society will blame the man somehow

>>84644835
>folic acid
Eat folate, taking folic acid not only inhibits you from absorbing folate but also doesnt get absorbed and treated as folate in the body. Eat some fuckin asparagus or something its not hard

>>84644839
>Child suffering
>How do I make this about me and the things I care about
You are spiritually a woman

>>84644835
Keeping things alive at all cost makes sense when we have the tech to prevent picrel

>>84644835
Folic acid is the problem. What you actually want is methylfolate and choline if you want to avoid schizophrenia

i dont understand when a baby is born with some super fucked up condition like harlequin babies or clyclopia and the doctors are "doing their best to keep him/her alive"
like why? why would you do that?

>>84644849
Eggs are the way.
But your prenatal better have methylfolate and cdp choline as well.
Weekly salmon and krill oil

>>84644882
Because they are mercenaries that care nothing for human well-being.

>>84644835
Its mens fault that the thing was born. Women would love to abort that.

>>84644882
The Hippocratic Oath. It's not for them to decide. If the kid grows up and decides they've given life a chance and don't like it, they can end it themselves

>>84644882
they wanna preserve suffering, like how normies wanna stop people from kill themselves

>>84644973
*killing themselves

File: accountability.gif (2.15 MB, 498x382)

2.15 MB GIF

>>84644835
>I'm so happy they allowed that child to experience the beauty of life instead of aborting it

Me too. Life is just so great, anon.

>>84644835
that's some alien shit right there

File: 1587181573806.jpg (52 KB, 640x947)

52 KB JPG

ET (2026 remake, funded by Blackrock)

File: screen-shot-2019-05-25-at(...).png (1013 KB, 1200x800)

1013 KB PNG

No you dont get it OP we need these horrors to exist

I think being born is horrific, but I think abortion is wrong. This is because abortion kills what already exists, what already has a life to life, and a right not to have violence imposed them.

The true compassion is not abortion, it's abstention from conception. When you see an image like this, realize you have been programmed by liberals/jews etc to think the "compassionate" thing should have been to "abort" (itself a bullshit word that just masks the truth which is killing/murdering another hunan). Kind of like how homesteaders talk about "processing" their chickens lol.

On top of that when you make these claims that the disabled should have been aborted I think it's pure eugenics and a total spit in the face to those of our fellow humans who are disabled, who enjoy and like their lives. It's to say to them "you should have been aborted, your disability is an affront to my sensibilities, you shouldn't have lived".

The egalitarian solution is a sort of 'total eugenics' to speak metaphorically. To where NO human is conceived. All human suffering woukd be prevented if their were no births. But once conceived, all parents have a DUTY to ensure they nurture and care for their children (regardless of its age whether that be 3 months in the womb, or 3 years outside). And no, murdering your child isn't "caring for its best interests".

>>84645283
>Abortion is le bad

The problem is people who are against abortion are not even gonna help look after the child after it is born.

>>84644882
Yeah, that's not how it works, though. A doctor can decide not to pursue resuscitation efforts. There's an entire medical field devoted to this - it's called palliative care.

In fact, not only can they do that, they can put a large, legally-binding red form in your notes saying DNACPR - whether you agree with it or not.

>>84644968
Nobody swears the Oath, and if they do, they'd break it constantly. It forbids surgery and the use of scalpels.

>>84645324
>the problem is people who are broadly against killing homeless people don't work at soup kitchens
Good argument, anon, you should do this more often.

>>84644882
Pro lifers don't want to make Jesus cry

>>84644968
>You have this disease that makes it feel like your being sliced with knives everyday when you turn 18 you can opt out if life
Life is just a suffering farm ran by Pyschopaths and altruistic sociopa8

>>84645283
>I think being born is horrific, but I think abortion is wrong.
>I admit life is suffering...but it's been pretty ok to me so far
I didn't realize we had a Christian with us

>>84644882
>harlequin babie
I did not need to know this exists. Couldn't imagine the horror of being a woman to birth something like that into the world.

>>84645458
How did you get that from my post? I'm like a hardcore antinatalist atheist, and my life has been terrible and ultimately regrettable (I wish I was never born). I just think morality demands that the time for the prevention of birth is pre-conception. Once another human exists (which is at conception) then murder becomes immoral and the duty is to care and provide for the child.

Or put it this way ->

1. my parents would have prevented a lifetime of suffering if they didn't conceive me (moral).

2. My parents would have prevented a lifetime of suffering if they murdered me when I was a 6 week fetus (immoral/murder)

File: why-is-he-being-associate(...).jpg (121 KB, 640x1065)

121 KB JPG

>>84645478
>Atheist anti natalist opposes abortion because it's bad
So that's what we're doing now just getting on the Internet and larping
>My parents would have prevented a lifetime of suffering if they murdered me when I was a 6 week fetus
My guy you aren't even conscious
But you are now

>>84645478
Anti Natalism is retarded as being born is always a net positive by the simple fact the vast majority of people aren't borderline suicidaly depressed retards.

>>84644882
>like why? why would you do that?
Hopefully a soon to be extinguished legacy of Christcuckery but women regardless of their professed religion are life-long weakness worshipping Christcucks

>>84645425
>The problem is people who are against abortion are not even gonna help look after the child after it is born.
>the problem is people who are broadly against killing homeless people don't work at soup kitchens

Wow, that is a really retarded comparison.

>>84645741
People also hate and kill each other.

>>84645741
> is always a net positive by the simple fact the vast majority of people aren't borderline suicidaly depressed retards.
How do I know you pressed the red button

>>84645741
>being born is always a net positive
Dumb as fuck. You'd call it moral for >>84645239 pic related to be born.

How many aborted children were deformed?

>>84645478
>Anti natalist
It's never too late anon, you don't have to live you know

>>84645915
Probably not that many but I do agree the Epstein and the Trumps of the world should have first pick out of the orphanages before we selfishly decide that non consenting creatures should not suffer

>>84645885
It tracks, you're just too retarded to parse basic logic. Get chatgpt to formalize it for you.

Alternatively, if you're too stupid to engage with formal logic, feel free to explain why you think this is disanalogous.

>>84645923
>Now that you can comprehend the horrors the void you should go

>>84645930
is that your faggot opinion?

