Are pro choicers simply just low IQ?

Sterilization is the final redpill

The spelling with -oo is first recorded 1590. Use after a verb, for emphasis (e.g. did, too!) I don't use your uneducated slang.

They are certainly defective.

Underrated

>Going to these lengths to justify a spelling mistake
Why aren't you speaking in Shakesperian if this is the case?

>be a woman
>taught your whole life that you're not responsible for your actions
>ride the cock carousel
>get pregnant
>kill your unborn child so you can continue your vapid hedonistic lifestyle

Because other evolutions in english are not based on slang.

Neither side is smart because they're engaging in word-thinking and semantic arguments.

>my body
>someone else's body
>but it's not a someone yet
>but the umbilical chord
>what's a person
>yadayada

Do you not see how engaging in these pointless word games is exactly how Jews want it?

Yes, it is actually.

>someone else's body
But... it is someone else's body. Humans don't have two brains. This isn't semantics, it's biology.

I’ve noticed

Attached: 1A13946B-BD4C-4AD7-AA87-9826E5764256.jpg (1125x1081, 461K)

Ok, why are you against removing them from the other person's body then?

This does destroy their strongest argument.

She made a choice to have it inside

The legality of abortion would not be an issue if we had a healthy society that valued family and tradition. We are in the midst of an intellectual dark age where simple concepts like biology are considered taboo and offensive topics.

Great post.

Trespassing implies the person who came in, did so without consent. Yet the ones who made him, likely knowingly chose to forgo using contraceptives and as such consented to the entrance of the now unwanted guest. But, given that the removal of the guest would result in his death, one which he did not ask for and cannot object to by leaving himself, abortion in itself would be an act of Murder.

The other person engaged in the single action that could knowingly result in their creation. The mother made a choice to at least risk getting pregnant, and if the reality of that is too intolerable for her that’s really too damn bad because if she reviles the thought of becoming pregnant and her own baby that much she could’ve just stuck with a blowjob.

this is such a powerful analogy, since tapeworms are human just like fetuses are.

this makes me angery

From the comments. I just don’t even know

Attached: 9E5771EF-C15B-4ACD-B536-CC87D299113C.jpg (1125x982, 392K)

Us federal uniform 'anatomical' gift act 1968
Supreme court makes abortion federal law, 1973
See Stanley Plotkin MD Deposition (Highlightes), 7:30. Dissecting fetuses ghoul shit.
Murders, USA yearly: 12,500
Abortions, USA yearly: 1,100,000
Pro baby killing women are sub human trash...
Find the line from the movie Dogma where the protester says to Garafelo "YOU'RE GONNA BURN IN HELL YOU FUCKING BABY KILLER!" Post At Will!

pro lifers are just meme covered christtards. ignore them because they actually think jesus was the son of god.
is it considered genocide when i shoot into a cock?
>no
is it considered murder when we kill innocents during wartime
>no
so when does life start?
>conception
says who?
>all my Christian friends

this is how all abortion debates go, theres no reason to give pro lifers any type of voice just like. climate change deniers

Pro-choice arguments are all pretty dumb.

If a woman has a healthy pregnancy, why should she be allowed to pay someone to kill her fetus?

People start talking about "choice" and "freedom" but that's lame as shit. You could say that about any issue.

"Why should X be legal?"
"Because choice and freedom!"

It's not a real argument.

If these pro abortion cunts don't want to get pregnant they should just stick to anal.

>parasite
>41.5k people are this fucking stupid
>mfw

Attached: 853498EE-6DF5-4630-966C-7A8ED3E39973.jpg (629x505, 33K)

Abortion is the premeditated killing of a human.
I'm against that.
Never even been religious. Don't need to be to see that abortion is murder.

That’s not what trespassing means; same reason kidnapping isn’t called theft.

This

Children should be their parents' chattel until they acquire agency of their own.

Removing the child kills it and is thus murder. The best analogy is a siamese twin. In this analogy you would not be legally justified in killing them. If you want to kick them out of your house you would be able to legally but only if you left with them. You do not suddenly gain the right to kill them as you want to move freely.

That does not matter. I asked you why you should foster a different person in you. If I were put in a situation where I could save a child by housing it I am in no way obligated to save it.

