How do I convince a leftist that abortion is unethical?

How do I convince a leftist that abortion is unethical?

Let's say for the sake of argument that it's a white woman.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=zk6gOeggViw
archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/108681725
str.org/articles/the-s.l.e.d.-test
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It isn't bro....youtube.com/watch?v=zk6gOeggViw

fuck off

we dont need any more polluting humans in this world. Not like the baby cares its being killed

It should be illegal to have more than one child

>leftists
You mean non-Christfags.

Abortion makes too much sense not to support it.

It's her body, her choice

because killing a living human is wrong

ask them if they'd have liked to have been aborted.

when they say "its just a clump of cells", remind the fool that every living thing is a clump of cells.

they have literally no argument.

It's not about ethics
The only time ethics are involved is when you're talking about what happens to the fetus after the abortion
It's a personal decision, there's no need to try to convince anyone that your opinions should decide how they act

Potentially flushing:

A woman
A Library
A taxpayer

>Oh wait .. . .

Ask why murder of pregnant woman is considered double homicide, if fetus is not a human.

>Two young adults with no sense of responsibility get pregnant
>Child gets raised in a broken home where its largely neglected
>Parents come to hate one another and more than likely get seperated where the male is forced to pay the female child support regardless of if he is a good care taker or not
>because of his broken childhood, the kid probably ends up being a homo sexual

or

>Off the kid before he even has a functioning brain. Young adults can either separate after a fling or peruse a meaningful relationship where they may one day be ready to have a child

Tell me which is worse.

>killing a living human
but user it hasn't lived yet

This

FUck damn otto complete

>Liberal

It's spitting in the face of the most amazing miracle of the universe, which is life.

That being said, mostly niggers get abortions and we certainly don't need more of them.

archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/108681725

murdering babies. that's definitely worse.

you edgy braindead NEET

bypass abortion completely and ask what kind of behavior is resulting in accidental unwanted pregnancies. Then talk about the cost and the trauma to the woman getting the abortion and how it's easier to just avoid the whole thing in the first place.

is it alive or not?

that's right.

its a living clump of cells, but its not a living human. it is a potential living human, but it is not a living human.

cut abortion off at beginning of third trimester.

>it should be illegal to have more than one child
Hmm, who is known for pushing this narrative in white countries?

You don't.
So long as it's during the first trimester, you're not aborting anything worth talking about (it's like killing skin cells)

If it's in terms of potential lives, masturbation should be outlawed and men who aren't able to convince women to breed with them constantly are considered murderers as the sperm all eventually die and are replaced.

In my opinion, you at least need a brain to even begin to discuss whether a life is worth preserving

>mfw people unironically pretend to actually give a shit about killing a fetus

No one should be against abortions. They should be against the federal funding of planned parenthood which principally violates a lot of the personal responsibility/anti-socialist values that conservatives hold. It's a completely valid reason - albeit potentially a retarded one since the alternative very well may be a worse society in the long run - but still a valid reason nonetheless

Ask them how would you feel if an astronaut decided to light the only single celled organism on Mars on fire. Pro choice is not murder said liberal fags

It isn't.

What is unethical is to force a child to be raised by someone who has no business being a parent.
People who would abort automatically fall into that category.

You don't because abortion isn't unethical. Not to mention we don't need this many people on the planet anyways

>Not like the baby cares it's being killed

Actually that's exactly what it's like

If a drunk driver kills a pregnant woman in a car crash, how many manslaughter charges should be brought against him?

It is not, in the United States.

Abortion is evil and degenerate. Meaning only the evil and degenerate have abortions. Less minorities/criminals(one in the same) means better country.

By that logic you better be a vegan or something faggot

what the fuck ? well, you're setting the goalposts wherever you want, arent you? If you define "living human being" as someone who comes out of a vagina, then it's impossible to convince your stupid ass.

if, however, you use the real definitions of "alive" and "human" you will find that unborn babies are in fact living humans.

