Give me one reason to be pro-life that holds up from an atheist perspective and without mentioning race

Give me one reason to be pro-life that holds up from an atheist perspective and without mentioning race.


Protip: You can't.
Protip II: Nigs get more abortions than whites so again, don't.

Other urls found in this thread:

secularprolife.org
youtube.com/watch?v=p59AjrBscc8
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Not prolife but in some cases it can harm the mother.

secularprolife.org

why dont you just kill human beings that are not in the womb? why dont you just kill toddlers and teenagers? make sire you give a strong atheist answer.

Forcing children to be born that aren't wanted causes problems.

Who are we to decide if a potential human wants to live or not?

More atheist babies are aborted than religious babies... That alone should be reason for an atheist to be pro life

Without a get out of kid free card, people might actually have to start taking some responsibility for their actions.

I can't do it without mentioning race. However, America and European countries should give assistance to minorities seeking abortions, while whites should be discouraged from doing it, but will receive assistance in cases of confirmed rape or incest.

The fetus is it's own independent being, distinct from the mother through its genetic makeup. The woman through intercourse agreed for the possibility to carry a child, and therefore she's obligated to give birth to the child, whom has its own set of rights.

No downside. Kills future welfare leeches and makes the world a better place.

Join us.
With the power of meme magic our Lord KEK grows ever more stronger.

Basic fucking morality?
I still believe human life is sacred, I dont need some kike religion to tell me that.
Unless its a rape baby, an incestuous baby, or it has some serious defect that will hinder its quality of life, you shouldn't be able to legally abort your child.
People, especially young people, need to learn to take responsibility for their actions. Maybe stop fucking everything that has a pulse if you dont want to get pregnant, or use a condom.

Pro-life atheist here.

Either all human life has value or none does. There is no inbetween, only mental gymnastics.

To add to this; legalizing it will only increase the amount of degeneracy in western culture.
The amount of fat niggers I see on the internet being proud of getting knocked up by Tyshawn and getting it aborted is fucking disgusting.
Its not some achievement you slags its a potential human being.

I want to support abortions from a scientific standpoint, since I've seen firsthand what stem cells can do. More fetuses = easier stem cell research. But morally I can't justify it.

are you for or against the death penalty? also, is war justifiable if all human life is valuable?

a fetus is a human being from the moment it is conceived.

do you think humans should be killed? what gives some stupid woman the right to kill another human, whether it's her baby or not?

watch this youtube.com/watch?v=p59AjrBscc8

Entirely different things fool
Fetuses haven't committed any crimes, or joined any military to fight.

Against the death penalty. War can be justifiable; human life is not the only intrinsically valuable thing.

>1 post

Every embryology textbook states that life begins at conception.

Throughout the entire cycle from conception to death, the human exists, its life can be verified and measured.

There is nothing that logically makes killing an embryo intrinsically different from killing an infant, toddler, teen, adult, senior, etc. because they all have the same underlying nature of being alive or developing in some way.

Because of this you must either choose that life has high value or no value at all.

Choosing the latter would force you to cite arguments without data that is measurable or verifiable.

This meme lasted a week, let it die

Murder is wrong.

t. atheist

Value can vary. A $1 coin technically has value but you wouldn't choose it over $10000.

We're talking morality here, kid.

And you're essentially arguing that $1=$10000 because they both have value. You literally posted that you think war can be justifiable so it's intellectually dishonest to hold a black and white view on abortion because muh morals.

literally every argument for abortion COMPLETELY ignores the fact that you are killing someone

Please stop, you're embarrassing yourself.

potential, all entity's have it. so for an interesting experience here try to increase your surroundings overall potential. one way of many and the absolute most powerful is to be creative. children being the most creative thing one can create that has its own potential. boredom is the path to sleep , godhood is absolute boredom. you are a god if you don't create we may all fall back into the dark ages. when all gods go back to sleep.

>no arguments besides ad hom
Careful you don't crinkle your fedora.

>without mentioning race
Why? It's an important part of genetic survival, which is the entire reason abortion may/may not be a good for humanity.