>>84645944
Look I agree with you the orphanages need to be filled and parents living in abject poverty with poor emotional regulation deserve a fair crack at the kid first before we selfishly spare them the joys of working 9 to 5 so trump can put in gold plated toilets in the white house

The burden of proof is on you. Explain how it's the same.

>>84645930
This but also faggots and trannies who rape kids at enormous rates

>>84645963
What's your obsession with those two groups
It almost seems pathological

>>84645962
Meant for >>84645935

This is an original post.

>>84645979
I was just observing leftist brainrot on another note pathological behavior is not just one group or another. People are just retarded in general is something I'm realizing it's pretty tragic. Don't worry you'll get your abortions.

>>84645979
What's your obsession with the orange man and the mossad asset jew? Man you must just be OBSESSED. Yeah, they probably raped kids but you seem OBSESSED. Trannies and fags also rape kids but you seem to hop to defend them for some strange reason. Maybe because you are a retard who takes political beliefs in sets and the sainted troons & fags can do no wrong, or maybe you just don't actually care about the issue of kids getting raped by pedos and it's all just some political football.

>>84644835
Folic acid deficiency causes spina bifida, but not gremlins with deformed heads.
Cousin marriage *does* cause deformed freak babies like that, and Muslims heavily engage in that.
In fact, Pakistan has the highest rate of cousin marriage on earth and the highest rate of microcephalics:
https://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008%2F08%2F02%2F54110
And if you google
>Use folic acid all married women
you find a youtube channel for a purported neurosurgeon in Lahore, Pakistan.

>>84645989
I bet if I say George Floyd you'll just short circuit repeating
Billions in damage
Riots
>>84645993
Trump is abject one of the worse human beings to exist his very existence lowers the quality of the human species and that's not even an overstatement

>>84645994
>you find a youtube channel for a purported neurosurgeon in Lahore, Pakistan.
I honestly thought the videos were AI slop (and may still be), but the fact that it tracks back to a neurosurgeon in Pakistan's social media accounts suggests it's real.
These people BTW blame everything for their children's birth defects besides cousin marriage.
Periodically you'll see articles bemoaning Iraq's birth defect rate and blaming it on the invasion(s), without acknowledge that their rates, while high relative to a civilized country, are actually in line with the rest of the cousin-marrying region.

>>84645935
>basic logic

Nigga, you're comparing a fetus to a full human being with self awareness and consciousness. A fetus cannot feel pain until at least the 24th to 25th week of gestation

no what am i reading guh i dont even know if its worth solving a captcha for even

>>84645962
The burden of proof doesn't cover explaining basic concepts like logic. That would be considered an axiom for rational discussion beyond metaphysics, and the onus is on you to understand and apply it. I'll attempt this anyway. I'll put it in simplified form for you:

[As an argument against "doing x is wrong"] The problem with people who say we should not do x [kill fetuses/kill homeless people] is they won't deal with second-order consequences [housing kids/feeding homeless people].

The issue, as I'm demonstrating with the homeless example, is I can apply this deranged second-order tu quoque to almost any issue. It's tu quoque because even if I burned orphanages in my spare time, my original argument isn't less valid. We're not arguing about me.

>>84644882
Holy shit, if I gave a birth to such baby I would think I birthed the anti christ
I wonder how they were viewed in antique or medieval times

>>84646011
Nigga, an anesthetized human can't feel pain, either. Neither can half the fented-out homeless people on my high street, but I repeat myself.

Explain why I shouldn't be allowed to kill them.

You're going to do that by abandoning this premise and pulling a new one out your ass. I'm sure you'll blow my mind, nigga. You'll definitely make an argument I've not seen before!

>>84646079
>antique or medieval times
They didn't have extra resources to feed freaks, that's a modern convenience. If your baby comes out a monster, you just left him outdoors overnight and the wolves fixed it.

>>84646085
Explain how killing a person with a consciousness and self awareness is the same as killing a fetus..

>>84646092
I searched and those Harlequin babies don't seem to live much anyway
But yeah if I gave a birth and it was that kind of baby I wouldn't ever reproduce again in fears of having another

>>84646099
I could, but I'm not going to yet, as that isn't your current argument. If present consciousness/self-awarenes is the defining trait to qualify for moral value, it should be fine for me to kill an unconscious person. That means coma, that means general anesthesia, that means off your tits on a CNS depressant; that also, strictly speaking, means someone who is asleep.

I've given you the solution, anon - you need to pull the next premise out of your ass.

>84646125
>I could

Okay, then do it. All you're doing is giving me the run around.

This shit again. It's insane how a folate deficiency caused by constant folic acid exposure is being hidden under the name autism. You can cure this shit so easily, but they won't say anything about it since they're probably doing it intentionally just like the 'accidental' vitamin D severe underdosage in the RDA.

File: 1752999022940048.png (285 KB, 648x524)

285 KB PNG

>>84645892
How many deaths are from murder compared to total deaths retard
>>84645905
I look worse than her desu

>>84646134
I will, but first I need you to concede on the matter of present consciousness, or make a better argument.

I'm not wasting my time on bad-faith niggas.

>>84646125
>If present consciousness/self-awareneas is the defining trait to qualify for moral value

That's not the only one. A homeless person would have agency and a fetus has no viability outside the womb.

>>84646159
>2 more premises, pulled from my ass!
Like clockwork.

>agency
An unconscious person has no agency, you stupid fuck. How did you not spot this? It's the same argument.
>viability
The youngest child currently in my NICU is 24 weeks. Before I continue to dismantle the rest of your position, I now need you to concede on second and third trimester abortion - unless you'd like to pull another premise out your ass?

>>84646156
>I will, but first I need you to concede on the matter of present consciousness, or make a better argument.

No, because it's fucking stupid. A developing fetus does have the neurological hardware required for consciousness. The thalamocortical connections do not begin to form until around 24 weeks of gestation.

Forcing a fully developed human being into a state of unconsciousness and then killing them is not the same.

>>84646184
>An unconscious person has no agency

They did, until they were forced not to in your hypothetical.

>>84646190
You've moved the goalposts from 'consciousness' to neurological development. If you're going to move the goalposts, at least don't miss a second time.

I suspect you're not going to get far on embryology on neurology with me, but I'll humornyoh. How do clinicians measure level of consciousness? Google this quickly and give me the most common scoring system. Let's see how the fetus fares, compared to the comatose patient.

