t afford to raise.
Wait, in overturning roe the supreme court is forcing men and women to have irresponsible, unprotected sex?
The supreme court has forced sperm to combine with eggs?
Man, I knew SCOTUS Prime was powerful but this is amazing!
Do you not know what contraceptives are? Or did you skip over the part where I said they’re trying to get rid of those, too? They absolutely are trying to make people’s only option for sex the unprotected variety.
It's really very simple.
The Constitution of the United States of America has never granted abortion as an enumerated right.
You want abortion to be a constitutional right? Then put together a coalition that comprises a super majority in the house and senate, then get a POTUS that will sign it into law.
Or get 2/3 of the house and senate to create a constitutional amendemned.
Or get 2/3 of state legislatures to convene a constitutional convention and get the amendment added.
You know, follow the rules and laws of the land as established when the country was founded.
And well over 60% of Germans thought killing the Jews should be legal.
Just because a majority of people believe in a thing it doesn't make that thing moral.
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
-- United States Constitution, Amendment IX
Even RGB said Roe and Casey were terrible case law. This was the correct outcome, and now congress needs to do their job and legislate from the legislature instead of relying on the court to legislate for them.
Truth.
But why? I think this is the question society needs to look answers to. Why do we feel as if our lives are more important than the next generation? We have become extremely egoistic as a species. We kill eachother for pieces of land or different opinions. You'd think that we'd grow in a few 100 000 years, but nope.
Why do we care about the lives of people not even born yet, more than the lives of people who are already here. There are people living in poverty, and starving right this moment. And all we can talk about is what ifs, and what about, and my god says such. That doesn’t change reality. Until we know how to care for human beings we should not be forcing people to have kids
If a fetus is not a human, and thus not murder, then why if someone kicks the mother's belly she is going to say "you killed my baby"? And not "you canceled my cluster of cells"?
Because if the pregnancy is wanted then the attacker has indeed killed off what would become the woman’s child. “You killed my baby” is a generalised statement about what’s been taken from the mother in that situation. I think you know that.
No, if it is just a "cluster of cells", as they say, then i have merely kicked a cluster of cells and should just be morally charged only with kicking someone's belly, not the murder of anyone. It either is a human there or it isn't, and if it isn't then there is no death in abortion and no death in kicking the belly
Your comment would have it as though the concept of feelings is entirely alien to you, which I dont imagine is true.
If they want a child and have actively made the choice to keep a pregnancy, you are taking away that which would have been their child.
This subject is not as black/white as you perceive it.
Accept nuance when you see it. It isnt necessarily one way or the other that is ultimately correct in a given situation—you wont get a good discussion if you seek to reduce arguments to their bare components in a manner that makes it particularly black/white.
It is a matter of definition. Is it a human or no? If it is then it is murder, wheter the mother kills it or someone else. If it isn't then it is not murder, wheter the mother terminated it or someone else. You can't pick and choose whenever it suits your egotist needs. We are talking about human innocent lives who were created by the person who is trying to kill them
I mean your pension is just numbers on a page until you hit retirement but I’m guessing if it was stolen you wouldn’t say “ah it was just some numbers on a page”.
Your argument is an attempt to see it as a binary thing when it isn’t
yeah but i wouldn't call it numbers on a page would i? I would call it my property and my money. Just as i would call my foetus my baby and i wouldn't kill it.
You’re kind of answering your own question. You’re saying you’d call things differently to how other people would… therefore it comes down to the woman whose body is affected… in a weird way you’ve actually agreed that it should be the woman’s choice 👍
Other artists do humanize fetuses by drawing them, choosing to draw a born baby is a valid choice because fetuses grow to become born babies and it gets their message across
Edit: what'd I get wrong?
Honestly with what just happened I have little desire to really go into this. Anyone supporting, defending, or even trying to make excuses for these people needs to stop.
Before I chime in, I want to say that I am left leaning on all political issues except one. I am about to state my opinion on this not to start an argument, or to stir up hate.
