What are Jow Forums's thoughts on abortion?

What are Jow Forums's thoughts on abortion?

Attached: 1522162943651.png (1280x1040, 104K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_Dodd
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_abortion
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ectopic_pregnancy
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I think morally it is an abomination and we should chastise those who have had or seek them.

I also believe it is not the god damned governments business

Can be avoided mostly of you wear a condom

Good for culling genetic dredge. Moralfags can fuck off

Thankfully it kills babies.

>it's not the governments business to punish people that kill children

>mfw I realize 90% of aborted babies would have grown up to be commies or braindead non whites

Attached: 1519718395409.jpg (402x402, 49K)

It's a grave sin, the murder of a helpless baby. Anyone who has had an abortion and feels no guilt at all for doing so, and those advocating strongly for it, are surely going to face wrath at judgement.

The main coherent arguments I see on the pro-life side:

>It kills millions of innocent babies.

>Religious values/God

>It removes the consequences of women's actions & bad behavior. They can act like whores instead of taking care of themselves, getting married, and starting a family, then they get an abortion if things go wrong. That's really why most women want free abortions, they don't want responsibility and want to have a careless sexual lifestyle

>It's a waste of resources & taxpayer money on huge social programs. Why should the average taxpayer be forced to subsidize abortions for Shaniqua & her 5 accidental pregnancies? Why should we increase the national debt as a result?

>The existing institutions in charge (Planned Parenthood) are terrible and not trustworthy, they should be defunded

>It could be a long-term scheme for population control as the state gets more and more power, until abortions are mandatory in some cases

Main coherent arguments I see for pro-choice:

>"Liberates women" regardless of how bad it is for society and women themselves. and how much it costs them and society

>Prevents overpopulation/it's basically eugenics.

>It's morally right when necessary (rape, incest and life of the mother). This is usually agreed upon by pro-life people though, so is it really pro-choice?

>Women will choose unsafe abortions in back alleys if it's made illegal or not publicly-funded. This argument has always had lots of holes.

>Religion shouldn't dictate our laws as if abortion is a strictly religious issue

>Having kids when the parents don't want them will create unhappy families and children

Attached: 1484668670800.jpg (728x545, 105K)

:^)

Attached: sieg_hill_crop.jpg (1195x388, 154K)

>We need a princess who's a union worker
What the fuck

no real excuse to abort a pregnancy with the many freely available prophylactics on the market, except maybe if the kid is a product of incest, rape or is going to be born with genetic defects or something

at least one person can wear a rubber or take a pill to ensure they fuck responsibly

What color is it?

Imagine living in a world with all the niggers planned parenthood has killed

Depends if its black or not

Attached: 1501528650700.gif (442x366, 2.85M)

White babies bad
Minority Babies good

This

Attached: C34A16E4-0E64-4707-8D0B-3FA48778699F.jpg (700x393, 54K)

>he doesn't think the government has no business in how many children he kills.

Attached: 1496332456329.png (562x504, 146K)

What race is it?

Pro-abortion

Eventually the liberals will wipe themselves out.

be honest, you really just want to know what race

Hillary should have been aborted

Against abortion, but those with mental retardation should be sterilized for the betterment of future generations. This dose not prevent said retard from living a productive, happy life.

Attached: NatSoc.jpg (1024x878, 196K)

how the fuck is a Disney princess a union worker? since when did princess have a union unless they occupied a job that wasn't a princess, in that case, would they be a princess?

Attached: 1508473382790 (1).jpg (1080x1530, 1.02M)

There will be no more disney princesses, have they not realized that?

Unfortunately this. Do we really want more niggers in the world? That and I don't think it's necessary for woman to have rape babies.

Attached: FD2055B6-4230-4FE8-BD42-60607DC3BED1-14721-0000114BE647ACAB.jpg (477x637, 54K)

Attached: Abortion.jpg (1069x1847, 795K)

I think it's one of the most unnatural and immoral things a person can do and it's ruining women

Does it really matter that much when they're bringing them into your country through mass immigration anyway? Especially in Europe?

