Why do so many people act like she’s the devil for aborting their child
>>153371719Culture War Bullshit.
>>153371719Because abortion is evil.
>>153371719Because turns out killing babies is pretty fucking evil.
>>153371719I don't know anon, why would society at large ever assume killing innocent children is a bad thing?
>>153371719Why do you want to talk about abortion in the first place? It's a superhero show.
>>153371719That plot element is why I had no interest in reading Invincible. I like heroes to be heroic and not mangle a tale of heroism by mixing it with evils most people are numb to.
>>153371719What the fuck is wrong with you that you think killing kids is anything but wrong?
>>153371719....because she is
Boy the responses in this thread are totally natural and not astroturfed.
>>153371719because she is. if you are missing the obvious reason why, then you are not mentally mature enough to even ask the question.
>>153371719We all had hopes that kirkman would cut this from the show because it was far and away the absolute worst part of the comic and there was just no point to it.
>>153371765I wish secondaries understood the context of Image Comics and 90's/2000's comic book culture before yapping about muh edge and muh wokeness.
>>153371809>nooo 4chan is supposed to be a place of hedonists, queers and kiwifarms posters!! Those people have a better time in a closed forum, not an open one.
make another thread on iti'm sure you'll get your answer
>>153371832>I wish secondaries understood the context of Image Comics and 90's/2000'sI see, you graduated in the reddit university.
>>153371891At least I have reason to believe that anon graduated.
>>153371891Keep whining that the comic made to be transgressive is transgressive. That doesn't make you the exact same as faggots on twitter at all.
>>153371940>transgressiveIt's concentrated moralfaggotry with gore on top.
>>153371719Because Gamergate.
>>153371930It's fine if you find your graduation inside a cereal box and brag about shit without making a point.
>>153371719...because she is.Killing kids is a very bad thing anon, I should not be the one to tell you this.
>>153371719Not ask Mark on it before doing is a massive dick move.The whole "oh it's my body i do what i want" bullshit doesn't work if his sperm was inside her too.
>>153371719because she's a literal superhero with powers who can create shit out of nothing which means she would never need anything, be homeless or hungry, she has friends and family who would help her raise the kid, and even as a single mom, she'd do alright raising the kid because believes in justice and shitthere was literally no objective reason to abort, and her arguments about it nothing to do with her body, just her stupid woman feelings. life and death is about logic and objectivity and real morality, not your fucking feelings
She could have told Mark about the pregnancy, instead she got the abortion without him knowing jack shit. It's a decision you should only make with your partner's full support.
>>153372221He was gone for 10 months.
>>153372193Couldn't she just make up a kid through molecules too?
>>153372387Yes....and?
>>153372387Then she never loved him, you just kill the last bit of legacy your partner left. Decades to settle down and a boring ass soap opera for nothing, just running around it but never reaching it.He should fuck the nigress and that's it.
>>153372426even if she could, she couldn't make a kid WITH someone else
>>153371719Because abortion is a satanic ritualThe people we trust the most (others and doctors)Killing the most helpless and innocent people(unborn babies)Then the bodies are ground into paste and used to (supposedly) Make barren spinsters look younger so they can keep larping as teenaged sluts beyond their expirery date.
>>153371719stop making new threads and use the ones that are already up
>>153371830It would be a good point to highlight how irresponsible and selfish eve is, but the point of feminism in writing is to portray women as irresponsible and selfish while all the characters around them pretend they aren't.>HOW COULD I DO THIS TO YOU?!
>>153371719Eve is basically a god so a baby inconveniencing her life when Cecil would help support it as its a future Viltrum nuke for Earths protection is just silly and a woman moment.
>>153371830The retcon arc is worse. It's not even close.
>>153372387Every moment the Viltromites weren't yet levelling Earth was one reason to believe an active resistance against them was still active, and Mark likely alive.
>>153372450>He should fuck the nigress and that's it.Amber would have aborted it too and then lectured Mark about it.
>>153372193It's a case of them telling on themselves. They can't help it.They had total control over eve and her circumstances and chose to write a character who supernaturally had NONE of the cliched excuses for moralizing an abortion. She has less of an excuse than is physicslly possible in real life to have. And all they could(all they felt they needed to do) was have her say "I don't want to" and that was it. She's justified, Mark is guilty, oh and btw Satan is a cool dude with a tiktok vocabulary (Jesus doesn't exist though. lol)
>>153372649For all we know she had several abortions and just didn't mention it because she doesn't beleive she needs to.
>>153372649How do humans even reproduce at this point?
>>153371719its literally a pebble in the mountain of shit that she does to make her unlikable
>>153371719She is.Thank you for your attention on this matter.
>>153372666trips of truthmore sixes
if it was weak enough to die from an abortion then it clearly wasnt viltrumite material.
abortion is necessary to keep the black and mexican population down.
Mark is a cuck, it's good to breed him out of the genepool.
They might have a point.
>>153372760Were Mark or Eve either of those things?
>>153372836Anissafags were always right
>>153372193>>153372666This is how you know it's a director inserting their own beliefs into the product. Woman moment which is an obvious decision by woman director who wants to force some more>Fuck yeah MY body!bullshit that continues to ignore the whole murder for fun aspect to it all. I'm sure she is still waiting for the Fuck Yeahs and Yass Queens on twitter right now.
>>153371719>comics/western animation still suffering from the "MORE MELODRAMA (read relationship drama) MEANS MORE MATURE" problemI DONT CARE ABOUT RELATIONSHIP SLOP I DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR DEAD BABY IT DOESNT MAKE ME CARE FOR THE CHARACTERS SAFETY THERES WAY BIGGER PROBLEMS GOING ON JUST FUCKING PUNCH SOMEONE ALREADY
>>153371719Abortion is a discourse dumpster fire since the late 20th Century and the 2000s. Its gotten worse ever since relationships between the opposite sex has gotten worse due to the later forms of feminism.
>>153371832It was a shit plot point then and a shit point now.
Abortion being THE women's issue of our lifetime is hilarious to me
>>153371719Because she is monstrously evil for doing so
>>153372836ANISSA IS MINE ANISSA IS MINE MARK IS TOO MUCH OF A FAGGOT FOR HER I SHALL GIVE HER 50 SUPER KIDS
>>153372618I always hated the abortion arc more, but fat Eve made people ignore it. At least Eve getting a space BBC can be defended by Mark possibly being dead, and Mark's masochistic moralfaggotry that likely consists of "Robot crashed out, killed tons of people, and took over the world over getting cheated on; we must be better men!!1!!"
>>153372760Mark and Eve aren't even those lesser races, so its extra bad
>>153373321The problem for me is it felt like an excuse for a timeskip with added misery. I would have rather had a regular timeskip.The abortion thing never really meant much except for Eve getting fat, which led to Architect Mark, which is funny.
>>153373276How exactly is>You know, maybe women should not kill children so they can continue being vapid drug addict whores well into their 40san "issue" in the first place? Seems like it is 100% understandably wrong to anyone that is even remotely civilized and likes to continue the whole concept of civilization.
>>153371719https://youtu.be/XAOt-OJACEg
>>153373234Yeah, the second feminism added the argument>Hey I want to be able to freely kill people whenever I want because women's rights!they sort of lost any pretext of being a helpful movement.
>>153371765>Why do you want to talk about abortion in the first place?Because the show made a point of bringing it up.
>>153371719Killing Mark's baby was pretty bad, especially when she knows Debbie would've given her all the support in the world. She raised Oliver for fucksake.
>>153373505Sorry i forgot the show is preachy bullshit.
>>153373234it didn't start as a discourse dumpster fire. birth control used to not exist, women can die and have serious complications in childbirth, women shouldn't be forced to remain in destitution or perpetuate cycles of destitution and it's her body her choice>>153373479you dipshit. you're ignoring the facts that a) it's about a super hero who has powers and has no reason to about and b) feminism today has changed for the worse. feminism was absolutely necessary in the past but its modern feminism that's shit because women's situation has vastly improved but they're still women who screech and take things for granted. cuckman is a product of that but you're mischaracterizing how feminism started
>>153373427Because our ass backwards polarized society has decided the only acceptable options are>ABORTIONS FOR ALLor>NO ABORTIONS FOR ANYONEinstead of allowing for a reasonable moderate position that discourages needless abortion but which acknowledges there are some medical, ethical, and financial circumstances where termination of pregnancy is a moral and responsible option, ie>ABORTIONS FOR SOME, MINIATURE AMERICAN FLAGS FOR OTHERS
>>153372387>My partner is dead>better kill off his legacy and end his bloodline for goodShe thought he was dead and decided to get rid of the last living memory of his existence, a viltrumite mind you which they might need to resist the other viltrumites in time which granted is a slim hope but she had every reason to keep the kid and chose to kill him because "hurr durr" I'm not ready which is also retarded on its face when she can transmute anything she would ever need and had Debbie's support.
>>153373427>ermagerd civilizationthere's more than 8 BILLION with a B humans. civilization's problems have nothing to do with too many people and everything to do with corruption and class consciousness
>>153371765>Why do you want to talk about abortion in the first place? It's a superhero show.It's a superhero show. Why is there an abortion in it as a plot point?
>>153373568>there's more than 8 BILLION with a B humansHow many of them are in the West?
>>153373601>the cold war keeps third world countries impoverished>capitalism wins, so social programs and education takes a hit, but humans keep reproducing>conservatives continue to vote for pro-war, pro-israel politicians who start wars, humanitarian disasters and refugee crises on purposewell if it isn't the consequences of capitalists' actions
>>153373648>It's Capitalism's fault China and India have billions of people, therefore there's no problem with abortions in a superhero cartoon where the woman can break the laws of thermodynamics
>>153371719Why is the animation so poop despite the ginormous production budget per episodes?
>>153373746>china is capitalist and right wing>india is capitalist and right wingyes, dumbfuck
>Tell them how you killed our baby, Samantha"
>>153373427How is a zygote without brain activity a child?
>>153373760>>china is capitalist and right wing>yes, dumbfuck
>>153373775It is an immature human which is a descendant of another human.
>>153373775I don't know, look in the mirror.
>>153371754>>153371787>>153373796Let me rephrase: A embryo is not the same as a baby.Is it immoral to pull the plug on someone who has lost brain function?>>153373801ad hominem
>>153373427Because they literally have NOTHING ELSE LEFT
>>153373755Celeb voice actors + North Korean slaves + a studio change after season 1 + wanting to come out yearly to stay relevant since Invincible is an old ass comic.
>>153373825begging the question
>>153373760Kirkman's hackery not aging well at all leading to such low-quality bait is how things will be for the next few years of this slop
>>153373879RadomAcc#213 has a point
>>153373876how is that begging the question?
>>153373825>Let me rephrase: A embryo is not the same as a baby.
>>153373928Did you mean to add anything else to the quote?
>>153373941No.
Is this begging the question:>A cat is not a dog.
>>153373825>Is it immoral to pull the plug on someone who has lost brain function?If you know with certainty they're going to GAIN brain function after a specified amount of time then yeah that's pretty fucking immoral.
>>153373953>>153373955alternately, Is this begging the question:>An old man is not a young man.
>>153373969Is creating brain function where there was none previously inherently a moral act?
>>153371748>>153371754it's been nice seeing /co/ have its head on straight.>>153373825https://www.straightdope.com/21343918/when-does-human-life-begin
>>153373955>>153373970>Likening the debate to a predetermined conclusion you have yet to prove that you want to assert as a premiselmao. Begging the question fallacy.
>>153373560>NO ABORTIONS FOR ANYONEThis one is the only acceptable answer, thnk you.
>>153373551birth control has always existed, silly. You can make condoms out of intestines, and before we drove it extinct, the pill existed in the form of an herb (thought to be the source of our 'heart shape').This was also used to kill a developing baby, and it was also normal and common to just kill babies up to a couple years old. Basically universally. That's why the catholics got a bug up their butts about birth control: for all of history it was synonymous with open infanticide.
>>153373560Except that there is no reasonable moderate position of >kill babies because...just kill the babies CHUD!It's not a position to take at all, anyone humoring it is not human and should not be listened to. It's actual, factual evil.
>>153371719she is
>>153374004>>Likening the debate to a predetermined conclusion you have yet to prove that you want to assert as a premiseExplain how I did that. Be specific.