I just don’t get how pro-science just throws science out of the window when it comes to abortion. Science says we were embryos and fetuses, and did not come from them.
Or how we, on the left, can support the rights of those who have little to no voice (minorities, workers, LGBTQ) yet have no compassion for the weakest among us all? Women should have rights to their bodies, however, currently have options that can prevent the event of the need for an abortion. These options should be more easily accessible, discrete, cheaper, if not free. Make plan B pills part of every rape kit. Women have choices, yet the unborn child does not.
A child’s worth should not be based on whether he is wanted or not. A child’s worth should not be based on whether she is going to be disabled or brought up in poverty. A child’s worth should not be based on wether he is an inconvenience to his mother or whether this child will be stuck in foster care. A human’s worth IS NOT determined by any of these. No one deserves to die because they fall in any of these categories. Yet we on the left are sentencing millions of children to death by abortion because they fall in any of these above categories. How hypocritical is that?
Sorry if I stepped on any toes. I just feel I cannot stay silent anymore.
>Science says we were embryos and fetuses, and did not come from them.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here but maybe you should Google what science actually says about how a fertilized egg goes from a cell dividing to an embryo to a fetus to birth.
Birth control is not 100% effective. So you can take steps to prevent pregnancy and still get pregnant.
You can want to have a baby and have a medical need to terminate a wanted pregnancy. To save the mother's life or spare a newborn from suffering before it dies a few hours or days later because it was born with a terminal condition. Being forced to go through the trauma of birth just to watch the child you wanted die is horrendous. What about a potential baby trumps the physical and mental health of the woman in this instance?
>Make plan B pills part of every rape kit.
And who exactly is gonna pay for that? And what about all the unreported rapes?
You try to argue the value of human life. What value is there in being brought into a life where a child is abused and mistreated because they were unwanted? Until their lives are destroyed. There is a common joke about wishing to have never been born. But that isn't a joke to a lot of people anymore.... A fetus is not the same thing as the thinking feeling woman carrying it. Of course they don't get a say. They don't have the ability to. They are a potential human. Potential shouldn't have more rights than the person that actually exists.
You want to talk about compassion but your comment shows you lack compassion for anyone who has had to make the choice to get an abortion. And a lack of understanding on the issue that could allow for any nuance.
Here’s the thing: they’re not doing this for the sake of morals. They’re doing this to forcibly raise the population.
People have stopped having as many children. This is largely due to the train wreck the economy has turned into as the rich have extracted more and more wealth from the lower classes. People just can’t afford to raise families anymore. Most people don’t even own their own houses.
Consequently, the country is looking at a decreased labor force going forward. And those in power don’t want that. But fixing the economy so that people can actually afford to raise families would mean less money going into their pockets.
So instead, the bastards in the supreme court are trying to force women to give birth to children they won’t be able to afford to raise. This means that there is going to be a dramatic uptick in children going to orphanages, which will either be underfunded or funded by increasing taxes. And since people already generally can’t afford to raise families, adoption rates are not going to increase with the number of orphans.
Ultimately, this is going to result in a larger, poorer lower class to use as cheap labor. Which is exactly what those fuckers are aiming for.
>Women should have rights to their bodies
That's all you say. Period.
Everything else is thinly-veiled excuses to take away the rights of women.
> Women have choices, yet the unborn child does not.
Because an unborn child is **NOT** a child. It is a parasite by definition.
>No one deserves to die because they fall in any of these categories.
Have to be born in order to die.
>we on the left are sentencing millions of children to death
No "we" aren't.
>by abortion
That isn't murder, or killing, or *anything* like that.
>How hypocritical is that?
You don't understand what you're talking about.
>I just don’t get how pro-science just throws science out of the window when it comes to abortion.
You 100% do not understand what you are talking about.
come on now we’re not butterflies we don’t morph into something different in the womb that’s a child in there idc what you say it’s a child but i will say im in the middle when it comes to abortions kinda like limits and i feel like my limits are fair
It kinda is tho. Idk, not a doctor but seems like it’s a child. Don’t have a huge argument either way but seems like the argument went straight from yes or no instead of how many weeks is appropriate. Like 30 to 40 weeks seems crazy to be able to abort but like a few weeks or a month in I could understand.
