This priest is well known for appearing on the Colbert Report and being pretty liberal. He gets a lot of flack for wanting the Church to make peace with LGBT people. Therefore, liberal Catholics who want their worldview confirmed flock to him.
But, it seems as if he does hold at least one Church teaching, and people are miffed.
i know colbert is really catholic but has he given his views on abortion before? if he's pro life i will literally throw that in every one of his boomers viewers faces everyday
I don't really know about Colbert. I think he follows a lot of the liberal Catholic trends, and chooses not to talk about abortion because he knows there's no coming back from making his opinion on the topic known.
Either he goes against the teachings of the church on a matter consindered a grave sin (pro abortion politicians have even been denied communion) or he loses his audience by being pro life.
He cant win. His soul or the world, too bad no one every talked about such a dilemma
Eh, I know a ton of pro-choice Catholics. They're pro-choice in the sense that they would not personally have an abortion, but they appreciate that other people have different opinions on the matter and that the government shouldn't decide for everyone.
It has to do with the fact that a significant percentage of the population thinks murdering the unborn is wrong. Also, it’s not just America, abortion is either illegal or heavily restricted in half or more of the world’s countries.
Wow as people become more civilized they start using modern medicine to improve their lives and save their neighbors from the scourge of overpopulation. How terrible! I wish we were more like the the crowded slums of Calcutta
Yes, until in a generation or two the old people will ountnumber the young people and the economy collapses because there's nobody to take care of them or pay their pensions. Brilliant!
The majority of europe is currently facing an impending demographic collapse with old people vastly outnumbering young ones, with fertility rates below 2. A problem unique to the first world.
Believe or not, these kids are not going to be living off dirt and mud. Blue collar work is nessesary for any country and there no conceivable scenario where old people outnumbering young ones has a good ending.
Until you lose your internet access, have to suffer with power outages, rust in the water and everything else that will come as a result of the infastructure collapsing.
Lmao what is increasing productivity? The only issue from here on out is a greater strain on the supply of healthcare which if you're not obese/boomer/gamer you have nothing really to worry about.
Yeah people spend a lot of time talking about the benefits of a smaller population but don’t realize it’s going to cause a lot of pain when billions in social benefits need to be cut because governments made promises they can’t deliver. China is actually going to get fucked the worse tho cause 1 child policy.
Wow as people become more civilized they start using modern medicine to improve their lives and save their neighbors from the scourge of overpopulation.
Nah, they just import their expanding tax base from 3rd world countries, with all the attendant political and social problems. Also (and hilariously), bringing people from low per capita CO2 emissions countries into high per capita CO2 emissions countries also has a worse impact on global warming.
That doesn't change the massive increase though. There is a fucking massive spike coming short of genocidal warfare or crippling famine. Even then they would just end up pouring into places like EU anyway.
Imagine actually believing the hundreds of millions of Nigerians and Kenyans to be born will all be able to emigrate.
/Seriouspost/
There were similar doomsday predictions for China and India, they're way too panicky and don't account for the increased productivity from the youth bulge and new technologies making thousands of acres viable for agriculture in those countries. Malthusian models throughout history have always failed, Africa won't be different. Nigeria(And a lot of other countries on the Islam-Christianity faultline) might be in for some trouble if the leaders don't realize the inevitability of a partition and do religion based population exchanges but overall it'll be OK. Best case scenario, the food surplus countries export food to them and set up something like the Chinese treaty cities to export the minerals. As long as Uncle Sam lives it probably won't get to interstate wars.
Yeah those countries where it is illegal or heavily restricted are strongly correlated with being backwards shitholes. Christians (rightfully) hate on Islamic countries for their bad policies on women and LGBT people, but once abortion comes up these places are suddenly enlightened protectors of the sanctity of life 🤔
I've thought for a while that it really doesn't make sense for so many conservatives who hate immigration and obsess over demographics on twitter to be so anti-abortion. If states like Mississippi and Georgia outlaw abortion then the white people will become a minority much sooner.
Geez, it's almost like being anti-mass immigration that is mostly done illegally isn't based off an inherit hatred of minorities but the idea that mass-immigration of what is generally societies outcasts is a bad idea.
Everyone who’s born already overcame crazy improbable odds by beating all the other speed in the race to the egg. I don’t think throwing in what amounts to one additional sperm to race is going to get us all that much luckier of a population. Actually, I take it back. At least this way we’re kind of making the eggs winna race too, albeit just a 1v1 instead of a 1v1,000,000.
Your comment has been removed. As of recently, we have figured out that using mean words (your comment contained faggots) is verboten as per reddit's magical rules.
If you would like to use your slurs in an illustrative context as per SRS theory, type the first letter and then "-slur". You are also encouraged to report violations of the reddit rules to the reddit admins using this report form.
Thank you for doing your part to keep reddit safe.
Your comment has been removed. As of recently, we have figured out that using mean words (your comment contained faggots) is verboten as per reddit's magical rules.
If you would like to use your slurs in an illustrative context as per SRS theory, type the first letter and then "-slur". You are also encouraged to report violations of the reddit rules to the reddit admins using this report form.
Thank you for doing your part to keep reddit safe.
The United States allows for unrestricted abortion up to 24 weeks. all European countries are such more strict than that, which is probably part of the reason why it's a "non issue".
European countries are certainly more restrictive, although what the pro-life movement in the US advocates (total or near-total bans on abortion with very few exceptions) is more radical than what exists in any Western European country and even most Eastern ones.
fuck off amer*can. europe is a freethinking continent where all women must receive abortions if their children are inferior untermensch (downies are disgusting) and 8 year olds run around naked under the watch of 40 year old men who arent repressed and forced to be masculine like in america
Part of the reason is the US got abortion from a judicial decision, rather than a popular movement. It doesn't help that Roe v Wade is a very, uh, creative interpretation of the Constitution.
Another thing is that Republicans discovered that abortion is a really easy way to get votes, especially from Catholic voters, who used to be reliably Democrats
Abortion rights are the christcuck plantation on the Republican side. They will never leave as long as it's an issue even though Roe will never be overturned. It's too good a vote getter for the right wing, though, so they won't let the issue actually be solved in a way that will satisfy religious voters.
Roe v Wade is a political wedge issue that neither side wants to get rid of. The Rs and Ds could have introduced legislation many times to solidify their position on it, but they won't because keeping it up gets votes out of fear.
I don't follow. Roe is a constitutional decision, which means that the Supreme Court's opinion overrides anything the Congress or state legislatures might pass. If you're not from the US, that might seem weird, but that's how it works here.
Interestingly enough, Roe actually does say Congress has the right to decide when life begins. No bill to decide the matter has ever gotten through Congress however.
I guess that's why Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), eventually did their work for them, choosing the "viability" (outside the abortion-wanter's lady-oven) standard (approx. >5 months, roughly?).