Should American (usually white) taxpayers be forced to subsidize organizations like Planned Parenthood and all the bad things they do so Shaniqua can have AIDS sex with Tyrone then get bailed out every single time at the taxpayer's expense?

Maybe if you had race-based laws but right now PP is completely shit, and more and more white women will use it with how degenerate the West has become.

I think a lot of people can agree that even if abortion should be legal in some cases, the way it's handled right now is pretty bad, and organizations like PP should be completely defunded.

Cultural marxism.

It's not just a meme.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_Dodd
>In 1953, she testified before the US Senate about widespread Party infiltration of labor unions and other institutions. On March 11, 1953, The New York Times ran a front page article entitled "Bella Dodd Asserts Reds Got Presidential Advisory Posts." The article reported that Dodd "swore before the Senate Internal Security subcommittee today that Communists had got into many legislative offices of Congress and into a number of groups advising the President of the United States."[8] The New York Times reported on March 8, 1954 that Bella Dodd "...warned yesterday that the 'materialistic philosophy,' [i.e., dialectical materialism ] which she said was now guiding public education, would eventually demoralize the nation."[9]

All your main government bureaucracies are run by Marxists.

Attached: 1489516639148.png (613x691, 305K)

Why did they add the word "actually" before "union worker"?

They only did it for that one.

Attached: 1483753893320.png (500x545, 397K)

That abortion is 25 years too late

I don't care. Although I believe genetics is a factor, I think most niggers are stupid because they have nigger parents. I think anyone can break out of the bad parent trap. My alcoholic father beat me weekly.

I believe in humanity. And I believe that those who do not are really reflecting what they see in themselves.

Abortion is a force for good. Most abortions are nonwhite.

Attached: Dylann.gif (790x329, 164K)

Not my body not my problem. Just mark the thots with a thot star.

It would imply there is an example of a Disney Princess who was some form of quasi-Union Worker. I think that is a little over the head of a five year old child. So too should a rolemodel based primarily around the fact they have killed their own child.

>It's morally right when necessary
A human being is having their body intentionally destroyed (killed) in each abortion. There is no justification for this. Even in rape/incest scenarios the child is innocent.

Abortionists often (incorrectly) cite medical emergencies that put the mothers' life in danger as a legitimite need for abortion. The commonly used scenarios are preeclampsia (catastrophically high blood pressure) and tubal/ectopic pregnancies (baby implants in the fallopian tube and will inevitably rupture leading to massive hemorrhage). Neither of these are treated with an abortion. The former is resolved with premature induction of labor and the latter with either a full or partial saplingectomy (removal of the compromised portion of the fallopian tube). Even though the loss of the child is a forseeable (and sometimes unavoidable) outcome of these therapies, the lives of both mother and baby are being respected because they 1)offer life-saving treatment for the mother by treating the underlying pathology in her body(extremely high BP/Imminent hemorrhage) and 2)do not at any point directly attack the child's body. There are ZERO (0) medical indications for an abortion.
An analogous scenario would be treating a pregnant cancer patient with radiation: while the therapy will in all likelyhood kill the baby, it is being used to save the mother's life and has the predictable, but unavoidable and unintended, effect of miscarriage.

Attached: 165.gif (300x222, 498K)

>princess
>undocumented immigrant
You really only get to pick one.

I’m pro life, but I can live with legalized abortions if they come with forced sterilization.

You gotta prove to me that you don’t want kids.

(((Disney)))

Attached: 8347589374985.png (1156x1871, 1.27M)

>All that text to say that you just want more darkies running around.
It's possible to believe that something is morally wrong but does a service to society. Abolishing abortion without reinforcing the importance of the family unit would be an absolute disaster. I do not want to support welfare queens that keep getting piped by Tyrone who feels NO obligation to be apart of his child's life.

abortion is immoral and should be illegal.