>24 weeks!!!
Before we do that - again, I need you to cede on third trimester abortion, and most of second-trimester. It's ok - it's just a minor concession. A matter of courtesy, really.

>>84644835
i bet that his mom came several times while giving birth to that bigass head

>>84646214
>Moving the goalpost

I didn't. I simply explained why forcing a fully developed human being into a state of unconsciousness and then killing them is not the same.

Unless you can come up with a good argument that explains otherwise.

>>84646204
Nah, they do fent themselves, honest. People also voluntarily sleep, and most of them consent to GA.

But again, we've moved the goalposts, from "current consciousness" to "has been conscious". Are you happy with that position, anon? Wanna add anything?

>>84646222
See below. Who is forcing anyone? You've added that component - but even if I granted it, your original position - current consciousness - STILL would not work.

Come on, mate. Do you need me to say the the thing rhymes with "raw man"?

>>84646223
>Nah, they do fent themselves, honest. People also voluntarily sleep, and most of them consent to GA.

Okay, then make that distinction. Is this hypothetical homeless person forced into a state of consciousness or not?

But it doesn't really matter either way.

>But again, we've moved the goalposts, from "current consciousness" to "has been conscious".

The fetus was never consciousness so there is no comparison in regards to ethics.

>>84646232
>but even if I granted it, your original position - current consciousness - STILL would not work.

Still haven't explained why. Come up with a cohesive argument.

>>84646240
> forced into a state of unconsciousness

>>84645771
I don't buy this at all being a particularly gendered issue and in fact I'd bet most women could be convinced of the validity of euthanized deformed babies. Idk maybe I'm wrong here, but i suspect being the life givers, they probably have a natural understanding of that role and instinctively understand the need to get rid of bad offspring that won't survive. I mean most mammals will straight up kill their own baby if they detect something is wrong with it, or if they don't have enough resources to feed them all, they'll cull the weakest. I bet human women also have that, even if we never talk about it publicly. The ethics of society that decided all life is sacred and must be protected are a holdover from patriarchal values. If we as men decided to change values I think it wouldn't be hard to get most women on board with it. Obviously speaking broadly/generally here. Of course some women are bleeding hearts, hard-core christcucks, etc.

>>84646240
>Okay, then make that distinction.
I don't need to, it's not relevant. You making a distinction and addressin that is a strawman.

>But it doesn't really matter either way
Correct; either would dismantle present consciousness, which is why you've moved to:
>The fetus was never consciousness so there is no comparison in regards to ethics.

Can we settle on your position now? I'll attempt to steelman it - let me know if I'm wrong, or if there's more convoluted shit you'd like to add:

>gaining consciousness makes an individual morally valuable

>>84646242
I've explained why, and it's not my fault if you're too stupid to understand that if your position is "a fetus has no value because it is not conscious", then in your worldview, a fented-out homeless person or your sleeping stepsis would also have no moral value unless you pull another premise out of your ass.

The other dude at least had the courtesy to move the goalposts. I suggest you do the same.

>>84645691
The most prominent antinatalist philosopher (Julio Carbrera) essentially shares my opinion on abortion. David benatar holds the opposite view, basically that abortion is acceptable maybe even post birth-> but he is a Jewish zionist and should he disregarded. The worth of human life is not determined by whether something can suffer, or whether it is conscious-> but rather, whether it is a human being who has a right to life. Another human becomes one at conception and is therefore afforded with all human rights including the right not to be murdered.

>>84646274
I don't need to, it's not relevant. You making a distinction and addressing that is a strawman.

Yes, because I'm obviously a mind reader. ,My name is Professor X.

>But it doesn't really matter either way
Correct; either would dismantle present consciousness, which is why you've moved to:
>The fetus was never consciousness so there is no comparison in regards to ethics.

Which is actually correct, moron. I already why explained it with >A developing fetus does have the neurological hardware required for consciousness. The thalamocortical connections do not begin to form until around 24 weeks of gestation.

>I've explained why, and it's not my fault if you're too stupid to understand that if your position is "a fetus has no value because it is not conscious", then in your worldview, a fented-out homeless person or your sleeping stepsis would also have no moral value unless you pull another premise out of your ass.

A born human being had an established life, social connections, and fully actualized consciousness before becoming unconscious. Explain why killing this person is the same as killing a fetus.

File: xmen.jpg (216 KB, 800x450)

216 KB JPG

>>84646304
>Yes, because I'm obviously a mind reader. ,My name is Professor X.

>>84646304
>Yes, because I'm obviously a mind reader. ,My name is Professor X.
Are you genuinely this stupid?

I could take any argument, add my own tidbits, address that strawman, and then say "Well, you didn't say you're NOT a faggot nigger who wants to burn kittens, ergo you want to burn kittens, and you're a nigger, and you're a faggot!!!!".

Be honest - is this bad faith, or is this really you?

>already why explained it with
>A developing fetus does have the neurological hardware required for consciousness. The thalamocortical connections do not begin to form until around 24 weeks of gestation.

Yes, and I addressed this. I asked you to google the clinical tool I'd use to assess a patient's level of consciousness - just do so, so we can discuss this like adults, instead of one adult discussing this with a person asspulling neuromumbojumbo they lack the context to interpret. It's very simple, it's a scoring system out of 15 - I can explain it to a literal retard. That's why we use it - so I can discuss consciousness with nurses and paramedics.

Also, I really need you to cede on third-trimester abortion, and half of second-trimester, too - would you mind? Alternatively, you need to asspull another premise. I have to be firm on this - I can't argue with people in bad faith.

>A born human being had an established life, social connections, and fully actualized consciousness before becoming unconscious. Explain why killing this person is the same as killing a fetus.
Good, that's a nice haul, straight from your ass. Do you mind outlining which ones matter? E.g., is it fine for me to kill people without social connections? What do you mean "fully actualized consciousness" - I'm retarded, and we didn't cover that at medical school, can you explain it to me? What is an "established life"? I learned the criteria for life, and the criticisms of those criteria, but a fetus meets them and the criticisms are generally that our criteria are too exclusive.

Eventually, all pro-abortion arguments ultimately boil down to "I don't care lol". Nobody ever has a rational argument. It's so dissappointing.

>>84646422
They really boil down to "I'm a hedonistic whore who can't be bothered to use birth control lol" and "I'm a retard who took political beliefs in sets and uhhhhhhh the authority figure said this is good and moral so it is."

