>>34270433
i understand if you cant get over the abortion part, but youre weird if you want to be with a woman who killed your baby.

>>34270440
definitely don't want to be with her, I miss the good parts about her but when the switch flipped it was monstrous.
we didn't have to stay together but i would have raised our baby, I don't think I even would have cared if she just up and vanished and left me to deal as a single dad, I wanted to be a dad.

>>34270433
That's the reason abortion is considered sin and murder you know. Turn the page.

>>34270445
im truly sorry about that man, id be devastated too if i lost my child. i hope you find a high value woman who treats you well and can give you children. id say just try and move past it, its a tough thing to go through but theres nothing you can do now besides try again with a better woman. but i get it if you wouldnt want to, if i was in your position id be wary of it happening again.

>>34270433
You give her too much understanding. You also blame yourself unnecessarily.

>I totally get her being scared and wanting freedom and independence.
She's a coward, through and through. Fact is having a kid is scary for everyone, but only a few people will use their base emotions as a motivator to kill the unborn. Their fear is no excuse.

>My happiness just fueled her sadness, I probably looked demonic or something
Do you really think demons symbolise joy and parenthood? They don't. They symbolise misery, insanity, suffering, and death. Demons also despise anything to do with self sacrifice, happiness, and joy. Your ex-GF was the one resembling something demonic, not you. And she proved that when she allowed the killing of the unborn child.

>Did everything she could to "get back at me" for "what I did"
Vengeance seeking, killed your kid to spite you.

>Last I saw her she decided she was a lesbian
Typical. Either she's a mental headcase or she done got possessed by the demonic spirit of Lilith or something.

Either way none of what happened was your fault, she chose to destroy life in the womb, the one place in life that should be the safest space in the Universe for developing humans and she had the fetish dismembered and pried out and killed. She did that, that's who she is.

Don't mourn what could have been with a woman who showed you to your face that she's bound for Hell.

>>34270433
>It's been about a decade and I still get torn up over it.
NGL that's really pathetic.

>>34270433
Well, I have some unfortunate news for you anon. Your girlfriend is not an incubator nor was she obligated to have your baby. If you really think having a family leads to fulfillment, you're wrong. It comes from within yourself. Not a wife or a child. No one is entitled to life either, not even your unborn child. There are many children in the world who are forced into terrible lives, yet you decide to have sympathy for a nonexistent person. Talk about delusional. It's not as if your child is special. They are worthless like everyone else. Their existence would've caused everyone around them more pain than joy. I actually laughed when I read this post. Cope harder.

Oh, and that "baby" was a parasite.

>>34271413
>Well, i have some projection for you anon. Your girlfriend is an incubator and she didn't want to incubate. My family life was horrible and my parents didn't love me. So I became a narcissist who fakes self love. Yet I will paradoxically claim no one is entitled to anything, here is me whining about children forced into horrible lives. Yet here I am calling them worthless and being the type of person who makes other people miserable. I say babies cause everyone around them more pain than joy, yet I am the anon who laughs at other people's suffering as I live.

That's what you really said. Imagine projecting your own sick self onto some stranger's problems. Especially when you show you are the parasite who makes other people's lives worse by your existence, like writing what you wrote. The next time you make an attempt on yourself, follow through.

>>34271421
You're one to talk. OP said he would have subjected his hypothetical child to a single-parent household if it meant he could be happy. Men love to complain about single mothers, but are quick to celebrate single fathers. The reality is that love is not enough to guarantee a child's happiness nor does it ensure their needs are met. People like you who have had perfect childhoods assume that happiness can be spread through reproduction. His ex-girlfriend bestowed mercy upon that child by aborting it. It should not have to suffer because of the choices its parents made.

>>34271521
No, go and take two flying fucks to yourself. I did not have a good childhood at all, but I do not victimise myself for it or project misanthropic venom like you do. You talk about suffering yet it's you who perpetuates it by spitting poison into other people's sorrows whenever you can for who knows what reason. And you have the gall to wax bullshit about self-love when you demonstrate there's nothing to love about yourself based on how you talk to others. Whatever 'self-love' you profess to have 'within' is forfeit.

>>34271528
Telling someone that an aborted fetish does not matter is much more evil than intentionally bringing about a child in a dysfunctional family. Right.