>>153373551>feminism was absolutely necessary in the pastOkay now you're just living in a fucking fairytale world.
>>153374014>Birth controlBro the lack of knowing what a UID is and that Eve could have just made one at any time and dissolved it when she wanted kids is how you know this plot was written by a man that doesn't talk to women.
>an embryo is not a baby.Did you know that during baal worship ceremonies the mother was not allowed to cry or show emotion while her baby screamed out in pain from the flames burning it alive?I suppose telling yourself lies like this helps you stay stonefaced to collect your shekels.
>>153373427Because they won every other cultural victory they wanted to win. They got everything. At this point women have more rights and more privileges in modern society than men and it's still not enough. Now they are demanding privilege over life and death, and they are going to keep on taking more and more and more beyond that.
>>153374043Your entire premise is "a fetus is not a human." Do you diagree?
>>153374004What makes something like an embryo, a zygote, or a fertilized egg the same as a newborn child?
>>153374089Is cancer human? What makes something human?
>>153374090I didn't ask you to ask me a question, I asked you if what I stated was your premise. It's a simple yes-or-no answer that you did not give.
>>153374067There is a ritual for abortion in the bible:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_bitter_water
>>153373984You don't have a responsibility to create a living, thinking being but if you know the natural processes at play are gradually building one and terminate it partway through then that's evil. That's a human being that could've had a life, and you robbed them of it because you didn't want to take responsibility for your carelessness. I think adoption and the foster system do need way, waaaaay more attention and care if abortion is restricted however.
>>153374089I said it doesn't have brain function (well, before a certain point). I didn't say it doesn't have human DNA.
>>153374116>Dude cancer is totally the same as a baby bro
>>153374139>hebrew bible>hebrewInteresting.
>>153374151>but if you know the natural processes at play are gradually building one and terminate it partway through then that's evilWhy is that evil?
>>153374163Answer the question. What makes something human?
>>153374172Bruh read the rest of the sentence since >>153374139 clearly didn't.
>>153374163>DUDE, A lump of flesh without brain is THE SAME AS A SENTIENT INFANT
>>153374139We already knew that big noses were baal worshipers, tell me something new rabbi.
>>153374158Nobody asked you if it had "human DNA." We're asking you if it's a baby, or a form of legitimate human life.Stop trying to motte-and-bailey
>>153374130did you respond to the wrong post?
The better question is: why is Kuckman obsessed with incompatible species?
>>153374232Yes, but >>153374158 got it anyway
>>153374228Define legitimate human life. This isn't a motte and bailey. you haven't defined a word that has a vague meaning or multiple possible meanings in this context.
And, just like that, /co/ began to care about the rights and morality of lines on a page (or, rather, on a screen).
I'm not too big of a chud but i agree with them, 100% when it comes to this issue, robert kirkman cannot right melodrama for the life of him. Whenever its shoved into the story it ends up being so ass, the abortion stuff, the whole amber stuff, monster girl's son arc, even paul(though the adaptation did make him more edible) it just feels really out of place to go from world ending story to 'mark i killed our baby when you were in space getting raped and gaped by thragg feel bad for not giving me attention' from pig eve. Also kinda funny seeing the abortion defenders in the thread admit that a drug addicts life means nothing. >>153373276child sacrifices were just ancient planned parent hood. women are naturally drawn to killing their kids. its in their dna
>>153374248>This isn't a motte and bailey. you haven't defined a word that has a vague meaning or multiple possible meanings in this context.To elaborate, this is why I specified human DNA, rather than making an assumption on how he defined humanity.
>>153374228You "allegedly" have human DNA but obviously don't have brain function.
>>153374243Don't their species just abandon their kids after a few months anway? Am I misremembering that?
>>153373427Children of unwilling parents should not be born (yes, men should be allowed to force women to get abortions), and neither should children with deformities and disabilities. More abortions is the way to go.
>>153371719Who cares, it's her body her choice at the end and the people who think she's evil for it haven't exactly been making the smartest, prudent decisions the last two years so
>>153374304More fuel for the baby furnaces you say?
>>153374116>Is cancer human?Yes, same as any other human tissue (when it occurs in humans). It's not "a" human.
>>153374287Yes.
>>153374249PIXELS THEY ARE CALLED PIXELS
>>153374248Shifting the burden of rebuttal.You're implying that action towards something (the murder of a fetus) is the default state instead of inaction (letting it germinate). This is backwards causality because it places the responsibility on the norm to justify a deviation. For abortion to be moral, (you) must then justify when human life begins, which pro-abortion parties can't agree on, since even though the first trimester is generally seen as reasonable (due to the lack of most vital organ forming yet), there have been people that have proposed and believe in abortion up to, and I will quote, "post-birth." This makes the distinction for when it's okay to kill what's recognized as a human inconsistent and unsafe to discuss due to the nature of "progressive" ideology encroaching on receded grounds.TL;DR: You deconstructionist approach fags can't decide on when it becomes life either, but you still want to kill babies even after most people would consider it no longer just a "fetus."
>>153374353Pixies*
>>153374249yes people are judging the thought processes and morality of characters in a story or even the writer behind them. Welcome to any discussion about fictional works
>>153374277Wow anon, you're so clever you rehashed a joke said 48 posts ago
>>153374200>What makes something human?Membership in the genus Homo, traditionally defined by traits such as bipedalism.
>>153374370Hiding your stupidity with big words fails to impress anyone.
>>153374400Thanks, I spent a whole minute devising that ragebait just to piss you off. Glad it worked :3
>>153374370>Shifting the burden of rebuttal.Asking you for your definition of a term is not shifting the burden of proof.>You're implying that action towards something (the murder of a fetus) is the default state instead of inaction (letting it germinate). That's not the default state. The default state is it dying.The mother hast to actively choose to eat in order to sustain the fetus (and her self).>This is backwards causality because it places the responsibility on the norm to justify a deviation.That's not what backwards causality means. >there have been people that have proposed and believe in abortion up to, and I will quote, "post-birth."How common is this? How common is it compare to people who are against abortion even when necessary to save a mother's life? >This makes the distinction for when it's okay to kill what's recognized as a human inconsistent and unsafe to discuss due to the nature of "progressive" ideology encroaching on receded grounds.What's the significance of people disagreeing about when it's morally justified?Can we compare that to other areas? Does it matter that people disagree when violence is justified in self defense?
>>153374370>For abortion to be moral, (you) must then justify when human life begins, which pro-abortion parties can't agree on, since even though the first trimester is generally seen as reasonable (due to the lack of most vital organ forming yet)There are also arguments that don't care about that:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_AbortionThe last one, the people seeds argument, seems like something you'd see in a comic book.
>>153374537You could call a baby an oreo for all I care, it's still a baby. I don't give a shit about any of this justification crap, murdering infants is murdering infants. End of discussion.
>>153374406I'm sorry you dropped out of middle school, but the adults are talking.Still, for the sake of lurkers, I'll rephrase: You fags can't agree on when a human life begins, but you still want to be the ones to call the shots on when it's okay to end a pregnancy. You've already encroached past the "first trimester" cutoff and started trying to justify post-birth "abortions". Ralph Northam came under fire for that when he brought it up in the case of babies born with physical deformaties, and Canada's laws already have legal wiggle room for normal, third trimester abortions.
>>153374537>The mother hast to actively choose to eatAnd this is the default state of affairs.>How common is this?Historically? Super common. Infanticide happened all the time.
>>153374427>I was pretending to be retarded
>>153374583>People can't agree when "self defense" is justified, but they still want to have the right to kill people when they feel threatened.
>>153374620>People can't agree when "self defense" is justified,Sure they can. At an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. I haven't seen a self-defense standard that's been articulated to the point of policy that's different from that.
>>153374595>And this is the default state of affairs.What makes it the default state of affairs? People don't get nutrition unless they actively take action to eat food. If default state of affairs is the one that occurs most often, does that mean abortion would be the default state of affairs if most pregnancies were aborted?>Six out of 10 unintended pregnancies end in induced abortion.https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion
>>153374672>Sure they can. At an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. I haven't seen a self-defense standard that's been articulated to the point of policy that's different from that.You clearly don't know anything about self defense laws if you think there's no difference in policy. Some places require you to flee before you can use self defense. some will consider it a crime if you use more force or better weapons than the attacker.>great bodily harmThis is a very subjective thing as well. It's not even necessarily required. You can be kidnapped without being harmed and totally justified in killing your kidnappers and escaping as well in many places.
>>153374604Okay baby murderer.
>>153374675>What makes it the default state of affairs? People don't get nutrition unless they actively take action to eat food.And since the mother in question has been doing this for decades, that is the default state of affairs. That's what those words mean.>does that mean abortion would be the default state of affairs if most pregnancies were aborted?No. Consider the word "abortion". It is an intervention at a particular point to stop something which is ongoing. You abort a rocket launch which would have otherwise continued. You abort a mission which would have otherwise continued. You abort a pregnancy which would have otherwise continued.
>>153374722>Some places require you to flee before you can use self defense. some will consider it a crime if you use more force or better weapons than the attacker.Quote the policy in question if you think it disagrees with what I said.>You can be kidnapped without being harmed and totally justified in killing your kidnappers and escaping as well in many places.You could be justified in killing the kidnappers either for apprehending a personal threat (self defense) or by taking measures to stop a felony in progress (not self defense, and applicable to many non-self-defense situations).
>>153374733>And since the mother in question has been doing this for decades, that is the default state of affairs. That's what those words mean.So if the person had been getting abortions for decades, would that be the default state of affairs?>No. Consider the word "abortion". It is an intervention at a particular point to stop something which is ongoing. You abort a rocket launch which would have otherwise continued. You abort a mission which would have otherwise continued. You abort a pregnancy which would have otherwise continued.Starvation is an ongoing process, We eat food and it stops us from starving which is something that would have continued otherwise.>>153374675Also many pregnancies end in miscarriage. If we include implantation of fertilized eggs, its probably a majority.>It is estimated that as many as 75 percent of fertilized eggs fail to implant, often without the woman’s knowledge.https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/health-and-medicine/miscarriage
>>153374537>Asking you for your definition of a term is not shifting the burden of proof.I said "burden of rebuttal," not burden of proof, and justified my case. You're being dishonest.>That's not the default state. The default state is it dying.What? Abortion is the default? So humans just had abortions until we started giving birth?>The mother hast to actively choose to eat in order to sustain the fetus (and her self).Very retarded pedanticism to try to force some kind of gotcha instead of addressing the point.It's not even a good one. By that exact same logic, it's okay for me to go out onto the street and stab someone because they're inevitably going to die anyway. Just ignore the knife!The comparison doesn't work because you're conflating the end result of a conscious decision with the natural end of life.>How common is this?Canada already has laws that allow for third trimester abortions.>How common is it compare to people who are against abortion even when necessary to save a mother's life?You and I both know that those cases are a very small minority, and most pro-life advocates are generally okay with these exceptions. That is not what you want though. You disingenuous cockbags try to frame it as an issue of women's rights and a choice in the pregnancy; by the very label of "pro-choice" you concede that this is a motte-and-bailey.>What's the significance of people disagreeing about when it's morally justified?>when it's morally justified?Hey, look, a circular argument, this time out in the open and completely unapologetic!You're not morally justified, though. You're using "it's morally justified" to try to prove that it's okay (and thus morally justified)!>Can we compare that to other areas?No. Do not try to change the subject just because you're losing this one.
>>153374780https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/society/20180110/koreas-self-defense-law-nothing-but-a-name
>>153371719I'm sorry, babe. You were gone for ten months. I had to kill your pet baby snake.What? He was just a few months old. Not even sentient. Why are you overreacting?
>>153374620How was Eve's abortion "self defense" you faggot?
>"My body" my choice>A fetus "is not a baby"The two big pro abortion arguments have something in common. These are not logical arguments. This is dehumanization, just like every genocidal maniac in history has done to their targets. There is no use in arguing against people like that all you can do is call them out on their bullshit and continue to call the targets of this atrocity what they are... babies.
>>153374782>So if the person had been getting abortions for decades, would that be the default state of affairs?If a woman needs to get abortions for decades, she's by necessity needed to get pregnant first. By its own premise your hypothetical is nonsensical.God, the worst thing this abortion subplot did was embolden you dumbfuck redditfags to come out en masse and start retarding-up the board.
