Well? When does life begin? At a conveniently arbitrary point point beyond conception?
>>18585329Human life begins at the moment of conception by divine intervention and a special creation. Everything else is basically a soulless robot.
>>18585329Life began a couple billion years ago. If you’re going to stroll off into trying to split hairs in an attempt to argue against reproductive rights, you might as well just post one of those threads about how much you hate women. Because ultimately the forced birth camp is about turning parenthood into a punishment given the absolute refusal of forced birthers to deal with the causes behind the need for abortions.
I mean I agree that a fertilized egg cell is already alive, but I don't agree that this somehow results in a situation, where you can't abort it.So yeah, it's alive, but it should be legal to abort it anyway. You don't want cruel people, who cut up their own offspring into a thousands slices to reproduce, do you?
>>18585329Thanks for an actual useful thread. Life begins at conception. God said it begins when the life is growing in the womb, conception.Sex is for a husband and a wife. Anything else is immoral and just faggots enjoying theirselves without purpose. They are ruining society and their own temple, their body.Furthermore, unbelievers don’t have anything to show for their scientific proofs. Remember when dolly came out? The cloned sheep. It died. So did all of the other clones. They even euthanized it when it got tumors. Which also scared the public that clones can’t even live very long. They still had to get a sperm and an egg.Now the board has some thread up going “look! we took viruses and E. coli and took their guts out and just poured lipid layers over it to create skin creating a new Frankenstein creature that still lives, creating a new form of life! Science!”Create something to SHOW for it. Something that helps us and we can see it and go wow this actually helps us and changes our life for the better. Wow I know about this 40 years down the line and thank the Creator for sending us this scientific invention that we still use to this very day.Why would I want to remember things that aren’t helping anyone? Thanks.The bacteria that they claimed to find on mars didn’t make us find a new form of bacteria and unlock more secret cures or anything. That means science has become corporate news media and is just for entertainment of celebrating unbelief to try and get you to leave God, with no other purpose.
>>18585427This is the position I hold too. I feel really sad for the babies that get aborted, but they were going to be born to parents that hate them or worse
>>18585427Yea, I do want the country filled with people having to raise their babies.
>>18585402I love women and babies. Enjoy trying to twist that.They are having to deal with reality and the law of giving birth in a society that punishes you for immorality.No, we won’t bend or erase your sins. You are a murderer.That is Jesus Christ’s judgement and God’s judgement. And by law, that means the government also judges you. When you become a criminal you already made a premeditated decision against your own conscience.I watched as abortion clinics became armed against protests or witnessing, your days are coming soon.
>>18585329Specifically for the abortion debate, it is life at conception but that does not immediately elevate it to personhood, and it is personhood that we actually value in humans, not cellular activity, so abortion is still permissibly even if there is life at conception.
>>18585856>and it is personhood that we actually value in humans,Then why do we value babies?
>>18585329it only starts being a human life in any way that matters once it starts exhibiting independent higher brain activity that's not just responding to stimuli. so that'd be either REM sleep or when the fetus starts kickingit also does not have the right to use another human life's body and risk their life for its survival
>>18585762>Create something to SHOW for it. Something that helps us and we can see it and go wow this actually helps us and changes our life for the better.motherfucker you're writing this shit ON such an invention
>>18585402>Because ultimately the forced birth camp is about turning parenthood into a punishment given the absolute refusal of forced birthers to deal with the causes behind the need for abortions.What are those causes, according to you, and how would you deal with them?
>>18585861We consider babies to be people, and even if they're not particularly developed at birth or for a while after there's an expectation that they will continue to develop into 'more' of a person.>but don't we also expect a single-celled embryo to continue to develop into 'more' of a person?Yes, but there are different stages of development. Someone would obviously be more bummed out at losing their 5 year old kid as opposed to their 5 day old fetus, at 5 days the fetus is so undeveloped that we can't possibly say it has any form of conscious experience.
>>18585877Why does conscious experience matter? Is it moral to kill coma patients?
>>18585866>it only starts being a human life in any way that matters once it starts exhibiting independent higher brain activity that's not just responding to stimuli. so that'd be either REM sleep or when the fetus starts kickingCompletely arbitrary nonsense. Most humans don't develop consciousness until they're around 2 years old. Zero infants are conscious. Most adult animals are more intelligent and capable than a human infant. Stupid bullshit.>it also does not have the right to use another human life's body and risk their life for its survivalThe mother literally created it through her actions, it isn't some alien parasite. What is this utterly insane line of "reasoning"?
>>18585877Most mothers who have miscarriages are extremely traumatized and grief-stricken by the experience, so nope.