>>34271542
Yeah let's talk about dysfunctional families seeing as how you are from one yourself, and how I am too. Game knows game after all. Do you think that the dysfunction is only contained within family? Or rather, can a dysfunctional person exist to cause and spread dysfunction to others around them, beyond just family?

The answer is the latter obviously. People from dysfunction will spill their bullshit onto other people as often as breathing. You get born in poison, you speak poison that's how it works. And that's what you do, by the way, and also why I find your position to be like a shotgun to your own head. Because unwittingly you argue for your own abortion, your own suicide and your own death. Take your logic to the furthest most conclusion and you will realise that is exactly what you are doing.
>Having a baby in dysfunctional upbringing is bad
>Because it means the baby will suffer from dysfunction which is bad
>Because baby will become dysfunctional adult which is bad
>Baby should have been aborted, should have died, to spare the suffering and prevent cyclical dysfunction repeating

If you are someone born from dysfunction yourself then all you are arguing for is your own destruction which you've never carried out for some reason. Nor should you, by the way. I admit your posts anger me but I'd rather not genuinely tell you to go kill yourself. But you need to realise how fucking silly you are when you've so far wasted your own suffering on misanthropy of all things. Because it's a total insult to yourself. You know why?

Because the people who fucking killed your innocence, who made you endure dysfunction, they did it so easily because they share that exact same mindset you have. You have become the very thing that ruined you. Wise up and stop being a fool.

>>34271563
I would have preferred to be aborted if it meant I was spared from my suffering. You should be happy your child did not have to experience a low quality of life. What do you do instead? Cry about how you missed out on a personal gain because it was aborted. You make me sick.

>>34271639
You still can't see the critical errors in your own perspective.

>I would have preferred to be aborted if it meant I wouldn't suffer
So answer this: Why haven't you committed suicide? I do not suggest you should, but you should know you can undo the 'mistake' of your own existence even now. Yet you have not, why?

And here is your other fatal error:
>What do you do instead? Cry about how you missed out in a personal gain because it was aborted. You make me sick.

First off you were made sick a long time ago let's be clear. And secondly, there is nothing wrong about considering another human to be a personal gain.

The reason why you suffered and exist so miserably as you do is because no one considered you to be valuable enough to qualify as something that adds to their life. You are no one's personal gain, you were instead made to feel like another person's burden, mistake, regret, and problem. That's why your life sucked so hard, no one told you that your life was a blessing to be added to their own. You were instead branded as accursed.

And that's the type of monster OP dated, the person you defend for some reason. You attack the type of person who objectively resembles opposition to the shit that gave you pain.

Again, you argue for your own poison. Are you blind?

>>34271670
Anon, you are making a lot of assumptions. I was born to someone who wanted me despite knowing what sort of life I was going to have. OP knows that his child might have suffered, yet he cares more about HIS OWN happiness rather than that of the child. My mom does not consider me a mistake, however, I consider myself one of the many mistakes she made in her life. If you truly do believe love is enough to ease all suffering, go ahead. You cannot deny that his child evaded a life of misery thanks to his ex. I would much rather extend my sympathy to an actual existing child than one who can potentially exist.

>>34271696
Yeah you don't think that's obvious to me or anyone else? It was obvious from how you ran the "men always hate single mothers" angle and how you attack OP but defend his miserable baby killing ex. Because OP is the man, and he resembles the one who hurt you and momma. Aka your big fat father issues. And his ex has a vagina and you automatically run to defend anything with a vagina. Even if that vagina is behaving like your father.

You're blind. And yes I can deny the child evaded a life of misery. Because the child was denied a life of joy, too. Because in order to know joy or misery, one must be alive first. Can't do either when you're dead. Can't even mature into wisdom and turn suffering into joy through process of survival and redemption, can't do anything at all because some selfish narcissistic 'self loving' lesbian ex decided it was far better to have forcerps dismember you and pliers crush your fetal skull in the womb and to vacuum you out and become dumped into a 'medical waste' bin.
Your priorities are all fucked up. But that's par for the course with dad issues.

>>34271710
I'm okay with that. It's nonexistence only affects the person who viewed it as merely a possession. Who cares if life is also filled with joy? Suffering outweighs joy. Whatever happiness that child may have had experienced in the future would be unable to replace the pain endured in the past. It would need to work for what it's parents should have provided in the first place. No amount of effort would be able to relieve the emotional anguish of a terrible upbringing.