I’m drinking some good whine myself right now and don't feel like Googling to see if you’re correct either, but that sounds like something nine functioning adults would come up with in that situation.
Or one Justice O'Connor. Her entire judicial philosophy seems to have been "SPLIT THE BABY" in every case* , regardless of whether or not one side or the other had a straightforward winning argument.
* Preferably with an inscrutable, highly subjective multi-factor balancing test that provided zero guidance to lower courts.
Look at the rhetoric the Dems used around Kavanaugh and Gorsuch though. ZOMG THOSE EVIL WOMAN HATERS WILL REPEAL ROE V. WADE FIRST CHANCE THEY GET. Both sides do it (and so the only reasonable response is to plug radical Centrism early and often)
If you ask a pro-choice supporter when does life begin? They completely avoid the question. God forbid that you let the mother know she has other options besides getting an abortion or offer her an opportunity to see the ultrasound. Plan Parent hood nutters are just as bad as Bible Bangers. People that want to save babies are the bad guys? The people that want to suck a healthy fetus from a womb are the good guys? Planed Parenthood nutters want to make it seem like they are only aborting downys and flipper babies. But they sucking out perfectly healthy future Lebron James because African American women have abortions at 5 times the rate of white women. Planned Parenthood is a bunch of racists.
The weird thing is, I am anti abortion more than I am pro life.
Like, in trying to determine what is just or unjust, the life or death of children really doesn't matter. There may be just situations that call for the death of children. Killing someone is not intrinsically evil.
But abortion seems to go against the natural order of things. Women become mothers, mothers give birth to children. It seems heinous to tamper with that process.
Also, I don't think human rights are a great way to determine justice. And the abortion argument is a good example why that is.
Sex is fun you retard. We live in a world where can get laid and not have kids. I don't want a gremlin to come out of your mom's snatch every time I bust a nut in her
His priests especially love the little children. Honestly that's probably why the church is against abortion, since prepubescent boys and girls can't get pregnant.
Pro-life and anti-BC is one of the most retarded combinations of stances that people unironically hold. More BC means less abortion unless your one of those hopeless mongs who thinks BC is a form of abortion.
It's because they don't really care about the abortions as much as they pretend to. It is much more about controlling people and punishing them (especially women) for having sex.
I switched to pro-life and will only support abortion again when men get to decide against (legal) fatherhood during the same X weeks after conception as women can.
This is literally the worst argument I've heard on either side of the debate. It is equivalent to opposing airplanes because humans weren't born with wings.
Every time I splurge on a tissue, I cry myself to sleep; shaking, sweating, limp-dicked, terrified. Knowing that I've just committed genocide to achieve a momentary pause of pleasure. May god forgive my sins.
Let's have a compromise. We agree that life begins at conception, but we adopt the ancient Greek idea of childhood in that a child is not a person until they reach age 8.
Yup. Just like an adult permanently on life support is not "alive" in any meaningful sense of the word. Life support is just modern medicine's semi-successful way of cheating death.
How is needing life support so different from those useless fleshbags needing everything done for them anyway?
For one if the mother does not want anything to do with the baby, there are people that want those babies and will take care of them.
And I admit I phrased it badly in my eagerness to be succinct. I meant that if the baby cannot survive outside of the womb anyhow, it's okay to abort in my view, and if can survive with life support, it depends on the views of medical professionals and how much care they need - there's a big difference between a case where a medical miracle is needed for a baby to pull through and a case where a baby just needs a little support (and can therefore easily go to a family wishing to adopt).
But ultimately, I think it's down to can the baby survive without the mother when she wants nothing to do with it.
If it’s down to can the baby survive without the mother when she wants nothing to do with it, then that means we should be able to abort many NEETs living in their mother’s basement. Nobody wants THOSE babies
Healthy children, ok I can see problem in that. Or even things like Down's syndrome.
But church actually wants complete ban on abortion, including cases where mother will die during/before labor, where child will be born without brain (good flock i guess?), where child will be born only to die screaming in pain, minutes later or live as a vegetable for years.
I live in catholic shithole where you can get abortion only in one of 3 cases: rape, severe fetus deformity, or risk of mother's life. Ever since pro-church gov has taken stage, they keep trying to push on complete ban on abortion. Church lobbies for that all the time. Meanwhile they also blame kids for being raped by priests...
Church smoothbrains simultaneously maintain that everyone has a right to life and that it is perfectly acceptable for both a mom and her baby to die during the pregnancy/childbirth because muh abortion. Never mind that an abortion can save the mother's life and possibly let her go on to have more kids in the future.
Yea, situations which a decision between the life of the mother vs the life of fetus / unborn whatever barely ever occur. Like 1 in 2500 of births and that's accounting for times where the mother threatens suicide. Also, I don't know of any country which restricts such abortions.
Not that many countries currently restrict abortions in the case where a mother's life is in danger. But the list would go up if the Church got their way and passed a blanket ban on abortion.
I couldn't find any shithole backward catholic countries which restricted these type of abortions. I really don't care if you want the right to scramble your inconvenient fetus, but saying that catholics want pregnant mothers to die is dishonest.
The only countries that completely ban abortions are heavily Catholic. Not even Islamic countries ban it when the mother's life is in danger (in terms of the law, idk how it works in practice. Here's a list since you couldn't seem to find one:
Three countries in Latin America (Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and Nicaragua) and two in Europe (Malta[3] and the Vatican City) ban the procedure entirely.[4]
It's retarded but from a catholic perspective there's no issue with giving life saving treatment a mother with the side-effect of killing the fetus so long a the mother consents. It's abortion whilst being to cowardly admit to it.
Double effect has been mainstream Catholic doctrine since the Thomas Aquinas. The Dublin doctrine is the pro-life'ers attempt to package this idea into a coherent manifesto which they contend preserves maternal mortality rates without "abortion" and most importantly absolves them of moral and legal culpability.
This is kind of a boomer post, but I don’t disagree with anything you said. Check out some quotes from Margret Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood. That organization is doing exactly what it was set out to do from the start; euthanize babies from black women who can’t stop having sex.
Check out some quotes from Margret Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood. That organization is doing exactly what it was set out to do from the start; euthanize babies from black women who can’t stop having sex.
You might want to recheck those qoutes. Yes she absolutely supported eugenics, so strongly she actually drove away other eugenicist but she opposed abortion. She called it the barbaric killing of babies
Lifers will march out a functional adult with downs syndrome to make you feel like crap about aborting them when the vast majority of fetuses aborted are perfectly healthy African Americans. You dont see them asking Lebron James how he feels about all the little black babies being aborted.
Honestly, no one with Down's is ever going to have an independent life in the sense that a non-disabled adult can. They need [non-MR/DD] adult supervision their entire lives, even if they are living in the community (and then, it's going to be in an intermediate-care group home -- think assisted living for retarded people -- if they aren't living with family).