>>153371719Why do women think killing children in their wombs is not evil>
>>153374782>So if the person had been getting abortions for decades, would that be the default state of affairs?No. An abortion is a specific intervention, not an ongoing state. Pregnancy is an ongoing state. Its end is a specific event.>Starvation is an ongoing processAnd the end of starvation is an event. >We eat food and it stops us from starving which is something that would have continued otherwise.In that case, yes. Eating food can end starvation. But starvation is not something most people experience. Most people eat food regularly, which maintains the ongoing chemical processes that underlie normal metabolism. A regular diet sustaining a regular metabolism is an ongoing state, and any particular meal makes little difference to the ongoing state because a normal diet involves regular meals.
Throughout history, women have always wanted to kill their children, especially if they're inconvenient for them.
>>153374791>>What's the significance of people disagreeing about when it's morally justified?>>when it's morally justified?>Hey, look, a circular argument, this time out in the open and completely unapologetic!That's not a circular argument. You are an illiterate fucking retard.
Imagine being male and still wanting to be heterosexual. Women are worse than demons at this point.
>>153374912almost right, women who have given themselves up to lust have always wanted to kill their children. It's almost like something happened around the 1970s that changed the goals of women from seeking a stable loving home life to partying and fucking around.
>>153374816I didn't say eve acted in self defense. I didn't say abortion was self defense either. My point is just because a lot of people disagree about when something is or isn't justified, that doesn't mean it's never justified.
>>153374801>https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/society/20180110/koreas-self-defense-law-nothing-but-a-name>Under the law, people are allowed to use force to “prevent unjust infringement of one’s or another person’s legal interest,” as long as there are reasonable grounds for that act and the degree of force does not go beyond reasonable bounds.So that agrees with what I said earlier. It's just that, in practice, self defense is illegal because authorities decide that actual self defense cases which obviously qualify by the stated policy do not actually qualify.
>>153374931>>>What's the significance of people disagreeing about when it's morally justified?>>>when it's morally justified?Even in your strawman you make yourself present a circular argument lol.Midwit, we are arguing whether or not it's morally justified period. You cannot use "it's morally justified" as backing for when you want to say abortion is morally justified. That is a textbook circular argument you absolute smoothbrain
>>153373825>Is it immoral to pull the plug on someone who has lost brain function?If your loved one is essentially brain dead, but you know for certain that they'll be awake and perfectly healthy in less than nine months, then yes. Pulling the plug is fucking murder.
>>153374881>If a woman needs to get abortions for decades, she's by necessity needed to get pregnant first. By its own premise your hypothetical is nonsensical.How does that make it nonsensical?Is it it impossible for the default state of something to change?
>>153374972Because occasionally people murder other people I should be allowed to shoot whoever I want in self defense.
>>153374912yupthis is why everyone treated them like retarded whores
>>153374984Dude, Are you ESL or are you genuinely a subhuman fucking retard?
>Conservatives when talking about abortion: MUH HECKING SANCTITY OF LIFE YOU’RE KILLING CHILDREN>Conservatives when talking about defunding school lunches for impoverished children: FUCK KIDS THWY DESERVE TO STARVE>Conservatives when doing universal childcare; NOOOOO FUCKING COMMIES HOW DARE YOU HELP WORKING PARENTS >Conservatives when talking about foreign wars started by US: LOL IT’S BASED THAT WE TARGET SCHOOLS AND MURDER CHILDRENAnti-abortion people are always hypocritical dipshits who only want to grandstand and pretend they’re morally superior despite being hypocrite
>>153374993>If your loved one is essentially brain dead, but you know for certain that they'll be awake and perfectly healthy in less than nine monthsThese contradict. Brain death can't be recovered from.
>>153374993This is stupid. You don't come back from brain death. If you do have brain death you want to be kept alive so people can harvest organs from you before you die. At least that's what I would do.
>>153374972>My point is just because a lot of people disagree about when something is or isn't justified, that doesn't mean it's never justified.Your argument is now "Some X are maybe Y or Z, therefore X is Y."
>>153375032WHO THE FUCK SAID ANYTHING ABOUT CONSERVATIVES RETARD?!
>>153375041>Brain death can't be recovered from.Only if you define it such that it is retroactively not brain death in cases where people recover.
>>153375061He thinks only conservitards could be pro-life.
>>153373770>no repliesFuck you all
>>153374977>So that agrees with what I said earlier. It's just that, in practice, self defense is illegal because authorities decide that actual self defense cases which obviously qualify by the stated policy do not actually qualify.No, there's clearly a very big disagreement in what defines "unjust infringement of one’s or another person’s legal interest".Another example, In some places you can shoot someone for just breaking into your house. That's illegal in some places.
>>153374997Because you literally cannot have an abortion until after you get pregnant you stupid fucking clown.
>they were copulating for a long time before mark fucked off planet>if not using protection, possible pregnancy should have come up since himself is proof of earth genes compatibility>if using protection then the chance of it failing was even more on both of them needing to be responsible and disuss said themesin short they both are retarded. probably murder eve more. but mark was not a lone victim.
>>153375010what does that have to do with what I said?
>>153375022Ad hom.>>153375032Vagueposting crashout from losing the argument with "I AM SILLY" thrown in.
>>153375076If someone gets pregnant very frequently and always gets abortions soon after, how is getting an abortion after being pregnant not the default state of affairs for her.
>>153375072Bruh, Genocide is genocide if it takes place in Gaza or on the children of westerners but i guess the red blue retard is a red blue retard.
>>153374933Women being awful should not equal becoming a fudgepacker or a troon.
>>153375041Eve literally sculpted her breasts to be bigger after healing from her own body and terminated the baby she was going to have with a half-alien man that can fly around in space. Take hypotheticals at face value here.
Eve can literally create everything she could ever need to raise a baby by herself, yet she chose to kill her baby. Debbie would have happily adopted the baby.
>>153375131could she have contstructed a bio womb or something?
>>153375075By your comparison, it's okay to leasurely shoot people because in some situations in other jurisdictions, it's okay to kill someone in self defense.
>>153375075>No, there's clearly a very big disagreement in what defines "unjust infringement of one’s or another person’s legal interest".Then quote the definition.>In some places you can shoot someone for just breaking into your house. That's illegal in some places.Because there is a disagreement in policy about what degree of threat someone breaking in is regarded as representing prior to taking any other actions. In any of these cases, if the person breaking in presents in imminent threat of death or great bodily harm, that's clear cut self defense.
>>153375056how is it that?
>>153373560>ABORTIONS FOR ALLIt’s just about access and ability to have abortion if the woman wants it. You are given a choice. Nobody is forcing you to do abortion. Meanwhile anti-abortion side want to force you to carry the pregnancy to term out of spite and moralistic bullshit while never wanting to help the mother after the kid is born. And they don’t care about medical complications or rape or incest. That’s why they don’t even give exceptions to them and lie that ectopic pregnancies aren’t a thing, that it doesn’t matter when women die from sepsis because it’s entirely acceptable that some women die
>>153375118>If someone gets pregnant very frequently and always gets abortions soon afterThank you for conceding that pregnancy is, in fact, the norm of the two and abortion is the deviation from a biilogical process.
>>153375118Again, an abortion is an event, while pregnancy is an ongoing state.
>>153375158how did you arrive to that? Thats not what i said.
BTW, women who get abortions get an intense high from it. Snuffing out the weakest creature of their species makes them happy.>>153375180You support women being stupid whores and consequence-free sex.
>>153375172>Retard doesn't even understand their own argument and can only give out talking points. Why do people take faggots like you seriously?
>>153375153I said that earlier! She could have just made a IUD. I don't know if Kirkman even knows those exist.
>>153373770>>153375073i thought it was funnyplus, it's buried beneath all the retarded "no, u awful for killing baby" "no, u awful for being a right wing gun murderer"
>the face your gf/wife gives after she had an abortion of the child you were looking to have without telling you:
>>153374984>Even in your strawman you make yourself present a circular argument lol.No, I didn't. You just can't read properly. Asking "When is theft justified?" doesn't mean that you can't answer "never".>Midwit, we are arguing whether or not it's morally justified period. You cannot use "it's morally justified" as backing for when you want to say abortion is morally justified. That is a textbook circular argument you absolute smoothbrainThat's not what I was doing. I was just asking: what's the significance that people disagree about whether or not something is justified in various different situations?
>>153375193I'm sorry you don't understand your own argument or the logic it presents, but you're literally trying to support abortion by saying>My point is just because a lot of people disagree about when something is or isn't justified, that doesn't mean it's never justified....And using shooting someone as a justification.
>>153374912And now let’s talk about all the times men abandon women when they discover they’re pregnant or insist it has to be aborted or refuse to pay for childcare
>>153375249>whataboutism
>>153375056>>My point is just because a lot of people disagree about when something is or isn't justified, that doesn't mean it's never justified.>Your argument is now "Some X are maybe Y or Z, therefore X is Y."Pointing out that X does not automatically equate to Z from the premise, is not the same as saying X is always Y.
>>153375249Believe it or not, men were shamed for impregnating and abandoning women. It doesn't help the community when the women are used up and have no fathers to guide the children.
>>153371719man this was a shitty attempt to make her drama-relevant before the raping thing
Hell is real and demons are misundertood, theres no heaven. Abortion is not a big of a deal. Did a jew wrote this ?
>>153375061Conservatives are the ones pushing through abortion bans and demand the laws to be so strict that it leads to women being charged for murder when they miscarry
>aborts first child and gaslights her partner into apologizing for it>later on starts fucking some blue alien that is disgusted by her daughter and wants to get rid of her yet she continues the relationship I don't think Eve is cut out for this. Mark should've just cut his loses and married Anissa. The irony being she actually turns out to be a great mother and wife.
>>153375241>I'm sorry you don't understand your own argument or the logic it presents, but you're literally trying to support abortion by saying>>My point is just because a lot of people disagree about when something is or isn't justified, that doesn't mean it's never justified.>...And using shooting someone as a justification.No, I'm pointing out that this argument against abortion is flawed: >>153374583I'm not saying that disagreement makes something justified. I'm saying that the existence of disagreement is not enough to say that something is automatically unjustified.
>>153375284Anissa was a superpowered single mother and she kept her baby.
>>153375196>You have to punish women for having sexDidn’t take long for you to show your true colours
>>153375270I agree, hence abortion isn't justified by the debate existing.
there are at least 23 different forms of contraception all above 80% in effectiveness. Any pairing of them makes pregnancy virtually impossible. Outside of health and crime, which are extreme minorities of abortions, this is strictly an irresponsibility issue. That said it's ironically a strong argument for abortion because the last thing society needs is such people trying to raise children and we already have a pretty massive sample size of how it turns out. Abortion is murder but also the pragmatic thing to do
>>153375180>while never wanting to help the mother after the kid is bornThere are plenty of Christian charities in the West
>>153375283And when I see a democrat who does the same I will shed tears of joy. It's a shame they're all too cucked to upset the roasties.
>the rapist geocidal space Hitler is a better mother than an abortionist bitchAnd I agree.>>153375310How about you have sex with your husband instead of random men and spreading STDs?
>>153373551>women can die and have serious complications in childbirth,COULD... a century ago. Childbirth is only meaningfully dangerous to third worlders who have no access to clean and hygienic health care systems that know how child birth works.>women shouldn't be forced to remain in destitution or perpetuate cycles of destitution This is why women have the overwhelmingly most massive social safety net, as well as a wide variety of programs and charities to ensure that having a child, even if only to give it up for adoption, is feasible even for the most destitute women.>it's her body her choiceAnd the baby's choice doesn't matter to you, why?>feminism was absolutely necessary in the past Maybe first wave, but even that is debatable, as every victory feminists claim for their movement throughout history was either already happening before they stepped in, or was made possible by other civil rights champions before feminism retroactively claimed it as one of their achievements.
>>153375320The problem with this though is giving them the option at all makes them take it, as they see one more failsafe in regards to their poor life decisions. Thus, it is still immoral and should not be an option as it allows further harm.
>>153375322You mean Christian organisations who are selling babies for profit and caught in child molestation scandals
>>153375228Needs more Eve's VA in HBO slop
>>153375330Married women have and need abortions too
>>153375351Another lie spread by athiest retards like you. Did you also find the "graves" of Indians behind an abbey, or did you forget that was a lie?