Also, Keep in mind that the child could have been born dead or miscarried before birth. Their existence was only a possibility, not a guarantee. You cannot force her to have a child either. You're not in the position to bear or care for an infant, therefore you don't have the right to judge her actions. I truly don't understand this obsession with defending beings who do not even exist.

>>34271756
>Suffering outweighs joy
Speak for yourself.

>No amount of effort would be able to relieve the emotional anguish of a terrible upbringing
You don't make efforts, that's why you remain exactly as you are.

>Their existence was only a possibility, not a guarantee
Bad logic. By that measure, your continued existence is only a possibility, not a guarantee. Tomorrow you could die if an aneurism.

>You cannot force her to have a child either
Nope. But she could have forced herself to be accountable and responsible and not have fucked someone she didn't actually love (she only loves herself). Also would have helped if she didn't lie about being straight when she was in fact a lesbian. Though with people like her, they don't care, they enjoy using others as means to an end.

>You're not in a position to bear or care for an infant
You absolute idiot, I have a child. I just finished changing their diaper 20 mins ago and kissed them good night.

>I truly don't understand this obsession with defending beings who do not even exist.
I suspect your idea of existence is as broken as everything else you've spoken. You've never been a parents so you don't know. Long and short of it is babies have brain activity by 6 weeks in the womb. All womens pregnancy tests only detect until 2 weeks in pregnancy. Most women find out weeks after the fact. Chances are the baby was around 6 weeks, had brain activity, she killed it. Probably way after 6 weeks mark too.

The being exists, fool. If it did not exist, there's be no being to abort. Think for five seconds before typing

>>34271803
She does not have to take accountability for a child that is not physically present, especially if it only exists as a bean in the womb. She had the right to abort the child if she so pleased. You want to project their morality onto the world, but it does stop us from ripping a fetish from the womb. I could care less if your a parent. You guys are judgemental pieces of shit who only advocate for the existence of the child, not their quality of life. I could honestly care less as I plan on sterilizing myself. Your own perception of a child's identity does not even exist until it is born. A fetish does not even have the capacity to sense or experience, and as it develops, very minimally. If a fetish died in the womb, the person it may have became does not exist because it was unable to form an identity for itself. And on a technicality, a fetish is considered a parasite because it relies on its mother as a host for sustenance. You're incredibly biased. No one cares about your retarded baby. Fuck off.

>>34271834
>She does not have to take accountability for a child that is not physically present
But it is physically present, you absolute fool. Do you know what physicality is? What matter is? What flesh and bone is? It's physically present in the womb, hence why doctors have to dilate the cervix wide and shove cold physical sharp objects up there to cut the physical baby into pieces to pull out of the vagina. You physical idiot.

>It does not stop us from ripping a fetus from the womb
Yeah I know. But someone needs to remind you of what you are. For example, you are able to assuage your conscience by weakly using the word 'fetus' instead of 'baby'. Because the word fetus is medical, dehumanises the baby just enough to help you feel better about yourself.

Fetus is Latin. Translates it means "child". So you just said "it does not stop us from ripping a child from the womb."

>Only advocate for the existence, not quality of life.
You don't care about the quality of life. Don't lie to yourself. If you understood or respected quality of life, you'd know in order for quality to be created you have to allow it to begin. Aka, leave the fucking baby alone.

What you mean by "quality of life" isn't the child's quality, but your own. You think the child will negatively impact your quality. That's what you're all about at the end of the day, 'self fulfillment' as you said earlier. Egotism cannot allow the concept of finding joy through self sacrifice of caring for another. That's your curse, that's your problem. You know it kills you, it's why you wish for death. But for some stupid reason you can neither give that to yourself or even fight through your own suffering and become stronger than it. That's for you to figure out.

But in the meantime, refrain from spitting on others and laughing at their pain, you sick twisted fuck.

>>34271852
And why shouldn't she find fulfillment through satisfying her own desires? Why does one need to sacrifice themselves for another in order to feel fulfilled? Although we are the same species, I do not consider myself equal to that of the baby. I actually have an identity of my own which was cultivated throughout decades. Nor do I care if the baby is made of matter. It cannot live outside of the womb, therefore I do not consider it a person. I will continue to laugh at the suffering of others. I will celebrate abortion and death. You cannot stop me from engaging in this behavior. Anyone should be able to choose whether or not they want to be a parent. You should stop projecting your biases onto other people. No one gives a shit if you're a parent. Parenthood is not an achievement. It is not worthy of celebration. You are merely partaking in a biological instinct. And you know what, I hope the dismembered remains of your kid gets flushed down some shitter.