TBF at least the lifers logic is based on something. Might not agree with it, but its a simple linear logic. Choicers? Their logic is all over the fucking map. When does life begin? If someone murders a pregnant woman, should they be charged with two murders or one? If 50% of women are pro-life, is it really a woman's rights issue? I could go one forever.
Pro-life logic makes no sense. Life begins at conception, unless the mom was raped. Birth control is the one thing proven to reduce abortion, yet catholics hate it.
It's almost like they're not actually interested in reducing rates of abortion
I dont know. I don't want ladies going to prison because they had an abortion. I dont want ladies going to clandestine abortion clinics endangering their lives.
My best answer would be when the fetus has a heart beat. They declare people dead when their heart stops. So I believe that's a good place to start answering the question when life begins.
I disagree. A mass of cells doing something is not indicative of life we actually value. You don't care about your individual cells, and thats's all a fetus is by that point. Life is conciousness. We don't value animal lives as much because we see them as a lesser conciousness. Bugs, less so. Bacteria even, is a cell accomplishing something. But we're completely indifferent because bacteria is pure instinct.
We pull the plug on braindead people, and that's not murder, even when their hearts beat and cells function normally. We don't consider them alive past conciousness, so I don't consider anything alive pre-conciousness. I get iffy about abortion when it comes to brain development.
Tbh the difference is mostly optics. It makes no difference to the brain dead person whether you pull the plug or shoot them because they are dead. But it's gross and messy so we don't do that when we have cleaner ways of "ending" their lives.
If they are diagnosed as braindead they are already dead and nature already "took its course". Shooting them is just rearranging the brain matter of their warm corpse.
That's a completely different topic . You don't euthanize a braindead person when you pull the plug because they are already dead. Shooting them is wrong because it is mutilating their corpse, not because it is murder.
And you're just being contrarian because you disagree with me as a whole. You don't value cells as life lmao.
Yeah, we. Like, the entirety of society on Earth. Short of vegans pretty sure everyone would agree that the life of an animal is less than that of a human.
Your analogy carries over to the main point. Where does life begin and what is considered alive? Not every one places a human fetus on the same level as an animal or bacteria.
Guess I just think people shouldn't try to ban something not inherently unethical. Philosophical beliefs will never be enough to ban abortion, and it's clear we will never agree on a good way to define life.
You mean not indicative of life you personally value.
I mean if you'd value a petri dish full of contracting muscle cells, then your opinion is trash anyway. A lot of people value horoscopes, but reality does not work democratically.
I do care if my individual cells are damaged it may cause me injury and pain.
Yeah but a ton of your cells die every day and your probably not very worried about them (then again you could be one of those semen_retention guys). So it boils down to which cells get damaged, but that just loops back around to defining life by the standard of the development of a certain tissue, e.g. brain development.
A heart beat can be detected around 3 to 4 weeks while it's still an embryo. Around 8 weeks its becoming a fetus and looks like a tiny baby. More than half of the states in the US allow abortion up to 24 weeks. 20 weeks is almost 5 months. I don't want to make abortion illegal. I think its sad when people feel they have to abort a healthy pregnancy.
Around 8 weeks its becoming a fetus and looks like a tiny baby
Not an argument. Looking like something =/= being that thing.
I think its sad when people feel they have to abort a healthy pregnancy.
Lots of sad stuff in the world, it's not really an argumentative framework to build policy on though. If I were aborted I wouldn't care because I wouldn't know. And there would still be some moral crusader soapboxing on my behalf, pretending to know what I'd want. Sound familiar?
Finally somebody gets it. For some reason one bundle of cells is different than any other bundle of cells because.... Potential? Conciousness is what life is.
Do super left wingers get pregnant and have constant abortions to exercise their rights like many super right wingers but up a ton of guns they’ll never need just to exercise their rights?
This is exactly why Catholics make up entire stories about Black Masses where women get pregnant and have an abortion on some Satanic altar or whatever. Oh, and obviously Hillary is involved somehow too.
The details of the ritual vary (and I recommend against Googling them), but they can involve the desecration of the Eucharist, the abuse of a woman’s body, and even the murder of infants (which is not surprising, given that there is a consistent and uncanny tie between abortion and Satanism).
This is why I know religion is a lie. We don't celebrate terminal cancer. I know the excuse is "People are just sad to be leaving their friends/relatives for a time." lets face it, if people really believed in a eternal after party, every death would be a happy dance.
273 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-11-28
Are you black or something? Why do you think fathers don't exist?
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 demotecontrol 2018-11-28
Snappy goes all in for the male-only priesthood.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
Lol, my quote came in for perfect timing.
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
For context:
This priest is well known for appearing on the Colbert Report and being pretty liberal. He gets a lot of flack for wanting the Church to make peace with LGBT people. Therefore, liberal Catholics who want their worldview confirmed flock to him.
But, it seems as if he does hold at least one Church teaching, and people are miffed.
1 RandolphCox 2018-11-28
i know colbert is really catholic but has he given his views on abortion before? if he's pro life i will literally throw that in every one of his boomers viewers faces everyday
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
I don't really know about Colbert. I think he follows a lot of the liberal Catholic trends, and chooses not to talk about abortion because he knows there's no coming back from making his opinion on the topic known.
1 Awayfone 2018-11-28
Either he goes against the teachings of the church on a matter consindered a grave sin (pro abortion politicians have even been denied communion) or he loses his audience by being pro life.
He cant win. His soul or the world, too bad no one every talked about such a dilemma
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
Eh, I know a ton of pro-choice Catholics. They're pro-choice in the sense that they would not personally have an abortion, but they appreciate that other people have different opinions on the matter and that the government shouldn't decide for everyone.
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
That's cool. We all know shitty Catholics.
1 Wordshark 2018-11-28
A damned comedian managing his public positions like a politician
1 SonyXboxNintendo13 2018-11-28
Joe Biden is supposedly catholic but says he will not do anything to stop pro-abortion laws. I bet Colbert is the same kind of hypocrite.
1 RandolphCox 2018-11-28
the only thing catholic about joe biden is fucking kids
1 youcanteatbullets 2018-11-28
Supporting freedom in a free country = hypocrisy. This is your mind on /r/drama
1 hhhhhhhhhhhhhgfsb 2018-11-28
Yes good point not allowing people to gun others down is also hypocrisy.
1 Redactor0 2018-11-28
He's as bad as all those politicians who say adultery is wrong but won't pass laws against it, amirite?
1 UrMumsMyPassword 2018-11-28
1 UrMumsMyPassword 2018-11-28
i just want to hate christians for being hypocrites then be mad when they're not hypocritical about stuff i support
is that too much to ask? :(
1 newcomer_ts 2018-11-28
Sometime, I wish I'm this shallow.
1 darkinard 2018-11-28
Why the fuck are burgers so obsessed with abortions?
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
Something about the right to life or some other bullshit.
1 automatic_cluck 2018-11-28
Their country was born this way.