>no arguments

That's funny, especially since your argument about $1=$10000 is utterly irrelevant to anything being discussed in this thread.

You didn't make an argument for him to refute, you just said a bunch of rubbish about humans being similar to currency

If you do not believe that life begins at or near conception, then the beginning of life is completely arbitrary meaning that killing someone is never immoral.
>but fetuses can't live on their own.
So can't many people in this world. That means it is okay to murder people on life support and mentally and physically handicapped people. If you believe that, then you have no sense of morality and are giving atheists a bad name.
BTW I'm atheist

>i'm pro life because all life has value
>But value can vary; like currency the one with the greater value would be prioritized if you had to choose
>UHHH UR A KID UR EMBARRASSING URSELF
Can't believe I had to hold your hand through this. Not even going to bother with (You) since you're this moronic.

If you're here for the honorary ameridumbcunt application then I'd say you passed with flying colours.

The only thing that determines who/what is human and who/what is allowed to be killed is human rules (law, ethics and morality)

If the definitions used by one include pre-viability embryos and foetuses then that is your argument.

There's no objective rules on this.

You seem to be confusing value (currency) with value (morality). I know it can be difficult since they are the same word, but they do have different meanings. You should read the definition and in the future use context clues to help identify which meaning of the word is being used.

>a fetus is a human being from the moment it is conceived.
Bullshit.

>Against the death penalty.
Even in extreme cases like confirmed mass murders?
>War can be justifiable; human life is not the only intrinsically valuable thing.
Agreed.

>If you're here for the honorary ameridumbcunt application then I'd say you passed with flying colours.

Projection?

People will be idiots regardless. You can't make niggers accept accountability for their actions. They dindu nuffins.

This

A mother should never want to kill her own child. That is the problem with abortion. Mothers are convinced that bearing a child is not worth it, and they're given an easy way out by murdering it. And the tragedy of it all is that they are patted on the back for it, so they can continue to make more children for the slaughter in their never ending quest for pleasure.

It saddens me to see a generation of children disappear when they could have been risen by a mother and father who would have loved them and taught them values. But that is why they are aborted in the first place. The parents aren't committing to a lifestyle that would read children.

They seek pleasure without responsibility, and society claps in their favor.

would rear*

>Even in extreme cases like confirmed mass murders?

Why do people always try to bring up extreme cases as though it were some form of argument?

Yes, I am absolutely against the death penalty in all cases for any reason for all time. If I said no, I'd just be one of those morality-lacking, "mental gymnastics" types.

prove me wrong

Use the same arguments that condemn murder from an atheist perspective.

Morality is absolute, relativism is satanism...a religion. Fag.

It only means you can murder anyone who isn't a land owning self made farmer since only land owning farmers who tend their own land can live on their own food and water supply.

Because someone might accidentally abort the next Hitler or Stalin, who would actually quell the massive population growth we're set to experience.

Because people need to be held responsible for their actions, and they can't go around creating something as precious as life and then killing it without penalties. People who are impregnated against their will get a free pass though.

We all agree that while the baby is developing, from blastocyst to birth, the right to life is developed. Pointing to the exact week in which the fetus gains the right to life is impossible. There is no distinguishing feature in which one could agree upon. It must mean that the right to life is inherit at conception. In concept, taking someone's life is wrong due to the fact that you take their control of their future. You do the same when abort.

Kudos to you for holding that opinion.

I'd much rather watch the world die out by the extremes. We already fucked this planet up pretty good. Since we're keen on importing low IQ mongoloids who won't help us colonize space, we might as well do a huge fucking cleanse before we destroy humanity for good.

>The parents aren't committing to a lifestyle that would read children.

Yeah that sucks, but if we can't change society, we're better off with a bunch of dead baby fetuses versus more unwanted humans on this planet.

abortion is probably the one issue that i just cannot sympathize with the opposition's (pro-choice) point of view. abortion is murder. there is no ifs or buts about it, not even in the case of rape. it is still murder.

if women are not willing to accept the possibility of pregnancy they should not have sex. if it is rape they should not make the tragedy even worse by killing an innocent human.