>>84645930
Total antigaytalist death

>>84646374
Because when discussing ethics, you HAVE to make that distinction. But like I explained before, it doesn't matter unless the homeless person CONSENTED to being killed because as a full human being, they have the ability to consent.

>is it fine for me to kill people without social connections

A baby that is born or a person is outside their mother's womb which means they have already made an established social connection.

>What do you mean "fully actualized consciousness"

A sense of self.

>I'm retarded.

At least you said it.

What is an "established life"?

A homeless person would have awarenss, memories, and they have grown into adulthood. I'd say that's an established life.

Are you gonna explain why killing an unconscious homeless person is the same as killing a fetus ethically?

>>84646422
And all anti-abortion arguments boil down to either "Hurr, why can't I kill living people then, huh? HUH?" and of course the underlying theme of "There's a ghost in embryos that a big invisible Jew put there and he'll be mad if you hurt that ghost."

False equivalency fallacy and plain old superstition.

File: 1778944718587161.jpg (93 KB, 1024x1024)

93 KB JPG

>>84646467
Killing people is wrong actually

A fucking fetus lacks the cognitive development, brain activity, and consciousness to experience the world or feel pain. In fact, they never had that ability before being aborted.

Saying killing a fetus is the same killing as a full human being is just dumb because there is no rational argument that can justify having that position.

>>84646466
>Because when discussing ethics, you HAVE to address a strawman!
Anon, just stop. It's fucking embarrassing. Let's try to move on?

>A baby that is born or a person is outside their mother's womb which means they have already made an established social connection.
... What? Can you tidy this up? Maybe get ChatGPT to turn your idea into a rational position? Why does being born "establish a social connection"?

>"fully actualized consciousness" = a sense of self.
Er, ok. I'll try and go with this - does a fented-out person have a sense of self? Does a person with retrograde amnesia have a sense of self? Does a person with advanced dementia have a sense of self? What does this mean to you?

>>84646467
>And all anti-abortion arguments boil down to either "Hurr, why can't I kill living people then, huh? HUH?"
Yes, but this is a rational position - I'll just clarify that we use the term "human", not "person", as personhood has been a notoriously bad marker to base moral value off, given how ill-defined it is.

>False equivalency fallacy
It's not a false equivalence - a fetus is alive, and human. I'm not sure why I'd be allowed to kill it, and you don't seem to be able to explain why, no matter how convoluted I allow the discussion to get.

I mean look at this shit, we're now at
>muh sense of self
>muh established life
>no, I wont google the glasgow coma scale and discuss consciousness with you, I'm just going to asspull more semantic nonsense!
>n-now it's being born! BEING BORN GIVES YOU UH... SOCIAL CONNECTIONS! That's the trait right there!!!!
It's fucking pathetic, genuinely.

>Are you gonna explain why killing an unconscious homeless person is the same as killing a fetus ethically?
I've explained several times that if you position is that present consciousness confers moral value, then neither party would have that trait, thus neither would have moral value. I really can't dumb this down further, anon.

>>84646490
Well, you shouldn't do it then.

>>84646498
But a third-trimester fetus has all of that.

Would you mind ceding on third-trimester abortion quickly? We can move on and address the rest, but I just need you to cede on this. It's ok, I promise.

You are rational, right?

>>84644882
Because modern medicine is a life-worshipping cult. "Do no harm" has been transmuted into "keep the patient alive at any cost". Why is this? There's probably multiple factors, but I'd say that a big one is that hospitals and doctors have targets that they are incentivised to avoid. If a hospital or even an individual doctor has a high rate of death of people in their care, they might suffer legal rammifications, lose trust of patients etc. That's not even considering private hospitals that are incentivised to keep you alive so that your family can keep paying for medicine/life support etc.

>>84646490
Actually there are many times that killing is right. Keep your wholesome chungus reddit batman philosophy to yourself.

>>84646532
>Because modern medicine is a life-worshipping cult. "Do no harm" has been transmuted into "keep the patient alive at any cost".
Again, this is just retarded nonsense.

Any doctor can sign a DNACPR form and slap it on your notes without your consent. They do this on a regular basis; that's half of geriatrics, and it's not uncommon in neonatology, either. There's an entire specialty devoted giving up on life-saving treatment and just making people comfy, including a paeds equivalent.

>Actually there are many times that killing is right.
Can you demonstrate a few so we can see if they apply to the fetus?

>>84646508
>Why does being born "establish a social connection"?

Are you retarded? Newborns make eye contact with and hug their mother. They fucking communicate basic needs through crying. They are likely to have other people around such as the father, extended family, and medical professionals.

>a fetus is alive, and human.
A fetus does not have a consciousness or sense of self and they never did before being aborted.

>I'm not sure why I'd be allowed to kill it, and you don't seem to be able to explain why

Explain why not with a rational argument.

>I've explained several times that if you position is that present consciousness confers moral value, then neither party would have that trait, thus neither would have moral value.

And then I explained why killing a homeless person that had a established life and consciousness before becoming unconscious is different from killing a fetus ethically. Again, you are free to come up with a rational argument for why this is incorrect.

If abortion is just removing a "clump of cells", why do women often cry and feel bad after getting one? Surely it should be no different than clipping your nails, or shaving right

>>84646508
>this is a rational position
>I'm much more rational, because I just am OK?
Oh, of course.

>It's not a false equivalence - a fetus is alive, and human
A. It's not "alive" by any metric anyone uses ever. We don't call chicken eggs "living chickens" for a reason. No one says "Want to meet my negative 8 month old son? He's a blob of stem cells in the blastocyst stage gestating in my wife's guts. We're very proud of his accomplishments."

B. It is very much false equivalence. There are rules against murdering living humans because you can't just go around killing whoever. It leads to chaos, revenge, war, it is an extremely anti-social behavior. If nobody gave a shit, if there was no leadership, no society, etc, yes you could go around killing whoever you wanted to all the time (but you would be bound by the same rules, someone could kill you just as casually).

A goopy blob of stem cells that the parents don't want isn't going to cause chaos, actually it will probably prevent it. Most shitty people were unwanted pregnancies from unfit parents. Just the simple truth. Go to a high security prison and ask the inmates about their relationships with their parents if they knew them at all.