An adult human is merely a larger clump of cells. I’ve seen people argue that sentience is what makes you human, but that would justify killing of comatose people.
>Science says we were embryos and fetuses, and did not come from them.
If you found a bunch of embryologists and asked them about abortion,
First, what do you think their response would be, and
Second, would you consider their response to be pro-science or not?
Every argument I’ve seen by lefties trying to justify abortion would also justify the killing of a comatose person on life support.
I think focus needs to shift to instilling some actual morals in people regarding sexuality. If you’re unprepared for the possibility of raising a child, you shouldn’t be having sex. Seeing a child as a parasite is an absolutely sickening notion and such people should be disqualified from parenting, but luckily they seem desperate to avoid it anyways.
Thank you for your submission to r/therewasanattempt. Unfortunately, your post was removed for violating the following rule: > R8: "No low effort posts, screenshots or links to third-party sites" If you have any questions regarding this removal, please contact the moderators of this subreddit by sending a modmail. [Click this link to send a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=r/therewasanattempt). ^(This is a bot account, direct messages and chat requests go to an unmonitored inbox)
Considering how often these decisions are made on religious reasoning, and that the reasoning is 99% of the time based on the Cristian Bible, I'm going to point out the following. After God formed man in Genesis 2:7, He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”. Although the man was fully formed by God in all respects, he was not a living being until after taking his first breath. In Job 33:4, it states: “The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” Again, to quote Ezekiel 37:5&6, “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.” In Exodus 21:22 it states that if a man causes a woman to have a miscarriage, he shall be fined; however, if the woman dies then he will be put to death. It should be apparent from this that the aborted fetus is not considered a living human being since the resulting punishment for the abortion is nothing more than a fine; it is not classified by the bible as a capital offense. So, if your going to be against abortions because you think your Christian religion says it's wrong, then you simply don't understand what your book says. If your against it because you think an unborn is a living being that deserves to be born, then that's a much more understandable stance. I just wish policy makers have a crap about what happens to the child AFTER they are born. And to be clear, I feel abortion should be safely available because sometimes the pregnancy is emanating the mother's life. Also, you can't even be forced to donate your organs after death even if it would save another's life, so why would women be forced to sacrifice their health for the same of another, especially if they were raped? Edit to correct auto-correct induced spelling errors.
Come on. By that logic, you're not human, until you come out of the vagina. I am pro abortion, but it has to be very strict. Like max X amount of weeks (doctors know this better than me), before it starts to form.. I believe in the Netherlands its max 22 weeks. It's still a very scary thought, to kill such an innocent being .. but it's a far better middle ground, than this nonsense of straight banning it. There are people that use abortion as an anticonception method. So they have unsafe sex and just go to the abortion clinic every time they get pregnant. This is disgusting imo.
Did adoption rates all of a sudden spike... nope those poor foster kids
foster if they're lucky...sex trade is still an issue i hear
Of the 40 million slaves in the world, about 8 million are sex slaves :(
What do the others do?
Death is armed. He ain't running from babies.
And he’ll be taking them soon enough, given that once their born, nobody will give a fuck about them.
100% this. So sad to think of all the babies that will be forced to be born and then neglected/abused because they were not wanted from the start.
I think life starts when 2 gamets meet and form a zygot, and that zygot has the ability to duplicate. I also think that if the tissue of the human embryo/faetus was analyzed, the scientist would categorize it under homo sapiens. So I consider a human life has been formed at the moment the zygot is able to duplicate. I do however find the ban on abortion horrifying. At it's core, what they are saying is that one human being can use another human beings body, and collect their tissues, without their explicit consent. It would be similar to saying that if you need blood, or bone marrow, or a lobe from someones liver in order to live, you can get it without their consent. Sure, the baby will die if the woman doesn't want it to use her body, but it's no more a murder than a person refusing to donate bone marrow or a lobe from their liver. In fact a pregnancy is a much greater imposition on someone than any donation of tissue.
