Here's an ultimatum. Would Sup Forums save 1,000 embryos or one child in fire?
Other urls found in this thread:
dailywire.com
archive.is
twitter.com
...
...
...
...
are the embryos for white children?
is the child in the burning building white?
Damn that's a good question
This. FPBP
one child, how is this even a question?
Question is irrelevant. The question of abortion is not "is an embryo more valuable than a born human" despite this faggot's attempt to make the argument about that.
Also: I've read his books, they're crap.
No one on the right honestly thinks first trimester zygotes are people. Just that they shouldn't be sucked out and murdered as they are slowly in the process of developing into a human.
What a fucking brainlet retard, goddamn.
>it's a saving someone is the same as reverse killing someone episode...
only a faggot would find this argument compelling or 'baffling'. lol. this man should kill himself
what is strawman
How about this, switch the child up with a 40 year old white christian male and say the embryos are all from black and mexican parents.
Which one would he choose?
Let's assume the same scenario. There's a burning room and two people in it, you only get to save one. It's two female twins. One's pregnant and the other one's not. Which one do you save?
The only "real" answer is -
>alarm goes off
>"well gee time to leave the building"
>there is a kid crying from the shocking sound of the alarm as you walk out
>the end
1 child, every time. An extracted embryo is an abomination, ask me if I give a fuck.
woah...
What color is the child
From a christian perspective, the embryos are already illegitimate.
Not to mention that the embryos aren't in a womb, so there's no guarantee they will be used for making kids.
>instinctively
And just because it is instinctive means it is right? What an idiot.
>No one, anywhere, actually believes an embryo is equivalent to a child. That person does not exist
>mfw i don't exist
Emotionally i would save the child, but from a logical perspective, saving the embryos is more worth it. Even if embryos aren't human life, saving 1000 potential humans is better than saving just one.
Also his whole thread just reeks of immaturity, and intellectual dishonesty. He asks you to play with his very confined rules and an impossible situation, and then to a very complex question demands "yes" or "no". If you don't, YOU ARE A BIGOT for not playing by his rules.
The winning move is not to play.
>sci-fi writer
Into the trash it goes
What's most baffling is how stupid that question is.
...
The child could grow up to have its own children while the embryos might not have this option in the future. It's also more justifiable legally standing to save a child rather than some spooge in a container. To ignore a child in danger has got to be illegal in some way. I don't know the law on this but it doesn't hurt to save a screaming child over some silent jizz in a jar.
thats not an honest answer apparently.
and fuck his question. 1000 embryos growing in a tube aren't the same as a woman getting an abortion.
A.
Would you save a pregnant woman or a not-pregnant woman?
Would you save your own child or five other children?
Would you save an elderly couple of a random child?
Neither.
The worst is overpopulated, and abortion is the only things keeping black people from becoming a majority.
The left's pathetic attempt to justify abortion of nigger babies.
Then why do pro-life people accuse pro-choice people of murdering babies?
Is the child white?
If yes, then raise him to impregnate 1000 white women
This is an evidently flawed and forced analogy
>"Embryos are worthless"
>"OMJIZz guise my doggo just died I want 2clone it"
>"HNNNNNG CAN you guise imagine if science can makes teh Willy mamoth"
Kids alive embryos are "could-be" at best. The embryos are gmo anyway.
>Nobody answers it honestly
Translation: Nobody answers it according to the arbitrary moral foundation I have made
Also, if you went into a burning building with a 90 year old and a 5 year old, you would save the 5 year old. That doesn't make the 90 year old not a human.
well considering living embryos are in pregnant women, i guess id save the 1000 women, and by extension, their embryos over 1 baby
yes, but that will never put off a leftist trying to make a point
jej
What's baffling is how someone can think a contrived hypothetical situation has any relevance to the debate
For one, a fire is a horrible way to die. Embryo has no nerves.
Second, there are far more cells in a child than 1000.
The white one.
Who the fuck leaves 1000 embryos laying about?
>This
If they are all shitskins the 1000 embryos goes in the fire with with the nigglet.
1001:0 K/D ratio.
Duh you save the embryos
What are you retarded or something?
>let me conjure up this absolutely speculative scenario that cant happen in real life that is a priori constructed in a way supports my bias
>wowzers looks like i win again , bigot!
L*ftists are truly subhuman
Mine is better, leafy
Because abortion is considered by the far left to be a human right and they are routinely done will into the second trimester; when it is much easier to make the case that it's a baby. It doesn't turn from a zygote into a baby overnight and this cuck was clearly referring to viable embryos which had been artificially inseminated.
In my country third trimester abortions are not only legal but tax funded as well. Despicable.
>extracted embryo
Nobody said it was extracted did they?
Why is there a child alone in an abortion clinic?
are the embryos black
Better question: what fuck-ass throws a child into a fire points at an abortion clinic, and demands people he dislikes choose betwixt the two? Better option, a lead pill applied directly to his done; neither the embryos nor the child has to die. All and each are more valuable than some talentless brainlet.
I save the embryo. The 5 y/o is obviously pic. related.
Fuck you and your burning building bullshit.
Would you kill one unborn child or not kill it?
Pretty stupid argument, there is value in human life. You would save the child before a dog trapped in the fire but most people would also save the dog if they could
the order goes
children>dog=embryo>pipettes>women
Not all abortions are performed on embryos you silly fuck
1000 embryos of course. Why raise a soldier when you can raise an army to protect the white race?
The question is not irrelevant. If answered, it will reveal what the anti-abortionist means with "an embryo is just as much a human being as a child."
That seems rather relevant, because that is often claimed when abortion is being discussed.
What if's are fucking retarded if there's no way to occur in real life.
