Lets get some views on abortion

Lets get some views on abortion.

I'll start. I used to be pro-choice as I have fairly libertarian and left-leaning views however two things have mostly changed my mind on the topic.

The first was when my sister gave birth to my nephew at 27 weeks. He is now living a fulfilling and happy life as an infant. Seeing his tiny body and face in the neonatal ICU the day he was born left no doubt in my mind that he was a fully formed human being at 27 weeks and I doubt he was much different 1 week earlier(a technically legal period to have an abortion). The idea that a "foetus" like him could be killed and discarded at such a late stage in pregnancy sickened me. So I began to wonder what point of pregnancy is early enough for it to be okay?

The answer to this question is virtually impossible to find. I'm not a believer that life starts at conception since a few cells in a zygote is hardly a person and yet I find myself forced to act as if that were the case simply because it's the "safe bet." If I don't take conception as the starting point then what point do I choose that isn't simply a arbitrary amount of weeks? 8 weeks when there is a heartbeat? or 10 weeks when there is a brain? what about the weeks before then when the spine is forming? It's too much of a grey area so the only safe choice is to just take conception as the point where life starts and avoid over-complicating matters.

CONT

The second thing that made me less supportive of pro-choice was when I was looking for reasons to support it. I had been pro-choice for most of my life because it seemed like the logical option but now that i'd had this new revelation about just how late abortions can take place i found myself struggling to remember why I supported it in the first place. So I began looking online and found myself reading some huffington post and salon articles (not my favorite choice of journalists but they were the first links that appeared when searching for "pro-choice arguments"). The problem that I had was that all of these arguments were either contradictory, indicative of a selfish compassion-less mindset or just simply weak arguments.

For example, one argument was about how the idea of abortions being used as contraception was "a false claim with no evidence" and yet two paragraphs down another argument directly contradicted that stating that abortions are necessary because not everyone has proper access to contraception (essentially implying that abortion should be used as contraception).

Another argument was something along the lines of it's "empowering for women" which is just a ridiculously weak argument because being "empowering for women" has no inherent value. A woman could go on a rampage and kill 50 men which would certainly be "empowering" for her but that's hardly a reason that it's okay.

CONT

Finally, the weakest argument was one that was simply selfish. it was something along the lines of "sex is a natural part of life and women should be able to have sex without worrying about the risk of pregnancy". Yes, sex is a natural part of life, do you know what else is? Pregnancy. Do you know what isn't natural? Abortions. Also when did it become okay for society to tell people that they do not need to take responsibility for their actions? Sex - as with anything in life - comes with risks and as an adult you take on those risks and bear the responsibility of them. If you choose to have sex - with or without contraception - you a taking a potentially life changing risk. Accept this fact, use contraception and pray it works - don't expect there to be a safety net in the form of ending a human life that you are too irresponsible to care for. If you are not mature enough to care for a child you are not mature enough to have sex.

Now, here are my views on the true reasons behind abortions. You don't find many wealthy or educated people who need to have an abortion. Generally, those who benefit from abortions are also the type who really shouldn't reproduce and society knows this. Abortions help us keep irresponsible people from becoming terrible parents and relieves the social strain on the welfare system along with policing and prisons. I'm not one for conspiracy theories but it's little wonder why the party most in favor of high levels of welfare are also the party in favor of abortion. This is one of maybe three "good/okay" arguments in support of abortion (the other two being rape cases and child pregnancy). And yet you do not hear this argument being preached by the left as it is not an argument of "compassion." The left must veil everything in the illusion that they are doing it out of the love and support of others instead of the cold hard truth that it is merely a matter of logistics.

CONT

So, do I think abortion should be legal? I'm not entirely sure - it's certainly a debate of lesser evils which in my opinion need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, something I am certain about is that we as a society need to avoid the dangerous road which we are headed down in which abortions are "acceptable." Abortions are the abhorrent and unfair deliberate choice of an irresponsible person to end a human life for what is in most cases selfish reasons and should be treated as such. Women who get abortions should feel a sense of guilt and the idea that this is unfair to them is ridiculous. Good people can make bad choices but they should still be held accountable for those choices regardless of their overall "good" character.