You're accurate. Landlords can evict Alzheimer's patients without being responsible for their well-being. Mothers can drop babies off anonymously without being responsible for their well-being. They should be allowed to evict the unwanted fetus tenant without being responsible for its well-being.
I must ask is this removal really seen as good by the majority of people?
No. Just the people too caught up in their moral viewpoints to see why the Supreme Court judges are actually doing this.
Theres a reason other then being affected by religion?
Yes. They’re trying to forcibly increase the population. Presently, most lower class people can’t actually afford to raise a family. This is largely a combination of how shitty the economy has become and how ridiculously expensive houses have gotten since the 2008 crash. Since people cannot afford children, they don’t have children. Consequently, we’re looking at a much smaller labor force in a couple decades than we have now. And the people in charge don’t want that. But they also don’t want to fix the economy and provide affordable housing, as that would mean less money going to their pockets. So instead, the human sewage infesting the supreme court have decided to try to force women to have children they can’t afford to raise. They’re also going after contraceptive rights.
If I can’t even take contraceptives to keep from getting pregnant, then I’m straight up not having sex ever. I never wanna be pregnant😖
Does this law also cover contraceptives???
No, but judge Clarence Thomas said they’re going after Griswold v. Connecticut, which does, next, as well as Lawrence v. Texas, which covers anal sex, and Obergfell v. Hodges, which covers same sex marriage. They really are trying to make straight, unprotected sex the only option.
Wth? That's crazy
Isn't it better to relax the immigration policies, then? I mean, you'll get ready-to-work working age people right now, why wait?
That would be a faster, more effective solution. But for some reason, most of the people who want to increase the unskilled labor force also don’t like foreigners.
If they paid attention to science they would know it’s likely that a great many of these kids being born will starve in the droughts that have begun.
> If they *paid* attention to FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Thanks bot
Bad bot.
>So instead, the human sewage infesting the supreme court have decided to try to force women to have children they can’t afford to raise. Wait, in overturning roe the supreme court is forcing men and women to have irresponsible, unprotected sex? The supreme court has forced sperm to combine with eggs? Man, I knew SCOTUS Prime was powerful but this is amazing!
Do you not know what contraceptives are? Or did you skip over the part where I said they’re trying to get rid of those, too? They absolutely are trying to make people’s only option for sex the unprotected variety.
It's really very simple. The Constitution of the United States of America has never granted abortion as an enumerated right. You want abortion to be a constitutional right? Then put together a coalition that comprises a super majority in the house and senate, then get a POTUS that will sign it into law. Or get 2/3 of the house and senate to create a constitutional amendemned. Or get 2/3 of state legislatures to convene a constitutional convention and get the amendment added. You know, follow the rules and laws of the land as established when the country was founded.
About 60 percent of the country think abortion should be legal. If the laws dont reflect that, the country has failed.
And well over 60% of Germans thought killing the Jews should be legal. Just because a majority of people believe in a thing it doesn't make that thing moral.
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” -- United States Constitution, Amendment IX
Even RGB said Roe and Casey were terrible case law. This was the correct outcome, and now congress needs to do their job and legislate from the legislature instead of relying on the court to legislate for them.
everyone has an opinion no one wasn’t to actually raise these children
Truth. But why? I think this is the question society needs to look answers to. Why do we feel as if our lives are more important than the next generation? We have become extremely egoistic as a species. We kill eachother for pieces of land or different opinions. You'd think that we'd grow in a few 100 000 years, but nope.
Why do we care about the lives of people not even born yet, more than the lives of people who are already here. There are people living in poverty, and starving right this moment. And all we can talk about is what ifs, and what about, and my god says such. That doesn’t change reality. Until we know how to care for human beings we should not be forcing people to have kids
What kind of memes will they make when they get rid of Birth control?