>>34271852
>hence why doctors have to dilate the cervix wide and shove cold physical sharp objects up there to cut the physical baby into pieces to pull out of the vagina
My brother you don't even know how abortions work yet you have this super strong opinion about it.

>you are able to assuage your conscience by weakly using the word 'fetus' instead of 'baby'. Because the word fetus is medical, dehumanises the baby just enough to help you feel better about yourself.
Incorrect. We use different words because they're two different things. A fetus is not a baby. A fetus is what comes before a baby like a seed is what comes before a tree. A seed is not a tree. You're using morally loaded language to poison the well of an argument that you have built solely on your emotions.This reminds me of that viral moment where a guy goes around with a picture of a dolphin fetus and tricks a bunch of pro-lifers into calling it baby because they have no argument for why we should treat a clump of cells like a fully formed human being, just moral brow beating.

>>34271891
Just a word for the wise - the bodily autonomy argument is just not super compelling. It breaks down once you introduce the concept of the who. The real argument is that a fetus is not a person. It has no conscious experience therefore there is no "who" being harmed during abortion. Like a human body with functioning organs and no brain isn't a person. Its just meat. We consider someone dead not when their heart stops but when their brain stops. A brain dead person no longer is given moral consideration because there is no "who" there. That's why we families to unplug them. If that's when personhood ends that when personhood also begins. We all understand that intuitively so all this "but you're killing a child!" nonsense just doesn't map onto the reality of what we understand about giving somebody moral consideration. You don't have to justify terminating a fetus before the age of 24-26 weeks. Before that point there is no conscious experience. There is no who. You could terminate a billion of them and there is no harm being done to a person of any kind because there is no person there.

File: qurkchungus.webm (3.51 MB, 1920x1080)

3.51 MB WEBM

>>34270433
I bet she was a quirkchungus!

OP Your misery is your own fault

I'm not even going to get into the whole abortion right/wrong thing. If he wanted a kid he could just have had a kid.

>I don't think I even would have cared if she just up and vanished and left me to deal as a single dad
Except
> I really wanted to have something with her
>I totally get her being scared and wanting freedom and independence
Trying to have your cake and eat it too.

>I probably looked demonic to her or something
The word you're thinking of is Deadbeat

>I wanted to be a dad
Humans tend to judge their own past actions with their current morality lens. Smells like nothing but regret

>>34271912
>The who argument

NTA I'm the other anon they are arguing with. The "who" argument also has a flaw. Human beings can lack a "who" while being alive and fully conscious. It's a real psychological phenomena that affects people with personality disorders for the most part, sometimes people with autism. No core self identity, only using mirroring mechanisms and mimicking strategies to fake a functional personality.

If we apply your who argument we can say it's absolutely moral to kill them as they live, because for all intents and purposes there's no one there.

Also newborn babies don't develop strong identifiable personality traits until at least 3+ months in. Can we kill them?

>>34271894
>Fetus is not a baby
I can't wait for you to knock some girl up and when she tells you "were having a baby!" I want you to correct her and say "erm actually we're having a fetus."

Also the seed analogy sucks because the fetus would not be the equivalent of a seed. Your semen would be the equivalent, fool. And the womb would be the soil. If you wanted to be a turbo pendant you'd say the fetus is a sapling. Which is a lifestage of a tree, so your analogy is bogus my "brother".

Speaking of comparisons most people don't consider eggs to be chickens, but they will consider bald eagle eggs to be bald eagles. That's why if you go and smash them in the wild, it's a federal crime. But if you smash up some fetus in the womb, apparently that's OK. A funny juxtaposition.

If we abort a 3 month unborn baby? Not murder. But if you kill a pregnant woman you get charged with double homicide. Wow what a weird contradiction, it's as if legality ≠ morality or something and if you're a thoughtless herd animal who can't think for itself, you'll conform into absurd beliefs like thinking human fetuses are seeds.

>>34271891
>And why shouldn't she find fulfillment through satisfying her own desires?
She should but she failed miserably at that. If she actually respected herself and understood her own desires, she'd have known she did not desire a baby and would have not opened her legs. People who demand to pursue their desires are admirable only to a point. They cross that point the minute they get in a knot and desire to retroactively undo former desires without consequence, then they stop being admirable and become contemptible, because it shows their core definition of 'desire' is based on nothing but self-consumption. To no one's surprise they always wind up to be miserable people.