Sperm is haploid

Cells of a fetus are diploid

>ask them if they'd have liked to have been aborted.

Anyone who answers no to this is ignorant as fuck by the way.

Why would you want a mother that would've aborted her child if she could to raise a human being? That's essentially what you're advocating for OP, for a shitty person to raise a person and then hope they don't turn out so shitty.

Look at the ghettos full of niggers and you'll see the end result.

Make a bunch of parallels to any Jainism or animal rights bs they believe in and watch the tears flow when they can't argue back.
>That is, if they don't try shouting over you and want a real discussion
Then follow up by saying that for prevention practices and to greatly reduce number of abortions to make readily available the morning after pill in free clinics for hood and trailer sluts who made a contraceptive boo-boo, impoverished rape victims, and just about any other dumb slut or rape victim from any other walk of life.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say you can't give a meaningful definition of "human life" that differentiates you from, say, one of your skin cells.

>that nose
>those lips
>that skull shape

Literally nothing wrong with killing proto-niggers.

>ow the edge.jpeg

would you concede now to have been aborted if that's what your mom wanted while she was pregnant?

thinking's hard, i know.

Define alive. If you mean it's a few living cells you should be charged with manslaughter every time you cut your hand.

do you not know the difference between organisms and organs? extrapolate that to your shitty analogy please.

There's a clear difference between a fetus the mother wants, and a fetus nobody wants.

your hand cells arent about to become a baby

Ask if they support infanticide.

There is really no difference between the two.

alive as in an animate organism. it's really not hard to understand. You're making it hard because you're trying to rationalize murder.

TITS OR GTFO

My thoughts on it are this:

If your stance requires you to switch from "beautiful little baby :^)" when you want it, to "fucking tumor, please kill it" when you don't, then there's a pretty big logical discrepency there.

Whether or not a bundle of cells can be called a "human" is irrelevant. It doesn't negate the fact that it will be a human life if given time to grow.

And whatever excuse you want to use, whether you think the world is overpopulated, or you'll be poor if you have to care for it, or it will end up in an adoptive home, does that really call for murder? Should we start murdering homeless people because they are a burden in society? Should we set fire to orphanages? No matter how much of a burden someone is, death is not the answer, and you cannot decide that for them.

Its not really a baby that early in. its a maybe baby, just a pile of mush

>her body her choice
Suppose your 15 year old son wants to tattoo a swastika on his forehead. You'd probably think the idea is fucking retarded and try to stop it.

As a society we tell young women "it's your body, your choice!!! Go fuck chads, YOLO".
By not giving them a stable moral foundation, we think we are allowing them to make that decision for themselves. But the reality is that young women are the most sexually targeted demographic in society (men of all age groups want to fuck them), and they don't yet have a sound psychological foundation to understand what is happening.
As a result, we are not making our young women free, we are signing them off to the cult of hedonism, which subconsciously breeds nihilism and moral relativism. All of which are terrible ideologies.

My point is that sure, her body her choice, in the same way that you deciding tattooing a swastika on your forehead is your body and your choice. That does not make it a good idea, and it does not mean we shouldn't convince people of the contrary.

Do me a favor and spell it out for me.

If I had the option to have never been born that would have been preferable.

/thread

and infants aren't toddlers. What's your point? I can call it a baby if I want to, and you can call it a fetus if you want to. One thing is certain- it is a living (animate and growing) human (human DNA). Just let that sink into your brain.

Please call it what it is.

Infanticide.

If we're gonna start killing babies we may as well start purging other undesireables too. I say we start with the fatties. Anyone over 300 lbs has 8 months to drop 100 lbs or we kill them and turn them into sustainable biodiesel.

This is the ultimate red pill.

