HUMAN PERSONHOOD - THE CASE AGAINST ABORTION

[Walker]

Why are you so obsessed with abortion ...

What you call obsession is actually an interest in correctly identifying and saying the way things are, no matter the topic.

A topic that causes semi-hysteria, verbal thuggery, and assaults on freedom of speech, especially concerning the modern death-cult paradigm of routine and necessary abortions, indicates a topic ripe for philosophy, even though a woman’s decision to abort may have nothing to do with philosophy and everything to do with personal convenience and failure to adapt.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Why are you so obsessed with abortion ...

What you call obsession is actually an interest in correctly identifying and saying the way things are, no matter the topic.

A topic that causes semi-hysteria, verbal thuggery, and assaults on freedom of speech, especially concerning the modern death-cult paradigm of routine and necessary abortions, indicates a topic ripe for philosophy, even though a woman’s decision to abort may have nothing to do with philosophy and everything to do with personal convenience and failure to adapt.

Get this straight you moron. From CONCEPTION, the young of humans are ENTIRELY dependent on the MOTHER for their survival. The male has a fuck and then has nothing more to do with the process--just like any other mammal. That's nature. A good mother will spend a great deal of her time worrying about the DANGER that males pose to her children--often from their own father. Whether or not the male sticks around is completely at the whim of the male. As someone with an interest in genealogy it's quite eye-opening to find that single motherhood has been the norm throughout history, and women have been constantly fighting for the survival of themselves and their children for as long as they've been giving birth. So don't give me your bullshit about men being an equal party to procreation. The only part of it where this is the case is in the biological sense-- in the millisecond it takes for a sperm to fertilise an egg. This applies to any conception, including rape. You just can't stand the fact that this is something that women have ALL the power in and that really gets the goat of inadequate, woman-hating religioturd males like yourself (little different from the motivations of smug, anti-choice religioturd females).
Stop being such a coward and just admit that you don't give a flying fuck about either the foetuses or children of people you've never heard of and are never even going to pass in the street. It's ridiculous to try to convince anyone otherwise. Men just don't go around crying over the foetuses of complete strangers, and when it's not a stranger's then they are only too happy to drive the female they have impregnated to the abortion clinic (or pharmacy in places where the abortion pill can be purchased over the counter) when it suits him, especially when the male is an 'upstanding' anti-choice American evangelical kristohypocrite. Therefore your ONLY motive is a general dislike of women, and feeling threatened and inadequate around anything that gives females more power than males in their own reproduction. That's kristianity to a 't'.
So butt out of it and shove your misogynistic kristoturd hypocrisy up your arse.

[Dachshund]

Why are you so obsessed with abortion ...

What you call obsession is actually an interest in correctly identifying and saying the way things are, no matter the topic.

A topic that causes semi-hysteria, verbal thuggery, and assaults on freedom of speech, especially concerning the modern death-cult paradigm of routine and necessary abortions, indicates a topic ripe for philosophy, even though a woman’s decision to abort may have nothing to do with philosophy and everything to do with personal convenience and failure to adapt.

Get this straight you moron. From CONCEPTION, the young of humans are ENTIRELY dependent on the MOTHER for their survival. The male has a fuck and then has nothing more to do with the process--just like any other mammal. A good mother will spend a great deal of her time worrying about the DANGER that males pose to her children--often from their own father. Whether or not the male sticks around is completely at the whim of the father. As someone with an interest in genealogy it's quite enlightening to find that single motherhood has been the norm throughout history, and women have been constantly fighting for the survival of themselves and their children for as long as they've been giving birth. So don't give me your bullshit about men being an equal party to procreation--the only part of it where this is the case is in the millisecond it takes for a sperm to fertilise an egg. So butt out of it and shove your misogynistic religiofuck hypocrisy up your arse. You just can't stand the fact that this is something that women have ALL the power in and that really gets the goat of inadequate, woman-hating religioturds males like yourself (little different from the motivations of smug, anti-choice religioturd females).
Stop being such a coward and just admit that you don't give a flying fuck about either foetuses or children. It's ridiculous to try to convince anyone otherwise, Therefore your ONLY motive is a general dislike of women, and feeling threatened and inadequate around anything that gives females more power than males in their own reproduction. That's kristianity to a 't'.