I just had an extremely lengthy debate with some pro-abortion people on cuckbook, and the argument came down to this:

>we don't know whether the fetus is a person or not
>therefore we shouldn't be killing them since the risk of them being a person means that we may be committing mass murder

Nobody offered any rebuttal to this but I did get several comments like this without any follow up.

Attached: dead women reply.png (511x79, 7K)

No, it's not murder. If I kick a hobo out of my house and he dies due to the environment it's not murder. Person A has no obligation to save person B.

No, she used contraceptives which means she wanted the opposite.

Yeah, your not.
But if you're flying around in your helicopter, you can't evict other people in your helicopter at will, as that would be murder. Even if the helicopter is your's.

When you use contraceptives that means you don't consent to having a child.

>muh feels
People can do what the fuck they want with their bodies. If a fetus is somebody else's body, it can get the fuck out or pay rent when the person hosting it wants it gone.
I let people into my house all the time who don't get to fucking live there just because of that.
If a persons body isn't at least as free as my fucking house then they have no autonomy.
Maybe you love the taste of boot so much that you want to give over control of your meat to mommy gov, but luckily we don't run societies based on your emotions.

If you don't want a child simply don't have sex

No contraceptive is 100% effective, the risks are often clear

mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/familys-heartache-five-year-old-6411134
>five-year-old conjoined twin dies after 18-hour operation to separate him from brother

Even if you are 5 years old, it is still not your body unless you are separated.

Attached: siamese twins my body my choice.jpg (1168x657, 62K)

That's like saying that pulling the trigger on the hobo was just you scaring him with a gun, and if he happened to be in the path of a bullet, he died from coincidental head trauma. Or if you threw him out of a window that he died from the fall and this was just the quickest way for you to evict him from your house.

this completely

the second they compare an infant to a parasite is the second they've lost

it's good to push them into saying that kind of thing in a debate

>you would be able to legally but only if you left with them
>legal abortion is suicide
>mfw

Attached: 1552698907598.jpg (570x570, 21K)

The helicopter is private property. So I don't see a reason why you'd be obligated to give someone on it a ride. I don't think to deny someone something is equal to murder. If you were in a situation where a man asks you for your bottle of water and you know he will die if you don't give it to him, I don't think to deny them would equal murder.

kek that's not how I meant it but putting roasties in the roasting oven is a good idea.

>Satanic
How is it truthful and opposed to jews?

You're not obligated to pick anyone up in your helicopter. Even to save someone from a flood.
But to evict them mid-flight is murder.
Pretty simple.

No, that would be using force on him. A fetus can be removed with no intent to destroy it. It will, however, die because it is dependant on person A.

To kill somebody who is trespassing would be self-defense.

When I go to a bar there is a risk, a small one, that someone will follow me home and steal my tv. Doesn't mean that I consent to them being in my home, even though there is a small risk.

>that flag
checks out

Classic capitalism. After all you don't have any right once working for others. Abortion is totally legal free market capitalism.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
>At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason

A baby isn't trespassing in your body. That's exactly where it is supposed to be.
Are you saying you can kill your children anytime you want because they're inside your house?

>with no intent to destroy it
you are clearly retarded and cannot figure out that force is applied here as force =/= gentle removal. it is forceful removal. By this analogy, if you own a hospital and there are people on life support and you want to save on electricity you should be allowed to switch off the building's power. You are not actually holding a pillow over them, you are just removing their support, and if they can't sack up then that's down to them.

You aren't trespassing into being employed by Jews, that's exactly where big banks want you to be, you still have no rights and can be terminated any day, like mother boss can terminate own child.

Nobody is obligated to get pregnant.

This

Also, what about the case where the woman is raped im not defending abortion i just want to explore the argument. Would the mother still be considered to have 'given the baby permission to enter her private property'

>That's exactly where it is supposed to be.
Having sex does not mean you consent to have a child.

>Are you saying you can kill your children anytime you want because they're inside your house?

Using the word "children" here implies I've had a history of caring for them. Let's say a child you gave up for adoption 20 years ago randomly enters your home instead, yes It would be self-defense to kill them.

Does government need permission from people to build city for population in capitalism? No. You are born there, they already have full control, decide your language and money you use, even your education, they can also terminate you in war or fire you from job, you go broke, you hunger, you die.

Someone kidnapped a person and put him inside your helicopter. You notice them mid-flight.
you can't evict the kidnapped person as that would be murder. They're innocent.