1 CatholicExpat 2018-11-28
It has to do with the fact that a significant percentage of the population thinks murdering the unborn is wrong. Also, it’s not just America, abortion is either illegal or heavily restricted in half or more of the world’s countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
Most civilized countries don't give a shit
1 Alicesnakebae 2018-11-28
Good thing America isn't civilized
1 SonyXboxNintendo13 2018-11-28
And look how their populations become smaller and smaller, year after year...Abortion is a signal of decadence.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
Wow as people become more civilized they start using modern medicine to improve their lives and save their neighbors from the scourge of overpopulation. How terrible! I wish we were more like the the crowded slums of Calcutta
1 1029384756-mk2 2018-11-28
Yes, until in a generation or two the old people will ountnumber the young people and the economy collapses because there's nobody to take care of them or pay their pensions. Brilliant!
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
I don't see the problem. Half of boomers should have been aborted in the first place.
1 1029384756-mk2 2018-11-28
Because it's not the boomers that are going to pay for it, it's the young people who will have to support them.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
And nothing says compatent, tax paying citizen like kids raised by dead beat parents who wanted to abort them in the first place.
1 1029384756-mk2 2018-11-28
The majority of europe is currently facing an impending demographic collapse with old people vastly outnumbering young ones, with fertility rates below 2. A problem unique to the first world.
Believe or not, these kids are not going to be living off dirt and mud. Blue collar work is nessesary for any country and there no conceivable scenario where old people outnumbering young ones has a good ending.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
All I'm seeing is positives.
1 1029384756-mk2 2018-11-28
Until you lose your internet access, have to suffer with power outages, rust in the water and everything else that will come as a result of the infastructure collapsing.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
I'm sorry your mom aborted your potential brother but she didn't have the courage to raise another autistic child.
1 1029384756-mk2 2018-11-28
I'm sorry you survived the abortion.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
Mine was better
1 siempreloco31 2018-11-28
Lmao what is increasing productivity? The only issue from here on out is a greater strain on the supply of healthcare which if you're not obese/boomer/gamer you have nothing really to worry about.
1 1029384756-mk2 2018-11-28
Who do you think pays for pensions?
1 siempreloco31 2018-11-28
Companies? Or are you talking social security?
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
Unique to first world, literally overlooks China with over billion people facing same issue.
1 HeftyHovercraft 2018-11-28
Yeah people spend a lot of time talking about the benefits of a smaller population but don’t realize it’s going to cause a lot of pain when billions in social benefits need to be cut because governments made promises they can’t deliver. China is actually going to get fucked the worse tho cause 1 child policy.
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2018-11-28
Why can't we let them starve again?
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-11-28
Because communism is out of fashion.
1 froibo 2018-11-28
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
One we get past the bottleneck caused when abortions became safe and legal, things will even out.
1 istural 2018-11-28
That’s what’s immigration is for dumby.
1 jaredschaffer27 2018-11-28
Nah, they just import their expanding tax base from 3rd world countries, with all the attendant political and social problems. Also (and hilariously), bringing people from low per capita CO2 emissions countries into high per capita CO2 emissions countries also has a worse impact on global warming.
1 CompetitiveLoiterer 2018-11-28
You say that as if the world needs more people.
And as if Africa quadrupling their their population from 300 million in 1960 to 1.3 billion today is totally not decadence lol.
1 siempreloco31 2018-11-28
All countries rate of growth is decreasing.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
Do you have blinders that block out entire continents?
1 siempreloco31 2018-11-28
Even African countries aren't increasing at the same rate as they were 8-10 years ago.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
Africa is blowing the fuck up in population. What are you smoking?
1 siempreloco31 2018-11-28
The rate of increase is high but the acceleration is decreasing.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
That doesn't change the massive increase though. There is a fucking massive spike coming short of genocidal warfare or crippling famine. Even then they would just end up pouring into places like EU anyway.
1 MandirKahaBanega 2018-11-28
Imagine actually believing the hundreds of millions of Nigerians and Kenyans to be born will all be able to emigrate.
/Seriouspost/
There were similar doomsday predictions for China and India, they're way too panicky and don't account for the increased productivity from the youth bulge and new technologies making thousands of acres viable for agriculture in those countries. Malthusian models throughout history have always failed, Africa won't be different. Nigeria(And a lot of other countries on the Islam-Christianity faultline) might be in for some trouble if the leaders don't realize the inevitability of a partition and do religion based population exchanges but overall it'll be OK. Best case scenario, the food surplus countries export food to them and set up something like the Chinese treaty cities to export the minerals. As long as Uncle Sam lives it probably won't get to interstate wars.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
They can all move to Sweden and Germany.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Yeah those countries where it is illegal or heavily restricted are strongly correlated with being backwards shitholes. Christians (rightfully) hate on Islamic countries for their bad policies on women and LGBT people, but once abortion comes up these places are suddenly enlightened protectors of the sanctity of life 🤔
1 Awayfone 2018-11-28
Broke clocks and all that
1 youcanteatbullets 2018-11-28
That same percentage tends to be strongly in favor of murdering the born for terrible sins like having too much melanin 🤔🤔🤔
1 HeftyHovercraft 2018-11-28
A lot of people think it’s wrong to kill babies and want to restrict my right to do so.
1 TheRootinTootinPutin 2018-11-28
Mandatory abortions for every other baby is the best solution
1 sevgee 2018-11-28
*mayo babies
1 masterstick8 2018-11-28
Except most abortions are done by black women.
Roe V Wade is a racists wet dream.
"You mean they'll kill themselves? And they'll fight like animals to keep it?" before they cum in their wizard outfit
1 sevgee 2018-11-28
Which is why mayo abortions should be mandatory
1 cimarafa 2018-11-28
I've thought for a while that it really doesn't make sense for so many conservatives who hate immigration and obsess over demographics on twitter to be so anti-abortion. If states like Mississippi and Georgia outlaw abortion then the white people will become a minority much sooner.
1 masterstick8 2018-11-28
Geez, it's almost like being anti-mass immigration that is mostly done illegally isn't based off an inherit hatred of minorities but the idea that mass-immigration of what is generally societies outcasts is a bad idea.
1 jPaolo 2018-11-28
ew
1 masterstick8 2018-11-28
fucking incels
1 jPaolo 2018-11-28
This isn't incel vocab, it's reddit vocab that the drones have been repeating since 2010.
1 masterstick8 2018-11-28
I said Incel Tears, which is a subreddit, which makes it a reddit word.
Why are you arguing against your own point lmao
1 wumbo17412 2018-11-28
this is the radical centrist solution
besides, we don't want a nation full of unlucky people.
1 Metal_Charizard 2018-11-28
Everyone who’s born already overcame crazy improbable odds by beating all the other speed in the race to the egg. I don’t think throwing in what amounts to one additional sperm to race is going to get us all that much luckier of a population. Actually, I take it back. At least this way we’re kind of making the eggs winna race too, albeit just a 1v1 instead of a 1v1,000,000.