Dear Veggie,

NEWBORNS are also entirely dependent on their mother and father for the resources (milk, then food, regular changing, bonding, protection, shelter, etc.) they need to survive. Just like you Vegetable are also entirely dependent on your environment to survive as an adult. Lots of fathers "stick around" after their spouse gives birth, children need two parents: a father and a mother, to grow up as well-adjusted youngsters. Single-motherhood has NOT been the norm throughout history. In the 6000 year history of human civilization there has NEVER been a civilized society emerge that was not firmly grounded on the nuclear family unit: (Mum, Dad and their biological offspring, staying together as a family)

The days of women's access to abortion on demand (over the 9 months of pregnancy) and infanticide (!) are drawing to a close. The SCOTUS decision in "Roe v Wade" '73 will be overturned in the relatively near future by the US Supreme Court when it is challenged - and it will be.

It seems to me you are projecting your furious anger respecting the negative experiences of a dysfunctional relationship you had that resulted in the birth of a child and the subsequent abandonment of you and your child by an errant father. Why else would you be carrying on in the totally hysterical and maniacal manner that you are. My advise is for you to seek appropriate psychiatric support.


Regards


Dachshund (Der Uberweiner)

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Umm no, they can get all of that from their mother, and have to for much of the time. That goes without saying. But it's a cruel and dangerous existence without some kind of support. If a woman is financially independent then there's nothing to stop her from successfully bringing up children on her own. You are too stupid to see that you are actually reinforcing what I wrote. I will leave you to ponder that. There is no evidence that children of single mothers are less adjusted. That's just more bullshit kristian propaganda.
You write so much crap that it's difficult to know where to start. I'm talking about the nature of reality, NOT whatever 'social norms' are in fashion at any given time. If you can't see the difference then you aren't going to understand any of it, plus it's not my job to increase your brain capacity. Go and learn to play the piano or something else that stimulates neuron activity.
You making it about what you think is my own personal experience is entirely expected. You can't even imagine how anyone could genuinely care about something that might not have ever affected them personally. Unlike you I am not totally self-absorbed. And here you are, expecting us to believe that YOU care deeply about every foetus of every stranger (including those 'inferior' black ones you are always drivelling on about) on the planet.
And yes, single motherhood has always been commonplace, and not out of choice either. If women couldn't look after their children then they died, or they depended on charity and had their children taken from them. It couldn't be any other way because people are people, and we are all animals.
And the fact that human society has evolved so that women have always been at the mercy of the whims of males then that only REINFORCES the need for safe, available abortion you retarded godenzyme. There has always been abortion. Women have always done whatever they could to get rid of unwanted pregnancies--more often than not dying in the process (but that only pleases a god-bothering creep like yourself).
I wonder why anti-choice and anti-welfare go hand in hand. Gee. That's a difficult one. Could it mean that anti-choice simply means anti-women? Surely not... Having no welfare and no access to safe legal abortion is not going to alter the realities of the human condition, or magic up solid, safe, dependable men (who never die or run off) for women to with live in 'nuclear family' bliss, with a picket fence happily ever after. That's not reality.

ps Whining about 'thuggery' is pretty rich coming from you.

[Walker]

Get this straight you moron. From CONCEPTION, the young of humans are ENTIRELY dependent on the MOTHER for their survival.

Not in the real world.

As Dave Chapelle says, if women have the right to kill them, then men have the right to abandon them … without being in arrears for child support.

[Walker]

Abby Johnson notes that employees of Planned Parenthood can no longer call clients women. Why? Because the official word at these medical-procedure facilities is that men can also be pregnant.

So much for science.

Bizarro World, ground zero.

Rationality-challenged pro-abortioners should be on alert for science defining personhood as the ability to think straight, because without an exempting grandfather clause they could be retroactively aborted to save the planet from overpopulation.

More pro abortion, hyper-emotional maniacs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EosJDaja70

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Abby Johnson notes that employees of Planned Parenthood can no longer call clients women. Why? Because the official word at these medical-procedure facilities is that men can also be pregnant.

So much for science.