You'll come back to pro-choice the more red pilled you become.

After 23 weeks should be disallowed barring massive medical complications. Other than that, strongly disapprove but allow it

>Women who get abortions should feel a sense of guilt and the idea that this is unfair
Abortion is on the brink of manifesting itself as a lazy persons birth control.

I was born, much like your nephew, too early. I'm a twin, and my weight was just about 4 pounds. After learning this as an adult, life has been pretty sacred for me. I thank God my girlfriend was raised as a church-going catholic, so that we don't ever need to have this discussion.

>Abortions help us keep irresponsible people from becoming terrible parents and relieves the social strain on the welfare system along with policing and prisons.

You mean this red pill?

None of that shit matters.

You just said that you were a left leaning libertarian, so according to that you want to hold people accountable for what they do, right? For me, it's not really a pro-choice vs pro-life argument. That's not a useful discussion and is designed to go in circles. Regardless of whether or not it's human at week 1 or week 30, it doesn't matter. It's still the potential for human life regardless, it's a potential human, and everyone alive now was at that stage. It is the result of irresponsibility on the part of the parent, the parent had sex irresponsibly, the woman was a whore and she wasn't even responsible enough to use cheap available contraceptives which are often times distributed for free in a lot of the places where abortion happens the most. To learn responsibility and get more red pilled, the woman should be forced to carry the baby and raise it as a mother should. She should not be given assistance for the child. She has to find a father for it herself, she can't marry the state.

I agree with everything you said exactly.

Dilly dilly

what race?

Before whites became supportive of abortion, they first had their family values eroded and disintegrated... Abort as many minorities as you want. Hell, forcefully abort and throw them into camps. It doesn't matter because the social indoctrination needed to bring a person to that point KILLS the drive for family.

Your future will be a bunch of Dicky Spencer's and Lara Loomers, running around preaching pro-whitedom, maybe engaging in a race war even.... For a white generation they never had.

> To learn responsibility and get more red pilled, the woman should be forced to carry the baby and raise it as a mother should.
This is true. some people are just so woefully irresponsible throughout their whole lives that this still wouldn't change them though.

See picture.

consider the following

woman doesn't want child man does
>my body my choice child dead
man doesn't want child woman does
>ree time to take responsibility and start paying your alimony

this is the world you live in Sup Forums

women have 100% control over reproduction

My line is the point at which a baby could be born naturally and survive long-term without the aid of machines.

>The idea that a "foetus" like him could be killed and discarded at such a late stage in pregnancy sickened me. So I began to wonder what point of pregnancy is early enough for it to be okay?
lol, yeah, the people who get abortions aren't typically warm nurturing married mothers.

the women who get abortions got knocked up, drink while pregnant, do drugs, are impulsive and are generally pieces of shit. They give birth and proceed to destroy their children with neglect and/or abuse. A woman who wants an abortion, deserves an abortion. It's absolutely the most responsible thing she can do rather than "raise" a fucking degenerate criminal or parasite on society.

That being said, I'm for "free", tax payer funded birth control and abortion for whoever wants one. No questions asked.

Good post, went through similar process myself when our baby died in the womb at 24 weeks.

My argument for abortion now is that most are performed on non western women, and that the alternative i.e. adoption is an evil industry.

But I could never support a family member in such a choice now.

Because it is murder plain and simple, and merely committing it because a baby would change your life profoundly in ways you're not prepared for - well that is selfish to the point of depraved.

This this this this this this

One issue I had with one thing you said though, and with something a lot of people have said, is that it's some form of eugenics. I fundamentally disagree with this statement, because it's simply not true. Often times people who have an abortion have multiple abortions and still end up having kids at some point, passing on their shitty parenting genetics and mannerisms and other races still birth enough children to outnumber and outbreed whites. If abortion is suppose to be a form of eugenics, it's definitely not working.

Abortion makes sense to me in very specific circumstances, such as, incest, rape, physically or mentally retarded fetus, fetus is going to kill the mother, etc.

lol, this. I'm for family planning. No "accidental" babies and fuckups.

This guy is right. I do like being pro life, however, bc I can instantly take the moral high ground in any argument against a democrat - which infuriates them

Any woman who aborts their child should also be neutered.