>Suppose your 15 year old son wants to tattoo a swastika on his forehead
You couldn't stop him if he decided to do it on his own
But if he wanted to go to a normal tattoo parlor, he would need your permission

>But the reality is that young women are the most sexually targeted demographic in society
>(men of all age groups want to fuck them)
Maybe the problem isn't letting women do whatever they want
Maybe the problem is letting males do whatever they want

Next time, give me an argument that castration of the male population doesn't fix

not that guy, but yes, gladly

I want it really bad but can never have it

No

>If your stance requires you to switch from "beautiful little baby :^)" when you want it, to "fucking tumor, please kill it" when you don't, then there's a pretty big logical discrepency there.
I don't really see how. One man's trash is another man's treasure after all.

>Whether or not a bundle of cells can be called a "human" is irrelevant. It doesn't negate the fact that it will be a human life if given time to grow.

>And whatever excuse you want to use, whether you think the world is overpopulated, or you'll be poor if you have to care for it, or it will end up in an adoptive home, does that really call for murder?

Isn't this rather inconsistent? How can it be murder if it's not a human life yet?

I often wish my mom aborted me or the copious amounts of drugs she used while pregnant did the job but alas

Fetuses aren't infants though. If I'm one thing other than a pragmatists, I'm a stickler for speaking correctly.

Have you ever heard of premature births faggot? How come the ""fetus"" survives when its lacking 1 or 2 months in the womb? A magic spell is it? The sheer fucking hypocrisy of most people supporting abortions is not supporting capital punishment for some criminals.

Show them the aftermath. Such as the picture you have posted. If they still don't have an issue with it then they're fucked in the head and should be sterilized.

>it is a living (animate and growing) human (human DNA).
This definition also describes cancer. I think you need to refine it more.

You don't magically become alive once you leave your mom's gaping pussy, kids.

...

It's called the "S.L.E.D." argument:

str.org/articles/the-s.l.e.d.-test

Did you seriously just call us edgy? Grow up


by the way, have fun paying for Shariika's 12 kids, their healthcare, and her apartment

>people are too stupid to look after themselves
found the communist

Wut? It's not a dog fetus. If it has human DNA then it's human. This is a scientific fact. Whether or not it is a person is a debate for philosophers.

no it's NOT it has different DNA

abortion is only unethical if the kid is past a certain level of development and has a functioning brain.

every living thing is a clump of cells, but just as we kill animals for meat, not every clump of cells is equal to every other clump of cells. That is a very hard non-sequitur, have you read the sticky lately?

see
first paragraph

>fucked in the head
>implying

I'm a completely normal, healthy person and I don't give a fuck about some human Jello on a table. I don't understand what's so sacred about a warm, sloppy mammal.

no, shitbrain, a tumor is not an organism, and it is not human. Why is logic so hard for yall? Either yall are women or you're used to using the woman arguments. Use logic ffs.

Abortion is the reason whites are going extinct.

Non-white births outnumber white births in practically all white nations.

>You couldn't stop him if he decided to do it on his own
Sure, I don't contest this, I contest what comes before. How did my son became so misguided to the point of believing this is a good idea and something that he wants?? This happening is a clear indication that something failed miserably in his upbringing.

>Maybe the problem isn't letting women do whatever they want
Maybe the problem is letting males do whatever they want
Okay, let's assume that the fault lies purely on men, that men are the hedonistic wolves and that our young women are sheeps. We would all agree that the wolves are bad for the sheep, and while we should try to tackle to wolf problem, we should avoid sending sheeps in the wolf's way.

When we say "You can do whatever you want, your body, you choice". We are saying "go ahead, embrace the wolf oh hedonism, nothing bad will happen", and this is ill advice for out young women.

If it has human DNA then it has human DNA, that doesn't mean that whatever that is A human

...

>every living thing is a clump of cells, but just as we kill animals for meat, not every clump of cells is equal to every other clump of cells. That is a very hard non-sequitur, have you read the sticky lately?

Do you frequently read the sticky so you can "win" arguments by using fancy latin words?

It's not a non sequitur. People say "its just a clump of cells" but every living thing is a clump of cells so that is a non-argument. You literally agreed with me, dipshit.