Preventing losers we don't need from clogging up society is a good thing. We're reaching a point right now in reality when a bachelor's degree doesn't even guarantee you a job. 100k people just got let go from IT and coding jobs. And you want 80 IQ losers with no discipline wandering around looking for food and shelter? Let's see how that goes.

>>84646508
>A developing fetus does have the neurological hardware required for consciousness. The thalamocortical connections do not begin to form until around 24 weeks of gestation.

This is semantic nonsense, huh? If this is so, then why come up with a retarded hypothetical homeless person argument?

>>84644882
Because the parents need to milk their defective child for clout and you can't do that if the child is dead.

>>84646570
>making eye contact and hugging makes them valuable!!!!
But anon, what if they are congenitally blind? What if they have phocomelia? How you gonna hug your mummy with no arms?

>They are likely to have other people around such as the father, extended family, and medical professionals.
Can you explain how this confers moral value in any way? Is this like a binary thing, or do you get more morally valuable the more people know you?

>A fetus does not have a consciousness or sense of self and they never did before being aborted.
They are conscious in the third-trimester. Before we continue, I just need you to cede on third-trimester abortion, or asspull your next premise. You are a rational interlocutor, right, anon?

Note that I've offered on 3 separate occasions to discuss level of consciousness with you. It's really simple - I can explain GCS and fMRI to retards, I do this for a living.

>And then I moved the goalposts
I know, anon. We've spoken about this. I'm happy to address your nonsense sequentially, but I need good faith from you, and so far, I'm not getting that.

File: 1747481929522741.jpg (133 KB, 800x868)

133 KB JPG

>>84646616
>A. It's not "alive" by any metric anyone uses ever
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHA

OH NO

OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

There's no way! THERE'S NO FUCKING WAY LOLOLOLOLOL

>we don't call chicken eggs "living chickens" for a reason.
Yeah - because they're not fertilized you fucking ape.

Oh my GOD, anon. Are you even sentient? Holy FUCK LMAO

>>84646636
Do you know what semantics are? Do you know what an analogy is?

>>84646616
>A. It's not "alive" by any metric anyone uses ever. We don't call chicken eggs "living chickens" for a reason.
Embarrassing.

>>84646645
>But anon, what if they are congenitally blind? What if they have phocomelia? How you gonna hug your mummy with no arms?

Now who's moving the goalposts? And you didn't address the crying. Very convenient.

>Can you explain how this confers moral value in any way? Is this like a binary thing, or do you get more morally valuable the more people know you?

Fallacy of composition.

>I know, anon. We've spoken about this. I'm happy to address your nonsense sequentially, but I need good faith from you, and so far, I'm not getting that.

Yawn. You're still not explaining why killing an unconsciousness homeless person is equivalent to killing a fetus rationally.

>>84646689
>>84646666

Now I see you're resorting to samefagging.

>>84646616
Apologies, I only addressed the first component of your two-part argument.

>There are rules against murdering living humans because you can't just go around killing whoever.
Do you think that the law dictates morality in its entirety? So, in countries where abortion is banned, that's morally acceptable? Any law is morally justified?

>A goopy blob of stem cells that the parents don't want isn't going to cause chaos, actually it will probably prevent it.
Our declining birthrates are currently collapsing both our demography and the economy, anon. Even from a utilitarian PoV, your argument sucks dicks.

> And you want 80 IQ losers with no discipline wandering around looking for food and shelter? Let's see how that goes.
You literally did not know why a chicken egg isn't considered to be living, and thought this applied to a fetus. That's primary school biology. The worldview you are advocating for would most likely include killing you, as you are clearly retarded.

>>84646718
You're just that fucking stupid. Did you really not know the egg thing?

>Now who's moving the goalposts?
You are, but you're still missing. You've not explained why this gives an individual moral value, nor explained what would happen in the cases I've outlined where these events would not happen.

>And you didn't address the crying.
Does crying confer moral value?

>Fallacy of composition.
I'm asking you what gives a person moral value. You've given a composite, and I've asked which of these criteria must be met, and if individuals who cannot meet all of them have no moral value.

>You're still not explaining why killing an unconsciousness homeless person is equivalent to killing a fetus rationally.
Because both are living humans, and the act is not being performed in self-defense. That's my position. I genuinely have no idea what the fuck yours is, it's the most convoluted pile of dog shit I've read in long time.

>>84646616
>We don't call chicken eggs "living chickens" for a reason.
I can't get over how fucking stupid you are. I'm sorry, it's just hilarious!

>>84646551
>Can you demonstrate a few so we can see if they apply to the fetus?

If the kid will have a horrific mutation, life limiting condition, profound disability etc, I think that it is better for them to be aborted. You are stopping them from a life of pointless suffering, all the suffering of the parents and family around them, the financial ruin, the social ruin etc.

But to be clear, I would also support post-birth euthanasia of fucked up potato children too. I'm not saying that a fetus isn't alive. I think that third trimester fetuses are not far off of newborns, and I do think that people who are pro-abortion (even late term abortion) but anti-euthanasia (which is most people especially when you are talking about babies) have some kind of congnitive dissonance.

I don't. I wold support going full Spartan and chucking retard babies off of cliffs. If my wife gave birth to a retard baby, it would be getting a pillow over it's face not long after we got it home, or I'd just leave her.

>>84646739
>You're just that fucking stupid. Did you really not know the egg thing?

You're talking to two different people.

>Does crying confer moral value?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm not even gonna explain why you're a brainlet for typing this. I'm gonna let you figure it out for yourself.

>I'm asking you what gives a person moral value.

A fetus is not a person. I've already made that distinction. You've brought up homeless people and babies who have disabilities that prevent from being to see or touch. You have not provided a rational argument that explains why these are equivalent to a fetus.

>Because both are living humans, and the act is not being performed in self-defense. That's my position.

And that is fucking retarded. Which I've already explained why plenty of times.

>>84646749
>If the kid will have a horrific mutation, life limiting condition, profound disability etc, I think that it is better for them to be aborted. You are stopping them from a life of pointless suffering, all the suffering of the parents and family around them, the financial ruin, the social ruin etc.
>But to be clear, I would also support post-birth euthanasia of fucked up potato children too.
Grim, but consistent - which makes you the only pro-choice person in this thread with a triple-digit IQ. I wouldn't debate you in the same way, as our axiology is fundamentally different and we could never reconcile this. I would just double down on this point:

> I do think that people who are pro-abortion (even late term abortion) but anti-euthanasia (which is most people especially when you are talking about babies) have some kind of congnitive dissonance.
This is the issue I have. I can tolerate axiological differences. I can't tolerate the hypocrisy and moral grandstanding that comes from pro-choicers trying to have their cake and eat it.