1 AssWizardOfSiberia 2018-11-28
Luck is NOT genetic.
1 Mikeavelli 2018-11-28
Tell that to Larry Niven.
1 X-107 2018-11-28
TANJ
1 ElHombreBatido 2018-11-28
Abortions for some. Miniature American flags for others. - Kang, 2020
1 thrillhouze- 2018-11-28
Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.
1 jsideris 2018-11-28
I read that in Cuba they have forced abortions. /r/QualitySocialism
1 MPHJ-7 2018-11-28
Is that sub just r/socialism without socialists?
1 NoWayItszer0 2018-11-28
Well considering their title is " It's like /r/Socialism but better because we don't have any socialists. " I would assume so
1 Mikeavelli 2018-11-28
Technically correct, but only because there aren't any true socialists.
1 jsideris 2018-11-28
The sub name is supposed to be sarcastic.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
Where are you getting that info? The only thing coming out of Cuba that I pay attention to is a good fastball with tight control.
1 Kuonji 2018-11-28
thanos?
1 9777 2018-11-28
But they are not babies.
1 Skobtsov 2018-11-28
They are mayos
1 trilateral1 2018-11-28
fetus is baby, if I wanted it to come out my vajay alive but it dieded first. very sad :(
fetus is just clump of cells, if it is healthy and could come out fine in 3 more weeks, but I want brunch mimosa now! so let's flush it out.
1 9777 2018-11-28
Fetus is literally a fetus for the first trimester. After that it can be argued if it's a sentient baby, but it's still a mother's choice.
Hell, I support abortion even until the baby is 12 months old. Especially if you give birth to a retard.
1 trilateral1 2018-11-28
wow rude
1 AutoModerator 2018-11-28
Your comment has been removed. As of recently, we have figured out that using mean words (your comment contained
faggots) is verboten as per reddit's magical rules.If you would like to use your slurs in an illustrative context as per SRS theory, type the first letter and then "-slur". You are also encouraged to report violations of the reddit rules to the reddit admins using this report form.
Thank you for doing your part to keep reddit safe.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-11-28
If a fetus was a baby they would he called baby and not fetus
Q
E
D
1 AutoModerator 2018-11-28
Your comment has been removed. As of recently, we have figured out that using mean words (your comment contained
faggots) is verboten as per reddit's magical rules.If you would like to use your slurs in an illustrative context as per SRS theory, type the first letter and then "-slur". You are also encouraged to report violations of the reddit rules to the reddit admins using this report form.
Thank you for doing your part to keep reddit safe.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 SeattleFingers 2018-11-28
As a man, I'd like the right to kill babies, too.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Leftover anxiety for not having their own retarded asses aborted as fetuses.
1 CanonizeOrigen 2018-11-28
European countries in general are far more restrictive of abortion than the US is
1 sevgee 2018-11-28
No, they're not. Abortion is a non-issue here.
1 IcySand6 2018-11-28
Yes they are you mongol. Abortion laws in europe are much more restrictive than in the US.
1 error404brain 2018-11-28
Yes they are you idiot.
1 Prosent 2018-11-28
The United States allows for unrestricted abortion up to 24 weeks. all European countries are such more strict than that, which is probably part of the reason why it's a "non issue".
1 cimarafa 2018-11-28
European countries are certainly more restrictive, although what the pro-life movement in the US advocates (total or near-total bans on abortion with very few exceptions) is more radical than what exists in any Western European country and even most Eastern ones.
1 polzavatel 2018-11-28
fuck off amer*can. europe is a freethinking continent where all women must receive abortions if their children are inferior untermensch (downies are disgusting) and 8 year olds run around naked under the watch of 40 year old men who arent repressed and forced to be masculine like in america
1 FalseArm 2018-11-28
But there are less sluts so it evens out
1 TheLordHighExecu 2018-11-28
Part of the reason is the US got abortion from a judicial decision, rather than a popular movement. It doesn't help that Roe v Wade is a very, uh, creative interpretation of the Constitution.
Another thing is that Republicans discovered that abortion is a really easy way to get votes, especially from Catholic voters, who used to be reliably Democrats
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Abortion rights are the christcuck plantation on the Republican side. They will never leave as long as it's an issue even though Roe will never be overturned. It's too good a vote getter for the right wing, though, so they won't let the issue actually be solved in a way that will satisfy religious voters.
1 Anus_of_Aeneas 2018-11-28
Roe v Wade is a political wedge issue that neither side wants to get rid of. The Rs and Ds could have introduced legislation many times to solidify their position on it, but they won't because keeping it up gets votes out of fear.
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
I don't follow. Roe is a constitutional decision, which means that the Supreme Court's opinion overrides anything the Congress or state legislatures might pass. If you're not from the US, that might seem weird, but that's how it works here.
1 demonkobra 2018-11-28
thats completely false. https://www.reference.com/government-politics/can-supreme-court-decisions-overturned-e5ed409fe40bd30d
1 demotecontrol 2018-11-28
Interestingly enough, Roe actually does say Congress has the right to decide when life begins. No bill to decide the matter has ever gotten through Congress however.
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
I guess that's why Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), eventually did their work for them, choosing the "viability" (outside the abortion-wanter's lady-oven) standard (approx. >5 months, roughly?).
1 demotecontrol 2018-11-28
I’m drinking some good whine myself right now and don't feel like Googling to see if you’re correct either, but that sounds like something nine functioning adults would come up with in that situation.
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
Or one Justice O'Connor. Her entire judicial philosophy seems to have been "SPLIT THE BABY" in every case* , regardless of whether or not one side or the other had a straightforward winning argument.
* Preferably with an inscrutable, highly subjective multi-factor balancing test that provided zero guidance to lower courts.
1 MandirKahaBanega 2018-11-28
A lot of countries have judicial review burger.
1 Anus_of_Aeneas 2018-11-28
Hm, I am from Canada, I might have gotten some faulty info. So they based abortion off of the anti-slavery amendment? That seems ridiculously fragile.
1 werewolf_bar_mitzva 2018-11-28
Look at the rhetoric the Dems used around Kavanaugh and Gorsuch though. ZOMG THOSE EVIL WOMAN HATERS WILL REPEAL ROE V. WADE FIRST CHANCE THEY GET. Both sides do it (and so the only reasonable response is to plug radical Centrism early and often)
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
What, you're not down with penumbras and emanations?
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2018-11-28
Because attractive women should be punished for having sex and not being in a harem for ugly white old dudes
1 Awayfone 2018-11-28
You are correct this celebrating abortion thing is pretty grotesque
1 meatpuppet79 2018-11-28
And gender and sexual alignment.