>>18585884>Why does conscious experience matter?It is what we truly value in other human beings. We want people that we can interact with, people who can express ideas and opinions and so on. Cellular activity is not valuable beyond keeping the conscious experience going.>Is it moral to kill coma patients?If it is not expected that they will wake up then yes, absolutely. >>18585893In the cases where people want to have children then generally they are very saddened when bad fortune robs them of this opportunity, yes. I am not advocating that abortion should be forced upon all women, let the women who want to have children have children and let the ones who want to have abortions have abortions.
>>18585899>If it is not expected that they will wake up then yes, absolutely.But it is expected that fetuses will "wake up" (become conscious over time)...
>>18585899Mothers are perfectly content with their babies suckling their nipples and saying googoo gaga. They don't feel nothing towards them until they're capable of holding philosophical discussions. In fact, many mothers express their wish that their babies would stay that way forever. You're extremely out of touch with reality.
>>18585889>starts yapping about consciousness when no one mentioned thatmoving the goalposts again I see. sasuga sharia-chan, at least you've successfully proven that you don't have consciousness
>>18585903Correct, but they have not yet become conscious for a first time. That is when they become a person.>>18585904The baby interacting with its mother is part of that valuable conscious experience, yes.
>>18585914Babies are not conscious and don't need to be in order to suck on their mothers' nipples. What you're saying makes no sense.
>>18585925Of course they're conscious. They look around at stuff, interact with their environment by reaching for and trying to stuff absolutely everything into their mouth, they even make some expressions of preference on basic things like who they like or want to be held by etc. They're not as highly developed as adults but they are clearly more advanced and display signs of personhood in ways that a 2 day old embryo can't.What do you think in valuable in a human? Mass? Cellular activity? Are two people in a permanent coma worth more than one healthy conscious person?
>>18585933By this definition, toads are conscious. You're a fucking retard.
>>18585967Are you operating on some obscure definition of consciousness that nobody else uses or how are babies no conscious? Is a person not conscious until they can hold PhD level philosophy discussions?
И oткyдa тaкиe нeдopaзвинyтыe бepyтcя? Haвepнeкя этo Aмepикa/Эвpocoюз. У вac жe c oбpaзoвaниeм пиздeц твopитьcя. Пoyчилиcь бы вы в CHГ, нe пиcaли бы здecь тaкoй хyйни.
>>18585329Red herring. Nobody denies that human life begins at conception. The question is at what level of complexity and intellect do we start giving that life protections and rights.
>>18585329Shit comparison because "bacteria on mars" includes said bacteria's whole life cycle while "clump of cells" refers to a state of being argued to predate the life cycle.Granted, it's a retarded argument I fully disagree with (life clearly begins at conception), but that doesn't salvage your comparison.
>>18585427>I don't agree that this somehow results in a situation, where you can't abort it.That's a perfectly condivisble statement and I agree with you.Keep in mind it's strictly equivalent to "it's ok to kill children when expedient" and it will be thrown in your face by every opponent with more than a single brain cell, especially if you're not equally open to similar calculations in other types of policy like death penalty, euthanasia, etc.
>>18585974You're so fucking stupid.
>>18586011If you're so smart then explain what makes human life valuable.
>>18585808You want to punish women and don’t care about babies. That’s the problem. You view parenthood as a punishment. You desire to use a child as a weapon against their parents. Calling that love is comical. >>18585875Let’s see, there’s access to contraception, there’s the social stigma and lowering of value from the bodily changes pregnancy brings, there’s the economic impact including lack of career advancement protection, addiction related issues, criminality, unreliable partners, and the list goes on. I’m not even going to get into the medical needs sphere, but that btw is where all the ‘late term’ abortions come from. Which given those pregnancies are wanted and instead terminated out of medical necessity rather than any outside need, I presume I don’t need to argue in favor of.
>>18586038And how would you go about dealing with these issues?
Do you want a scientific or a biblical answer?
>>18586161NTA but access to abortion for one
>>18586183So you have a circular argument where you accuse anti-abortion people of not wanting to deal with the causes of women wanting abortions, but your solution to those issues is just going ahead with abortions. Okay.
>>18586038No, the parents who sinned against their own body view it as punishment because of the law. You hate the law because you don’t want to go under it , because as a murder is going to the electric chair, under premeditated first degree murder, you brought arms to the abortion clinics because you don’t want anyone telling you you were wrong. But you will be.>>18585867The computer was built by Americans and we were white Christian Europeans who arrived with ship and cannon. And we didn’t mate with the Indians we kept ourselves pure from both the tyranny of the monarchy and the Roman Catholic and Protestant wars and we also kept our self pure from things like the Spanish Inquisition.You however all you have to offer is unbelief and filth. Like Obama and bill clinton and Joe Biden.When the laws kick you to your own unbelieving country to live with abortionists, good riddance in the name of Jesus Christ!