>Why does one need to sacrifice themselves for another in order to feel fulfilled?
Without insult to you, ask your mother. She did that for you after all.

>I'm not equal to a baby
So what? $1,000 is not equal to $100. But both have their value. Just because something or someone is not equal to you does not automatically mean they are to be stripped of innate value.

>Baby cannot move outside the womb therefore not a person
Some problem can't live outside their parents basement. Some people are in a coma and can't move outside of life support. Being dependent on someone else does not revoke humanity. I'd ask you if you'd see sense if your mother had suffocated you in sleep as a baby since babies need milk or they die, but knowing you you'd say "it would be preferable".

>Laugh at the suffering of others, celebrate abortion and death
A pity. You're free to do that, but every time you do you become more like whoever it was who fucked you up.

>Stop projecting biases onto other people
So stop entering threads to mock and gloat at someone else, hypocrite. You whine about judgemental people yet the first thing you did when entering the thread was pass judgement.

>>34270433
>anon had one (1) girlfriend 10 years ago, has never attempted to get another one, and is still hung up on her
Yeah, no shit.

>Recently I had this sudden shock like I saw a vision of myself with what could have been, I saw her and our child and it just got to me.
No you didn't, you retard. What you had was a continuation of the same maladaptive daydreaming you've been doing every year since she left you. IMAGINE wasting the entirety of your 20s because your gf got an abortion.

You could have met someone new, gotten married, and had multiple children in the time you've spent refusing to learn a lesson from your literal first adult relationship.

>>34271834
Your phone has autocorrected "fetus" to "fetish" every single time almost as if it's speaking your subconscious for you.
You're a demonic, sociopathic, pleasure fueled freak.

>>34270433
NGL from your post you didn't really seem to care much about her and what she wanted, you just seemed to care what the baby would do for you personally.
I'm not surprised she got upset and left, or even that she aborted it frankly. You seem sort of narcissistic and I think at some point that became clear to her.

>>34270452
Thank you, I've attempted to date since then but nothing's worked out really and not in the "I just can't do this because I'm too emotionally fucked up" sort of way, more like the
>what the fuck is wrong with these people
kind of way. 90% of women I've gone out with since also turned out to be fervent bisexuals.
Anyone I've met since just wants either a fling or some excitement to shake up their boring married life and I'm sick of it. Even my guy friends are all in long term relationships or married and they just won't shut up about how much they hate it, they see me as some liberated single bachelor but it's not by choice.

>>34270468
>possessed by the demonic spirit of Lilith
I'm into occult studies and mythology so I've actually made that comparison myself before. Strange how some people even in this thread see me the same way she did; some demonic, evil narcissist that just wants to force a woman into being a broodmare. I didn't force her to have unprotected sex with me.

>>34272241
How does wanting to take care of our child make me a deadbeat?

>>34272368
What lesson was I meant to learn, then, Swami?

>>34272660
How old are you people? You talk like some 20 year old armchair psychologists throwing around overused words like "narcissist" and projecting your own limited experience onto my experience as if I'm the person who hurt you. I'm not shocked the lot of you are actually acting JUST LIKE HER
Needlessly vindictive to the first person who presents an opportunity to lash out your unresolved anger at your parents.
Just like anon said above, you're projecting your own fucked up, warped sense of self onto an experience that has nothing to do with your own.

>>34271521
>People like you who have had perfect childhoods assume
Good god almighty, the stewing anger and resentment that must be within you to project that onto a random thread is insane. Just this automatic assumption that everyone had it better than you despite you being born in a first world country.

>>34272679
And this is a pretty narcissistic response kek. I didn't diagnose you as a narcissist, just said you're coming across as narcissistic. Which is true, you are.

Sorry dog, but the fact that her unhappiness and disagreement was an inconvenience for you looks like a red flag to me. As well as her cutting you off and getting aggressive soon after. You are on an anonymous advice forum, if you're looking for a hug box to validate you then you shouldn't be posting threads here.