The state will fund and sustain this person for the rest of their lives if they end up with a life sentence, in turn putting added weight onto the tax paying public's back to support a further increasing and failing welfare state. Why sustain a human life who had major disregard for other human life? War can be justified just as taking the life of a horrific murderer can be.

Or can the death of a murder only be justified when carried out in retaliation for the initial act? (As in, say someone's wife was murdered and then the husband killed the murderer after the fact in retaliation.)

i don't even understand why people have to be 'redpilled' on abortion. it should not even be a question of left and right wing, unless the left wing has the ability to somehow justify murder.

That's what I'm getting at. It's not the law thats the problem.

We have to change society.

1) It's the murder of a child and has gimped our birth rates in white countries.

2) Only per capita, on a numbers basis whites do more and remember a white life is worth several non-white lives so a 1:1 comparison is silly anyway. I'd rather see the white race grow at a moderate rate while nigs explode in growth than see the white race decline in numbers while nogs grow. When we hit our Malthusian limit it'll be nearly exclusively nogs dying off anyway so there population right now doesn't matter too much as long as we whites stay strong and multiply.

Less likely than keeping the baby harming the mother.

>Yeah that sucks, but if we can't change society, we're better off with a bunch of dead baby fetuses versus more unwanted humans on this planet.
This. "B-but dead babies" is a libcuck-tier argument when it's just insane to replace a simple solution with post-facto moralizing.
>race

>it's murder
So is meat. You can't be pro-life without being a vegetarian.

Maybe it's because I'm in favour of sterilizing criminals and tards but all these "arguments" seem really inconsistent and leftie-tier so far.

>why dont you just kill human beings that are not in the womb?
Because they are out of the womb and posses cognitive thought. Don't be stupid. Anything past second trimester should not be happening though.

>it's the murder of children

This was my primary argument. The race part is fluff.

Generally pro-death, actually. I'm fine with execution of criminals given a sufficiently robust jurisprudence surrounds it.

I'm fine with abortion, given a practical mechanism for it- and as a side note birth control pills ought to be more freely distributed.

We only have so many resources, and mandating these kinds of things is just as impractical as outright banning them.

Also using the 'but it's MURDER' terminology is inaccurate. By definition, if both of these things are legal, then they are not murder- which is a criminal killing.

These acts, conducted under a law you don't have to agree with, are simply killing. You can kill an animal, you can kill a criminal. Legal killings, whether you agree that they ought to be legal, are things that can occur.

And, surprise surprise, they still won't take responsibility for their actions and we'll have yet another drain on society running around.

animals are not humans you fucking retard

population control

>The amount of fat niggers I see on the internet being proud of getting knocked up by Tyshawn and getting it aborted is fucking disgusting.
>Its not some achievement you slags its a potential human being.
And you think these people are going to raise their children to be upstanding, contributing members of society? You should be glad these people are dumping their spawn. You need to grow some thicker skin, user.

>killing
>someone

It's immoral to kill our own kind that are children. This is a basic primitive fact of life. It is the woman's fault for not getting on a birth control pill after already being unprotected, and any child past a week should be allowed to live. I love meat and I'll kill and eat any animals I want to, because they are inferior to humans. It's lefty-tier if YOU think unintelligent animals commonly eaten (pigs, cows, chickens) are worth anything more than human food.

>Anti-lifers believe a woman could legally kill you by suffocating you with her womb as long as you were asleep or unconscious

Removal of something that is not living is not murder. No ifs or buts about it. Removing a tree from your yard is closer to murder than removing a fetus from a womb, because the tree is living.

There is something so ironic about a website which goes on and on about minorities being unable to raise their kids to be contributing members of society largely wanting said parents to keep their offspring.

No, I don't. Because I am a living, human being, capable of cognitive thought.

Had two abortions in my life, two different girls.

Fuck you I don't want kids.

If power truly does lie with the people, no worldly power may decide who can join and leave the people.

>a baby
>something that is not living

Pick
One

congrats you're going to hell

Because killing a fetus is immoral. It takes away that person's entire lifespan. He or she would've grown up to be just like you or me.

It's basically murder, or at least morally wrong for the same reason as murder.