>>18586338The computer was not created by Christians.
>>18585402>strawmanI love women! I hate abortions!
>>18586199that was my first post ITT so no idea what you're talking about
>>18585329>Well? When does life begin?"Spurred on by Leeuwenhoek’s innovations in microscopy, Leibniz therefore announced, ‘not only is there life everywhere [but] there are also infinite degrees of it’. Or, conversely, ‘there is nothing fallow, nothing sterile, nothing dead in the universe’. (This of course was the basis of his fractal vision of each quantum of matter being a ‘populated world’, itself containing further populous worlds, with telescoping interminability.)Each single life is contained within indefinitely many other lives and includes indefinitely many others in turn—*without remainder*—because, by the very same token, there is simply no external medium or environing death within which life could be excluded or suspended. By introducing infinitesimals into biology, then, Leibniz effectively biologized infinity.This applied both spatially and temporally: such an outlook coupled perfectly with William Harvey’s *omne vivum ex ovo injunction* (‘all life comes from life’) and the embryological idea of preformation (which proposed that—through infinite ‘scatulation’ or ‘encasement’—organic reproduction operates essentially like a never-ending Matryoshka doll).And so, if all life comes from other life, then, as far back as you can go, there is always life. What this meant is that the *inorganic simply didn’t exist*. Indeed, the very term ‘inorganic’ in the modern sense only appeared later, around 1800, in response to innovations in geochemistry and massive shifts in world view. (Previously, the archaic ‘inorganical’ had long referred, instead, to something *incorporeal* or *spiritual*. Here, the fact that the antonym of ‘life’ was not ‘death’ but ‘afterlife’ is incredibly telling.) <...> Thus, all matter was considered essentially biogenic."
>>185864582/3"And so, via the Principle of Continuity, homogeneity in space (infinite divisibility) was taken to also entail homogeneity in time (eternal inclusion of lives within parent lives, back to the beginning of time). In short, matter can have no ‘memory’, and can ‘tell no tale’, because it is always, everywhere and everywhen, the same (that is, basically alive) and is so *continuously and interminably*. Preformationism precludes memory in any meaningful sense, because everything is already contained (with infinite divisibility) within the present moment. ""In 1668, Nicolas Steno (1638–1686) had announced his *Stratigraphic Law of Superposition*: the founding gesture of modern geognosy and geohistory. Steno was the first to note explicitly that stratigraphic succession correlates with temporal succession. In other words, that *depth is time*. (Hence, centuries later, McPhee’s coinage of ‘deep time’.) This marked the inception of the notion of *depth as mnemonic and temporal retrogression* that would later be so vital to psychoanalysis or so-called ‘depth psychology’ ""Importantly, Steno’s Stratigraphic Law expedited the scientific formulation of an entirely chronometric notion of time <...> since it implied that *all space and body is itself nothing but coagulated time*. <...> in 1824, the great astronomer William Herschel, having realized that many observable stars were likely already long extinct, consequently observed that something like Steno’s Law applies just as much to astronomy as to geognosy and that the Milky Way is thus itself a ‘kind of chronometer’.)"
>>18586458>>185864593/3"*Every object an hourglass*. Time is not produced by bodies and motions; all bodily motions, without exception, are the effluvia of Grand Time. The somaticized reading of ‘memory’ proposed by Spinal Catastrophism descends directly from this revelation, via a particular transliteration of Steno’s Law onto vertebral levels <...> somatic containment catastrophically becomes reformatted as *self-abruption* rather than *self-inclusion*. The Principle of Continuity, along with its stipulation of infinite soma-divisibility and self-similarity, is rescinded and *depth* becomes available as an internalized heterogeneity, giving rise to something more like a Principle of Mereological Alienation. <...> When the indivisibility of ordinal time is read through embodied self-divisibility, the body becomes a thread to be unravelled. Thus the geognostic Law of Superposition came to compromise and revoke that of Leibnizian Continuity.""That is, if we contain the grandest time, then we carry within us our outside, the trace of our prior nonexistence (in more contemporary terms, this is the organism’s internal pact with its own dissolution through dissipative renewal—the fact that we must constantly die in tiny amounts in order to stave off dying entirely).""Matter is amnesiac mind <...> the conviction, among many practicing naturalists, that the entire external universe was simply the fossilized museum of various arrested stages of evolutionary development, ‘relics’ or ‘abortions’ from mind’s unconscious voyage unto self-consciousness. "
>>18586161As that anon, aside from the fact that forced birth advocates being the ones invested in ending abortions and thus being their task to sort out? There’s better social safety nets, better legal protections, more accountability for business owners who penalize an employee for being a parent, making birth control free/readily available, and so on. Which still amuses me because the people most likely to oppose access to birth control, worker protections, and social safety nets also tend to be in favor of forced births. I’d further point out that being pregnant makes a woman less valuable as a person. Weight gain, stretch marks, sagging breasts, etc. It’s akin to a man losing an inch of height, two inches of hair line, and half an inch of cock length.>>18586338What kind of schizophrenic thirdie babble is this? Arms to abortion clinics? What? Yes. People going to get a medical procedure don’t want to be harassed and threatened by crazies like you. Fuck, how is that hard to understand? Take your Thorazine.>>18586366No you don’t. You just want to use state coercion to turn parenthood into a punishment. If you cared about women as more than objects of scorn you’d stop imposing on them.