>"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

Attached: 1520045917926.png (640x598, 74K)

>Most people that get abortions are trailer park trash and niggers.
>Why would anyone want to keep them around?

Attached: 1516033044562.jpg (500x322, 16K)

44.5 million babies murdered by abortion

Attached: 9873495739845.png (1079x2006, 176K)

I'm sorry I'm a man of principle.

>without reinforcing the importance of the family unit
It's a good thing I didn't make that claim anywhere in my post then.
>It's possible to believe that something is morally wrong but does a service to society.
Well yeah: we could fix our homeless problem in less than a year if we decided to just kill them all. What a retarded stance.

>Women will choose unsafe abortions in back alleys if it's made illegal or not publicly-funded. This argument has always had lots of holes.
>Having kids when the parents don't want them will create unhappy families and children
Giving these types of people access to easier abortions just encourages their shitty behavior.

>It's morally right when necessary (rape, incest and life of the mother). This is usually agreed upon by pro-life people though, so is it really pro-choice?
Special cases are supposed to be just that: special. It's not supposed to be a gateway for women to act like sluts. There isn't even a total ban on abortions, so what the hell do pro-choice people actually want?

The only good government program, honestly. They just need to step up their game and have a few thousand or few hundred thousand "accidental complications" then they will be godly.

Attached: Margaret-Sanger2-1764x700.jpg (1764x700, 121K)

>There are ZERO (0) medical indications for an abortion.
Doctors are allowed to terminate a pregnancy if it is a life saving procedure for the mother. This is a common ethical question in medical school

It's hte height of degeneracy and could hisorically be compared to child sacrifice to the devil.

Provide a scenario where an abortion is medically necessary nigger.

You provided it yourself: preeclampsia. If the mother has a severe form and the fetus is too young, then termination of pregnancy is warranted. I'm against pro-choice but you should spend more time researching before you resort to typing walls of text

I’m trans and I do think we need a Disney princess who is trans. All those other ones would make no sense. Like why would she be a union worker or pro-choice?

I'm sorry for your lack of reading comprehension. Inducing labor =/= abortion. The same protocol used to induce premees is not an abortion. I detailed in that same post how inducing labor was distinct from invading the womb and killing the child. I even provided an analogy for the simpler minded audience (You) to recognize the distinction with the pregnant cancer patient. Try again.

>I'm sorry for your lack of reading comprehension. Inducing labor =/= abortion. The same protocol used to induce premees is not an abortion. I detailed in that same post how inducing labor was distinct from invading the womb and killing the child. I even provided an analogy for the simpler minded audience (You) to recognize the distinction with the pregnant cancer patient. Try again.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion
>the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus
>induced expulsion of a human fetus
Look at those sentences. Real carefully

>dictionrary definition arguments
You're attempting to obfuscate a spontaneous abortion, ie a misscarriage in which the body expells the child post mortem with induction of LABOR

Attached: 1469475532324.jpg (1906x5750, 3.2M)

Attached: 1485302137461.png (600x429, 16K)

Attached: 1464783826671.jpg (400x383, 52K)

Attached: 1438195905151.png (1140x3235, 824K)

On one hand I hate kids

On the other it gives women a choice

Why would you give a shit OP
Don't get an abortion if you don't like them
Sticking to a word's dictionary definition is now a logical fallacy on Jow Forums apparently

Context is everything, frog. His desperate retreat from the argument of "medically necessary" abortions to the definition of the word abortion to include everything that uses the term "induce" is a clear sign he is in over his head and toothless. Inducing Labor Is Not An Abortion.

>You're attempting to obfuscate a spontaneous abortion, ie a misscarriage in which the body expells the child post mortem with induction of LABOR
Read carefully. Again
>induced expulsion of a human fetus
Here let me point it out
>---->>>>>induced

>Inducing Labor Is Not An Abortion.
And if it results in the death of a nonviable fetus? If the doctor KNOWS it will result in the expulsion of a nonviable fetus? What do you call that?

Q.E.D.