>>34272274
>Human beings can lack a "who" while being alive and fully conscious. It's a real psychological phenomena that affects people with personality disorders for the most part, sometimes people with autism. No core self identity, only using mirroring mechanisms and mimicking strategies to fake a functional personality.
Not really. If you're talking about personality disorders then there is a "who" there but their conscious experience is just fragmented or altered. If you're talking about severe autism there is still a "who" there but, again, their cognitive functions are just altered. A severely disabled non-verbal person is still a who. They still have a conscious experience even if their ability to communicate or process stimuli is diminished. To make it easier to understand, we can have a conversation about the cognitive functions of disabled people or people with personality orders but that is a completely separate and wholly incomparable to a person who is brain dead and incapable of experiencing any outside stimuli.

>Also newborn babies don't develop strong identifiable personality traits until at least 3+ months in. Can we kill them?
Personality traits aren't conscious experiences. The human body develops the parts of the brain and necessary nerve bundles to begin projecting a conscious experience at around 24-26 weeks. They can experience pain, fear, happiness, curiosity, anger etc., They can touch, process, interact with and be aware of the world around them. They are aware that they are a thing that is experiencing regardless of their ability to communicate this. That is what a "who" is. No. You can't morally kill newborns.

>>34272296
>I can't wait for you to knock some girl up and when she tells you "were having a baby!" I want you to correct her and say "erm actually we're having a fetus."
This makes no sense. The point of saying "We're having a baby" is to refer to the end product. A fetus eventually turns into a baby but saying "We're having a fetus" doesn't make any sense. By the time she gives birth it isn't a fetus. Its a baby.

>Also the seed analogy sucks because the fetus would not be the equivalent of a seed. Your semen would be the equivalent, fool.
It doesn't matter how far back you want to take it in the developmental process. The point is that a thing is not the thing it will eventually be. A seed is not a tree. A pile of lumber and nails is not a house. A caterpillar is not a butterfly. Choose whatever analogy you want the concept remains the same.

>but they will consider bald eagle eggs to be bald eagles
An egg is not a bird.

>That's why if you go and smash them in the wild, it's a federal crime. But if you smash up some fetus in the womb, apparently that's OK. A funny juxtaposition.
The reasoning for the two things are not even remotely comparable. The reason we decide to preserve certain bird species is for the optimal preservation of natural spaces not because we morally value bird lives. The law is to protect the environment, not birds. We kill 25 million chickens in the U.S. every day.

>If we abort a 3 month unborn baby? Not murder. But if you kill a pregnant woman you get charged with double homicide. Wow what a weird contradiction
Its not a contradiction. The reason its entirely different from abortion is because abortion is a consensual procedure. Also, a lot of states don't recognize in fetuses as people so not even your argument is settled consensus.

>you'll conform into absurd beliefs like thinking human fetuses are seeds.
You haven't given a single reason why a clump of cells should be given the same moral consideration as a conscious human being.

>>34272998
>To make it easier to understand, we can have a conversation about the cognitive functions of disabled people or people with personality orders but that is a completely separate and wholly incomparable to a person who is brain dead and incapable of experiencing any outside stimuli.

Experience of outside stimuli is not what makes a life, a life. You can decapitate a dog at the head and artificially pump blood and oxygen into the severed arteries and if you hit surrounding surfaces with a hammer, dog’s ears twitch in response. Its eyes flicker open and closed etc. Give it lemon juice and it will lick its lips bitterly, even though the dog is dead and decapitated.

>They can touch, process, interact with and be aware of the world around them. They are aware that they are a thing that is experiencing regardless of their ability to communicate this. That is what a "who" is. No. You can't morally kill newborns.

Do you have any idea how many animals fit those boxes too? Yet we hunt them for game or kill them for food and it’s morally fine. I am not trying to devalue human consciousness in the womb, but I still think the notion that what makes a human is their consciousness is absurd. Consciousness isn’t exclusively human. It’s also not stable and persistent, it can be lapsed in and out of. Placing the moral marker at consciousness leads to dumbass positions. A human is a human is a human, we dont need to dissect down into consciousness or petty sophistry to know this.

>>34273014
>You haven't given a single reason why a clump of cells should be given the same moral consideration as a conscious human being.
You’re the reason. Those clump of cells are what you’re made of, only more grown and developed. Your body started from somewhere and without your body you’d have no consciousness to enjoy. If you spit on your own genesis, it means you either hate yourself like the psychotic misery anon from before, or you are extremely jaded and dont care.

>>34272679
>I'm into occult studies and mythology so I've actually made that comparison myself before. Strange how some people even in this thread see me the same way she did; some demonic, evil narcissist that just wants to force a woman into being a broodmare. I didn't force her to have unprotected sex with me.

