Anonymous #10 1w

I wish it didn’t so I could roast his ass 😞

22

Anonymous #10 1w

Genuinely who says that abortion is worse than the holocaust

13

Anonymous #11 1w

the facts it’s downvoted even know numbers are literally the facts shows where liberals are at in their life

-4

Anonymous #12 1w

I would say that, based on kill count, abortion is worse than the holocaust. If you disagree, articulate why

12

Anonymous #10 1w

W mom

6

Anonymous #6 1w

It’s not the same because you’re counting unborn clumps of cells as “people”

22

Anonymous #11 1w

You sound like an idiot

18

Anonymous #9 1w

It is the same because you’re counting born clumps of cells as “people”. Some, like hitler, might have even said it’s not the same because you’re counting Jews as “people”. The distinction you’re making is ultimately arbitrary and rhetorical. Tell me at which point that clump of cells ceases to be merely a clump of cells and begins to be a person. Anything after conception is arbitrary.

-1

Anonymous #14 1w

Yeah idek, the mom’s position almost sounds more relativist, which would really work against Charlie’s narrative lmfaoo

1

Anonymous #6 1w

That’s such a blatant false equivocation. Yeah hitler would’ve argued that Jewish people aren’t people. But objectively, that is not arbitrary whatsoever. Obviously looking different or holding different beliefs does not take away the fact you are a person. A clump of unborn cells incapable of surviving on its own or having conscious thought is not a person.

12

Anonymous #10 1w

Bro each ejaculation contains ~15-200 million sperm. Every time a guy nuts its basically the holocaust :/

18

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

Perry the platypus??? (Sees comment) Pro-choice perry the platypus!?

13

Anonymous #14 1w

that’s the gist of what she was saying, basically that how you lived your life/how you were raised/what events you went through determines what you think/believe, which honestly i agree with and i can understand why people would believe something different than me because of have they have lived their life, but how the fuck do you not at least say “yeah that probably wasn’t the best thing to say” like she couldn’t even acknowledge that his statement was bad or wrong, and she’s pro-choice btw!!

5

Anonymous #15 1w

Fuck yeah

12

Anonymous #6 1w

If you really think about it, each time your mom blows me i holo in her caust till she aborts

14

Anonymous OP 1w

Right like, you can totally be raised in a certain environment to believe certain things, but that doesn’t mean you can just say whatever awful shit you want and blame it on that lmao. Like my parents were some of the most awful people I’ve ever met and raised me to be the same. It took awhile but eventually you learn enough to realize that shit is bad lmao

13

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

thank you pro-choice perry the platypus, you’re my hero

6

Anonymous OP 1w

Happy to help lmao 🫶

1

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

When does it become a person then?

-1

Anonymous #15 1w

Me when I’m incapable of understanding basic concepts (jerking off =\= conception)

-1

Anonymous #6 1w

Did you read my comment? I said if it’s incapable of conscious thought or surviving on its own, it is not yet a person. It doesn’t have consciousness. So logically, when it has those two things, it would be considered a person. Which is late in pregnancy, at which point I agree abortion should only be used when medically necessary

9

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

But at the end of the day, putting it in the hands of the law leaves room for legal repercussions for all involved parties, which could prevent or postpone life saving care, leading to far more deaths. Hence why I think the decision should ultimately be up to the individual, and the government should have no say in the matter

10

Anonymous #6 1w

The gametes are still composed of human DNA :/ so ridiculous drawing the line at conception when it clearly begins at the gametes (why does it matter if they meet each other…. Thats still a person :/)

3

Anonymous #17 1w

Me when im fucking inbred fr

8

Anonymous #9 1w

Doesnt just sound like one, they ARE one lol. MAGAts are hilarious

5

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

What about somebody in a coma, or a severely disabled child who has never been able to articulate its thoughts (and whose consciousness, therefore, is unverifiable)? Is it okay to kill them because they can’t survive on their own? What about old people who need machines to survive?

-2

Anonymous #6 1w

Well yes, being born gives you all your legal rights. Someone needs to be born to be on US soil, at which point they would have a right to due process and all the rights following that. So, I treat born clumps of cells as people because that’s what they are

5

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

Where’s Perry? Fighting the good fight deep in a yikyak comment thread

1

Anonymous #15 1w

Me when I use facts and logic and argue with tards

-2

Anonymous #17 1w

“Facts and logic” turns out you can make anything a “fact” if you ignore actual science. I am in fact a dragon. If you disagree youre basically h*tler. I am very smart, please argue with me :)

4

Anonymous #6 1w

I mean there is a strong debate about someone in a coma who’s in a vegetative state, and often their family will make the choice to pull the plug and let them pass. And in terms of disabilities, there are numerous other ways to verify conscious thought outside of speech. I can’t think of a single case where a child was so severely disabled that they weren’t capable of expressing that in any way whatsoever. But if there were, is that any way to live?

5

Anonymous #9 1w

Heck yeah dawg

1

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

You really can’t think of any cases where a child has been disabled to the point they weren’t capable of expressing themselves? It literally happens all the time dude, a kid is so severely disabled that they’re only able to perform basic bodily functions. Even if you might think that’s “no way to live” that’s certainly not justification for killing them

0

Anonymous #6 1w

Correct. Because we’ve progressed enough that we have the technology to work around many disabilities and allow those who have them to communicate in other ways. It is very obvious to tell when there is no consciousness present, as they would likely be in some sort of vegetative state. Same as with the coma patient, that decision lies with the family

1

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

Even when they are in a vegetative state, it’s not justifiable to kill them. That’s a human being. One’s value as a person does not come from one’s ability to be self sufficient.

-1

Anonymous #6 1w

Like you seem to be trying to misconstrue my argument here. I’m not making the argument we should just kill everyone who has a severe disability, absolutely not. But if there is absolutely no consciousness, as in they are incapable of thinking or interacting with the outside world in any way, I would personally consider that a mercy. But it’s up to the family to make that decision

3

Anonymous #6 1w

Of course it’s a human being, and of course value doesn’t come from being self sufficient. Again literally not at all what I’m saying. What I am saying is that we literally have the technology to monitor brain function. If an individual’s brain has stopped functioning completely and will not function, they are essentially no longer alive

1

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

“Did you read my comment? I said if it's incapable of conscious thought or surviving on its own, it is not yet a person.” Literally exactly what you’re saying lmfao

0

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

I really want to understand what youre saying. Would you be open to a debate? I’m trying to argue in good faith

0

Anonymous #6 1w

Of course I’m open to debate. Is that not exactly what this is? I’m also trying to argue in good faith, but I don’t know how many different ways I can say it to get you to understand what I’m saying. When I said capable of surviving on its own I didn’t mean in the sense of self sufficiency. I mean in the sense that if you take a fetus out of the womb early, it will almost certainly die or have many serious health issues. Like I said, I’m not suggesting killing off disabled people, obviously

5

Anonymous perry_theplatypus 1w

If a person is at the point where there is absolutely zero brain function, and they have no way to actually survive without a plethora of machines forcing them to be so, they are functionally no longer alive. And we have the knowledge and technology to be certain about these things, so there is nothing arbitrary about it

5