Induction of a premee, we have resources to care for many of them. There is never a guarentee that an induction won't risk the life of the child but we are talking about the extreme scenarios to begin with. See my original post you knuckledragging ape:
>Even though the loss of the child is a forseeable (and sometimes unavoidable) outcome of these therapies, the lives of both mother and baby are being respected because they 1)offer life-saving treatment for the mother by treating the underlying pathology in her body(extremely high BP/Imminent hemorrhage) and 2)do not at any point directly attack the child's body.
>It is being used to save the mother's life and has the predictable, but unavoidable and unintended, effect of miscarriage.

Extra-uterine pregnancies warrant an abortion, they're a medical necessity, otherwise you lose both the mother and the child
Various forms of placenta anomaly as well (Placenta percreta and the like if my memory isn't too rusty..)
And seeing as some of the medication used in clinical abortion procedures is indeed labord inducing to get rid of the foetus/embryo, it falls under the definition of an abortion
You'd know that if you actually cared about educating yourself and not simply backing up and rationalizing your pre-existing opinions
You fucking mutts disgust me more and more, you're all intellectually bankrupt and unable to educate yourselves on your own, passive-agressively begging for scraps of information instead

Lots of born innocent people are killed, why are babies spared.
>wanting to keep rape spawn alive
You are so fucked up, wanting a woman to raise someone else’s kid at the detriment to society.

>Induction of a premee
It baffles me how a retard like you can continually miss the fact that abortion can mean the same thing. Also, the fact that you actually put "induction" and "miscarriage" in the same post just proves to me that you actually know nothing of the subject you are talking about

>Extra-uterine pregnancies warrant an abortion
Wrong. Gestation to term is actually possible for many non fallopian cases and in those that are fallopian, salpinjectomy is the protocol to use since it again, treats the pathology in moms body without attacking the kid and also has better pronosis for reducing reoccurence.

>what I personally do is the only thing that matters, not how laws and collective values make a society function and prosper
>who cares if someone tortures kids and cats at home, it doesn't affect you
>who cares about massive social programs that you're forced to pay for with your tax dollars or adds to your national debt, it doesn't affect you
>who cares about another way to lower birth rates for Europeans and how it could be used in the future

Attached: 1506384431169.jpg (750x411, 52K)

>And seeing as some of the medication used in clinical abortion procedures is indeed labord inducing to get rid of the foetus/embryo, it falls under the definition of an abortion
The same drugs/dosages used to induce labor are not used to give abortions.

Abortions should only be done if having the child risks killing the mother or if the fetus as very obvious genetic defects that would be too costly for the family to treat.

It's her kid too, nimrod.
In any case, the majority of studies and statistics as to the reason for abortion show that rape is the reason in less than 1% of the cases.

Retard, the induction is in reference to labor and the miscarriage was in reference to the radiation/chemotherapy. Again, reading comprehension.

Fallopian cases are the majority, and it's still impossible for many others, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about
You realize salpingectomy* is the permanent removal of a tube, and it does indeed 'attack the kid' since the embryo is removed along with it ? Are you just being retarded on purpose right now ?

murder

>the induction is in reference to labor
And here you are, a retard who cannot accept the fact that inducing labor to expel a nonviable fetus can be called abortion.
>and the miscarriage was in reference to the radiation/chemotherapy
Yet radiation and chemotherapy was not even mentioned once in the post. Nice try moron

> it does indeed 'attack the kid'
Not at all. The mother's tube is whats at imminent risk of hemorrhaging and being removed. The child is inseparable from this part of the mother's antomy and we currently lack the tools to provide life support at this stage. This is just like giving Mom chemo/histerectomy for the treatment of cancer. The child is never the target of the therapy.

Lets see.

No.
No.
No.
What?
No.

God, you are dumb. Read the ORIGINAL POST again and your pea-brain will find the context.

It mostly culls nonwhites and defects. The real issue is lax sexual morals.

The only way to stop it is to give women the choice all while doing massive propaganda against it both at home and in the public space.