See I'm pro-choice AND i'm pro-accountability.

Accidents happen, user. A couple months ago my wife and I were having sex and the condom broke without our knowledge. She didn't get pregnant, but it was definitely a scare.

My wife and I are financially stable and own our own home, but she's going back to school and a baby right now wouldn't be awful, but it would definitely lower the potential child's quality of life.

What if an abortion now could make a future child have a better life?

What makes me want to vomit until I vomit blood, is seeing a child with the features of fetal alcohol syndrome.

It sickens me.
Also, who the fuck wants their kid's elementary school classroom terrorized by a neglected, angry, crack baby that kicks the teacher, screams and scratches its classmates because their horrible mother didn't use birth control or get an abortion?

>Any woman who aborts their child should also be neutered.
That's not necessary. Abortion causes scarring in the uterus and can make women virtually infertile.

>what if killing a child now is more convenient for us and better for the child who we don't kill later?

Funding degeneracy and coal burning, as well as contraceptives so that spics can get ahead in life before they have 6 ninos and outbreed us? Be careful with your altruism.

It starts with conception. That's science. There's no actual discussion being lead over it, that's just pro-abortion propaganda and ignorance from the humanities "scientists".

t. med student

fuck off. Abortions keeps them from existing in the first place.

No, you're just reasoning your way through killing a child that you're afraid of rearing. You think some magic time will come when you're "ready" even though you already just said your stable and own your own house. Most people aren't even going to own their own house. Pump her full of kids, what are you doing? No child will ever have a perfect life. No matter what you do, they will have adversity and that's a good thing. Hard times create strong men, so long as you have good stock.

You described me user, you described how I was as a child. I'm on this site now, and I'm doing really well for myself at the moment. If you come from good stock (I'm complete european admixture) you have the potential to turn things around.

Mexicans don't get abortions.

Abortion is murder, because it is god's property, and we hold these truths to be self evident, that man was endowed with the right to live, but not a right to stay in our lands, their "EQUAL" share of the earth is somewhere else.

If you cant get that right, and keep it simple, then you are biting off more than we can chew, and, what goes around comes around.

Man's right to live is not under the jurisdiction of another man, but under nature(natural selection), and nature's god. And if you steal from god, you will lose your rights.

People need to learn about one case and one case only before making their minds, if they are in limbo between pro and con, and that would be Kermit Gosnell and watch 3801 Lancaster: American Tragedy.

So called good Dr Gosnell performed abortions in filthy clinic, late term abortions, even deliver babies only to snap their spines with pair of filthy seizors killing them on spot. This went for years, decades and no health agency every stopped him...

why you ask?

First there is no requirement to oversee the worst killing machine in the world, and second there is no wistleblower law that will protect you if you go against planed parenthood.

>when your entire country is assigned a post birth abortion becasue you did something stupid

lol its just bantz bro

Rename it to baby murder and let people make their own choices. Personally no fucking way savages.

>what if killing this human would make life better for this other human?

That's literally the justification of every murder, ever.

I'm pro choice for niggers, pro life for whites. In fact I think we need to have mandatory abortions for mother and fathers with IQs less than 90.

there are so many ways to prevent childbirth now (condoms, birth control, morning after pill) that there is really no justification for abortion anymore, especially after the 1st trimester.

But you're libertarian tho

Only niggers and shitskins should be allowed to have abortions.

Isn't killing sometimes justified for the greater good?

the moment the zygote has formed, the potential for a full human life then exists and to deliberately cut it short amounts to murder. at that moment, the fundamental human cell is brought to bear. it is the simplest and most indivisible form of human life and simply needs time to grow.

>my wife wants to go to school
>let's kill this baby so she can
>greater good

The Ebers Papyrus, also known as Papyrus Ebers, is an Egyptian medical papyrus of herbal knowledge dating to circa 1550 BC. Among the oldest and most important medical papyri of ancient Egypt, it was purchased at Luxor (Thebes) in the winter of 1873–74 by Georg Ebers. It is currently kept at the library of the University of Leipzig, in Germany.