>>153375351There are plenty of Christian charities that haven't done that.
>>153375279>Robert (((Kirkman)))Most likely
>>153375326Most people don't like the government dictating their lives and taking away rights. It's the antithesis of what America is supposed to be
>>153371719Because she killed their kid, retard.
>>153375365Tie your tubes, bitch. Be responsible for your body.
>>153375330Married men freely out of their own volition fuck other women, impregnate them and then insist on abortions. But you just want to shit on women like a typical misogynist
>>153375300>I'm not saying that disagreement makes something justified. I'm saying that the existence of disagreement is not enough to say that something is automatically unjustified.I'm going to ignore that you're trying very hard to reframe your post into "prove why abortion shouldn't not NOT happen" and instead refocus the discussion to the fact that you are, in fact, trying to argue that abortion should be justified.You know you are. Everyone reading knows you are. I specifically can call out the specific tricks you're trying to do - you're trying to shift the burden of rebuttal and reframe it under a Socratic wording. The problem is that you can't use the Socratic method to push an agenda - you can't try to relentlessly ask questions when you're advocating for something to try to disarm people that don't believe you and make them trip up, that's just gaslighing.
>>153375365>needOnly if their lives are endangered by the continuation of the pregnancy, such cases make up less than 1% of abortions
>have to disengage in dishonest debate and rhetoric to deny the basic indisputable fact Eve was an irresponsible dullard of a woman who murdered her own child
you virgins never have to worry about abortion anyway so why do you care
>>153375390Why can’t you keep it in your pants if you can’t use a rubber, fuckboi? Why are men incapable of taking responsibility
>>153375394>taking the worst examples of men to prop up the worst of womenAmazing strategy!
>>153374791>I said "burden of rebuttal," not burden of proof, and justified my case. You're being dishonest.Burden if rebuttal is not an actual term. You just made it up. What is it, and how does it apply here?>What? Abortion is the default? So humans just had abortions until we started giving birth?Well, technically most pregnancies end in abortion:>>153374675 >>153374782In the medical definitions, abortion includes miscarriage.>It's not even a good one. By that exact same logic, it's okay for me to go out onto the street and stab someone because they're inevitably going to die anyway. Just ignore the knife!That's just the end results of your argument. Assuming that the default nature of things is morally justified, is a flawed stance.I didn't even imply what you said here: >>153374370>You're implying that action towards something (the murder of a fetus) is the default state instead of inaction (letting it germinate).I made no claim about default states and morality. you brought that up.>Canada already has laws that allow for third trimester abortions.3rd trimester is not post birth. What places allow post birth abortion? how common is 3rd trimester abortion in canada?>You and I both know that those cases are a very small minority, and most pro-life advocates are generally okay with these exceptionsis it more or less common than people who are for post-birth abortion? or Is it about as frequent?>by the very label of "pro-choice" you concede that this is a motte-and-bailey.I didn't use that label here, so i don't concede anything.>>153374791>No. Do not try to change the subject just because you're losing this one.using a comparison to make a point is not changing the subject.
>>153375351People will say this with little proof and/or cherry picked examples, then say "da joos" to mock people who notice hebrew criminal organizations
>>153375379Nice to know I have the right to kill people who inconvenience me in America. I think we know exactly how 4chan would use that right.
>>153375412Because you fuckwads only shame men for their mistakes while encouraging women. When women are responsible, there will be equal duties.
>>153375414>Women are STD riddled whores!!!>How dare you generalise men back at me!!!
>>153375411
>>153375396What is the burden of rebuttal? You just made that term up. Why does it apply here?
>>153375411I don't want children to die
Times like this make make happy that Islam is aggressively expanding and taking over the west.
>>153375313*isn't automatically justified or unjustified
>>153375451Yet you support killing children in other countries and gladly pay taxes to fund it
>>153375411>Lose argument>>Y-YOURE ALL JUST SEXLESS
>>153375438Both are true, but it's easier for women to spread than it is for men. For one thing, women can easily get more men than men can get women in a shorter amount of time. That doesn't absolve men of wrongdoing like you think I'm implying.
>>153375452Islam is a false and evil cult started by a paedophile warlord
>>153375463>Lose argumenti wasn't even in an argument in the first place, i walked in the thread, saw it was stupid, and decided to make it even stupider
>>153375181Being non pregnant is actually the norm. Most women are not-pregnant for most of their lives. So abortion represents a return to the norm
>>153375461I'm not American
>>153375351Another case of forgetting per capita. Look it up, the whole catholic priests molesting kids was one of the lowest per capita rates of molestation but the news ran with the story anyway for some reason.
>>153375432A fetus isn't a person.
>>153375469Yeah I know. But it's going to be funny when women start getting their organs mutilated by screaming brown men.
>>153375444knowing that other people can get abortions makes me feel fantastic!
>>153375498You can say that all you want but it doesn't make it true. >>153374876
>>153375498What's your definition of a "person"
>>153371832>2000's comic book culturewas garbage and no way excuses Kirkman's shit writing
>>153375494Child molestation happens in protestant circles too. Southern baptists have had massive scandals about the continued abuse and coverups in the past decade
>>153375518spotted the jew
>>153374180He literally explained why it was evil, are you being dense on purpose?
>>153373427The fact that you think>so they can continue being vapid drug addict whores well into their 40s is the top reason to get an abortion to begin with the entire reason why people hate you so much and why the right wing is losing elections and influence around the world
>>153375533wait until you realize how much this happens everywhere https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tsn1Ld8gatgpublic schools still have a higher rate of molestation than any of these too
>>153375452Islam is dying, retard. More and more people are seeing it as the pedo worship retarded death cult that it is.
>>153374780https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_retreat
>>153375545>>153374151>That's a human being that could've had a life, and you robbed them of it because you didn't want to take responsibility for your carelessness.So, it's immoral not to get as many women pregnant as possible because those potential children could have had lives?
Women are so stupid and easily manipulated that you can convince them to do whatever you want them to do, so long as you promise them the free right to kill their children.
>>153375558lmao come to France sometime. These roaches multiply and spread their beliefs among each other faster than you can decry them. Even happenng in japan now.
>>153375527The law disagrees. You don't have a right to dictate what others do with their bodies.
>>153375554And we have elected congressmen like Jim Jordan cover it up and let abuse continue even when kids come to him for help and say they’re being sexually abused
>>153375554>public schools still have a higher rate of molestation than any of these tooSource?
>>153375529Not a fetus.
>>153375580Seeing how we still have the draft. Yes, the law can dictate what you can do with your body.
>chuds be like: "What's your definition of a "person""
>>153375041>>153375043hence why "losing all brain function" isn't analogous to being a fetus in the womb.
>>153375589That doesn't explain anything. I can say you're just a clump of cells, and it would be lawful to kill you.
>>153375478>So abortion represents a return to the normBut also an intervention in the ongoing state of affairs. Same in that regard as the sex that brought about the pregnancy in the first place. Whether the intervention is justified depends on an actual justification, since it's an intervention and not the ongoing state which would persist absent intervention.
>>153375607he has brain function unlike a fetus.
>>153375580>Your jewish masters say it's okay so it must be okay. Retard.
>>153375607A clump of cells that can experience pain, form memories, and breathe independently (all things a fetus can't do)
>>153375620Pregnancy requires constant interverntion to continue, given that the mother needs additional nutrition (above and beyond what she would normally have).
>>153375607Do you think that's how it really works?How long did you mull that epic rhetoric in your head for?
>>153375631Your ideology was started by a Jewish pedophile to keep you docile and subservient.
>>153375572
>>153375641it's cute how much you have to play retarded to justify yourself
>>153375651got an actual response?
>>153375595damn these acardiac twins are nuts
>>153375595>>153375644>twitter postsThis is the equivalent of "I made it the fuck up"
>>153375577I was born to Muslims and I left that evil cult years ago. Islam perpetuates itself solely by indoctrination and ignorance.
>>153375580The government does, you colossal retard.
>>153375625>>153375632>>153375644Wow, so none of you guys actually read biology?
>>153375564>>153374780>Quote the policy in question if you think it disagrees with what I said.
>>153374151>That's a human being that could've had a life, and you robbed them of it How is that robbery, and why is it evil to prevent that from happening?What's your deifintion of human being?
If men were the ones stuck carrying the fetus to term this conversation wouldn’t even happen because every guy out there would think it’s the inherent right to abort if they want to
>>153375641>>153375658why are you so fatphobic?
>>153371719Only Christcucks give a shit
>>153375676They don't. I can do whatever I want with mine and that's how it's supposed to be.
>>153375687off the basis of what?
>>153375687I think it should be fair. If women have the right to abort the child, men should have the right to financially abort the child. You bring that up and suddenly feminist are like HELL NAH I NEEDS MUH CHILD SUPPORT
>>153375589That's not a definition. A definition is that which makes a meaning definite. That is, clearly described with distinct boundaries that separate it from other meanings. So a person is not a fetus. Neither is a rock. Is a rock a person?
>>153375420>Burden if rebuttal is not an actual term.Yes it is, it's just not a common one. (You) don't know it because it's not listed on a Wikipedia fallacy list.>Well, technically most pregnancies end in abortionNo they do not, and that's some absolutely retarded mental gymnastics you're pulling.>In the medical definitions, abortion includes miscarriage.You know damn well that's decisively not what anyone, including you, are talking about. Everyone here, you included, know that "abortion" in what this is about is discussing a consciously-induced termination of a pregnancy.>Assuming that the default nature of things is morally justified, is a flawed stance.You're not even making a counterpoint here!>I didn't even imply what you said hereDid I say you were? No? Fuck off.>I made no claim about default states and morality. you brought that upNo shit, because it's vital to who needs to define when human life begins.I will repeat the argument you keep running from: if you want to argue that abortions aren't murder, you need to fulfill a satisfying answer to when it's no longer okay to commit one - of when the procedure you want would morally be considered murder.I don't care that you didn't bring this up because this is the argument against you. There are more viewpoints out there than your own you retarded egocentric redditfag>3rd trimester is not post birth. What places allow post birth abortion?>>153374583>Ralph Northam came under fire for that when he brought it up in the case of babies born with physical deformaties, andCome on, retard, keep up.>how common is 3rd trimester abortion in canada?I love this. You're open to admitting that pro-abortion leads to third trimester abortions being legal.Hey, faggot, how many third-timester and post-birth abortions need to happen before you consider it immoral? Put another way, what's the maximum amount of out-of-the-womb babies you're okay with killing before you admit baby-killing is wrong?
>>153375645Lol, Christians who follow the "pre zionist" ways make jews seethe to no end because they know who the true favored of God are and they hate it because it's not them.
>>153375672The twitter posts are to get the lurkers attention so that everyone knows you're a fucking retard
>>153375711>men should have the right to financially abort the childLots of guys abandon their families. I met several dudes around my age that did it last year.
>>153375680You clearly don't know about about american law if you are asking this question.Here's two states to compare for instance.https://www.mass.gov/doc/9260a-to-9263-self-defense-full-set/downloadhttps://code.wvlegislature.gov/55-7-22/
>>153375703Stepping away from abortion for a second here, can you murder someone with your body? Is that generally allowed by the government?
>>153375726>Yes it is, it's just not a common one. (You) don't know it because it's not listed on a Wikipedia fallacy list.Show me two different published philosophers who have used the term "Burden of rebuttal".Explain what it is as well.
>>153375743Abortion isn't a crime and there's no victim involved. You're arguing in bad faith.
>>153375733i have never read anything more retarded in my life
>>153375641>Pregnancy requires constant interverntion to continueSupposing that this is the case, this has necessarily been the ongoing state of affairs over the course of a pregnancy.
>>153375445>The third argumentative obligation is shared by both sides. This burden is the need to respond to the arguments of the other side. This is called your Burden of Rebuttal. If during the argument you do not respond, you fail to meet this burden.https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Communication/Argument_and_Debate/Arguing_Using_Critical_Thinking_(Marteney)/04%3A_Claims/4.05%3A_The_Argumentative_BurdensPlease read something besides other comments from unemployed faggots on reddit.
>>153375756Did you read the first sentence of my post? Anon stop being stupid on purpose.