Sepirothposting: The Thread
>>18586010>similar calculations in other types of policy like death penalty, euthanasia, etc.Why? It's not like it's a logical entailment I need to hold to exactly zero broad overarching principles These things can be judged on a case by case basis
>>18585329By definition, it's human life from the moment of zygote formation, even discounting completely all "humanity" from the argument. Personhood to be fair can be argued to take a much longer time to be considered to have occured
>>18585329There’s a difference between sentient life and non sentient life
>>18585893I'm against the termination and abortion overall, but his point was that at say a week, the foetus really is functionally to your brain just a rapidly dividing clump of cells (probably way more "auto-terminate" without even realising they're there at that stage) and it's not really the same mentally as a "real" miscarriage at that stage but effectively a failed implantation in terms of emotional effect
>>18585329At conception. That's just scientifically accurate. However, the woman has to host and give birth to the child, so it should still be her choice until birth.
>>18585866It's human life the instance a zygote is formed
>>18585993Wrong, calling it a "clump of cells" isn't giving it the respect of a human life.
>>18588179It doesn't deserve respect. It has not formed the sufficient complexity of mental capacity to deserve that respect. These cancer cells in a Petri dish are "human life" but no one would argue they deserve respect.
>>18588179I made this point in a previous thread on abortion ethics, but babies don't exist until after 32 weeks in my eyes. Before that, it is basically impossible for them to grow as a human outside of parasitic attachment to the mother's uterus. >>18588328Like what this anon says, before that point they are embryos with human-derived DNA coalescing into a particular shape resembling a baby. HeLa cells were once a full-grown woman, they have the 23 chromosomes of a haploid human cell. Are the cells human? Most conservatives would argue not I think.Anyways like others have also said, late term abortions basically only happen for medical necessity. Nobody carries a fetus for 30 weeks and then realizes it's time to take it out, the abortion happens way before for those cases. These are women who have picked out a crib and painted the new room, just to be told that it is a threat to their life or to itself
At conception a new human being/body starts its existence. Abortion is the murder of another human being. I'm even like a hardcore antinatalist and even I understand that abortion is wrong. The way some modern women treat it like birth control disgusts me. Sickens me.
>>18588179Niggers are technically fully grown humans but they dont deserve rights or life either
>>18588641>Abortion is the murder of another human being.Murder is unlawlul killing. If abortion is legal, it is by definiton not murder.>and even I understand that abortion is wrongThere is nothing wrong with killing. It's merely the question of legality, not ethics.Soldiers, executioners, black ops, biblical prophets - all of them kill.>The way some modern women treat it like birth control disgusts me. Sickens me.>modernOh, you sweet summer child...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Paleolithic_and_Neolithic"Many Neolithic groups routinely resorted to infanticide in order to control their numbers so that their lands could support them. Joseph Birdsell believed that infanticide rates in prehistoric times were between 15% and 50% of the total number of births,[19]"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Middle_Ages"Whereas theologians and clerics preached sparing their lives, newborn abandonment continued as registered in both the literature record and in legal documents.[14]:16 According to William Lecky, exposure in the early Middle Ages, as distinct from other forms of infanticide, "was practiced on a gigantic scale with absolute impunity, noticed by writers with most frigid indifference and, at least in the case of destitute parents, considered a very venial offence".[55]:355–56""very high sex ratios were common in even late medieval Europe, which may indicate sex-selective infanticide.[58]"
>>18588179>calling it a "clump of cells" isn't giving it the respect of a human lifeWe are a minuscule sample of agonized matter, comprising genetic survival monsters, fished from a cosmic ocean of vile mutants, by a pitiless killing machine of infinite appetite. All health, beauty, intelligence, and social grace has been teased from a vast butcher’s yard of unbounded carnage, requiring incalculable eons of massacre to draw forth even the subtlest of advantages. This is not only a matter of the bloody grinding mills of selection, either, but also of the innumerable mutational abominations thrown up by the madness of chance, as it pursues its directionless path to some negligible preservable trait, and then — still further — of the unavowable horrors that ‘fitness’ (or sheer survival) itself predominantly entails.Crucially, any attempt to escape this fatality — or, more realistically, any mere accidental and temporary reprieve from it — leads inexorably to the undoing of its work. To the precise extent that we are spared, even for a moment, we degenerate — and this Iron Law applies to every dimension and scale of existence: phylogenetic and ontogenetic, individual, social, and institutional, genomic, cellular, organic, and cultural. There is no machinery extant, or even rigorously imaginable, that can sustain a single iota of attained value outside the forges of Hell.