This is supposedly the oldest document pertaining to abortion, and in it was an herbal recipe for something that was suppose to kill the child in the womb, I believe. This in the grand scheme of human history, is not that long ago. Unless we want to assume abortions were performed via abortion stump during the hunter gatherer times, which is most of our evolutionary history, we can assume that abortion is not natural. It's a relatively new thing and hasn't become as wide spread and accessible in such a safe way as it is in modern times. For the vast majority of human history, nothing like this was as safe or as convenient to do. I think it's safe to call this a societal destabilizer. This seems to be one of the many things these days engineered to breakdown the strength and moral integrity of society.

I support abortion because I don't like black people.

Are you an insect? The only time killing is justified for the greater good is if you are officially at war with another country and have to do the dirty work so your country is prosperous, or if you are defending yourself from an assailant personally. Those are the only 2 times killing is justified in my opinion, and maybe if your group of people, nation, religion, race, whatever, is being invaded and conquered by another group. Kind of falls under the declaration of war thing though. These days with globalist propaganda and the consolidation of power, it gets confusing though.

Google "silphium." It was a plant known to the Romans which could chemically terminate a pregnancy. They literally farmed it to extinction. It is suspected that this was not the first instance of this, either. Abortion is old as fuuuuuuck

Under the Christian, Age of Accountability, an aborted human will go to heaven. A person who aborts, which is murder, will most likely not raise their child to learn Christianity. Knowing both of these things can lead one to conclude that it is better for the aborted than to be raised upto the Age of Accountability and have a higher chance of going to Hell. You could also see it as the aborted child would have accepted God anyway as they were taken to Heaven before the Age of Accountability.

Rome eventually fell. The goal should be to create an ever withstanding nation state with it's own religion, identity and racial components, that never falters and continually progress's human technological and economic growth.

So shouldn't we strive to raise the best possible offspring in the best possible circumstances? What if a broken condom prevents that?

You made the choice, now live with the consequence. Rape? Ok fine, abort it. If it wasn't really rape it's all on your conscience, noone else's.

The only other acceptable reason to abort imo is genetic defects that will result in poor quality of life for the kid.

This will all be moot once people come to terms with reality and realize that eugenics/"conscious breeding" is the only sensible way forward.

Pro-life except in the case of rape or genetic diseases.

Often I see the abortion argument coming down to simply, "Are we okay with actively halting a life from continuing?".

We do kill other humans and other animal lives, and I would argue that as long as we are respectful of the gravity and significance of such an action, in the context of abortion at least, the mother should have the right to make such a decision.

We glorify taking life in some cases, such as war, and condemn it in others, as in crimes. If we as a people had a more respectful view of what it means to take a life, perhaps we would also be more respectful of the natural process which potentially creates life.

To me, the true crux of the issue is in the current way we are divided in regarding life as a phenomenon.

You don't need to do that in order to achieve what I just suggested. What makes you think that you do? You're over-planning and scared to be a father, obviously. Doing good research around child rearing and introspection and everything you need to know is good, becoming financially independent, and having a stable, healthy relationship with your spouse is good. Going to church is also a good thing, a traditional church, is a good thing to do for your family. Owning a home for your children to be reared in is amazing, but this is all you need, to accomplish what I just suggested. As long as you're teaching them the right things and withholding the proper morals, praising discipline, achievement, competition, tradition, responsibility, etc basic pillars of human society and community. Being a good mensch. This is what you need. Fight degeneracy, and subversion undermining your principles and morals where ever you find it. The circumstances sound like they are as good as they need to be. The only limiting factor is you.

According to Jewish (Talmudic) tradition, Hindu theology, as well as earlier Christian theology, "ensoulment" does not occur at conception but on the 49th day of gestation (40th in Jewish law).
This makes sense to me on a spiritual level as well as scientific/rational one, in so far as 'soul' or consciousness can be contemplated scientifically or rationally.

Rape babies, deformed babies, babies who will require an aid throughout out and retarded kids should all be aborted.

The child must come out completely normal, for it to be okay anything else should thus be aborted as it would serve as a strain on already limited resources and serve no purpose other than getting in the way.

Its more cruel to allow a child who will NEVER get the chance to live a normal life to be born than it is to abort it.

/thread

You should probably have the discussion anyway, just in case.