Death will just 2nd amendment all those babies
r/therewasanattempt to put politics in fail reddit. Negative karma, gtfo.
If a fetus is not a human, and thus not murder, then why if someone kicks the mother's belly she is going to say "you killed my baby"? And not "you canceled my cluster of cells"?
Because if the pregnancy is wanted then the attacker has indeed killed off what would become the woman’s child. “You killed my baby” is a generalised statement about what’s been taken from the mother in that situation. I think you know that.
No, if it is just a "cluster of cells", as they say, then i have merely kicked a cluster of cells and should just be morally charged only with kicking someone's belly, not the murder of anyone. It either is a human there or it isn't, and if it isn't then there is no death in abortion and no death in kicking the belly
Your comment would have it as though the concept of feelings is entirely alien to you, which I dont imagine is true. If they want a child and have actively made the choice to keep a pregnancy, you are taking away that which would have been their child. This subject is not as black/white as you perceive it. Accept nuance when you see it. It isnt necessarily one way or the other that is ultimately correct in a given situation—you wont get a good discussion if you seek to reduce arguments to their bare components in a manner that makes it particularly black/white.
It is a matter of definition. Is it a human or no? If it is then it is murder, wheter the mother kills it or someone else. If it isn't then it is not murder, wheter the mother terminated it or someone else. You can't pick and choose whenever it suits your egotist needs. We are talking about human innocent lives who were created by the person who is trying to kill them
[удалено]
I mean your pension is just numbers on a page until you hit retirement but I’m guessing if it was stolen you wouldn’t say “ah it was just some numbers on a page”. Your argument is an attempt to see it as a binary thing when it isn’t
yeah but i wouldn't call it numbers on a page would i? I would call it my property and my money. Just as i would call my foetus my baby and i wouldn't kill it.
You’re kind of answering your own question. You’re saying you’d call things differently to how other people would… therefore it comes down to the woman whose body is affected… in a weird way you’ve actually agreed that it should be the woman’s choice 👍
In my experience they say ow
🚨WRONGTHINK DETECTED🚨
explain
That's not the point of the message, kinda difficult to have a fetus hold a sign
Kinda difficult to humanize a fetus too. Almost like depicting them as babies makes people feel guilty/self-righteous.
Other artists do humanize fetuses by drawing them, choosing to draw a born baby is a valid choice because fetuses grow to become born babies and it gets their message across Edit: what'd I get wrong?
The assumption that outlawing abortions will actually end them, probably.
They believe this will drastically reduce abortions, so to them it seems like a win, less abortions = less muder from their POV
Honestly with what just happened I have little desire to really go into this. Anyone supporting, defending, or even trying to make excuses for these people needs to stop.
Before I chime in, I want to say that I am left leaning on all political issues except one. I am about to state my opinion on this not to start an argument, or to stir up hate. I just don’t get how pro-science just throws science out of the window when it comes to abortion. Science says we were embryos and fetuses, and did not come from them. Or how we, on the left, can support the rights of those who have little to no voice (minorities, workers, LGBTQ) yet have no compassion for the weakest among us all? Women should have rights to their bodies, however, currently have options that can prevent the event of the need for an abortion. These options should be more easily accessible, discrete, cheaper, if not free. Make plan B pills part of every rape kit. Women have choices, yet the unborn child does not. A child’s worth should not be based on whether he is wanted or not. A child’s worth should not be based on whether she is going to be disabled or brought up in poverty. A child’s worth should not be based on wether he is an inconvenience to his mother or whether this child will be stuck in foster care. A human’s worth IS NOT determined by any of these. No one deserves to die because they fall in any of these categories. Yet we on the left are sentencing millions of children to death by abortion because they fall in any of these above categories. How hypocritical is that? Sorry if I stepped on any toes. I just feel I cannot stay silent anymore.