>blacks abort at higher rates
>let's get rid of abortion, this will solve the white population problem

>abortion is only unethical if the kid is past a certain level of development and has a functioning brain

Sounds more like a preference than an argument.

>Next time, give me an argument that castration of the male population doesn't fix

Population decline.

Anons, be wary of this poster. The endgame of feminism is exactly this.

A full blown gendercide.

Look at pic related. This is more than just a "Muh Gurl Power!!!" meme. It is a statement. A statement to be taken literally.

Autists keep bringing up artificial wombs but don't realize we can already create artificial sperm. Two women can already procreate.

They are coming for our balls.

Their goal: the end of the Y chromosome

you mean race mixing

...

thats retarded

This is because blacks and mexicans have 20 kids when they cant even afford 1

we need to abort all of them

Is a fetus an organism by whatever definition you're using? I just went by the two criteria you gave of "growing" and "containing human DNA."

Keep killing your white babies, see what shit gets you.

What is a human fetus if it not human?
Either way killing is bad, she is vegan right?

DNA is how we differentiate one organism from another. A puppy is still a canine even if it hasn't fully developed.

You're retarded. Killing nigger babies is never unethical.

Infanticide isn't specifically about infants. You can practice it on toddlers and adolescents the way a male lion does to his rivals cubs when he take over a pride. It's a practice that has been going on for centuries and will continue no matter what.

So if we can kill people who have committed no crime then I say we start killing fatties. We could fix the entire health care system in a matter of weeks.

I am personally against abortion. But I respect a woman's right to get one.

Yet I support removing federal funding for any abortion services.

Am I a dirty woman hater?

A two-week old embryo is certainly not animate, nor self-aware. And if it was removed it wouldn't start walking around and learn to talk.

The argument was living cells. Don't move the goalpost.

>meme tier libertarian
Why are parents a thing?
On your 18th anniversary, did you get an epiphany and stoped being a retarded teenager?? Of course not. As a society we are willingly giving young people shitty societal advice. It's not a question of communism or not (which I despite deeply), it's about fucking caring about the youth.

No one wants to be a single mom in their 20's. No one wants to pay child support for 18 years. No one wants to have dysfunctional social lives, yet this is what we are setting our youth into.

Oy vey. This man knows what's up

>and while we should try to tackle to wolf problem, we should avoid sending sheeps in the wolf's way.
So we should put more women in seats of power and let them govern the sheep and the wolves
That's fine
But don't think that you can say "we have to stop the sheep from going to the wolves" without being a huge hypocrite. You're a wolf who is telling the sheep who to hang out with. Sure, your intentions for them are "noble" or whatever, but you're still a wolf who has power over sheep.
Obviously, your point of view isn't needed

Yes, it is an organism. Did you fail 7th grade science? A fetus is a living human. It is an organism. You cannot compare it to a skin cell or a tumor, retard, as those are not organisms.

>abortion is only unethical if the kid is past a certain level of development and has a functioning brain.

Where "certain level of development" is always hidden and dodgy. The S.L.E.D. argument addresses this.

>and infants aren't toddlers. What's your point?

SLED's the point.

>I can call it a baby if I want to, and you can >call it a fetus if you want

No, you can't, because SLED.

Also a violation of the law of non-contradiction, since "fetus" cannot equal "non-fetus" in the same time and in the same relationship. But I don't expect you to revere logic all that much to begin with.

Well I suppose my argument is more in the pragmatic than the naming. Yes. I am perfectly find with murdering a baby if it benefits more lives than it harms.

goverment subsidizing of abortions makes sense only if you have socialized universal healthcare.

All I'm saying is that holding those two views should conjure up some cognitive dissonance.

And it's not inconsistant at all. Whether or not you can call it a "human", you are still effectively ending a potential human life.

A man that murders a pregnant woman is charged with two counts of murder in many cases. So, why can a woman do the same to her child and the law doesn't bat an eye?

THAT is incositency.