>When is it too late to have an abortus?

In my opinion when it can live on its own without medical help

If its born too early and it would die without medical help its not too late

I know how you feel, my birth and life are literally the textbook case of when the stereotypical "pro-choice"er would abort the fetus. I was very abortable by most peoples standards yet here I am, thanks to god most likely.

>incest, rape, physically or mentally retarded fetus

I don't understand this side of the pro life movement when applied to the "it's wrong because it's murder" assertion. If abortion is murder, isn't allowing it in the case of incest, rape, physically or mentally retarded fetus basically like saying murder is okay as long as the victim is deformed or a bastard?

I think in the case of the pregnancy being terminated on the grounds of it being threatening to the mother's health, then it just becomes a matter of triage and it's easier for people on most sides to agree on this point.

22 Weeks should be the cutoff (No fetus has ever been proven to be viable before that).

Once artificial wombs are implemented, women should be free to terminate their pregnancy at any time, and allow the fetus to continue growing in the artificial womb.

Abortion is OK, but on non-whites only.

Yeah, I wasn’t born early, but my birth was the result of an accident. My birth mom had gotten back together with her ex and in getting back together, I was conceived.
My biological father ran away when he learned she was pregnant. So since was an office worker with a low-paying job at 25 years old, she was left with two opitions: abortion or adoption. She chose adoption, and thankfully, I’ve been raised in a loving catholic home, and hearing this story only cemented my thoughts on abortion.

>In my opinion when it can live on its own without medical help

That takes a couple years after birth.

I kek we because it’s true.
Real talk, the arguement, as gastly as it is, can be made that it isn’t human because it shows no cognitive reasoning until the age of 2.

As a middle school teacher, I might argue that they don't show cognitive development until age 14

See My reasoning is the same as this user's.

dont forget nice sized breast and puffy cunny too

>a zygote is hardly a person
It has the essence of a human person. This essence manifested in the material of the zygote individuals and constitutes a person. I find that a lot of people that say a zygote is not a person takes their argument from a emotional point of view. (ie I don't have any empathy for a zygote because it doesn't look human yet) not all people that hold he aforementioned position have that opinion but a lot.

That's usually 16. I think. Also My agreement with also has to do with my desire for

Well that's the majority of abortions to begin with in America. Abortions kill more black children than white children.

I feel like this is the compromise position based on appeasing the two positions and based on any principle.

I can maybe see an argument for euthanizing the physically deformed (that is, see the argument, not necessarily agree with it), but I'm still not sure how a fetus or infant that is the product of rape has no capacity to live a "normal" (how do you even measure that?) life, other than maybe the social implications that their existence might hurt some people's feelings or something.

I just stand by that I think it's hypocritical to assert that an unborn fetus of the earlier stages of pregnancy has the same value as any born person, but to then also turn around and start making exceptions that apply to some unborn fetuses and not others, but not apply those same standards to born persons. It's either murder or its not.

I understand where you're coming from, you want the principle to be applied evenly, and I agree. But to have a just and proper society, we can't condone rape in any way. A child produced in rape cannot have a normal life, because every time her mother looks at that child, she see's the face of her rapist. She knows that that child was not produced with consent, it's an invasion of her body by the rapists sperm and genetics, she may not have even wanted that child one bit. It's a fundamentally unlawful and wrong birth. We live in a civilized society now, and we shouldn't have to condone rape or theft in any manner or support the fatherless offspring of a rapist that we'll have to place in prison. It's a strain on society, just as a child born with no legs and no arms.

Abortion should be illegal, however if the baby has a deformity or illness its aborted forcefully

Agreed provided we include nonwhiteness as a deformity and/or illness.

i am And i mean it is okay for rape babies to be born, however id prefer against it as its unjust as the child will never know its father or mother depending on who raped who.

So, are you saying that the abortion of a pregnancy that is a product of rape must be mandatory even if the woman in question wishes to carry the pregnancy to term?