Look, this is a very plain and boring ethical dilemma exactly like the so called trolley-problem. The way to go around these sort of questions is this. The scenario is hypothetical, which also means fictional. i.e. whatever your answer, it bears no consequences whatsoever over into real life. Ethics is not strictly a science on it's own, but is rather part of epistemology. Ethics show themself, but are not known beforehand, they become known.
Now what is values. We can call values the collection of experiences which gives us a feeling, a fore-knowledge of the coming situation. Values stem from real life, as lived, as does everything else on Gods god earth (because God is good). oh but I could go on. Anyways, the questions is senseless on the grounds of it's fictitious nature which hold no bearings to reality or the simple but groundbearing gut-feeling, of something just being right.
It depends is the right answer and as others pointed out his question is retarded.
Personally I'd save the kid, it doesn't mean I'm pro-abortion (depends once again) but I'm mostly against sucking out fetuses with a lawn blower because some whore couldn't keep her legs closed and hasn't learned responsibilty yet.
Because pro choice think it's fine to abort a baby 7-8 months in.
>points to forehead
I smart now
Race of child and race of embryos?
No it's not. It's intellectually dishonest. Of course people are going to save the child. Remove the child from the equation and EVERYONE SAVES THE EMBRYOS.
He's implying that the lesser value of the embryos when compared to a child somehow justifies abortion. It most certainly does not. It's a false dichotomy and that this faggot thinks its a good argument shows how a retarded he is.
If I had to choose between saving my mother or ten strangers, I would choose my mother. This does not mean I can arbitrarily kill ten people when it is a CHOICE.
Neither because saving one of them would break the NAP.
>1 child or 1000 expectant mothers
That's a different game, isn't it? Disingenuous fucks get no patience from me.
I'd save 1000 human embryos if they were inside pregnant women who consented to sexual intercourse
>When they don't fall for your retarded, ideological ruse, regain the intellectual high ground through senseless violence
Fuck leftists. - Aristotle
Something's fucking fishy here mate
>I POSTED IT AGAIN!!
For a post-natal abortion
A child I am anti abortion but I am also anti Artificial insemination, also am pretty sure the heat would destroy the embryos
The only proper response to his tweet:
Instinctively, I want to beat this guy to a pulp.
Does this mean I should?
Also, can someone explain to me how anyone can equate saving the 5 year old to being pro-abortion?
If I want to save a 5 year old over a 40 year old am I pro-murder?
I really honestly wish someone on the pro-abortion side would answer this.
>no one has EVER answered it honestly
>they answered it differently from how I would answer it, therefore they were being dishonest
This fags thought experiment already got BTFO by Ben Shapiro.
dailywire.com
This
/Thread
kek
You are in a welfare centre with an overweight nigger and a handicap chink.
The welfare centre catches fire.
You can only save the nigger or the chink, not both.
This destroys the liberal.
This is also actually the intellectual standard of the left. Absolute drivel.
>Not risking your life to save a puppy is the same thing as stomping on its head
>save a woman who is pregnant with 1000 children or one child
>check mate bigots
but would you save 1000 human embreoes or the 90 year old?
what about a 90 year old and a 2 day old
what about a 90 year old and 4 year old Hitler?
>t.sub-human too stupid to realize it's a false binary
That's a fantastic argument for an 8th grader. Your parents must be very proud of you.
What is he name of the 8th grader who formulated that argument, and why do you still have any faith in Ph.D.s? (Answer: such is the lot of a brainwashed cultist caught in the tentacles of their cult leaders.)
Tell your parents about your post today. It's a test: if they aren't ashamed of you you can be fairly confident that you are stupid because they are stupid, and that you're not a product of society but rather the stupid product of stupid people (smart people call that "genetics.")
Dumb question. In an emergency you have a couple of seconds to make the best decision. You can do this with anything.
>Would you save the scared child in the far corner or the old disabled person in a wheelchair who is closer?
>would you save the injured woman who can't walk or the injured man who can't walk?
It all depends on the circumstances and who has the best chance of survival.
depends what race they are
Also, the guy didn't even respond, he just bitched out and blocked Shapiro on twitter
Mine is better than yours, too.
it depends on which is white
The embryo doesn't weight anything for him, he is a nu-sci-fi guy, not some assburger STEM/Ph writing down his dreams and fears.
Are the embryo's personally mine?
I learned from Steven Paddock to multi task so I would save the embryos and the child while eating comped sushi
Am I the only one thinking those ARK books look interesting?
>look, I made up a retarded question and you gotta answer it
Leftism is a mental illness.
>not specifying their race
>Race of child and race of embryos?
this
>unaborted libtard unironically arguing for the abortion of others
Fuck him. He needs marched to a ditch and aborted.
>archive.is
Wouldn't embryo mean pregnant woman?
Let 1000 pregnant woman die or one kid
you're not ready for this red pill
thanks for this i was having trouble with it
>If you say you would say the embryos you are being disingenuous
Stellar argument from a stellar article
>It's a trolley problem episode
Guys wouldn't the heat destroy the embryos ? It's logical to try and save them both if not save the child
Also how the fuck will I locate the embryos a child will probably scream
Retarded argument from a sophist who is too intellectually destitute to understand the issue. He's probably a sociopath, tbqh. He's just a step above the imbeciles who argue "lol when you jack off you kill a bajillion sperms so abortion is the same thing."
I've never heard anyone who is against abortion say that 'a viable human embryo is the same as a baby'. We're saying that a developing fetus doesn't suddenly become human after sliding out of a vagina. It's human for quite a long time before that point, and killing it for convenience' sake is horrific.
Not coincidentally, he's a flabby soyboy bugman type. I bet he owns multiple "this is what a feminist looks like" shirts. Spawn of evil.