Jokes on you, hell isn't real.

When you're not some kind of wealthy heir then who will pay you and your healthcare in your old age (70+)?

Protip: Niggas, jews or other wealthy folks probably don't.

sure thing champ

all these
>muh babies
posts
fuck that. the more uwanted fatherless shitheads born the more degenerate the world gets.

I just believe abortion is murder from the perspective that had the pregnancy not been terminated, that a person would otherwise have been born.

If we are willing to say there are times it is ok to end a life (IE early stage) then we are finding a way to excuse murder. By this logic the murder of someone too old could be validated. Or the murder of someone with a disability. You are in essence rationalizing ending a life for whatever arbitrary purpose you have found.

The spark of life is initiated and a doctor goes in and purposefully ends that.

Murder is Murder if by another name. (abortion). I honestly believe all the women's rights issues are an added way to deflect a closer inspection of what it really is. Ending someones life at your convenience.

fucking this.

That's the whole point. Atheist are essentially just nihilist. Nothing means anything to them. There is an atheist nutjob at Princeton who says sex with corpses is fine as long as they agreed before they died and sex with animals is fine as long as they give consent. He never really goes into what constitutes an animal giving consent. His name is peter singer and once again he is a board member at Princeton university

manpower is necessary to the security of the state

modern countries have a low fertility rate

preventing abortion helps protect the state

>nigs
Are the reason I am pro-choice.

I think it's a terrible, disgusting thing for a human to do.
But unfortunately there's no reasonable chance of them just okaying it for those filthy beasts if it's not just as available to actual humans.

>3016
>having a "natural birth"
Fucking disgusting.

Jokes on your, hell is a metaphor for the empty godless directionless lonely lifestyle you are already living.

If you are so smart, then reason yourself past this one. If the known result of abortion is death for the child, and the alternative (being pro life) is inherently better for society. Since the future of the child is unknown, he has a statistical probability of being the smartest person to ever exist, among many other great people. Therefore you should be pro-life, and wait till the child is of an age where his attributes can properly be measured, and if they are not up to par, then you may kill it. So, in conclusion, being pro life, and letting the child live until it can be deemed either a benefit to society or not, is the most logical solution

Eh, you're half right. Not being religious kinda sucks sometimes because you have to deal with existentialism. The rest is pretty legit though, I can hate Islam and not sound like half a tard because I'm following a skynigger of my own. Granted I favor Christians far more than mudslimes.

Listened to Singer on Gad Saad's podcast, Singer is insane.

agree, but still its murder. I'm fine with it, but lets call it for what it is.

You have to believe in something and I bet you still believe in psychology and put in faith in some superstitious skynigger mind in your brain controlling your body and perspective.

Every child is a potential future contributor to the economy. A strong economy makes a strong nation.

>from an atheist perspective
>without mentioning race

and why are you here?

The hell is your argument to say a fetus isn't living? Cells are living, sperm are living, human eggs are living, fetuses are living, zygotes are living, grass is living, trees are living...

The difference between a fetus and a tree is that one is a living human being and one is a living plant. One is a sentient being (albeit not yet self-aware) while the other is a fucking tree lol.

>there's great irony in a site which criticizes people on the way they treat their children, but doesn't advocate for their mass murder

Do you see how silly a statement like that is?

That really makes us think.

>Without mentioning race
Why? Race is real.

Abortion should be given on request

>implying

Easy. If you think ending a person's life is wrong, then what difference does it make at what stage? Does the end result change? Is stealing $1500 less of a problem than stealing a $1500 tv? No one says, oh these are pieces of paper, it's not real money until you exchange it for a good or service. We generally attribute to it a value based on its potential purchasing power, despite there being a real disconnect between cash and goods; one that doesn't exist between the unborn and the born.

The only reason it's seen as morally acceptable is because people think it's convenient. You can get knocked up and act like it never happened, and most people aren't emotionally invested enough to care enough to call it what it is let alone be upset about it.

There's no rational reason to find it acceptable apart from any perceived practicality. Strip it of that and it would be perceived as one of the many barbarous human acts.