I also want to ask this: are you familiar with the Stephen King story Carrie? In it, Carrie is born to a woman that had consensual sex with her husband for the purpose of procreation, but later came to resent her daughter's existence because she believed her act of sex to have been evil, and Carrie's mother grows to hate the shit out of Carrie because of it. Every time she looks at Carrie she is reminded of her "sin," and this drives her (more ) mad.Putting aside the fact that Carrie's mom happens to be insane because her feelings happen to not align to the feelings of society at large, should Carrie have been put to death because her mom didn't want her and was hurt by her existence but had to take care of her anyway?

By the way, are rich people allowed to have deformed kids as long as they can afford them?

If this was carried out in the 1800s, then those slaves would have never have given birth to those half breeds.
If only.

Well, I was just thinking about it and I see a major flaw with the conclusion we've just drawn. You could make the argument that rape babies should be given up for adoption, but that means forcing the mother to carry the rape pregnancy to term, legally. Forcing a woman who was 100%, with clear evidence raped to carry her rapists child to term seems unnecessarily cruel to me.

Although putting people up for adoption is also a strain on society.

>Forcing a woman who was 100%, with clear evidence raped to carry her rapists child to term seems unnecessarily cruel to me.

Is it still cruel to force a woman who didn't wish for a pregnancy but whose contraception method failed to carry that pregnancy to term? Or is it less cruel enough to be acceptable?

Because killing them after birth is illegal and there's no better way to reduce the breeding of degenerates...

Carries mom didn't know that it would be that way beforehand, she didn't know that she would have those feelings. Carries mom took care of her anyway, even though she hated her I would think so, and no, I don't think bad genes should be propagated, they'll hurt our descendants and weaken the nation as a whole.

Where do you draw the line on bad genes?

Contraception in terms that we know it is a very new invention and has degraded our society and weakened it as a whole. It's bad for our society, so that argument is invalid in my mind.

This, as much as I hate the idea of abortion it's more unpalatable to propose baby euthanasia as an actual practice.

Mostly Africans and some native populations like aboriginals, maybe some Islanders. Anyone with heritable diseases, any kind of severe deformation that limits you and will make sure that you are never able to become a net gain for society.

How are other forms of contraception bad when compared to sexual abstinence?

>I'm not a believer that life starts at conception since a few cells in a zygote is hardly a person

Nice strawman.

When White women get abortions, it is usually either that the child is retarded or genetically defective, or the mother is a feminist cunt. Abortion is still highly eugenic either way.

I am anti-life and anti-choice. I have antinatalist feelings but also believe strongly in eugenics. I am much more sympathetic to the pro-life arguments than the pro-choice ones, but I nonetheless support abortion because I want to do unethical genetic experiments to compete with China and I see this as a necessary first step in that ethic degradation. Find a view edgier than mine: You can't.

>The only time killing is justified for the greater good is if you are officially at war with another country and have to do the dirty work so your country is prosperous, or if you are defending yourself from an assailant personally.
Have you never heard of eugenics?

Don't kill my baby you fucking monsters

I don't think the eugenics thing works, mestizos are still invading, non-whites are still invading, liberals and communist whites still have enough kids to have a voting impact. It doesn't seem like the degenerate control you think it to be.

>heritable diseases
>deformation that limits you
So, poor eyesight maybe? The need for eyeglasses perhaps? If there were some kind of test during pregnancy to determine that a fetus will eventually need eyeglasses, and the laws and government have determined that this condition counts as debilitating (we are discussing abortion in terms of laws I think, so ultimately it will be the law system determining who is or isn't deformed), then these abortions are okay but "healthy" pregnancies are not? Or maybe eyeglasses should get a pass, but legal blindness is doesn't? Iunno, seems kinda arbitrary to be writing it on the law books.

They allow you to have sex. Abstinence does not. Sex is a euphoric drug. There are no consequences to sex, unless you are part of the 1% of contraceptive users that end up having an "accident".

Nope, I suppose I'd create a detailed list of every disability and deformity that constitutes abortion, would that be good enough for you?

By week 10 the baby looks human but most people dont find out before week 7. Then a few weeks to schedule especially if ur in a nigger dome.

Also lmao at the catholic, white men protesting outside. What a fucking joke. All they do is read verses and scriptures and say how ur gonna go to hell. Get a good fucking argument, get some women out there, and show some pictures of the baby by week. Step ur game up