I'll close by saying the reality for kids with PMLD isn't as grim as laypeople think it is. They're probably happier than you are, and I'd love in a bizarro world to meet up with you and take you to specialist school to see if you'd still feel the same way.

>>84646783
*from being able to see or touch

>>84646783
>I've already made that distinction.
You've pulled it out your ass with a hodge-podge of semantic bullshit, about crying, eye-contact, hugging, sense of self, and bunch of other shit I'm struggling to tie together. Your argument is a mess; I'm just trying to get to the bottom of it.

>And that is fucking retarded. Which I've already explained why plenty of times.
Again, you might think you've explained your position well - you haven't. My position was presented simply - it's a single sentence. Yours is convoluted as fuck, evolving over several posts, and I'd love for you to tidy it up and try again.

>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'm not even gonna explain why you're a brainlet for typing this. I'm gonna let you figure it out for yourself
Again, I'm asking you what makes an individual worthy of moral consideration. This is not a complicated question, but you don't seem to be able to provide a coherent answer.

>>84646788
>triple-digit IQ.

Something that you clearly don't have. It's because you are unable to provide a good argument for why you are correct.

>>84646788
People are retarded. There's genuinely people that think it's fine to rip out a baby like a month before it would have been born, killing it, but think that post-birth euthanasia is horrific murder, like whether the baby is inside a womb or not is the deciding factor.

>>84646809
>You've pulled it out your ass with a hodge-podge of semantic bullshit, about crying, eye-contact, hugging, sense of self, and bunch of other shit I'm struggling to tie together. Your argument is a mess; I'm just trying to get to the bottom of it.

I've pointed out the clear differences between fetuses and homeless people and newborn babies. Just say you're too stupid to understand and concede.

>My position was presented simply

And I simply explained why your position is retarded. All you're doing is giving me the run around.

>Again, I'm asking you what makes an individual worthy of moral consideration.

Explain why a fetus is an individual, equivalent to that of a homeless person.

File: pit2nr9v732a1.png (1.17 MB, 2560x1600)

1.17 MB PNG

Pro-lifers are dumb as fuck. This is just insane.

>>84646849
>I've pointed out the clear differences between fetuses and homeless people and newborn babies.
Are you doubling down on crying, eye-contact etc?

Ok, can you explain what we ought to do with a blind child with phocomelia and laryngomalacia? Do they not hold moral value?

Can you also just give me a definitive list of what is required for moral value? I've asked this half a dozen times now, and you just don't seem to be able to produce it.

>Explain why a fetus is an individual, equivalent to that of a homeless person.
Because they are a discrete human lifeform; without further context, these hold equivalent moral value. I want to be clear - my position is moral equivalency.

>>84646865
>actually, it's eye contact and huggies that give people moral value!
Kek. Come on, at least present some Judith Butler, you stupid nigger.

>>84646879
>Ok, can you explain what we ought to do with a blind child with phocomelia and laryngomalacia? Do they not hold moral value?

This child has consciousness. It is not the same as a fetus. And before you bring it up, being forced into unconsciousness by the use of drugs does not make it equivalent to a fetus.

And I see you're moving away from the retarded homeless person argument.

>Because they are a discrete human lifeform

You've conceded on the fact that a fetus is not equivalent to that of an individual. Which is makes everything you've said up to now completely worthless.

>>84646886
And here comes the racial slurs. I'm fucking white as snow. Haha.

>>84645994
Those microcepahalics are custom made to be beggers. Like there isn't enough inbred retards, begging gangs actually set out to deform babies to make them more lucrative beggars. Not even joking.

>>84646931
>This child has consciousness. It is not the same as a fetus.
A third-trimester fetus is conscious. It doesn't magically gain consciousness because it's removed from the uterus. I'm going to need you to cede on third-trimester abortion, anon. Also, the latter half of second-trimester abortion.

> And before you bring it up, being forced into unconsciousness by the use of drugs does not make it equivalent to a fetus.
No need - babies sleep alot. When asleep, I take it that it's fine to kill the child? Why not? Would you like to pull another premise out of your ass?

>You've conceded on the fact that a fetus is not equivalent to that of an individual.
Are you illiterate? I said they're morally equivalent. No offense, but I'm not discussing ontology or metaphysics with you. Stay on topic, please.

>And I see you're moving away from the retarded homeless person argument.
It's not an argument - it's an analogy. One that tests your argument, not mine. But yes, your argument is kinda retarded.

File: 1758725855859487.png (143 KB, 388x388)

143 KB PNG

>>84646931
>I'm fucking white as snow. Haha.
What an odd thing to say.

>>84644882
Cause if they don't they'll get sued for medical malpractice.

>>84644839
we just know

>>84646964
>No need - babies sleep alot. When asleep, I take it that it's fine to kill the child? Why not? Would you like to pull another premise out of your ass?

A sleeping baby can still process pain signals unlike a fetus, retard.

OH NO NO NO HAHAHAHAHAHA

>>84646964
I've already dismantled everything you've said so far and you know it seeing that you've conceded on the issue of whether a fetus is an individual so there is no reason to even keep going.

You're a typical pro-life retard and you've demonstrated that.

>>84646991
>n-no its not consciousness, actually it's processing pain signals!!!!
Ok, we'll move the goalposts again.

Note that you were stupid enough to word your argument as "process pain signals". That comes before consciousness, so now I need you to cede the majority of second trimester. Sorry, anon.

By the way - what should we do with kids with CIP? They can't process pain signals, and since that's your latest asspull, I guess fuck em, fight?

Do you think you're doing well?

>>84647025
>and you know it seeing that you've conceded on the issue of whether a fetus is an individual so there is no reason to even keep going.
If be concede, you mean state my position that a fetus is an individual, you might be right - this is pointless. You're an illiterate nigger who can't string a basic argument together, and while it was fun to watch you embarrass yourself for a while, it is getting boring.

As with most pro-choicers, you lack a consistent position and have no rational base to argue from. Read some Butler, I guess.

>>84644835
>"My name is Palpitator, Im a creature of pure headache".