Bizarro World, ground zero.

Rationality-challenged pro-abortioners should be on alert for science defining personhood as the ability to think straight, because without an exempting grandfather clause they could be retroactively aborted to save the planet from overpopulation.

More pro abortion, hyper-emotional maniacs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EosJDaja70

Do you spend all your time trawling kristian anti-choice videos on Youtube? Don't you have anything better to do? No one is interested in clicking on your pathetic links.

[Walker]

Do you spend all your time trawling kristian anti-choice videos on Youtube? Don't you have anything better to do? No one is interested in clicking on your pathetic links.

Only at the purrfect time.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Get this straight you moron. From CONCEPTION, the young of humans are ENTIRELY dependent on the MOTHER for their survival.

Not in the real world.

As Dave Chapelle says, if women have the right to kill them, then men have the right to abandon them … without being in arrears for child support.

And I'm sure nature knows all about American child support laws Most men weasel out of paying it anyway--that's when women have to go to Judge Judy
By the same token, weirdo males who are anti-choice should be made to fully financially support every unwanted child whom the mother was forced to give birth to because of anti-choice laws.

[Walker]

... males who are anti-choice should be made to fully financially support every unwanted child whom the mother was forced to give birth to because of anti-choice laws.

That amounts to zero in these parts.

Abortion is legal in the USofA, for quite some time.
Maybe as long as you've been non-aborted?

Child abandonment is not legal.
Men are already forced under threat of penalty, unwanted or not.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

... males who are anti-choice should be made to fully financially support every unwanted child whom the mother was forced to give birth to because of anti-choice laws.

That amounts to zero in these parts.

Abortion is legal in the USofA, for quite some time.
Maybe as long as you've been non-aborted?

Child abandonment is not legal.
Men are already forced under threat of penalty, unwanted or not.

But according to the perverted male weirdos on here who are obsessed with abortion that will change if the and their ilk get their way. Men have all kinds of ways to weasel out of child support or women wouldn't have to take them to court, which must be a huge hassle and expense--especially in the US.

[Walker]

But according to the perverted male weirdos on here who are obsessed with abortion that will change if the and their ilk get their way. Men have all kinds of ways to weasel out of child support or women wouldn't have to take them to court, which must be a huge hassle and expense--especially in the US.

You’re becoming repetitive and noisy.
Act your age.

Discussion is discussion.
Discussion is not obsession.
Topics for discussion vary.
Life and death is but one topic of discussion.

Life and death is relevant to philosophy because of a prevalent status-quo, death-cult mentality in modern society, among other reasons.

If women can kill them, men can abandon them; this means that women wouldn't have the right to take men to court, just as men now have no say in the killing of their child.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

But according to the perverted male weirdos on here who are obsessed with abortion that will change if the and their ilk get their way. Men have all kinds of ways to weasel out of child support or women wouldn't have to take them to court, which must be a huge hassle and expense--especially in the US.

You’re becoming repetitive and noisy.
Act your age.

Discussion is discussion.
Discussion is not obsession.
Topics for discussion vary.
Life and death is but one topic of discussion.

Life and death is relevant to philosophy because of a prevalent status-quo, death-cult mentality in modern society, among other reasons.

If women can kill them, men can abandon them; this means that women wouldn't have the right to take men to court, just as men now have no say in the killing of their child.

What a fucking stupid non argument. If women abort then there's nothing for men to whine about. Who said I believe in child support? Rich women get a lot and poor ones get nothing anyway. It only gives males more power.
Grow a brain.

[Walker]

A man will never have that right to abandon responsibilities, even if it does make him a weasel.

A woman has the right to kill the baby. What does that make her?

Here’s your chance to be no one and miss more monkeys in the mix by not being interested.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g9RI0GgRIQ

[vegetariantaxidermy]

A man will never have that right to abandon responsibilities, even if it does make him a weasel.

A woman has the right to kill the baby. What does that make her?

Here’s your chance to be no one and miss more monkeys in the mix by not being interested.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g9RI0GgRIQ

Fuck off with your stupid links. I'm not interested in anything you find fascinating. I just said I don't believe in child support, and I couldn't give a flying toss about your yank way of doing things.