>>18588641Oh so you agree the HeLa cells are human and it would be murder to kill them then? They fit literally every qualification for human being you've given. So you must think smashing that Petri dish is murder then. If not then we know you're nothing more than a liar.
>>18585329>When does life begin?As your image notes, bacteria are life. Being considered "life" is not a relevant criterion for moral debates.
If they're too young to say no,It's okay to let them go.If they're wanted for serious crime,They don't need any more time.If they'd rather not see the next sunrise,It's fine to speed up their demise.Pro-abortion,Pro-execution,Pro-euthanasia,Pro-death.
>>18588785Oh, before I forget. I'm also pro-leftism, pro-atheism and pro-technocracy. I'm on the right side of history.
>>18585993>The question is at what level of complexity and intellect do we start giving that life protections and rights.Wrong. The question is whether or not that's even a valid question.
Retard doesn't know the difference between life and sapience
Retard doesn't know the difference between sapience and moral worth.
>>18588809>moralMeaningless spooks
>>18588819Good job removing yourself from the discussion.
>>18585889>Completely arbitrary nonsense. Most humans don't develop consciousness until they're around 2 years old. Zero infants are conscious.And this is why Jewish religious doctrine allows abortion until the infant "draws its first breathe" outside the mother's body.
>>18588361>late-term abortionReminds me of the tripfag Indre Gelzinis on /fa/ lol
>>18588689So if it were legal, it would be okay to ranggape-fuck you to death?
>>18588862>So if it were legalIt is illegal, because an alternative would be a medieval Icelandic model of blood feuds.Not due to some innate sense of morality, retard. But an emergent system of checks and counterbalances, a-la cold-war nuclear-weapon dick-waving.Because either an entire human network does not want their fellow productive member to get randomly attacked by a random retard, or some Mr Moneybags does not want his peons/wage-slaves to attack each other instead of profitting him.
>>18588881>dodges the question Gangrape is a matter of legality, not ethics. Because gangrape is legal, you can cry about your asshole.
>>18585402Literally just keep your legs closed or use the pill bitch
>>18585329>Well? When does life begin? It doesn't matter because that's not the real argument, the real argument is uncouth, uncomfortable and leaves very little room for compromise while also being entirely subjective and arbitrary in both cases. The argument is actually whether you value the innocence and potential course of life of an unborn, unfulfilled potential child over the established life and known motivations and desires of an (assumed) adult human. There's no easy answer, and choosing one or the other is based on subjective qualitative criteria. Which is why it just makes us mad and want to punch the other side, both think it's obvious. It isn't. I place greater value on the established life btw. >At a conveniently arbitrary point point beyond conception?Yes, as all things in law lines are established arbitrarily based on convenience, convention and spirit the law was written in.
>>18589724>Gangrape is a matter of legality, not ethics.Yes, and?You suddenly start *liking* being gangraped if it gets decriminalized, moron? No.Does *you* not liking it imply that all humans are equal and that any such activity must on principle cease *because* of *your* empathy? Again, no.Does "not-liking it" suddenly make it a question of ethics? Again, no.Any civility in behavior is still a "mutually-assured destruction" thing. A question of whether you are strong enough not to be fucked with. And that's about it.*If* (and that's a big if) you are a *useful*, *valuable*, *productive* group member, your group can put up just enough resistance, that any perpetrator would think twice and will seek an easier, more vulnerable target. The weak/useless/helpless (aka, lacking any safety network), on the other hand, suffer, have suffered and will suffer. Such is life.