>>153375587https://slatervecchio.com/blog/new-report-states-public-school-sexual-abuse-is-higher-than-the-catholic-church/
>>153375737Do you understand what a quote is?
>>153375457Nope.Prove abortion is justifiable before its allowed, and don't use "but people can't agree on other things!"
>>153375726>You know damn well that's decisively not what anyone, including you, are talking about. Everyone here, you included, know that "abortion" in what this is about is discussing a consciously-induced termination of a pregnancy.Well, most unplannded pregnancies still end in abortion>Six out of 10 unintended pregnancies end in induced abortion.https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion>I will repeat the argument you keep running from: if you want to argue that abortions aren't murder, you need to fulfill a satisfying answer to when it's no longer okay to commit one - of when the procedure you want would morally be considered murder.different people have different answers. some say when brain activity starts. legally some states limit it after a certain amount of weeks.>>153375726>>Ralph Northam came under fire for that when he brought it up in the case of babies born with physical deformaties,Source?https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-ralph-northam-virginia-abortion-952598071326>I love this. You're open to admitting that pro-abortion leads to third trimester abortions being legal.No. I didn't say that.>Hey, faggot, how many third-timester and post-birth abortions need to happen before you consider it immoral? Put another way, what's the maximum amount of out-of-the-womb babies you're okay with killing before you admit baby-killing is wrong?How many are being killed currently? where is post birth abortion legal?
>>153375478Being non-alive is also the norm compared to living. Therefore, it's okay to kill people.
>>153375775You're comparing something that isn't a crime to a crime. You're making yourself look like a retard
>>153375777This says there is another report but doesnt cite it or link to it.it doesn't give the numbers to compare between public schools and churches. or the per capita rates.
>>153375796mentalgymnastics must be done for babykilling to be justified in any mannerfor fuck's sake, they had to name it abortion and termination to obfuscate and ignore what it actually is
>>153375508Buddha was right about women.
>>153375580>The law disagrees.>>153375461>you support killing children in other countries and gladly pay taxes to fund itClassic leftist cognitive dissonance
>>153375804You made the claim that you can do whatever you want with your body and the government can't do anything about it. You can't murder, you can't rob, you can't sell or do drugs. Your claim is wrong.
>>153375645Uh...>>>153374139Awkward...
>>153375779I gave you a citation. why can't you read just open the links and read?>>153375737>https://www.mass.gov/doc/9260a-to-9263-self-defense-full-set/downloadmassachusetts says you have to retreat unless impossible>A person must retreat unless they reasonably believe that they cannot safely do so. A person need not place themselves in danger or use every means of escape short of death before resorting to self-defense.>>153375737>https://code.wvlegislature.gov/55-7-22/WV on the other hand explicitly says there is no duty to retreat.>Provided, That such person may use deadly force against an intruder or attacker in a place that is not his or her residence without a duty to retreat if the person reasonably believes that he or she or another is in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which he or she or another can only be saved by the use of deadly force against the intruder or attacker.
>>153375804You are murdering a baby, I don't care if it's legal.
>>153375777>slatervecchio.com/blog/CHUDSARERETARDED
>>153375858It's not a baby and it's not murder no matter how much you think it is.
>>153375839>I gave you a citation.In response to a request for a quote.>why can't you read just open the links and read?It's not my job to make your argument for you. Now, can you produce an actual quote of policy which disagrees with what I said?
>>153375867Whatever lie you have to tell yourself to shy away from the truth that you support mass industrialized death.
>>153375861>shitter criticizing anyone
>>153371787She didn't kill a kid. She killed a clump of cells smaller than a speck of dust.
>>153375927why do you hate midgets?
>>153375880Did you read the rest of the post? There are quotes there. In One state you need to flee unless impossible, in the other state you have zero obligation to flee.
>>153375790>Well, most unplannded pregnancies still end in abortionSo not miscarriages, as I pounted out.Thank you for going through all the effort to prove your own point wrong.(And doing a bad job at it too on the side from making an indictive argument).>different people have different answersNO.FUCKING.SHIT.That's what I said in my post in >>153374370 and >>153374583.YOU fags can't decide, but you want to terminate fetuses anyway. You want to kill fetuses, but can't draw a hard line at when it stops. That's how we end up with shit like third trimester abortions.By. fucking. GOD. an hour later and you're just NOW starting to get it.>ap>>Experts told The Associated Press that abortions in the third trimester are extremely rare.>>"If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam says in a video from the 2019 interview being shared online. “The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”Did you even read your own article you window-licking retard?>No. I didn't say that.Asking how common they are conceded that they do happen. You shift the argument from their existence to their relevance.Point made in:>How many are being killed currently?
>comparing babykilling to self-defensewe are on a level of mental gymnastics and denial that is utterly impossible
>>153375861Something tells me that this is the schizo who kept screaming "Trump raped little boys in the Epstein files" yesterday in the Eve pregnancy threads
>>153376021no shit
>>153375967>There are quotes there.And they don't disagree with what I said above. To belabor the point:>>153374672>At an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. I haven't seen a self-defense standard that's been articulated to the point of policy that's different from that.The West Virginia quote squarely aligns with what I said. The Massachusetts quote concerns a duty to retreat if that can be done safely. If a person is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, the window for that has already passed. Care to try again>?
>>153376053Can you cite a source that supports your claim they are identical? Got any case law?
>>153371719You're not supposed to kill babies.
>>153373770>"Mark, no!"
>>153376221Concession accepted.
Laughing at all the hetnoids in this thread.
So, Eve's dad was right in the comic
>>153376301I didn’t concede anything. You are claiming a reading that contradicts the text, so I expect to see some case law or legal essay supporting it.
>>153376301https://www.findlaw.com/state/massachusetts-law/massachusetts-self-defense-laws.html>Everyone has the right to defend themselves from an aggressor. While this is true in Massachusetts, the Commonwealth also expects citizens to do everything within their power to avoid a fight. The line between justified self-defense and illegal use of force is often thin.[…]>A duty to retreat means that people are expected to do everything within their power to avoid using physical force or lethal force to respond to a threat from an aggressor.>This stands in contrast to the stand-your-ground laws of many other states, such as Florida. Stand-your-ground allows individuals to defend themselves, often with lethal force, if they have a reasonable belief that they’re in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death. This changes self-defense from an affirmative defense to immunity from prosecution in most self-defense cases.>That approach isn’t permitted in Massachusetts.
>>153376374So glad I don't live in a pro-criminal state.
Anon's argument about abortion being like self-defense in that it's tricky to differentiate is a silly false equivalence that implies abortion necessity should be decided on a court case-by-case basis.
>>153376021Idk if that’s a schizo thing. It was a real rumor thing that was in the news or online at least. Sascha Riley accused him of that.I do wonder how that came up in that invincible thread though
>>153376348I mentioned that I have not seen a self defense policy different from what I said. In response, some people offered self defense policies that were in fact similar to what I said, and so I still have not seen a self defense policy different from what I said.>You are claiming a reading that contradicts the textI pointed out how the quote given does not disagree with what I said. In response, you stopped arguing the point and went off on a tangent, ending further argument in support of your position. That's an implicit concession.>so I expect to see some case law or legal essay supporting it.A courtier's reply does not constitute an example of a different sort of self defense policy.>>153376374>This changes self-defense from an affirmative defense to immunity from prosecution in most self-defense cases.No, that's a difference in prosecutorial policy, not the policy that determines what is and is not self defense. In both situations, "self defense" laws serve to grant legal defense to what would otherwise be illegal violence. And when can people perform such violence? When there is an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. The "duty to retreat" business concerns what happens BEFORE it gets to that point. The section quoted above EXPLICITLY says that people are not obligated to retreat in unsafe conditions, and that, in a situation where self-defense violence would be justified, there may still be unused means of escape. "Stand your ground" and "duty to retreat" have been political and media footballs, but (as in the Trayvon Martin case that prompted a media circus about them) they're typically not very relevant. Rather, "self defense" is generally what matters, and the policy for that is about an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm, or language tantamount to that.
>>153376539>>153376006
>>153373825Then why is it considered a double homicide when somebody kills a pregnant woman?
>>153376546>It was a real rumor*hoax.It was a hoax that came from a facebook post about a badly shooped AP "screencap."And it came about like anon's earlier "but muh gaza! Drumpf!" shit: some stupid fucking tourist came into this thread and started spamming retarded r/poltics sloganeering because people didn't like that Eve had an abortion, malded about "mub republicans," lost every argument he tried to make, and sperged out.And then he accidentally revealed he was likely Canadian.
>>153376612>tfw Canadians were more outraged over losing at a sports game than getting replaced in their own country
why is everyone ignoring how much pregnancy and labour affects the body. once artificial wombs are available the conversation will completely change
>>153375973Did you read the previous paragraph?>Northam was giving a hypothetical example of what could happen if a mother whose fetus had severe deformities, or wasn’t otherwise viable, requested an abortion while in labor.He was talking about situations where the Baby wasn’t viable and how they handle a dying baby. That’s not the same as being for post birth abortion.He didn’t even say thy euthanize them in that quote.
>>153376628>why is everyone ignoring how much pregnancy and labour affects the bodyTHAT IS WHY WOMEN ARE PHYSICALLY DIFFERENT THAN MENTHIS IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPENTHIS IS WHAT THEY EVOLVED FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS TO DO
>>153376612Not confirmed a hoax, but it was doubt around his accusations :https://www.ms.now/news/sascha-riley-trump-epstein-conspiracy-theory
>>153376568>A courtier's reply does not constitute an example of a different sort of self defense policy.What do you mean?
>>153373560Explain why you want innocent babies to be murdered.
>>153375180Women don’t deserve choices because they’re mentally retarded, and will always pick the wrong one.
Should the show have been more preachy about the pro-life, pro-choice arguments or nah, this is western dbz?
>>153376643anon, you must know that pregnancy is uniquely risky for humans due to our big heads and tight pelvises due to upright walking right? even without labour risks specifically, the 9 month gestation period is extremely taxing and renders the individual effectively disabled especially towards the later months
>>153375377Kirkman was raised Christian, he’s just an enlightened euphoric atheist now.
>>153376612That guy sounds like a total chad if he made you seethe this much
>>153376634>He was talking about situations where the Baby wasn’t viable and how they handle a dying baby. That’s not the same as being for post birth abortionHe was implicitly talking about killing babies that fit that criteria. What the fuck do you think "have a talk with the physician" means in that context you stupid faggot?
>>153376707THAT IS WHAT YOU WERE MADE TO DOMEN ARE SENT OFF TO DIE IN WARYOU MUST RISK YOUR LIFE TO GIVE LIFEFUCK OFF
>>153376698It shouldn’t have been in the show at all. Just say Eve had a miscarriage due to the grief of thinking Mark was dead. That way she’d feel awful because she’d think she killed their baby because she didn’t have enough faith in him, and he’d still blame himself because his absence caused it.
>>153376661https://www.snopes.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-epstein-sascha-riley/It's a hoax, faggot. When even Snopes doesn't want to confirm it as even possibly credible, you don't push it.
>>153371719I hope they cut the Anissa rape so that chuds seethe even more
>>153376346He always was.
>>153376712Yep, sounds like the jeet.
>>153376769>Just say Eve had a miscarriageLmfao chud couch writers are literally buckley tier
>>153376744surely eve gets a free abortion token for zapping conquest?also LMAO lets not pretend that the amount of women dealing with pregnancy is equivalent to the amount of men who go off to die in war in modern america
>>153376796Time is a circle
>>153376796What exactly is wrong with it?
>>153376675I mentioned that I have not seen an example of a different sort of self defense policy. Then some examples were given, intended as examples of different sorts of self defense policies. To which I explained how they aren't actually different. To which, rather than support your case, you demanded a case law or legal essay to support my currently-unanswered argument.The Courtier's Reply https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtier%27s_reply is an informal fallacy where, rather than address Person A's argument, the Person B claims that Person A lacks sufficient authority (typically credential-related) to make an argument, so therefore Person A's argument is dismissed out of hand. And so, simply dismissing my explanation for how two self defense policies are similar does not constitute an example of a self defense policy which is different from what I had said. Do you have anything to say to my reasoning?