Yeah I know how it goes, I used to be into occult shit myself. Lilith, the harpy jezebel demonness who convinces men to become gooners and women to become rug munching lesbians. Asmodeus, the two-faced egotist wyrm who convinces women to become whores and men to become pillow biting homosexuals lol.

Demon or not, fact is your ex had her mind made up long before the abortion, long before she met you. Her wires were already crossed, her mind already dissociated into self sabotaging mush. But she mislead you into believing she was somewhat stable and you hoped for the best and it had consequences, you missed the red flags.

Humans are special and we are all innately valuable, but we’re not too complex or hard to understand. Your ex gf hated her own mom, or her mom hated her or otherwise didnt give a fuck about her daughter. Your ex gf hated her own femininity, yet deeply desired to have what she was denied: womanly love from mom. But she can’t get that, so she obsesses over the next best thing: fucking a female.

She hated the idea of motherhood because it would mean resembling her own mother who fucked her mind up. So she aborted and ran off to go lick carpet.

>>34273048
>>34272679
>continued from the demon point

Is your ex a demon? possessed by one? influenced? Doesn’t matter. Because whether you believe in their existence or not, one thing is clear: People choose them. She made her choices, and those consequences will catch up to her, either in this life or the next. Sadly for people like her, it happens in this life mostly. Because these types of people anon, they’re mostly made up of compulsion. They cannot separate feelings from reality too well, they’re aren’t rational, they feel the first tinge or lick of influence from psychological pressures and they jump and chase at self sabotaging impulses like a dog humping a leg.

Your relationship was doomed right from the start, you didn't see it is all. You couldn’t see the fact she wasn’t actually an adult woman, she was a fucked up broken kid wearing the skinsuit of a adult human woman. Her body just piloted by autopilot lalaland compulsions.

People like this are out there, in great numbers too. About 1 in 5 of all people give or take. There are many of them, the living dead. There was nothing you could have done, you cannot save them or raise their spirits into wakefulness. They are rigged to move a certain way, and when you see the pattern, thats what they do without fail. She was always going to leave and abort your kid. If it wasn’t you, it wouldve been some other guy’s tragedy.

Thats why you should move on, mate. The person you thought you loved never existed to begin with. Go and find someone else, someone who lives, who has actual life behind their eyes and meaning behind their words. Go and marry and make merry, have children, give yourself to their happiness, make sure the next generation gets to know joys you never had and reap the pleasure of many good memories. Forget about her, anon.

>>34273040
>Experience of outside stimuli is not what makes a life, a life. You can decapitate a dog at the head and artificially pump blood and oxygen into the severed arteries and if you hit surrounding surfaces with a hammer, dog’s ears twitch in response.
I don't care about life. I care about personhood. There's plenty of things that are alive that aren't people and don't get moral consideration. If I hook up a heart to a bypass machine and its pumping and alive it isn't a person. You could have an entirely functioning human body with all of its organs intact and operating but if there is no brain it isn't a person. There is no "who" there.

>Do you have any idea how many animals fit those boxes too? Yet we hunt them for game or kill them for food and it’s morally fine
I don't care about the conscious experiences of animals.

>I am not trying to devalue human consciousness in the womb, but I still think the notion that what makes a human is their consciousness is absurd.
You're mixing up terminology. I don't care about what is human. I care about what is a person. If I cut your finger off and put it in a jar its still a human finger. There's living human cells inside of it but its not a person. A permanently braindead body is still a human but there is no person inside of it.

>Placing the moral marker at consciousness leads to dumbass positions.
Like what? Give me an example.

>You’re the reason. Those clump of cells are what you’re made of, only more grown and developed.
This is still not a reason. A thing is not the thing it will eventually become. I am glad I am alive but the key phrase there is "I". If my brain had never been formed I would have absolutely no opinion about my "genesis" one way or another. A thing that never existed can't suffer the loss of anything.

>>34272807
>her unhappiness and disagreement was an inconvenience for you looks like a red flag to me
NTA but how is this narcissistic? Isn't it just caring about the other person's opinion?

Well the only thing to do now is track her down and kill her, I'm afraid

Text her and mock her about the.abortion. thats what I did. She called me crying lol

>>34273146
>I dont care about life. I care about personhood.
So egotism then. That’s more or less what you’re driving at. Whether or not you perceive a negative connotation on what I suggest is up to you. You’re an egotist by definition of your values. You think the human consciousness is the sum of all intrinsic value.