1 ___Moufasa___ 2018-11-28
Because they secretly wish they were aborted
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-11-28
In typical christcuck fashion
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
If you ask a pro-choice supporter when does life begin? They completely avoid the question. God forbid that you let the mother know she has other options besides getting an abortion or offer her an opportunity to see the ultrasound. Plan Parent hood nutters are just as bad as Bible Bangers. People that want to save babies are the bad guys? The people that want to suck a healthy fetus from a womb are the good guys? Planed Parenthood nutters want to make it seem like they are only aborting downys and flipper babies. But they sucking out perfectly healthy future Lebron James because African American women have abortions at 5 times the rate of white women. Planned Parenthood is a bunch of racists.
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
The weird thing is, I am anti abortion more than I am pro life.
Like, in trying to determine what is just or unjust, the life or death of children really doesn't matter. There may be just situations that call for the death of children. Killing someone is not intrinsically evil.
But abortion seems to go against the natural order of things. Women become mothers, mothers give birth to children. It seems heinous to tamper with that process.
Also, I don't think human rights are a great way to determine justice. And the abortion argument is a good example why that is.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
I'm sure you are also against birth control and the day after pill because it tampers with the holy process of creampies
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
I mean, that's a little lewd, but yeah.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
I'd humans should have command of one thing, it should be birth rates.
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
They do. It's called don't have sex if you don't want a kid. You can do your part by not reproducing. Probably not a challenge for you.
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
Sex is fun you retard. We live in a world where can get laid and not have kids. I don't want a gremlin to come out of your mom's snatch every time I bust a nut in her
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
But I want more little brothers!
Also, what is having to make sacrifices to ensure the common good?
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
More kids isn't for the common good, especially if they are raised by your fentanyl addict of a mother
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
This song proves you wrong
1 pvijay187 2018-11-28
His priests especially love the little children. Honestly that's probably why the church is against abortion, since prepubescent boys and girls can't get pregnant.
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
While Fr James Martin has probably looked at little boys with a twinkle of lust in his eye, this is pretty shit bait my friend.
1 Xenepa 2018-11-28
how to tell someone is not having any sex
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
"Just don't have sex" say the people who have missionary sex in the dark once a year to make babies because their religion tells them sex is bad.
1 _Suprememe_ 2018-11-28
Pro-life and anti-BC is one of the most retarded combinations of stances that people unironically hold. More BC means less abortion unless your one of those hopeless mongs who thinks BC is a form of abortion.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
It's because they don't really care about the abortions as much as they pretend to. It is much more about controlling people and punishing them (especially women) for having sex.
1 RandolphCox 2018-11-28
ive completely switched on the abortion topic just out of contempt for pro lifers
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
I have just taking to supporting whatever political movement with the best memes.
1 HP_civ 2018-11-28
A k a daddy supporter
1 trilateral1 2018-11-28
I switched to pro-life and will only support abortion again when men get to decide against (legal) fatherhood during the same X weeks after conception as women can.
1 Sarge_Ward 2018-11-28
this is the weirdest argument in this debate I've ever seen. I think this manages to make literally every side upset.
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-11-28
Most animals literally eat their children. Which is something we need to bring back.
1 trilateral1 2018-11-28
why, did humans ever used to eat their children?
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-11-28
They did in Ukraine
1 TheLordHighExecu 2018-11-28
This is literally the worst argument I've heard on either side of the debate. It is equivalent to opposing airplanes because humans weren't born with wings.
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
Well I do hate flying.
1 OnicoBoy94 2018-11-28
this is the dumbest post I've ever read
1 AntifaSarqueefian 2018-11-28
The answer is maybe twelve weeks, but almost definetely twenty weeks. Source: my educated guess
1 IseeDrunkPeople 2018-11-28
Conception is a good point to consider.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
Life begins at erection.
1 GayLordMcMuffins 2018-11-28
Every time I splurge on a tissue, I cry myself to sleep; shaking, sweating, limp-dicked, terrified. Knowing that I've just committed genocide to achieve a momentary pause of pleasure. May god forgive my sins.
1 Medibee 2018-11-28
Let's have a compromise. We agree that life begins at conception, but we adopt the ancient Greek idea of childhood in that a child is not a person until they reach age 8.
1 allwordsaredust 2018-11-28
/>when does life begin?
At the point where the fetus is able to survive outside the womb without life support.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
If the baby is born premature and has to be on life support for a time is not really alive until life support is removed?
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-11-28
It shouldnt have made it anyways. We need to weed out the weak.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Yup. Just like an adult permanently on life support is not "alive" in any meaningful sense of the word. Life support is just modern medicine's semi-successful way of cheating death.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
An adult on life support is most likely not going to get better. A premature infant has a high likely hood of recovering and being normal.
1 _Suprememe_ 2018-11-28
Most importantly, while abortion isn't murder in the eyes or the law killing a premature infant most certainly is.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Yes the baby has a better shot at becoming alive but it isn't meaningfully alive yet
1 Metal_Charizard 2018-11-28
How is needing life support so different from those useless fleshbags needing everything done for them anyway?
1 allwordsaredust 2018-11-28
For one if the mother does not want anything to do with the baby, there are people that want those babies and will take care of them.
And I admit I phrased it badly in my eagerness to be succinct. I meant that if the baby cannot survive outside of the womb anyhow, it's okay to abort in my view, and if can survive with life support, it depends on the views of medical professionals and how much care they need - there's a big difference between a case where a medical miracle is needed for a baby to pull through and a case where a baby just needs a little support (and can therefore easily go to a family wishing to adopt).
But ultimately, I think it's down to can the baby survive without the mother when she wants nothing to do with it.
1 Metal_Charizard 2018-11-28
If it’s down to can the baby survive without the mother when she wants nothing to do with it, then that means we should be able to abort many NEETs living in their mother’s basement. Nobody wants THOSE babies
1 Xenepa 2018-11-28
Healthy children, ok I can see problem in that. Or even things like Down's syndrome.
But church actually wants complete ban on abortion, including cases where mother will die during/before labor, where child will be born without brain (good flock i guess?), where child will be born only to die screaming in pain, minutes later or live as a vegetable for years.
I live in catholic shithole where you can get abortion only in one of 3 cases: rape, severe fetus deformity, or risk of mother's life. Ever since pro-church gov has taken stage, they keep trying to push on complete ban on abortion. Church lobbies for that all the time. Meanwhile they also blame kids for being raped by priests...
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Church smoothbrains simultaneously maintain that everyone has a right to life and that it is perfectly acceptable for both a mom and her baby to die during the pregnancy/childbirth because muh abortion. Never mind that an abortion can save the mother's life and possibly let her go on to have more kids in the future.
1 jaredschaffer27 2018-11-28
If you get pregnant and carrying the baby through to term causes you to die, that's God's will. Do not interfere.
1 Kachajal 2018-11-28
If you get a tumor and continuing to live with it causes you to die, that's God's will. Do not interfere.
1 totalrandomperson 2018-11-28
this but unironically. every religious person should do this.