>>153376568> In both situations, "self defense" laws serve to grant legal defense to what would otherwise be illegal violence. And there’s significant disparity between legal codes in regards to what gets the exception.
>>153372193>>153372666>>153372922How about the fact that she was a lab experiment and still doesn't know how her powers work. With how her powers were fucking up how does she know that the baby won't just disintegrate right after she gives birth to it.And that's leaving out the fact that even if you are financially stable that does not mean you are ready to raise a child. She also didn't know if Mark was coming back or not.
>>153376852Can you quote one?
>>153376568Examples of the differences in different self defense laws:https://reason.com/volokh/2022/03/15/comparing-u-s-english-and-german-law/
>>153376885>>153376874
>chuds be like: YOOOOOOOOOO THAT WRITING IS FIRE
>>153371754>>153371748>>153371787Literally this. Killing babies is morally wrong always has been.>>153373825>A embryo is not the same as a baby.They most certainly are. Both have their own DNA. Both are capable of thinking and feeling. Both require the assistance of others to live.>Is it immoral to pull the plug on someone who has lost brain functionAn embryo not only has brain function it will continue to increase as it grows. This is a retarded comparison.
>>153376568You would not be convicted for this in the USA:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0rq4evqq75o
>>153376899>no argument
>>153376918So that's a no on the quotes? You can't quote a different policy?
>>153376939I literally showed you a different policy. He was convicted of murder because he shot someone who broke into his house.That’s legal in the USA.
>>153376949Not a rebuttal
>>153373825>>Is it immoral to pull the plug on someone who has lost brain function?By this logic then is it doubly evil to kill someone just gaining brain function?
>>153376936Are you genuinely fucking asking me to "argue" why ctrl + alt + delete has bad writing?Are you genuinely retarded? Why are you defending this writing now? Is it for political reasons?
>>153376845Courtiers reply doesn’t apply here. This is a situation where authority matters. It 100% matters how the courts and judges interpret the law because they are the ones that apply it.Courts care a lot about precedent as well
>>153371719According to kirkman all women are:SelfishRapistsCheatersAlcoholicsAbortistsWhy hasn't he gotten in trouble for his views?
>>153377025Because women see the last 3 as good things to be celebrated
>>153376737So what are they supposed to do when a baby is about to die? Maybe they talk to the doctor about palliative care. Give the baby painkillers so they don’t die in agony.
>>153377035>Can't actually make an arguement>Just keeps posting miscarriages as if this justifies the killing perfectly healthy babies
>>153376964>That’s legal in the USA.Depends on the circumstances. Can you quote the policy in question? To remind you, the statement which led to this line of discussion is>>153374672At an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. I haven't seen a self-defense standard that's been articulated to the point of policy that's different from that.So if you want to challenge that, you'd have to show me a self defense policy which is different.
>>153376778Unironically this would've been a better arc. Something like Cecil tricked Eve during the Abortion to incubate and later raise a Viltrumite under his control Homelander style and all the implications this would have as time goes on
>>153377050>miscarriage That's a twin.That's an embryo. Both have their own DNA. Both are capable of thinking and feeling.You should feel bad about your beliefs. You're an immoral, evil person.
>>153377078>This rare circumstance means every baby should be killed!Lemme guess you support cutting men's penises off because it'll prevent rape?
It's interesting that everyone is so hung up on Eve killing her kid and not Thragg killing thousands of his own kids by literally sending them off to crush themselves to death.Watching Ursaal break down as she watched all of them literally explode mid punch made me sad for her.
>>153375595>>153375663>>153377035>>153377078Binding of Isaac looking fucker
>>153377058> There was a case where a police officer shot a victim in his chest, instantly killing him because he resisted with a knife. The action of the police officer was not recognized as self-defense because there were other options for subduing him without killing him, such as using a gas gun or shooting a non-vital body part such as a leg (Supreme Court Decision, 91Da19913 delivered on September 10, 1991).https://seoullawgroup.com/self-defense-korea/In the USA the police can shoot people who threaten them with knives
>>153377104Probably because Thragg is the fucking villain and no one is defending his actions they way they are Eve. Thragg is rightly shown being wrong and evil, Eve is not despite doing somwthing morally reprehensible.
>>153377024>This is a situation where authority matters.Not a whit. And it would still be a courtier's reply since it doesn't actually address what I said. It merely serves as an excuse to dismiss it.>It 100% matters how the courts and judges interpret the law because they are the ones that apply it.I was asking for a policy, which is the written guidance for such people, typically enshrined in law. Of course courts and judges violate legal policy all the time. That's why the situation in Korea mentioned above doesn't represent a different self defense policy. >>153374801 >>153374977 But there's typically some process with public oversight for actually generating legal policies in the first place, and from what I've seen, the nominal self defense policies are pretty similar. Even when the authorities will obviously not follow the written law.
>>153377103>>This rare circumstance>A embryo is not the same as a baby. >They most certainly are.>Both have their own DNA. >Both are capable of thinking and feeling. Youre an evil hypocritical retard btw
>>153377138Do you know what case law is?
>>153377163So you do think we should cut penises off to prevent rape?
Using the law as the basis of your argument when the supreme court struck down a main pillar and many states are basically making it illegal is a weird choice, but carry on
>>153377124Do you understand what a legal policy is? I'm not asking for court cases. What does the LAW specify as constituting self defense?
>>153377163How does that thing think or feel if it doesn't have a brain?>embryos don't have brains!They do from 6 weeks on.
>>153377104The people aligned with the pro-life crowd tend to be on the side of the most genocidal freaks that ever existedFunny how that works
>>153377047Northam's takes also apply to deformities like Siamese twins. You're deliberately pigeonholing his stance.
>>153377206Source?
>>153377180Using law as written as an argument is in general really dumb because laws change. You are completely failing to prove the morality of abortion
>>153377165Sure. Do you know why that's not what I'm interested in?
>>153377193>How does that thing think or feel if it doesn't have a brain? Interesting how the existence of a brain suddenly became important after you got BTFO lmao >A embryo is not the same as a baby. >They most certainly are. >Both have their own DNA. >Both are capable of thinking and feeling.
>>153377198Meanwhile, these are the people screaming "Trump is a pedophile!"
>>153377136>Thragg is the fucking villain and no one is defending his actionsNot to the same extend Eve is being defending no, but there are plenty of threads saying he did nothing wrong, or that he should have killed more and that he was retarded for not killing Mark/other characters sooner etc.
>>153377220>Physical deformaties
>>153377253Pipe down pedoboy, men are talking
>>153377183Do you know what case law is?The courts decision is part of the law. The Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of the law.
This is a strange thread
>>153377240Anon thinking requires a brain and the vast majority of embryos have brains. Just because you keep posting rare circumstances doesn't change this. By your logic we should remove the rights of black people so long as I post pictures of them murdering people.
Threadly reminder that projection is a key tenant of right wing thoughtAny accusation coming from a right winger is actually an admission of guilt
>>153377267He specified when it wasn’t viable due to them. That’s not the same as having a cleft lip.
>>153377260>Retards defend bad behaviorYeah kind of like the retards in this thread defending Eve.
>>153377229>>153377180The point is that disagreements exist in other areas as well
>>153377273Dude you're unironically Canadian.
>>153377289So... how do we explain leftoids like the SPLC funneling money to fund the KKK?
>>153377295Define "viable."
>>153377233Why not. Explain why case law isn’t relevant to a discussion about the legality of self defense , especially in common law systems such as the UK or the USA.
>>153377260For one thing Thragg is really no different from any other great conqueror and history tends to suck those guys off. I guess he's just missing a cool moniker like Thragg the Great
>>153377326Capable of surviving outside the womb
>>153377340So all those babies and children that can't feed themselves aren't viable and can be aborted?
>>153377309Proof? That doesn't disprove you're a pedophile btw
>>153377340That's a revision that his team came up with after the backlash.
>>153377138Korea also requires proportionality:https://m.koreaherald.com/article/10378636
>>153371719I'm not against abortion, but a heroic good character in fiction shouldn't do it.
>>153377351Oh boy no one tell this guy that Neo-Nazis are actually funded by leftists.
>>153377359Source?
>>153377351(You) are a pedophile.>B-b-but this random guy-I can play this game too, but give more than Literally Whos.
>>153377329people are fucking schziophrenic
>>153377381An informant isn’t the same as the entire group
>>153375734Yeah and the ones supporting abortion would at least call them dead beat losers for doing it. When the guy abandons it that's the reaction but when the women kill it hiding behind technical legality (which doesn't even apply to the rich), it being a "parasite/cancer", someone else technically doing the operation it's omg poor thing she so strong good for her it's literally impossible to not take dick etc. Also they can and have forced men to pay them for the kids which may or may not be theirs. Women are not known for sticking to one cock at all especially now and besides that don't want the responsibility of being a wife or mother even assuming the guy is paying, so is it even a family or is it just another dick that accidentally got them pregnant? Because family implies a lot that probably isn't there.
>>153377392A list of thousands of convicted rightoid pedos:https://www.dailykos.com/history/user/CajsaLilliehook
>>153373825If its not a person then why do you get charged with a double homicide if you kill a pregnant woman. Why is it that punching a pregnant woman in the stomach and causing a miscarriage can get you a murder charge? The answer is simple, there is a vile double standard which the baby is not a person unless the woman wants them to be. Abortion is just seen as another method of birth control and exists to avoid responsibility. And the people who support it hold up cases like rape and potential death as a means to justify it while ignoring that the majority only use it as birth control. Condoms exist for men and women, spermacide exists, IUD's exist, so many methods of contraception yet for some reason abortion is something that NEEDS to be allowed. And to bring up miscarriages again why should people feel bad for someone if they have a miscarriage if the baby is not a child? Why should there be a level of trauma to that? I mean this is your logic and what you are putting forward. Will you pretend that it exists in a vacuum and only applies to specific situations?
>>153377279>>153377233Since you apparently don't, let's go all the way back here >>153374620>>People can't agree when "self defense" is justified, but they still want to have the right to kill people when they feel threatened.In general, this is something that people actually broadly agree on. As exemplified by self defense laws written by legislators subject to public elections. Hence >>153374672>I haven't seen a self-defense standard that's been articulated to the point of policy that's different from that.>>153377328The question is about social consensus regarding what constitutes self defense, not what an individual person may think. If there were significantly differing view on self defense, there should be significantly different laws in various jurisdictions reflecting the different views of the people there. I have not seen such a thing. Have you? It was given as a comparable state of affairs to abortion, where laws vary significantly.
>>153377381Lmao I want you to know that the reason why nobody is picking up on this meme is because even the average retard knows sending in sting operations isnt the same as "funding" Try again somewhere else /ptg/
>>153377405An informant needs $275,000 paid illegally through a shell company? You know they couls have just hired a PI or do their fucking job as Journalists.
>>153377385Just fucking you stupid cunt. You haven't provided a damn source for a dam thin but want people to disprove (you)r horseshit.How about you post your source so I can copypaste the parts from it that will undoubtedly show up sourcing that from his team after the backlash happened.
>>153377392>>B-b-but this random guy- This is literally youYou're a pedophileAnd everyone hates you
>>153377372So no quote.
>>153377434Is that why they had to break the law to send hundreds of thousands of dollars to neo-nazis? You lost nigger give up.
>>153376707If women really cared that much about the risks you would think they would avoid having sex at least with the wrong men and take better care of their bodies if they're going to play pussy roulette.
>>153377448>erm why do federal investigators pay informants for information?>erm.......why would they give they much money to JUST ONE GUY???Are chuds retarded?Do they think normal people fall for this?
>>153377444>Look up article>read through it>no evidence>just an accusation>anon and media want to spin this as if it were true because of an odd claim made exactly around the time this candidate was running for office.Yeah Imma need something actually substantial and not hear say.
>>153376053>The West Virginia quote squarely aligns with what I said. The Massachusetts quote concerns a duty to retreat if that can be done safely. If a person is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, the window for that has already passed.That’s a difference
>>153377424There's thousands of leftists pedos too. Difference is you faggots cover for them. Joe Biden can smell children on live TV and Tim Walz can parade some groomer putting tampos in the boys' restrooms as schools and you fags will be all "we need this in the Oval Office (heart eye emojis)"
>>153377486the average rightoid is so out of touch that they unironically think people read trumps schizophrenic rants every week
>>153377198Why are leftists pretending none of the politicians or celebrities they support bang kids?
