Anonymous #1 1d

So you are pro birth, not pro life.

14

Anonymous #2 1d

They are pro control over women’s (total stranger’s) bodies. Maybe they should focus more on their own life and its shortcomings.

11

Anonymous #4 1d

I’d have the same opinion if men got pregnant

-5

Anonymous #1 1d

No the fuck you wouldn’t LMAO

7

Anonymous #5 1d

Yes bro. I could care less about controlling women or their bodies. I care about the unborn baby. Infact I actually wish men got pregnant instant cause we’d just have the baby and put it up for adoption without getting emotional. Abortion rate would be 0%

-4

Anonymous #1 1d

Curious about your stance on abortion under the circumstances of rape, or a minor, or death/ mortal risk of life to the mother or to-be child, or all three. Because all three happen. Regularly. You cannot fathom the trauma and existential fear of being forced to undergo permeate lifelong damage from a situation for which there is no justice and for which you are blamed. Many of us would literally rather die. If I get pregnant in any capacity, and I can’t choose, we both dying.

10

Anonymous #1 1d

But by caring about the unborn baby (in almost all cases a literal clump of cells) you are actively controlling women and their bodies. Whether you like it or not that is what you are doing, full stop. “Without getting emotional” let’s see you shit out a watermelon and avoid getting emotional about it, and that’s without the baggage of caring for another human being.

11

Anonymous #1 1d

The foster system is already overflowing. We are overpopulated. The economy is in shambles and most can barely provide for themselves, let alone a child. Your mindset is how the cycle of poverty and suffering continues all in the pursuit of some moral high ground you will never be subjected to. You do not get to make choices about other people’s bodies. Trying to do so makes you legitimately dangerous.

10

Anonymous #1 23h

Yeah you just don’t care if they die AFTER they’re born bc it’s the easiest moral position to take: fighting for something that has no opinions to upset you with and asks absolutely nothing from you. The minute that changes, you stop caring because your whole position is lazy and careless

7

Anonymous #5 22h

Caring about a born baby is also always caring for a literal clump of cells. Tf do you think humans are made of, metal?

-2

Anonymous #5 22h

I agree you don’t get to make choices for other people’s bodies. I just extend that to not being allowed to kill human beings. Idk why that’s controversial

-2

Anonymous #5 22h

„We?“ I thought the baby was just “a literal clump of cells.”

-2

Anonymous #5 22h

Yeah I would it would not affect my opinion whatsoever, considering men already benefit from abortion anyway and will coerce their partners to get one. Unless life stops beginning at conception when men can get pregnant there’s no reason for me to change my views. Also I think trans men are men but whatever. Idk what you want from me to prove it.

-2

Anonymous #4 22h

Hey quick question what does abortion do again?

-2

Anonymous #7 21h

“We” is what you view it as, thus I used the word. I’m telling you what you would see the situation as. I see the situation as equivalent to an animal in a trap gnawing off its own leg to escape. Give me liberty or give me death.

8

Anonymous #7 21h

Omfg “clump” meaning hundreds at most, not fucking TRILLIONS that actively have thier own agency I think you knew that but yes, let’s debate imperfect linguistics

4

Anonymous #7 21h

Hot take, I don’t care what it does as long as it preserves the life and sanity of someone already living. “It’s murder” even if it was, which it’s not, that “person” is still dependent entirely, with no thought or speech of its own, on the adult woman; I still don’t care. I will take the life of someone already living over the unborn (which #6 is right btw, laziest and easier moral stance to take with no self reflection or follow up needed) every. Single. Time. 1/2

2

Anonymous #5 21h

2/2 you do not get to make that choice for others. It will actually lead to more death and has been proven to do so. You don’t care about life, actually, as much as you think you do. You care about control and abstract lazy morals for which you will suffer no consequence, ever. Fuck you.

8

Anonymous #5 21h

Isn’t that interesting. I guess you’re fine with controlling someone else’s body by killing them. Do you really think the unborn aren’t living? Are they dead then?

-2

Anonymous #5 21h

Lmao, you can’t be serious. You claim to care about preserving people’s bodily autonomy and yet you’re fine with killing a human being because they can’t fucking talk. Why do you get to make the choice for someone else if they deserve to live? Why are you so blatantly inconsistent in your values? Why are you pretending to care about bodily autonomy?

-2

Anonymous #7 20h

I’m not inconsistent. If a full grown human being was somehow, hypothetically, living inside another, I would preserve the body of the one they are living inside. It is a matter of freedom to the carrier. Defending the unborn but NOT the born is how poverty and suffering continue. There is nothing stable or moral about your values.

7

Anonymous #7 20h

“Someone else” is based on belief. I think it’s a clump of cells. You think it’s a person. I will never police you to get an abortion. You are policing others to permanently affect their bodies. Therefore I will get an abortion if needed and you won’t. Problem solved. The unborn are living like a plant is alive, not a person- in my opinion. Thus I will choose and you will carry, as is determined by our beliefs.

7

Anonymous #5 20h

It’s a human being. All human beings are people. That’s not a matter of opinion. Why do you think it’s not a person when it’s a living human being?

-2

Anonymous #7 19h

We can disagree on that, then. My point stands. Freedom to the carrier will ALWAYS be more important and the more morally correct choice. Especially if the carrier had no choice in the matter of being a carrier.

6

Anonymous #5 19h

So you would say the more morally correct choice is to not kill the innocent unborn human being? What about their freedom and bodily autonomy?