1 next_acc 2018-11-28
Yea, situations which a decision between the life of the mother vs the life of fetus / unborn whatever barely ever occur. Like 1 in 2500 of births and that's accounting for times where the mother threatens suicide. Also, I don't know of any country which restricts such abortions.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Not that many countries currently restrict abortions in the case where a mother's life is in danger. But the list would go up if the Church got their way and passed a blanket ban on abortion.
1 next_acc 2018-11-28
I couldn't find any shithole backward catholic countries which restricted these type of abortions. I really don't care if you want the right to scramble your inconvenient fetus, but saying that catholics want pregnant mothers to die is dishonest.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
The only countries that completely ban abortions are heavily Catholic. Not even Islamic countries ban it when the mother's life is in danger (in terms of the law, idk how it works in practice. Here's a list since you couldn't seem to find one:
Three countries in Latin America (Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and Nicaragua) and two in Europe (Malta[3] and the Vatican City) ban the procedure entirely.[4]
1 next_acc 2018-11-28
It's retarded but from a catholic perspective there's no issue with giving life saving treatment a mother with the side-effect of killing the fetus so long a the mother consents. It's abortion whilst being to cowardly admit to it.
Background info if you want it: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5473037/
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
That looks like an unofficial Catholic perspective that tries to exploit a semantic loophole. Very interesting article thanks for sharing.
1 next_acc 2018-11-28
Double effect has been mainstream Catholic doctrine since the Thomas Aquinas. The Dublin doctrine is the pro-life'ers attempt to package this idea into a coherent manifesto which they contend preserves maternal mortality rates without "abortion" and most importantly absolves them of moral and legal culpability.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Really it's just a cope tho. Leave it to Catholics to find a convenient loophole to aborting a fetus while pretending they aren't.
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
Do any women even live in Vatican City? And if they did, couldn't they just cross the street to Italy to get an abortion?
1 jPaolo 2018-11-28
It's called Middle America.
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
Looks like /r/atheism is leaking again.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2018-11-28
A Pollack talking shit about places that restrict abortion is truly rich.
1 jPaolo 2018-11-28
I'm not talking shit, you babbling idiot.
1 error404brain 2018-11-28
Man, I can't tell if it's a shitpost or not.
1 Warneral 2018-11-28
The best kind of post really
1 bunkerman11 2018-11-28
That's me everyday on this sub.
If you cant tell if it's a shitpost or a shit post, does it really matter?
1 OnicoBoy94 2018-11-28
Yeah I'm 100% stumped. I'd be surprised either way
1 PufferfishNumbers 2018-11-28
Isn’t there a point where the brain is formed/the baby starts to gain consciousness? I’d say then.
1 RandolphCox 2018-11-28
depends on the race and gender. like that develops for gussies never
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
You dont when that actually happens though. It's just some arbitrary value you made up.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Conception is equally arbitrary.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
I have never stated my opinion on when life starts or whether I am pro-choice or pro-life.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
My point is that every answer will be arbitrary
1 LightUmbra 2018-11-28
Not really tbh
1 PotentialFortune5 2018-11-28
Wrong it begins at conception
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
Isn't that like 18 months after birth?
1 palerthanrice 2018-11-28
This is kind of a boomer post, but I don’t disagree with anything you said. Check out some quotes from Margret Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood. That organization is doing exactly what it was set out to do from the start; euthanize babies from black women who can’t stop having sex.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
GenX
1 Awayfone 2018-11-28
You might want to recheck those qoutes. Yes she absolutely supported eugenics, so strongly she actually drove away other eugenicist but she opposed abortion. She called it the barbaric killing of babies
1 ArlenBilldozer 2018-11-28
That's always been my issue with "pro-choicers". They avoid the "when live begins" question like they are auditioning for a Matrix remake.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
Lifers will march out a functional adult with downs syndrome to make you feel like crap about aborting them when the vast majority of fetuses aborted are perfectly healthy African Americans. You dont see them asking Lebron James how he feels about all the little black babies being aborted.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Yeah what they don't show you is the kid with downs who isn't doing so well and will never have an independent life
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
Honestly, no one with Down's is ever going to have an independent life in the sense that a non-disabled adult can. They need [non-MR/DD] adult supervision their entire lives, even if they are living in the community (and then, it's going to be in an intermediate-care group home -- think assisted living for retarded people -- if they aren't living with family).
1 Corporal-Hicks 2018-11-28
TBF at least the lifers logic is based on something. Might not agree with it, but its a simple linear logic. Choicers? Their logic is all over the fucking map. When does life begin? If someone murders a pregnant woman, should they be charged with two murders or one? If 50% of women are pro-life, is it really a woman's rights issue? I could go one forever.
1 seshfan2 2018-11-28
Pro-life logic makes no sense. Life begins at conception, unless the mom was raped. Birth control is the one thing proven to reduce abortion, yet catholics hate it.
It's almost like they're not actually interested in reducing rates of abortion
1 Arbys_Official 2018-11-28
So what's your answer for when life begins? It's a pretty complicated question whichever position you're defending.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
I dont know. I don't want ladies going to prison because they had an abortion. I dont want ladies going to clandestine abortion clinics endangering their lives.
My best answer would be when the fetus has a heart beat. They declare people dead when their heart stops. So I believe that's a good place to start answering the question when life begins.
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
I disagree. A mass of cells doing something is not indicative of life we actually value. You don't care about your individual cells, and thats's all a fetus is by that point. Life is conciousness. We don't value animal lives as much because we see them as a lesser conciousness. Bugs, less so. Bacteria even, is a cell accomplishing something. But we're completely indifferent because bacteria is pure instinct.
We pull the plug on braindead people, and that's not murder, even when their hearts beat and cells function normally. We don't consider them alive past conciousness, so I don't consider anything alive pre-conciousness. I get iffy about abortion when it comes to brain development.
1 throwawayforme9000 2018-11-28
You can pull the plug on a braindead person, but you can't shoot them.
It's a subtle by important difference.
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
Fair.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Tbh the difference is mostly optics. It makes no difference to the brain dead person whether you pull the plug or shoot them because they are dead. But it's gross and messy so we don't do that when we have cleaner ways of "ending" their lives.
1 throwawayforme9000 2018-11-28
No, because pulling the plug is allowing nature to take it's course. While shooting the guy is killing him.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
If they are diagnosed as braindead they are already dead and nature already "took its course". Shooting them is just rearranging the brain matter of their warm corpse.
1 throwawayforme9000 2018-11-28
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/doing-allowing/
It's clearly not the same thing.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
That's a completely different topic . You don't euthanize a braindead person when you pull the plug because they are already dead. Shooting them is wrong because it is mutilating their corpse, not because it is murder.
1 throwawayforme9000 2018-11-28
You also can't lethally inject a person on life support, despite the fact that it would have no effect on their corpse.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
You mean not indicative of life you personally value.
I do care if my individual cells are damaged it may cause me injury and pain.
You keep using the word "we". When this is what you believe not what everyone "we" believes.