>>153377496Not regarding whether an imminent danger of death or great bodily harm legally justifies violence in self defense.
>>153377486>Why yes informants for non-profits can be paid illegally via shell companies>why yes non-profits should be allowed to secretly send money to multiple neo nazi groups without telling their donorsAre leftoids so far gone they need to actually defend sending money illegally and covertly to the KKK and Neo-Nazis? Are they really so stupid to think these are actually informants when they could have just told the truth from the beginning? This is what happens when the demand for Racism heavily outweighs the supply.
>>153377490>anon and media want to spin this as if it were true because of an odd claim made exactly around the time this candidate was running for office. Lmfao that's a shit load of words to defend pedophiles for zero reason other than political affiliation This is why everyone hates you btw
>>153377501Source? Show us the thousands.Trump kisses little kids on the lips.
>>153377515It literally does. You have to flee unless it’s impossible even if there is imminent danger in states with a duty to retreat
>>153377527>Trump kisses little kids on the lips.Source?
>>153377517Holy shit nigger at least pretend like you know what you're talking about lmfaoThere's a reason why this meme isn't spreading lmfao
>>153377536>duty to retreatUnconstitutional
>>153377545What does Israel have to do with the SPLC illegally funding KKK and Neo-Nazi members? Oh right it doesn't because you can't spin this in anyway that doesn't look bad faggot.
>>153377536>It literally does.>>153375839>>https://www.mass.gov/doc/9260a-to-9263-self-defense-full-set/download>>A person must retreat unless they reasonably believe that they cannot safely do so. A person need not place themselves in danger or use every means of escape short of death before resorting to self-defense.Your statement is diametrically opposed to the quote given earlier.
Do you become right wing because you're a pedophile or do you become a pedophile because you're right wing?Someone answer this
>>153377444And this is you, faggot.You literally cannot throw a rock in a crowd of leftists and not hit a child predator or wifebeater lol.
>>153377558>Oh right it doesn't because you can't spin this in anyway that doesn't look bad faggot.Because I already disproved your attempts to to propagandize and now you're just flailing like a little child lmao >>153377434Reply one more time, youre getting paid for the post right?
>>153377198Since when were just rightoids in muttland fat?
>>153377563Where’s the contradiction?
>>153377595That's from the Rittenhouse circus, right? Shot four people, three of which were felons?
>>153374378Where's this energy when it's time to talk about lolis?
>>153377595That's literally one of Trump's friends LOL
>>153377527>Source? Show us the thousands.Uh... sure. Every single person who saw Joe Biden smelling children and pinching their nipples on TV and voted for him anyway.What do I win?
>>153377432 you only brought up society vs individuals now. You are moving the goalposts.Supreme Court decisions have multiple judges.The Tony Martin case in the uk was appealed to higher courts.It wasn’t a single random judge.>In general, this is something that people actually broadly agree on. Prove it
>>153377538https://slate.com/human-interest/2016/10/donald-trump-tried-to-kiss-a-little-girl-on-the-lips-as-she-squirmed-away.html
>>153377614>Where’s the contradiction?>>153377536>You have to flee unless it’s impossible even if there is imminent danger>>153375839>>A person must retreat UNLESS they reasonably believe that they cannot safely do so. A person NEED NOT place themselves in danger or use every means of escape short of death before resorting to self-defense.Caps since you seem to need help.
>>153377624everybody already knows lolis are a fetish
>>153377617Yeah. Glad someone here has a memory at least.The left tried to ruin some teenager's life because he shot a pedophile and wifebeater.And then they'll say "every accusation is a confession."
>>153371719>Why do so many people act like she’s the devil for murdering her own flesh and bloodIt's a mystery.
>>153377651No contradiction there. Imminent danger is not active danger.
>>153377626Uh read >>153377617, retard.
>>153377624Lolis are usually just porn or anons getting off to characters that just exist in some story, Invincible takes itself much more seriously trying to cover real life issues as some type of authority on how things should be.
>>153377280Just more astroturfing to prop up a dying website.
I'm not actually mad about her murdering her baby, abortions are fine and it's the womans choice. It's Mark being a total beta male and the whole context of the situation that sucks. She kept it hidden, he went to war, they made no attempt to keep in contact or talked about what would happen if she got knocked up. That seems cruel - especially when she had a billion people willing to take care of said kid. I would break up with her, millions of other men who support abortion would as well. Mark is just an ACTUAL beta male.Cuckmen wrote it that way intentionally.
>>153377447Read the article> One of the most controversial cases involving self-defense in Korean legal history occurred in 1992, when a man who had habitually raped his step-daughter was killed by her boyfriend. The Supreme Court accepted that there had been a “threat of imminent harm” required for a plea of self-defense, but not that the response had been proportionate. The two were found guilty of murder.
>>153377447Another example from the article:> Korean law, which, unlike American stand your ground laws, does not outline a justification for “deadly force,” permits only force proportionate with the aim of “repelling” an attacker. This standard also applies in using force against an intruder into your home, whereas many U.S. states have “castle” statutes that apply the stand your ground principle to property.
>>153377689Abortions are fine like slavery is fine. For now because female supremacy is seen as fairness women get to larp as self impregnating goddesses who are just controlling their own bodies by failing at partner selection and at using protections while destroying the separate body growing inside them.
>>153375773That’s one quote. You need at least one more.
>>153377742Remember post civil war when a large enough majority of society agreed that blacks should be segregated and treated differently that such policies were enforced? But now people look back on that and find it abhorrent. What if some of the beliefs you have now that people think they are absolutely right about and have the moral high ground on are someday judged as similarly abhorrent by a future society? It's interesting to think about.
>claims to love him>thinks he dead>murders the only thing that would continue his legacy
>>153377630>you only brought up society vs individuals now.Because, on failing to find examples of laws with different self defense policies, you looked elsewhere, and apparently forgot the original context about what "people" can agree on. Self defense laws were only even a proxy measure of that, and court cases do not serve as such a proxy.>Prove itThe broad agreement of written laws regarding self defense, as with the examples posted by various anons in this thread in an effort to dispute that claim.>>153377666>No contradiction there.OK, Satan.>Imminent danger is not active danger.There is no difference, legally speaking. Someone about to stab you is an imminent danger (of death or great bodily harm). Someone about to stab you is an active danger (of death or great bodily harm). Someone actually stabbing you right now is not a danger, it's an instance of great bodily harm that may lead to death. "Danger" involves a threat of some harm which has not materialized yet, but which may do so.
>>153375773Any response according to that page is enough to satisfy the burden of rebutal
>>153377755Probably it will be like that for abortion in the future
The pearl clutching over abortion is so fucking stupid i wish they left it out of the show just so people who dont like it wouldnt have a reason to be really fucking annoying especially because it amounts to literally nothing in the story
>>153374304I was thinking more "financial abortions" for man where he doesn't have to do child support or be connected in any way as opposed to forcing abortions.
>>153377696>Read the article>>153375880>It's not my job to make your argument for you. Now, can you produce an actual quote of policy which disagrees with what I said?So what's the actual self defense law in question?>>153377712So what is the ACTUAL self defense law in question?
>>153377672Lines on a page, pixels on a screen. You guys are really bad when it comes to ideological consistency.
>>153377801Eventually the Science of real non-hormonal birth control will become so prevalent and available that it won't be a necessary thing. Gonna have to fight the Bible-thumpers for a good long while tho.
>>153377827The Supreme Court decision is law.
>>153377508See >>153377267
>>153377803Pearl clutching was the show framing the idea of heroes getting pretty women being sexist in season 1. Killing your kid when you don't even have the sorry excuses of real life and that's all you possibly had left of the guy you supposedly loved so much is pretty ridiculous. A lot of people think abortion if fine irl based on retarded reasons and so that extends beyond the show. This is what happens when you try to bring up known heavily debated issues in your superhero slop.
>>153377827It’s not my job to spoon feed you after you’ve already been given valid sources and specific quotes disproving your claims.I have accepted your concession.
>>153377828You're really bad at arguing if you're going to compare a fetish to a show talking about how things should be irl.
>>153377803The discourse is fun though.
>>153377750>>153377793You faggots didn't even know the term existed this morning and thought I invented it out of thin air. Don't pretend you know what you're talking about.
>>153377871The Supreme Court is appointed with the approval of the democratically elected representatives of the people. There are multiple people on the court, It is not a single person making an arbitrary decision.
>>153377871No, South Korea has separation of powers similar to the US. Laws are things written by the legislature, the National Assembly in this case. Courts do not write laws in South Korea. A court ruling or legal precedent is not the same thing as a law.
>>153377926>>153377926> For instance, your spouse requests that you put gas in the car before you return home from work. You hear him or her, but you do not respond. Your spouse can reasonably assume that you have agreed to the request. If you failed to fulfill the request, your spouse has a right to be upset with you. If you had initially responded to the request by saying, "I will if I have time," you would have met your burden of rebuttal. In that case, your spouse should not be angry over the unfulfilled request.There’s no need for evidence in the definition given here.
>>153377916Pixels on a screen, Anon. No child was actually aborted.
>>153377803this person is supposed to a hero. A hero who's lover is fighting and might die for the fate of the universe. She kills their child. It's easy as hell to understand why this would rub many people the wrong way. Nobody would care if this was within the context of some hbo drama where everybody is a different degree of bad person
>>153377936A supreme Court ruling is law. It is not a statute but case law is a type of law.
>>153377956Hang on, if you want to destroy them."You ask a woman for sex, but she doesn't respond, therefore, it isn't rape if you push her down."The burden or rebuttal or whatever the fuck has long been jettisoned as a proper exchange.
>>153377890>valid sources and specific quotes disproving your claims.Of things which agreed with my claims, as I explained. If you disagree, can you articulate the reasoning?>I have accepted your concession.See, this bit of rhetoric should actually follow a concession. When I ask for evidence in support of your claim and you refuse to give it (e.g. a self defense law which disagrees with the description I gave above), and I point that out rather than go down a tangent that you brought up, that doesn't constitute a concession on my part.
>(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/pen/part-1/title-c/article-35/35-15/> A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such forcehttps://law.justia.com/codes/florida/title-xlvi/chapter-776/section-776-012/
>>153377956The article is giving a leyman example to demonstrate it to people who aren't using it in debate circles.
>>153377972Fine, if you want to use legal rather than School House Rock definitions on /co/. Can you give a statutory definition of self defense which disagrees with what I've said?>>153377962Ideas in heads. No character was actually animated.
>>153377991What’s wrong with the Korean source?Show me proof something is wrong with it.
>>153378069Can you provide evidence for your claim?If what you are saying about the “burden of rebuttal” is true then you are obligated to provide evidence or you must agree with me.
>>153378044So... how do you imagine that this conflicts with the statement here >>153374672? That's why you're bringing this up, right? Because you imagine that it conflicts in some way?
>>153377962The difference is it's openly what they want to do irl. None of them would say "actually I think abortion is wrong and women shouldn't get to choose". They can't use the excuse of it just being fiction because they're choosing to make it about how real life should be and being openly biased about it. It would be like if they somehow made a loli show and said it's only right to grab your nearest pre schooler to give them some love. So yeah pretty dumb comparison.
>>153378122You are required to retreat even under threat in new york
>>153378102It doesn't disagree with what I said regarding self defense statutes. It instead explains how South Korean courts do not apply the statutes as written (or at least as quoted in the article).
>>153378117At this point you're just sea-lioning dude.You keep asking for evidence but (you) barely provided jack shit all thread.
>>153378140Only with respect to using deadly force, not violence in self defense in general. Did you even read that?
>>153377827What’s wrong with the quotes there?>>153378098What’s wrong with using a Supreme Court decision to show that different people define self defense differently?
just a question, would you anons accept if your gf wanted to avoid sex until she was ready to have a baby?
>>153378161>What’s wrong with the quotes there?That's not a quote of a statute. That's a quote of an article paraphrasing an unspecified statute or statutes.>>153378161>What’s wrong with using a Supreme Court decision to show that different people define self defense differently?Because that is not a good proxy for societal views on self defense. Statutes written by elected legislators are better in that regard, and display remarkable similarity, as I remarked upon.