Personhood isn’t static, I hope you under this much, anon. Who you are now is not the same persona/ego as 10 years ago. And wont be the same 20 years from now. Personality is always in flux. Personality can also be greatly altered and twisted very easily, with drugs or traumas. Other humans can deliberately program it too over long term strategy. By wholly putting all your value in personality, you pen yourself into a very precarious box.

>Like what? Give me an example.
Eugenics for one. You know for a fact there is no consensus on human consciousness absolutely. You know its still a field very much undergoing research, study, and contemplation by our thinkers. Its not fully understood, not close. You may designate valid consciousness at 26-28 weeks, someone else says its only valid if you are (x) amount of IQ. Or if you possess inner monlogue or imagination or not. The dumbass position is relativism, thats where it always leads. Which lends itself to eugenics extremely easily.

>>34273170
Never her. Only him.

>>34273177
>So egotism then. That’s more or less what you’re driving at. Whether or not you perceive a negative connotation on what I suggest is up to you. You’re an egotist by definition of your values.
Absolutely not. My values align perfectly with the modern understanding and social conceptualization of life and death. The modern conceptualization is that a person is gone when the brain is gone. Even if all other organs are functioning perfectly fine medically, and socially, we consider that death. The person is no longer there. The brain is the ONLY part of the body that cannot be replaced and the "you" to still be intact. My conception of when person hood begins tracks one to one with the modern conception of when a person ends.

>Personhood isn’t static, I hope you under this much, anon. Who you are now is not the same persona/ego as 10 years ago. And wont be the same 20 years from now. Personality is always in flux. Personality can also be greatly altered and twisted very easily, with drugs or traumas.
Personality and developmental changes during the course of one's lifetime has nothing to do with consciousness. Even if my brain were to stop developing at 2 years old and I was permanently disabled I would still have a conscious experience.

> By wholly putting all your value in personality, you pen yourself into a very precarious box.
I put no value into personality. Personality is not a conscious experience. The character of one's conscious experience is not the experience itself.

what a woman-brained way of thinking. worry about getting your dick wet with new pussy faggot, not some dead baby and dyke ex

>>34273177
>Eugenics for one. You know for a fact there is no consensus on human consciousness absolutely. You know its still a field very much undergoing research, study, and contemplation by our thinkers. Its not fully understood, not close.
The logical fallacy in this argument is the notion that because there is a blurry line between one thing and another that a delineation can't be drawn. Google "Loki's Wager". Essentially the God Loki makes a bet and if he loses he says the winner can take his head. When he loses he tells the winner "You can only take my head but none of my neck" and because the winner cannot draw the EXACT line where his head ends and his neck begins he gets to walk away intact.

The moral of the story is just because I can't draw an EXACT line where consciousness ends and begins does not mean there isn't a clear, qualitative difference between someone who is conscious and experiencing the world and someone who isn't. The difference between a robot body with a human brain and a robot brain with a human body is still easily understood and accepted. One is a person and one is not. Everyone understands this intuitively even without a complicated ethical framework. Needing to pinpoint the exact cells that contain consciousness is not necessary at all to accept this delineation.

>You may designate valid consciousness at 26-28 weeks, someone else says its only valid if you are (x) amount of IQ.
We could have that argument but I would still win. We don't consider someone dead when their IQ drops below a certain level. We consider them dead when their brain functions cease. It isn't legal to unplug someone from life support because their IQ is too low. All of our societal lines of moral consideration map perfectly onto my conception of the beginning and end of personhood.

>>34273104
>>34273048
Thank you for that, anon. screenshotted for future reference when this starts to get to me again.

This is such a strange board
>>34273149
They're either a bitchy, cunty female or psychopathic troon that just wants to shit on any man who doesn't hate himself. Nothing about what OP said was narcissistic.
This board tends to attract rejects from other boards since it's the most like plebbit.
They think 4chan is about being needlessly cruel because they don't understand how their retarded actions and shitty opinions warrant ridicule. There's dangerously low levels of self awareness.
So they reflect/project that sense of rejection or perceived cruelty they feel is unjustly directed at them onto people they morally or politically disagree with.
They can't see how their opinions could be onesided, biased, or outright wrong so they think everyone deserves the same treatment they received for speaking what they consider an incorrect, invalid, or unpopular opinion.