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
And you're just being contrarian because you disagree with me as a whole. You don't value cells as life lmao.
Yeah, we. Like, the entirety of society on Earth. Short of vegans pretty sure everyone would agree that the life of an animal is less than that of a human.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
Your analogy carries over to the main point. Where does life begin and what is considered alive? Not every one places a human fetus on the same level as an animal or bacteria.
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
Guess I just think people shouldn't try to ban something not inherently unethical. Philosophical beliefs will never be enough to ban abortion, and it's clear we will never agree on a good way to define life.
Even if the heartbeat belief is retarded
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
I dont want to ban it. I find it laughable how little value liberals place on little black fetuses when conservatives want to save them all.
1 HumongousGentleman 2018-11-28
I mean if you'd value a petri dish full of contracting muscle cells, then your opinion is trash anyway. A lot of people value horoscopes, but reality does not work democratically.
Yeah but a ton of your cells die every day and your probably not very worried about them (then again you could be one of those semen_retention guys). So it boils down to which cells get damaged, but that just loops back around to defining life by the standard of the development of a certain tissue, e.g. brain development.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
A heart beat can be detected around 3 to 4 weeks while it's still an embryo. Around 8 weeks its becoming a fetus and looks like a tiny baby. More than half of the states in the US allow abortion up to 24 weeks. 20 weeks is almost 5 months. I don't want to make abortion illegal. I think its sad when people feel they have to abort a healthy pregnancy.
1 HumongousGentleman 2018-11-28
Not an argument. Looking like something =/= being that thing.
Lots of sad stuff in the world, it's not really an argumentative framework to build policy on though. If I were aborted I wouldn't care because I wouldn't know. And there would still be some moral crusader soapboxing on my behalf, pretending to know what I'd want. Sound familiar?
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
Finally somebody gets it. For some reason one bundle of cells is different than any other bundle of cells because.... Potential? Conciousness is what life is.
1 old_grumpy_grandpa 2018-11-28
Now you're just pretending to be smart.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
You caught me Sherlock.
1 wow___justwow 2018-11-28
Fetus has a heatbeat by 3-4 weeks which is before most women know they are pregnant.
You bet your ass I'd care about a clump of my cells if it was responsible for keeping my heart beating.
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
Well that's missing the point entirely.
1 wow___justwow 2018-11-28
>makes an incredibly stupid statement "you don't care about your individual cells"
>buttmad when called out on it
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
???
1 IllustriousQuail 2018-11-28
So what you're saying is that we should be eating all these unwanted babies?
Mmmm, "long veal."
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2018-11-28
They are the bad guys, mostly because the unwanted babies will be supported on my tax dollars.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
So you believe abortion is good because it saves us from paying extra taxes to support the children? You should campaign on that.
1 bunkerman11 2018-11-28
I'd vote for that
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2018-11-28
Can't. Pisses both sides off since most voters are dumb enough to believe in ideologies.
1 PotentialFortune5 2018-11-28
Because they cannot answer because they are child killers.
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
It means their racists out to kill black babies.
1 jPaolo 2018-11-28
3465 million years ago.
1 melokobeai 2018-11-28
I forgot that PP kidnaps black women and forces them to get abortions against their will
1 Chauncy_Prime 2018-11-28
Exactly, I cant think of any other reason why someone would abort a perfectly healthy baby.
1 Kazundo_Goda 2018-11-28
I am amazed he got the time to tweet while being surrounded by so many altar boys.
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-11-28
Altar boys can't get pregnant, so it makes sense.
1 hobocactus 2018-11-28
The male refractory period is a blessing and a curse
1 CreatedOutOfSpite 2018-11-28
The real question is why is does a Catholic priest (or anyone) have a Twitter account?
1 bunkerman11 2018-11-28
You missed out on some really high effort catholic twitter posts from a while ago.
1 snallygaster 2018-11-28
They need to convince more women that abortion is wrong so they have more kids to diddle later on.
1 Xenepa 2018-11-28
Well of course catholic priests are pro life. How else would they always have fresh batch of babies to rape?
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-11-28
Unwanted children from unstable homes do tend to be the easiest ones to molest since their parents don't care about them 🤔🤔🤔
1 HovarTM 2018-11-28
1 tdvx 2018-11-28
Do super left wingers get pregnant and have constant abortions to exercise their rights like many super right wingers but up a ton of guns they’ll never need just to exercise their rights?
1 demotecontrol 2018-11-28
This is exactly why Catholics make up entire stories about Black Masses where women get pregnant and have an abortion on some Satanic altar or whatever. Oh, and obviously Hillary is involved somehow too.
1 LightUmbra 2018-11-28
What Catholics do you know?
1 demotecontrol 2018-11-28
Here’s one example of their typical idiocy.
https://catholicherald.co.uk/issues/august-19th-2016/how-we-stopped-a-black-mass-at-harvard/
1 LightUmbra 2018-11-28
Only like 5 Catholics care about this.
1 VicisSubsisto 2018-11-28
#NotAllPapists
1 bunkerman11 2018-11-28
I dont know but it sounds like they have great drugs.
1 bunkerman11 2018-11-28
As a libertarian, I alternate between getting an abortion and a gun every week.
1 Chicup 2018-11-28
I think abortion is murder, but I'm pro eugenics murder.
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-11-28
Murdering babies just gets them to jesus faster.
1 Chicup 2018-11-28
This is why I know religion is a lie. We don't celebrate terminal cancer. I know the excuse is "People are just sad to be leaving their friends/relatives for a time." lets face it, if people really believed in a eternal after party, every death would be a happy dance.
1 Howshpup 2018-11-28
Religion is the ultimate cope.
Except Islam. Those guys are nuts.
1 throwawayforme9000 2018-11-28
more like reLIEgion am I right.
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-11-28
boo
1 FrenchFriesFriday 2018-11-28
Can’t believe amerilards are still fighting over this shit
1 Sniffposter30 2018-11-28
I hate this "person" so much
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
Profile pic for reference
1 Sniffposter30 2018-11-28
Which one of them is it?
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
That's the best part. I don't know!
1 demotecontrol 2018-11-28
You missed an opportunity to post MasterLawlz, you nincompoop.
1 IseeDrunkPeople 2018-11-28
:(
1 ToTheNintieth 2018-11-28
Bantz
1 melokobeai 2018-11-28
Abortion limits the supply of children to molest, of course Catholic priests are outspoken about it
1 zuulmofozuul 2018-11-28
But I thought Fr. Martin was a crypto-prot/judeo-masonic heretic who wishes to subvert mother church.
1 Argentumvir 2018-11-28
CMV: If you're pro-life and eat meat you haven't actually thought about your views and you should feel bad
1 HungerArtistatlunch 2018-11-28
Counter point: ur a stoopid
1 Argentumvir 2018-11-28
:(
1 Dover939 2018-11-28
prety epic burn tho