>>84647040
>what should we do with kids with CIP

A sleeping baby still has a brain that sorts, generalizes, and consolidates daily experiences and sensory inputs into memory, buddy. No equivalence.

>>84647050
>If be concede, you mean state my position that a fetus is an individual, you might be right- this is pointless.

Thank you.

>You're an illiterate nigger

Still with the racial slurs.

>who can't string a basic argument together, and while it was fun to watch you embarrass yourself for a while, it is getting boring.

You just conceded on your main point from the beginning, idiot.

>Read some Butler, I guess.

>O-Oh no.
>Read this book, it'll prove I'm right!

>>84647100
Ahh, now it's some compilation of inputs that matters. Again, this applies from 24 weeks onwards, would you mind conceding on the third trimester quickly? And half of second trimester?

>you conceded your main point!!!!
Nice. Would you mind quoting the concession? Shouldn't be difficult, you can paste it after you concede on third trimester or pull the next premise from your ass.

2 hours in, and you still can't answer a simple question: what gives something moral value?

In all seriousness, this is getting boring. You are not the guy to debate for the pro-choice position, or probably anything, really. On some level, you must realize that, right?

>butler will prove me right
She's the eminent contemprary pro-choice ethicist. I was hoping by directing you to read her works, you might one day sound like less of a retard. Consider doing this.

>>84647149
>Nice. Would you mind quoting the concession?

Go back and figure out what you conceded on. In fact, check out how you backtracked and changed the goalpost.

>You are not the guy to debate for the pro-choice position, or probably anything, really.

Funny seeing that I made you concede and exposed you as a cock-sucking psuedo-intellectual who spams racial slurs when he gets you upset.

>R-read this book.

No

File: orb-of-confusion-spongebob.gif (922 KB, 498x372)

922 KB GIF

>>84646125

>Explain how killing a person with a consciousness and self awareness is the same as killing a fetus..

>I could, but I'm not going to yet

1000 posts later...

>Le fetus is still a lifeform!
>Le moral value!

>>84647224
Can you tell me what gives something moral value? Can you show me where I conceded? If not, I'm not going to to reply further.

Maybe you're not a nigger - but you certainly reason like one. You're the second dumbest person I've discussed this with - top placing going to the other anon (or You) for arguing that a fetus is morally equivalent to an egg, and that neither is alive.

You guys are worse than pro-lifers arguing from divine command theory. At least that's a coherent argument. Utterly embarrassing.

>>84647284
>>Le fetus is still a lifeform
Correct. A human lifeform.
>Le moral value
We're discussing moral value.

>>84647324
>>84647306

>Can you show me where I conceded?
>Literally concedes again with his next post

>>84647350
Do you not know what a concession is?

>>84646942
>Those microcepahalics are custom made to be beggers. Like there isn't enough inbred retards, begging gangs actually set out to deform babies to make them more lucrative beggars. Not even joking.
No, you're wrong.
Again, these people blame ANYTHING besides cousin marriage for causing this, including "Jinn."
Microcephalics are caused by a recessive mutation, and it's recessive mutations that cousin marriage unmasks.

File: 1714972362957003.jpg (53 KB, 720x565)

53 KB JPG

>>84644835
the gigaretards that make up the "prolife" movement really don't understand the importance abortion has in keeping a society healthy and safe

>"b-b-but it's murder n shieet
that doesn't mean it's bad
It's better to terminate a pregnancy than to spread disease and if you seriously can't understand that then you have a Sub-Saharan IQ
Especially if the child is just going to physically suffer every minute of their life

>"b-b-but it's heckin eugenics!"
Yes
And eugenics are a good thing and the world will only survive if world leaders stop being pussies and actually adopt programs regarding genetics that will without a doubt make their nations thrive

>>84644849
>taking folic acid not only inhibits you from absorbing folate but also doesnt get absorbed and treated as folate in the body
Only for a tiny minority with the MTHFR mutation.

>"Killing a fetus is the same as killing a person!"
>Is unable to prove why
>"Okay, a fetus is just a lifeform but it's the same ethically bro, trust me"

>>84648964
When you get down to their basis of their argument it boils down to
>This makes me feel bad
Even when they pretend to be altruistic it's really about what makes them feel good

>>84648964
he asked the guy how a fetus is different from an unconscious homeless guy or a guy in a coma or under anaesthesia.

the guy could not make an actual distinction

and personhood is not a good qualifying criteria, since the argument of "thats not a person" was and still is used to defend slavery

>>84649015
the basis of the pro abortion side bpils down to "it is inconvenient for me not to be allowed to kill my baby"

>>84649139
The basis of your argument is
I had to suffer Jeffrey Epstein and wage slavery so you have to too
There is no reasoning with you
Your entire worldview is
I cannot feel happy until someone else suffers arguing with you with rational arguments is like arguing with a trump supporter who makes 30k a year how a tax on billionaires is not an attack on him.

>>84644882
I'm a foid and I would abort all deformed babies. Even dysgenic children, straight to abortion.

>>84645283
Fuck you for taking over society. People like you should be curb-stomped.

>>84649139
>A fetus that was never conscious in the first place is the same as a unconscious homeless man

>the argument of "thats not a person" was and still is used to defend slavery

If you pro-lifers don't understand why comparing a fetus to a person is retarded, there is no point in continuing this discussion.

>>84649139
>how a fetus is different from an unconscious homeless guy or a guy in a coma or under anaesthesia
No developed cerebral cortex, simple as. It's also unable to stay alive on its own meaning it depends on someone else's willingness.

>>84645994
One of the most informed posts here.
Thank you. Also, fuck Muslims, I hate them.

>>84648964
Trying to sneak one in before bedtime, eh, faggot?

A fetus is a living human. A homeless person is a living human. You are repeatedly asking why killing a human is comparable to killing a human, which is the same as asking
>anon, why is a = a

The answer is that's the law of identity. I can't prove this to you, it's a logical axiom. You don't have to accept it, but if you don't, you also can't a make a logical argument about anything.

Also, you're a stupid nigger with no logical reason to believe the things you believe. Isn't that a little sad? I mean, who would want to be a nigger?

>>84649184
A third trimester fetus is conscious, anon. Before I dismantle the rest of your position, I just need you to consneed on third trimester abortion, really quickly.

It's ok, it's just a minor concession any rational interlocutor would make. You are a rational interlocutor, and not a fucking nigger, right anon?