Abortion out of convenience is evil. Abortion out of necessity (to save an otherwise healthy and fertile woman from a life-threatening situation) should probably be tolerated.

If you think abortion is responsible for all those societal ills you're referring to then you're a retard and a pretty solid case for why abortion is good if it gets rid of poor uneducated trash
Who cares if they're not the same, it's still used and you have no argument there aside from showing you're a retard who didn't do a single shred of research
The tube wouldn't be removed if there wasn't a placenta and an embryo growing there in the first place dipshit
It's a disfunction of a physiological process, and warrants medical treatment.. the embryo is removed, because if it continues to grow it will fuck the mother up. So it's a necessity to abort it, that is, terminate the pregnancy voluntiraly
Next time try graduating highschool before arguing about anything, ever

This debate is long settled.
Wake up already you pathetic christcuck

Attached: wmels4lthgvz.jpg (477x637, 38K)

The original post was as dumb as the rest of your posts. You cried like a little bitch when I said that there are times when abortions are warranted, and for some stupid reason you, who probably has never read medical text in his entire life, keep bringing up "induction of labor", as if that remotely strengthens your argument. How does an infamous drug like Misoprostol cause abortion, you dumbshit?

My thoughts are more about Planned Parenthood right now.

Idk why I'm paying for some whore to kill her consequences
If these whores want us to pay for their free sex so badly, then instead of abortions, let's go with government mandated sterilization. Fuckboys and whores who want free promiscuity can undergo sterilization and fuck off.
This way, we don't pay for abortions, we don't kill fetuses, and we remove inadequates. Very simple solution.

seems rude desu

Attached: abortion-procedure.jpg (653x475, 136K)

You just want more mature company down there, don't you Satan?

Attached: 20180314_013340.jpg (1127x986, 472K)

baby killer

>Who cares if they're not the same
You should, since you're the one trying to argue induction of labor = abortion.
>It's a disfunction of a physiological process, and warrants medical treatment.
Agreed. The therapy isn't an abortion though. Again just like a histerecromy isn't an abortion. There is ZERO (0) medical indication for abortion. This is why I wrote that "wall of text" for you brainlets at the begining so I dont have to hold your hand every time you try to talk about shit you don't understand.

Nigger lover cuckold

Attached: 1473977786201.jpg (229x183, 11K)

Thank buddy

Using a drug to induce labor and terminate a pregnancy = Abortion

Medical abortion regimens using mifepristone in combination with a prostaglandin analog are the most common methods used to induce second-trimester abortions in Canada, most of Europe, China and India

From here : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_abortion
That's how it's done, it's in the fucking CIM you massive retard, you're literally arguing against reality right now

Also :
Early treatment of an ectopic pregnancy with methotrexate is a viable alternative to surgical treatment[33] which was developed in the 1980s.[34] If administered early in the pregnancy, methotrexate terminates the growth of the developing embryo; this may cause an abortion, or the developing embryo may then be either resorbed by the woman's body or pass with a menstrual period. Contraindications include liver, kidney, or blood disease, as well as an ectopic embryonic mass > 3.5 cm.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ectopic_pregnancy

Got some more logical fallacies and mongoloid nonsense to add to this already tragically stupid monologue of yours ?

>Agreed. The therapy isn't an abortion though. Again just like a histerecromy isn't an abortion. There is ZERO (0) medical indication for abortion. This is why I wrote that "wall of text" for you brainlets at the begining so I dont have to hold your hand every time you try to talk about shit you don't understand.
The fact that you wrote a case for medically-induced abortion in your wall of text and the fact that you call everyone else brainlets is so funny.

Using a drug to terminate a pregnacy is an abortion. Using that same drug to treat send the mom into labor to treat preeclampsia isn't an abortion. The devil is in the details. You are either using it to kill the child or to save the moms life primarily with the unintended, but expected, side effect of losing the child.

Tell me about the reoccurence rates of those methods froggy.

How's the taste of my dick ?