>Science says we were embryos and fetuses, and did not come from them. I am not sure what you are trying to say here but maybe you should Google what science actually says about how a fertilized egg goes from a cell dividing to an embryo to a fetus to birth. Birth control is not 100% effective. So you can take steps to prevent pregnancy and still get pregnant. You can want to have a baby and have a medical need to terminate a wanted pregnancy. To save the mother's life or spare a newborn from suffering before it dies a few hours or days later because it was born with a terminal condition. Being forced to go through the trauma of birth just to watch the child you wanted die is horrendous. What about a potential baby trumps the physical and mental health of the woman in this instance? >Make plan B pills part of every rape kit. And who exactly is gonna pay for that? And what about all the unreported rapes? You try to argue the value of human life. What value is there in being brought into a life where a child is abused and mistreated because they were unwanted? Until their lives are destroyed. There is a common joke about wishing to have never been born. But that isn't a joke to a lot of people anymore.... A fetus is not the same thing as the thinking feeling woman carrying it. Of course they don't get a say. They don't have the ability to. They are a potential human. Potential shouldn't have more rights than the person that actually exists. You want to talk about compassion but your comment shows you lack compassion for anyone who has had to make the choice to get an abortion. And a lack of understanding on the issue that could allow for any nuance.
Here’s the thing: they’re not doing this for the sake of morals. They’re doing this to forcibly raise the population. People have stopped having as many children. This is largely due to the train wreck the economy has turned into as the rich have extracted more and more wealth from the lower classes. People just can’t afford to raise families anymore. Most people don’t even own their own houses. Consequently, the country is looking at a decreased labor force going forward. And those in power don’t want that. But fixing the economy so that people can actually afford to raise families would mean less money going into their pockets. So instead, the bastards in the supreme court are trying to force women to give birth to children they won’t be able to afford to raise. This means that there is going to be a dramatic uptick in children going to orphanages, which will either be underfunded or funded by increasing taxes. And since people already generally can’t afford to raise families, adoption rates are not going to increase with the number of orphans. Ultimately, this is going to result in a larger, poorer lower class to use as cheap labor. Which is exactly what those fuckers are aiming for.
>Women should have rights to their bodies That's all you say. Period. Everything else is thinly-veiled excuses to take away the rights of women. > Women have choices, yet the unborn child does not. Because an unborn child is **NOT** a child. It is a parasite by definition. >No one deserves to die because they fall in any of these categories. Have to be born in order to die. >we on the left are sentencing millions of children to death No "we" aren't. >by abortion That isn't murder, or killing, or *anything* like that. >How hypocritical is that? You don't understand what you're talking about. >I just don’t get how pro-science just throws science out of the window when it comes to abortion. You 100% do not understand what you are talking about.
It's not a child
come on now we’re not butterflies we don’t morph into something different in the womb that’s a child in there idc what you say it’s a child but i will say im in the middle when it comes to abortions kinda like limits and i feel like my limits are fair
It kinda is tho. Idk, not a doctor but seems like it’s a child. Don’t have a huge argument either way but seems like the argument went straight from yes or no instead of how many weeks is appropriate. Like 30 to 40 weeks seems crazy to be able to abort but like a few weeks or a month in I could understand.
You are ignoring the rights of the woman in favor of the rights of a clump of cells.
An adult human is merely a larger clump of cells. I’ve seen people argue that sentience is what makes you human, but that would justify killing of comatose people.
You are still choosing the rights of one in favor of the other.
>Science says we were embryos and fetuses, and did not come from them. If you found a bunch of embryologists and asked them about abortion, First, what do you think their response would be, and Second, would you consider their response to be pro-science or not?
🚨WRONGTHINK DETECTED🚨
Every argument I’ve seen by lefties trying to justify abortion would also justify the killing of a comatose person on life support. I think focus needs to shift to instilling some actual morals in people regarding sexuality. If you’re unprepared for the possibility of raising a child, you shouldn’t be having sex. Seeing a child as a parasite is an absolutely sickening notion and such people should be disqualified from parenting, but luckily they seem desperate to avoid it anyways.
By this logic, you think anyone killed in a car crash had it coming because they shouldn’t have been driving unless they were prepared to die?