debate

Yes I do know the phrase. Originally I was just joking around. But Yh it’s recreational so u saying there is obviously a chance a kid is produced. But what if people take all precautions to have recreational but it still happens, then bruh let them get rid of the kid they never wanted. I would. Don’t bother me in the slightest lol

i think its unfair to tell a person no sex cause they dont want a baby its unreasonable expectation for a human like pull yourself up by your bootstrap type shit personally i couldnt have an abortion for religious reasons i use to think life started at conception but after listening to a few abortion debates iv changed my stance

Im gonna start off with the organ thing. One im assuming you mean that keeping an organ inside someone/having them grow an organ for the purpose of saving others. Here is why that makes no sense 1. That just turns people into cattle, you have them grow this whatever for the purpose of reaping it later (figure of speech) 2. Cuz cancer occurs when the i think its DNA? Strands reorganize themselves. They can only do this so much before it becomes a cancerous growth. Imagine if humans like lizards are able to regrow limbs cancer would probably pop up more often 3. a baby isnt an organ and it def isnt going inside another human later on Now onto the feeling topic i honestly dont care for abortion at the end of the day i dont live with any of those consequences. My feelings dont play any part its just common sense your "fact" have been you arguing on the side of the woman obviously taking their side and their side only.i advocated for women of rape pregnancy. My feelings play no part...cant tell if ur trolling tbh Also like you said they didnt go out trying to get pregnant but guess what just like in a casino you dont go to lose your money right? You go to win, and in the case of pregnancy you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. Such as unplanned pregnancy. It feels good right? Well it also comes with a risk a risk you willingly ignore if you cant understand that then there is no argument to be had its just simple i cant put it any clearer Also where you grow up or your life has nothing to do with anything. My parent struggled raising 4 kids all planned btw and we went through rough times but im no serial killer that has no impact and is a tiny bit racist since you threw women of color when most mass murders and serial killers arent of color im sure neither are the abortions if you are truly poor you couldnt afford an abortion tbh. People just ignore their children and neglect them thats what makes them fucked up that and mental illness. The ones who steal or whatever is a plain case of zero discipline no strong parental figure in their life As for the zygotes i will save them if they can grow up to be people regardless of what they become. The life of one isnt equivalent to the loss of many. Her being burned alive is just a sacrifice that is necessary for the others to live. She lived a life and like her everyone dies including a fetus. If you choose between you bing alive and everyone else dying thats the sane thing as that scenario

Ok so you're against that but for some strange reasons? 1. Not sure what turning people into cattle has anything to do with anything? 2. Not sure why DNA strands have to do with this. 3. The hypothetical had to do with showing why people's bodily autonomy is important. You shouldn't force someone to grow something in them against their will for the sake of reserving life. They have more rights over their own body then that thing has the right to live. You can't be asked to grow organs to keep someone alive, and you shouldnt ask someone else to grow a baby in themselves to keep it alive. You have full rights over your own body and no one can tell you what you have to do with it. You memed me saying fetuses instead of babies xD you clearly care because theyr "babies" (which they arent) or you wouldn't have cared about me being scientific with theyr labeling. I'm on the side of bodily autonomy in the main debate, but i do feel passionate about this because of the real consequences of making abortion hard to get. There is 0 up sides to that. Without safe abortions you'd have more poverty and more taxes being paid to the prison system and welfare just economically abortions are a positive xD Another bad analogy. Casinos are rigged toward the house. Casinos aren't something that everyone goes to to have fun all the time. So having sex is a stupid game and pregnancy is a stupid prize xD? this is why i think you dont understand what women go through. JUST women. What if the government forced you to have a vasectomy and then freeze your sperm for when you do wanna have a kid and you have 0 say. fyi, youll be forced to pay for it. this way youll never have an unwanted kid, and therefore wont be a drain on the taxpayers Is that morally right? Would you agree that the government is allowed to do that? Bro statistics arent racist. Statistically underprivileged women of color are core demographic of abortions. It's a fact. The people who mostly get abortions, as i keep having to say, are not middle class whores. They are struggling mothers. The fact that they happen to be people of color has more to do with systemic racism keeping people of color down but that's another debate (and not one i even wanna touch personally) I dont care how you were raised and never did i say you'd be a serial killer? i said its more likely. and it is. just like im not a celebrity. it's a stupid claim to make that you shouldnt have an abortion cause your kid could grow up to be rich. that would be a statistical anomaly. Really? Dayum thats cold. Just imagine the look of betrayal when you pick up those petri dishes and leave xD (jk jk)

along with answering my above, please answer this as well Let's say you get in a car drunk and know theres a risk of crashing, but disregard it because you gotta get home and pee. So you get in your car and than, bam, you hit another person. Afterwards you wake up and find that your suddenly strapped to a machine, with the person you ran over sleeping next to you. The doctors tell you that for the next 9 months you will be attached to him, growing him new organs along with acting as his organs in the meantime. You can not leave that bed until 9 months is over, where you will then shit out those organs through your penis, and he will be detached from you. Is this fair?

I havent read the whole conversation on abortion, but I quickly read through some of it, so I'll respond to some things that have been said. "The woman didn't intend to get pregnant" Intention means nothing when it comes to moral consideration. A drunk driver might not "intend" to crash and kill someone, but they did so they should be held accountable for their actions. "So i would say that the fetus does not have the same rights because of bodily autonomy." While I agree that someone's right to life does not necessarily trump someone's right to bodily autonomy, by engaging in sexual acts you are essentially consenting to the possibility of contraceptives failing and becoming pregnant. Here's a hypothetical: Let's say that there is a button in front of you. If you press that button, then there is a 99% chance that you will win a trip to disney world. However there is a 1% chance of someone losing both of their kidneys and therefore they would be in danger of dying. If you press that button and the 1% chance of the person losing both kidneys happens, don't you think you would be morally obligated to give one of your kidneys to the person to save his life? "So basically it would come down to sentients. " Why does sentience matter though? What about sentience makes you worthy of moral consideration? I'll start with this and maybe we can have a conversation on it

@mio im interested how youd answer this hypothetical since you brought up the car accident thing Let's say you get in a car drunk and know theres a risk of crashing, but disregard it because you gotta get home and pee. So you get in your car and than, bam, you hit another person. Afterwards you wake up and find that your suddenly strapped to a machine, with the person you ran over sleeping next to you. The doctors tell you that for the next 9 months you will be attached to him, growing him new organs along with acting as his organs in the meantime. You can not leave that bed until 9 months is over, where you will then shit out those organs through your penis, and he will be detached from you. Is this fair? also What if the government forced you to have a vasectomy and then freeze your sperm for when you do wanna have a kid and you have 0 say. fyi, youll be forced to pay for it. this way youll never have an unwanted kid, and therefore wont be a drain on the taxpayers Is that morally right? Would you agree that the government is allowed to do that?

Under the assumption that he would die otherwise, yeah you should definitely be forced to do that. Your actions would have caused him to die and so you would be morally obligated to save his life. I gave a similar hypothetical here: Let's say that there is a button in front of you. If you press that button, then there is a 99% chance that you will win a trip to disney world. However there is a 1% chance of someone losing both of their kidneys and therefore they would be in danger of dying. If you press that button and the 1% chance of the person losing both kidneys happens, don't you think you would be morally obligated to give one of your kidneys to the person to save his life?