>>153378147I gave you a direct quote from your source that backed up my point.This is about whether silence is agreement. Not about whether I am required to give evidence if I have a disagreement.> Your silence can indicate your approval and acceptance of the arguments advanced by your opponent. In Western law, silence can be reasonably interpreted as “implied consent.” According to Columbia Legal Encyclopedia, "In law, active acquiescence or silent compliance by a person legally capable of consenting may be evidenced by silence when silence implies concurrence."
>>153378183only if I thought she was wife material
>>153377163>>153377078>>153377035They have no brain, or heart, or digits, they are basically a detached teratoma. You're stupid.
>>153378183No because I don't want a kid and there's not just vaginal sex. Just get a different girlfriend who matches.
>>153378044> A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.Unlike New York there is no duty to retreat before using deadly force in Florida https://law.justia.com/codes/florida/title-xlvi/chapter-776/section-776-012/
>>153377926Asking for clarification of a term>>153374370 is not failing to meet what your source calls the burden of rebuttal.
>>153378157See:>>153378229
>>153378194> That's not a quote of a statute. That's a quote of an article paraphrasing an unspecified statute or statutes.So what?
>>153378144How are they applying the statues different from how they are written?
>>153374672You didn’t specify you wanted statutes here or a broad societal agreement. Asking for that now when the request is met is moving the goalposts.
>>153378195You removed a quote from its context after denying it even existed.Here's another definition that's not as leyman that took seconds to find.>Rebuttal burden refers to the obligation of the party opposing a claim to provide counterarguments or evidence that disprove or weaken the initial argument presented. This concept is crucial as it determines who must respond to the assertions made and shapes the flow of a debate or legal argument. Understanding rebuttal burden helps to clarify the dynamics of argumentation and the responsibilities of each party in a discoursehttps://fiveable.me/hs-speech-debate/key-terms/rebuttal-burdenAnd while I'm at it, here's from Wikipedia on the forementioned "sealioning">Rhetorically, sealioning fuses persistent questioning—often about basic information, information easily found elsewhere, or unrelated or tangential points—with a loudly-insisted-upon commitment to reasonable debate. It disguises itself as a sincere attempt to learn and communicate. Sealioning thus works both to exhaust a target's patience, attention, and communicative effort, and to portray the target as unreasonable. You've been a disingenuous cunt all thread. (You) know you have no argument, so your only hope is to try to be an annoyance with all of this pestering bad faith questioning that could have taken you literally seconds to google. You didn't care to see if it was an established term first before you started accusing me of inventing it, because you don't actually care. You just want to wear at everyone's patience until someone, anyone, relinquishes any point, no matter how petty or irrelevant, just so you can try to say that your original point had any merit whatsoever. It's fucking obvious dude, and you're too stupid to try pulling off this kind of understandness.
>>153378434thats an even more layman source. it's got no author listed.
>>153378434See this:>>153378260
>>153378284>>153378229That New York statute is poorly written. While it seems to require retreat before using deadly force in this bit>the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;this contradicts the scenario in the first section>The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if So, as written, retreat rather than using deadly force is only required in situations of safety, but also when someone is killing another person in front of you, or about to stab you. But that still leaves us with >>153378122. What is the point of bringing this up?>>153378304>So what?So it doesn't demonstrate a self defense statute at odds with my earlier statement. That would require quoting the actual statute.>>153378317From the quote earlier, the statutes specify that people can use violence to defend themselves, and that the courts do not operate by this.>>153378345The original context was >>153374537>Can we compare that to other areas? Does it matter that people disagree when violence is justified in self defense?in which an anon brought up self defense as an area where people disagree similarly to abortion. When this was brought up again >>153374620 I pointed out that self defense is actually pretty consent. From the discussion that followed, you can see that everyone involved knew that I was referring to statutes, with different matters brought in after none were found to conflict with that statement. And this was obviously given as an indicator of how self defense is not like abortion in that people generally don't disagree much about it.
>>153378526>From the discussion that followed, you can see that everyone involved knew that I was referring to statutes, with different matters brought in after none were found to conflict with that statement. And this was obviously given as an indicator of how self defense is not like abortion in that people generally don't disagree much about it.Nope, im pretty sure the only person talking to you was me, and you didn't start requesting statutes till here: >>153378098
>>153378561>and you didn't start requesting statutes till hereBecause I didn't think it was necessary in a casual discussion on /co/. Check first reply >>153374722>You clearly don't know anything about self defense laws if you think there's no difference in policy. Some places require you to flee before you can use self defense. some will consider it a crime if you use more force or better weapons than the attacker.These are clearly statutory issues. I suppose for future reference I should go full robot from the start.
>>153378526>That New York statute is poorly written. While it seems to require retreat before using deadly force in this bit>>the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;>this contradicts the scenario in the first section>>The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if >So, as written, retreat rather than using deadly force is only required in situations of safety, but also when someone is killing another person in front of you, or about to stab you.There's nothing poorly written about it. It's called nuance. Basically, If someone is trying to kill you and you can escape, you are required to escape. If you can't escape, you can use lethal force in self defense. An example, suppose you are in a car with its motor on and have a gun at the ready. Someone comes running at you from 30 feet with a knife and screaming they'll kill you. You already have a pistol drawn, but since you can easily hit the gas and escape, you are obliged to escape. But in florida you can sit there and shoot them instead.>>153378526>But that still leaves us with >>153378122. What is the point of bringing this up?It clearly shows a difference.
>>153378490That's an arbitrary criteria that doesn't address anything either of us have stated.You keep doing this. Instead of addressing what's in front of you, you twist your brain into a pretzel trying to find ways to avoid it. Let's recap this conversation:>>"Human life" needs to be defined by pro-lifers>That's shifting the burden of rebuttal since abortionists propose an action and want their opponents to define the terms relevant to their own stance>>"Burden of rebuttal" isn't a thing! You made it up!>Here is a definition>>According to another part of that article, just denial is enough!>That article is a layman's context. Here is one that's more formal>>T-That one doesn't have an author!Do you think anyone's as lost as (you) are?
>>153378526>From the quote earlier, the statutes specify that people can use violence to defend themselves, and that the courts do not operate by this.No, they allow violence, it just has to be proportional to the threat.Even if what you are saying is true, it doesn't matter, since my point is that people have different standards of describing what self defense is.If what you are saying is true, it actually improves my point since it shows that different high up members of government in the same country can have significantly different interpretations of legal concepts.
I wish I wasn’t a foid. I don’t wanna be associated with retarded shit like this. Even if the thing’s not sentient *yet* it’s still murder of a to-be human being. Why’s this so hard for people to wrap their heads around? “ohh my body, my choice,” Well what about the to-be person, fag, that’s their body too isn’t it? Fuck everything
>>153378704>>>"Human life" needs to be defined by pro-lifers>>That's shifting the burden of rebuttal since abortionists propose an action and want their opponents to define the terms relevant to their own stanceNo, I asked for a definition because you didn't like when I said an embryo has Human DNA.I didn't make any statement about whether it is a human life is relevant to morality of ending life. >>153378704>>That article is a layman's context. Here is one that's more formal>>>T-That one doesn't have an author!That's not a more formal source. The first one was a college textbook and had a college professor as an author. It's one that would probably be acceptable to cite in a paper, but the second source doesn't meet that standard.
>>153378645>It's called nuance.It's called self contradiction, which is bad. >Basically, If someone is trying to kill you and you can escape, you are required to escape.Nope. You can beat them up all you want, so long as they don't die. And if you think that you or others would not be completely safe while you escape, you can straight up kill the threatening person.>but since you can easily hit the gas and escape, you are obliged to escape.Not if escaping would pose a threat to anyone, including others in the road or the knife guy himself. You could even hit him non-lethally with the car. The duty to retreat only applies to situations where retreating can be done with "complete personal safety" to oneself and others, but it supposedly also applies to situations where someone is actively killing another person. That's a contradiction.>It clearly shows a difference.>>153374672>At an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. I haven't seen a self-defense standard that's been articulated to the point of policy that's different from that.The New York statute allows violence in self defense under that condition.>>153378710>No, they allow violence, it just has to be proportional to the threat.>>153374977>>Under the law, people are allowed to use force to “prevent unjust infringement of one’s or another person’s legal interest,” as long as there are reasonable grounds for that act and the degree of force does not go beyond reasonable bounds.>So that agrees with what I said earlier. It's just that, in practice, self defense is illegal because authorities decide that actual self defense cases which obviously qualify by the stated policy do not actually qualify.>>153378710>my point is that people have different standards of describing what self defense is.So, can you quote a statute that disagrees with my earlier statement?
>>153378809>I didn't make any statement about whether it is a human life is relevant to morality of ending life.To clarify:I didn't state that human life is more valuable than non human life or vice versa.My only statement about the humanity of zygotes, fertilized eggs, or embyros was that they had human DNA (well thats in the case of humans).Humanity is something that can be defined in a lot of different ways, and personhood is more important than humanity (which is another can of worms).
it’s GOING TO BE A HUMAN EITHER WAY FUCKWITS
>>153378817>It's called self contradiction, which is bad.If the laws are insane and contradictory in one place and clear cut in another, that just proves my point that the standards can be significantly different.
>>153378889>that just proves my point that the standards can be significantly different.Not with respect to what self defense is, legally speaking. New York is just like every other place posted here so far in allowing violence in response to an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm.
>>153378809>because you didn't like when I said an embryo has Human DNA.The first mention of DNA comes in >153374158, well after that point. Thanks for making this lie easy to debunk.>The first one was a college textbookFair enough on that, and while you're on that page, read the full thing, take notes, reread the Burden of Predumption, and take your faggotry to-go.
>>153378852>I didn't state that human life is more valuable than non human life or vice versa.Noone said anything like this.
>>153374977>>153378144>>153378526No, the actual law says it has to be proportional:> Article 21 (Self-Defense)>(1) An act which is performed in order to defend one's own or another person's legal interest from impending and unjust infringement shall not be punishable if there are reasonable grounds for that act.>(2) When a preventive act has exceeded reasonable limits, the punishment may be mitigated or remitted depending on the circumstances.>(3) In the case of paragraph (2), an act caused by fear, shock, excitement, or confusion at night or under other uneasy conditions shall not be punishable.https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_mobile/viewer.do?hseq=60888&type=part&key=9
>>153378951Oh, finally a quote. >No, the actual law says it has to be proportional:That's not what the part you quoted says. And even then, I would say that a proportional response to an imminent threat of great bodily harm or death is to kill the threat. Is there a statutory definition of how to determine a proportional response to various threats?
>>153378942>The first mention of DNA comes in >153374158, well after that point. Thanks for making this lie easy to debunk.how is that a lie?My premise was basically that a brain activity is basically what gives a living thing's life moral weight. (as implied here: >>153374158)You claimed my premise was something else here: >>153374089
>>153378987>That's not what the part you quoted says. And even then, I would say that a proportional response to an imminent threat of great bodily harm or death is to kill the threat. Reasonable and proportionate would mean the same thing in this context. >Is there a statutory definition of how to determine a proportional response to various threats?none listed there. They probably intended to leave that up to the court. Stuff like that, especially when vague, is typically is left to the courts.
>>153371748Correct
>>153378917then we can say everyone agrees on allowing abortion when its morally justified.
>>153378917>>153374370>For abortion to be moral, (you) must then justify when human life begins, which pro-abortion parties can't agree on,In regards to self defense, just like how people disagree on when human life begins, people disagree on what is a threat of imminent death or bodily harm.
>>153379251The clear difference being that the threat is dependent on unpredictable human action from the criminal, while the beginning of human life is a biological, scientific, objective process which can be studied, and that obviously starts at conception.
>>153379311>the beginning of human life is a biological, scientific, objective process which can be studied, and that obviously starts at conception.People also disagree on what makes life valuable in both situations.Whether human dna is enough to do it, or abstract things like personhood or some conception of "humanity",Merely being human isn't enough to give life value in some perspectives, they only care if it has brain activity.
>>153377688but 4chan is not dying, you astrosplifing
yeah come to think of it, the debate from the "pro-choice side" is usually more over when does it start being a person, rather than when does it start being alive (especially since the sperm and ova are already alive and have human dna).Though there are stances that don't care about the child's personhood while it's in the womb. Some of those were mentioned earlier.