>>84649184
>It's also unable to stay alive on its own
Do you think a neonate can do this?

>>84649331
what is the point of trying to argue with these people? there is no such thing as debate. they will not concede anything even if you pove it all axiomatically.

the only solution is to kill antinatalists

>>84649331
>A third trimester fetus is conscious
The overwhelming majority of countries don't allow third trimester abortions save for when it threatens the mother's life.

>>84649317

>A fetus is a living human. A homeless person is a living human.

I am not that guy, schizo. You already conceded that a fetus is not an individual, it is simply a lifeform.

They are not equal in regards to ethics unless you have a reason for believing otherwise beyond >muh feels.

You are retarded, sir.

>>84644835
>ce the beauty of life instead of aborting it
life fucking sucks already anon, and that kid looks like they have it a millions times worse, might as well of aborted her for her ownsake

>>84649348
A neonate is outside it's mother's belly and is fully conscious. Again, stop with the false equivalency.

Inb4 >B-But what about

>>84649383
Great. To clarify, I did offer to address the rest of your position. I just first need you to concede or at least acknowledge that a third trimester abortion would be morally wrong, or offer more premises as to why this isn't the case, beyond consciousness.

Again, this isn't a big deal. It just demonstrates to me that, unlike the other retard shitting this thread up, you are capable of reasonable discourse.
>>84649413
>You already conceded that a fetus is not an individual, it is simply a lifeform.
Why don't post that quote from me, really quickly? Shouldn't be difficult, right?

>>84649432
Can it stay alive on its own, anon?
>i-its not the same!!!
Are you really this stupid, anon? Is moving the goalposts your only argument?

I have to ask, dude: are you actually pro-choice? You are making the position look so laughably bad that I'm considering going full schizo and playing devil's advocate to avoid further second-hand embarrassment. You cannot argue for shit, and you have to be aware of that on some level... Right?

>>84649459
>>84647324

>Correct. A human lifeform.

Dude, you keep flip flopping. You embarrassed yourself this entire thread.

>These two things are equivalent even though I already admitted they're not!

I'm starting to think you're trolling.

>>84649490
just because 6 retards at a time flung the same 3 shitty and already dismantled arguments at him doesnt mean they won you retard.
this isnt high school. read through the fucking thread, every single person who tried to debate him on the topic moved the goalposts 3-4 times then said "durr youre retarded my opinion is obviously correct" and stopped responding

File: 200.gif (347 KB, 192x200)

347 KB GIF

>Why don't post that quote from me, really quickly? Shouldn't be difficult, right?

>Correct. A human lifeform.

>>84649490
Stating it is a human life is not stating it isn't an individual.

Have you ever been screened for a learning disability? I'm dead serious - this isn't normal.

File: images (5).jpg (4 KB, 220x195)

4 KB JPG

>A fetus is an individual

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
OH NO OH OH NO OH NO
NOOOOOOOOO

>>84649516
>it's a human life
>HAHAHAHA GOT EM, YOU CONCEDED
Anon, you claimed that I conceded a fetus isn't an individual. Would you mind quoting me on that?

I can't really "concede" that a fetus is a human life. That's already my position.

File: jordan-laugh.gif (3.76 MB, 320x284)

3.76 MB GIF

>>84649562
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
MY SIDES ARE IN ORBITTTTTT

>>84649516
>>84649562
>>84649580
Spam a few more, anon. Maybe is you spam enough, people won't see you spent most of the day in this thread and couldn't string a single coherent argument together.

>>84644968
They break the hippocratic oath every time they mutilate a troon.

>>84649614
Nobody swears the Oath, and that's a shame. It forbids both surgery and medical abortion, which is pretty based.

This guy just claimed an unconscious fetus, integrated into a gestating body, that lacks the ability to feel pain or awareness is an individual. There is no reason for me to keep posting and I will be leaving this thread.

Lesson learned: Pro-Lifers are retarded and they are motivated completely by muh feels.

>>84649655
yeah retard we read the thread, youre the 5th or 6th guy that sperged out and left the thread after not being to make a coherent argument against the doctor guy.

>>84649655
>This guy just claimed an unconscious fetus
Anon, I'm just gonna stop you right there, as this would only apply until the middle second trimester, so before I shit on the rest of your argument, I just need you to consneed on third trimester abortion, really quickly.

It's just a minor concession, nonny. Really, amobo te, just cede this and we'll move on.

>>84649655
Lesson learnt indeed.

>>84649655
>>84649885
>integrated into a gestating body
While I eagerly await your concession on the subject of third-trimester abortion, I'll address this, as it's a common misunderstanding. The fetus is not "integrated". It's actually quite neatly separated from the mother, and interfaces with her anatomy through the placental syncytium. If you biopsy this region, you can see a really cool separation between the mother's cells and the fetus's. This is why I couldn't concede on the fetus's individual nature earlier.

>lacks the ability to feel pain
Response to pain develops early in the second trimester.
>awareness
Mid second trimester. By 20 weeks, there are adults in ITU and probably homeless dudes in your high street with a lower GCS.

Since this is your current asspull - that the ability to feel pain + awareness + is an individual bestows moral value, I have to ask: If I run into conjoined twins with an SCN9A loss of function mutation causing CIP, and they fall asleep, is it ok to kill them? What about the GCS 3-4 dudes in ITU - can I kill them? I'm not sure why they'd have moral value in your worldview - can you pull another premise out your ass to explain that?

>>84649992
I seriously hope you and people like you never take over society. I am the second person you are responding to, not the first one. We're different anons. And you just admitted yourself that a fetus isn't conscious in your own post.

>>84650029
>We're different anons.
You can see how someone might mix you up, though, right? I mean, I argue that a 20-week fetus is more conscious than adults from various examples, and from that, you've somehow extrapolated:
>And you just admitted yourself that a fetus isn't conscious in your own post.

It's natural that I'd mix you up with the person who read - and even quoted - "[a fetus is] a human lifeform", and concluded that I was stating a fetus is not an individual.

But maybe I am just arguing with the two stupidest people on this subreddit.

>I seriously hope you and people like you never take over society.
Then you really need to do better, anon. I suggested you faggots read some Judith Butler earlier, maybe then you could string a fucking argument together.

Seriously - no cap - I'm trying to help you out, here. If you two are exemplars of the pro-choice movement, you guys are absolutely fucked.