What's your argument against this?

What's your argument against this?

Attached: Screenshot_20190521-085643_Gallery.jpg (1080x1920, 775K)

No one forces you to get pregnant and plan b is sold literally everywhere

Donating an organ is not the same as having a child grow inside of you. A woman should not have control over the life of her baby. Abortions should be a tool of eugenics, not a simple pleasure whore degenerates can take part in.

2 things

1-undergoing a procedure that could prevent a death is not the same as NOT undergoing a procedure that will cause a death. The key here being the risk involved to the moral actor cuts the other way. In the organ donor scenario, you are risking yourself to help another, in the abortion scenario, you’re risking yourself to kill another.

2-legality and morality are not the same. Even if we granted that these 2 scenarios are morally analogous, we could say that it is immoral in either case, both to abort your child or fail to donate your blood to your family member, but legally they could be different

Just like it can be immoral to cheat on your girlfriend but shouldn’t be illegal, but it is immoral to steal from your neighbor and also illegal

We should enact mandatory blood donations and organ donations after death. It's just organic waste sitting around unused. At least put it into use, why let perfectly good tissue go into the ground?

Attached: 1558397466384.png (640x493, 498K)

Passive restrictions on medical procedures aren't analogous to forcing invasive procedures. An invasive procedure would violate your bodily autonomy. Otherwise saying we can't use illegal drugs is violating our bodily autonomy. It's not. It's just a restriction. This is a common logic flaw these NPCs use. Moreover, a separate body being attached to you via an action you willing participated in completely throws bodily autonomy out the window.

There's no universal right to bodily autonomy anyway. Police can shove their hands up your ass against your will as you scream in protest, it's called a body cavity search, it's not any physically different than what they call rape. It's totally legal in all states.

The claim we can't take organs from corpses without their consent is wrong. Dead hobos without ID are donated to science and their organs are used for research. If it were possible their organs would be transplanted to save lives but that's extremely unlikely for numerous reasons, most of them have hepatitis and their organs are long expired by the time it's established theres no next of kin who would decide the fate of the remains.

As always, these emotional pro choice to kill arguments are based on falsehoods and nonsensical fallacies and was probably written by a clueless teenager.

Attached: 1538880618502.jpg (461x407, 50K)

Easy, dumb bitch is comparing apples to oranges. A car accident simply is not pregnancy, and pregnancy due to the informed decisions of the mother is simply not an accident.

MyBodyMyChoice needs to be coopted and made about circumcision. These same dumb cunts get it done 'to make it look cleaner' and honestly believe the baby belongs to them even outside the womb.

You're a high school dropout, I'm guessing?

My property, my choice.

Attached: honk10.gif (815x815, 818K)

>less bodily autonomy.

That's literally what the law does though. It's called prison.

Attached: my-body-my-choice-lol.jpg (311x445, 40K)

I'm confused. The fetus at no point gets bodily autonomy? I couldn't tell which way they were arguing until it came down to them not wanting to be committed to a pregnancy for nice months.

Attached: zMhe3B4.jpg (2399x3536, 1.09M)

>a few grammar mistakes
invalidates his entire argument huh? kys

FUN FACT: Empathy would prevent that cunt from letting his little sister die in that car accident. It's the dehumanisation of the foetus that's the main bone of contention.

women aren't people

>1 post by this ID
you faggots
I thought you were trying harder
but no, you're back to posting once
Let me speak with your manager.

All I'm reading is that a corpse has more of rights to life than a fetus

If u a pregnant woman with a male child, the kid is part of u and u are technically a dickgirl (and therefore a trap and therefore gaj) with two brains and shouldn’t u not b treated as such?

>My kid needs a blood transfusion
>One person can save my kid
>Blood donation is risk free - it literally costs them nothing to save a life
>They 'don't wanna' because of 'muh choice'
>Expect me to respect that and accept the death of my kid.

Just fucking watch as I drain that blood with my own hands. Just because you have bodily autonomy does not mean it is morally justified to use it any way you like.

Don’t be gaj: the kid is not part of u

Not saving your sister with the blood transfusion is unethical and so is ripping babies from wombs like a savage.

Like Dr. Paul says when you are working with a pregnant woman you have two patients.

She's absolutely right, and all the pseudochristian faggots trying to make abortion about "saving lives" need to stop doing the Right's equivalent of virtue signaling.
It's about taking back control of women and getting civilization back on track. Legal abortion simply means you're letting women run loose and blackpilling betas.
Stop doing mental gymnastics to act self righteous and godly.

>refusing blood donation is the same as destroying a 5-month old fetus with pliers.
One is neglect and the other is deliberate physical harm. Shit argument.

Attached: 305849679345.jpg (445x424, 52K)