Nobody is obligated to stay pregnant, nor to not consume copious amounts of vitamin C.

I mean, I support abortion because I like dead Leftists. It's this complicated thing where I would be anti-abortion for an Aryan of good character, but I would make it mandatory for niggers, various shitbloods and anyone with any opinion to the left of Mussolini.

This causes a great deal of confusion in some circles because Conservatives in general tend to have this ridiculous idea that leftists deserve to live. I don't think that. If I could personally crush the skulls of every shitlib's children myself, I would. I'd do it for free. Humans have rights, but leftists aren't human, period.

Am I the only person who thinks this way? It feels like we're fighting a war but everyone on my side doesn't want to shoot anybody. You are supposed to kill your enemies. If your enemies kill their own kids, that means you're winning.

Attached: giphy (2).gif (540x304, 1.79M)

the analogy sort of works i guess. but you clearly don't like the whole jew situation so you've just made an argument against abortion.

They are now, Jew. I don't think you understand what the word "obligation" means.

>Someone kidnapped a person and put him inside your helicopter.
This is already a fallacious basis. Sperm willingly swims towards an egg and impregnates it, against the owner's will.

Well it is very simple. If you want people to decide if abortion should be performed, then you need collective owners. You are living in capitalism where government makes the rules with instructions from banks and if everything works like that, even private companies, then abortion is totally logical for that system. At end of it you don't have country decisions as people and you can't fix abortion related problems, like why does abortion even happen, why do people want it, it's a systematic capitalistic problem. Capitalism has collateral damage, since you compete, people don't decide what's best, they compete and eliminate themselves.

You won't be able to do anything to a female who consumes a lot of vitamin C. It leads to miscarriage. If you want to make money, buy stocks in the OJ industry.

Yes.

It’s often referred to as
>The banality of evil
The most stupid are the most casually evil.

No actually, we are saying you're obligated to stay pregnant. I didn't provide an argument when i said 'nobody is obligated to get pregnant' because i thought it was ethically self evident. that doesn't mean you can just use similar worded statements to argue contested points retard.

Good point.

VPN fag

High quality post

>ethically
Try again

You might not consent to a child, but you still can't murder them.
This scenario where you can kill anyone entering your house is also weak, because you have to have a reasonable argument for self-defense. You can't just shoot a kid in the head because they walked inside your house to play or something.
Killing a baby for self-defense is absurd.

so? just because you use a legal loophole doesn't make attempted murder ethical.

I'm not gonna say I endorse your thinking, but I will say, when you play minecraft and the endermen start stealing your blocks and spawning at exponentially increasing rates, it'd be nice to be able to eliminate their spawning blocks, but that shouldn't also stop you from getting new players into your server to build alongside you, and disempower the villagers, who keep manipulating your currency system.

Search Dr levatino destroys abortion in two minutes, abortion survivors, and the new young faces of the anti abortion movement...

so when does life start faggot?

>having sex does not mean you consent to have a child
Yes it does since the first living being with sexuated reproduction appeared on earth.
Don't want a child? Don't fuck around. There is absolutely NO OTHER WAY to get pregnant if not fucking or in vitro (which also implies consent).

If you invite me for dinner you can't then shoot me because "muh trespassing" retard.

>fetus
>baby
pick one

>fetus
>walked
pick one

Self-defense is still government law and you are arguing a moot point, since they can take away that right from you. Why didn't they already? Because you like guns and have gun lobby. On other hand roasties obviously side with abortion and so government has no problem with it also.

It doesn't.

"fetus" and "baby" are just words to describe different stages of human life. What they objectively are, are tiny human beings.

Still, you've just made self harm illegal. I don't really mind if you use force to enforce arbitrary moral dogma, but it seems like the mother has lost ownership of her body - not that I mind.

If I invite you for dinner, that doesn't mean you're allowed to stay indefinitely.

Yes, I have trouble with self-harm when you put others at risk. Go ahead and OD in your bed but don't jump on the freeway and put others in danger.

Palestine and Iraq are just words that describe different stages of non-Democratic system.

since when was self harm illegal?

>a pregnancy lasts for an indefinite period of time
LoL

>Yes it does since the first living being with sexuated reproduction appeared on earth.
No, it doesn't. It's consent to have sex, not to be impregnated.

If you have a point, I don't see it.
A fetus is a tiny human, a baby is a tiny human, murdering human beings is wrong.