-2

Anonymous #5 19h

You can preserve the body of that person without violently killing them and ripping them limb from limb. I never said i wouldn’t defend the born, I’ve been very adamant that born people are are unconscious/dependent on a caregiver/undeveloped all equally deserve rights. It is incredibly inconsistent to support bodily autonomy and not be against killing someone else, which is the ultimate violation of that right, and which abortion does.

-2

Anonymous #7 18h

Hey so that’s not how abortion works. When I had an abortion I took two pills, a massive blood clot came out, and that was that. There is no body to rip apart.

4

Anonymous #2 18h

You were pregnant with a blood clot?

-2

Anonymous #2 18h

Anyway I was referring to surgical abortion. You can look up the procedure for yourself if you like

-2

Anonymous #7 18h

No I would not. The morally correct choice is to protect the carrier, the mother. The “baby” has no autonomy because it is not alive (like a human is an alive) per my beliefs. It’s real easy to advocate for something that can’t correct or disagree with you, isn’t it? Real easy to advocate for that which has no consequence to yourself.

3

Anonymous #7 18h

Just say you don’t know how it works.

5

Anonymous #5 18h

But I do know how it works. Why do you assume I don’t? I can go through different abortion procedures in detail if you like.

0

Anonymous #7 17h

And yet, it doesn’t matter what the procedure does. It saves the mother. Period.

5

Anonymous #5 17h

If it’s to save the life of the mother and there’s no other way to treat her than to get the fetus out of the uterus an abortion is allowed anyway. We’re not talking about abortions done to save the life of the mother.

0

Anonymous #7 17h

…it’s not allowed in some places, or at a minimum the right to have that done is being threatened and has already led to death. No one wants an abortion like they want an ice cream or a Porsche, they want it like an animal wants to chew off its own leg to escape; that alone is saving the mother, to me. It is always to save the mother. It is never an easy choice. It is always one that should be made by mother and doctor. I’m not sure what other abortions you could possibly be talking about.

4

Anonymous #5 17h

Where is it not allowed? Are you saying that getting an abortion is like chewing your own leg off? Because that’s a completely different human being. It’s not part of your body.

0

Anonymous #7 16h

My bad, I left out the other half. Women, almost always, (the exceptions being those who truly wanted a child and now have to get one to survive- a heartbreaking decision) want an abortion like an animal wants to chew off its own leg To Escape A Bear Trap. It is part of the body. Even if it wasn’t, it relies on and takes from that body. Preservation of the mother every time.

2

Anonymous #7 16h

Several states in the US have total or near-total bans on abortions- this is where the “to save the mothers life” gets hard to define and as such leads to politicians messing in medical business- some poor woman had to carry her, already dead via miscarriage, baby for two fucking weeks. That’s DETRIMENTAL to her health, but because of these bans women are dying. Women are dying. Women are fucking dying. I do not gaf about the unborn when compared to them.

6

Anonymous #7 16h

I’m also getting increasingly convinced that you are part of the 60% some odd percentage of internet traffic that is bots, code designed to enrage and exhaust opposing beliefs and to coddle aligning ones.

5

Anonymous #5 16h

Interesting. I missed the part where escaping a bear trap involves murdering an innocent human being. You do realize a fetus is a distinct organism from the mother, right? Can I ask you what you think the first stage of life is of an organism? Also, do you think relying on someone else justifies that person killing you? Do you think women have the right to kill breastfeeding infants as well? Just curious.

1

Anonymous #5 16h

Seriously recommend blocking them like I have. They account for half of abortion debating in this group and they can only argue on morality which is completely subjective. I’ve been able to find facts refuting every claim they’ve made. They have absolutely nothing better to do with their time bc they will go on and on until you get tired of them. Even if you could properly debate them on here considering we’re limited on characters, they are set in their moral stance and can’t be swayed by facts

4

Anonymous #5 16h

All US states allow abortion in the case of miscarriage. That’s explicitly in the law, so if any woman was unable to get an abortion, that’s medical malpractice. Just like how it’s medical malpractice if a woman dies from preventable causes in a pro choice state. Yes, women are dying, and legalizing abortion pretty clearly is not preventing that. Any developed countries that restricts abortion more than the US does has lower maternal mortality rates, including compared to pro choice states.

0

Anonymous #5 16h

Then it’s quite sad you’re losing an argument to a bot.

0

Anonymous #7 15h

“Losing” and its explaining basic accountability and empathy to someone who gets their info from Fox News

4

Anonymous #7 15h

OH MY GOD!! Legalizing abortion is statistically proven to save lives and lower death rates! And YES! It's malpractice you're so close to the point malpractice is commonplace for women! It is COMMON. We aren't fucking safe oh my god your so close to the point

3

Anonymous #6 15h

Yeah, that’s probably true. Still deeply bothered by a potential opportunity to educate being lost, but yeah I’m probably being rage baited, boo hoo to me. Rage bait used to mean obvious truth being denied, not denying human rights to half the population (and supporting the IRL movement making that happen) Thank you. I’m so tired boss 🫩

4

Anonymous #5 15h

How the fuck is it not alive according to your beliefs??? The life of an organism starts at conception, that’s objectively true

0

Anonymous #5 15h

„Obvious truth being denied” you mean like claiming the unborn aren’t alive?

0

Anonymous #5 15h

Also I’m a woman and can get pregnant, and my mother has experienced a miscarriage before. My unborn sibling died and I mourn them. Are you saying it doesn’t fucking affect me for you to deny reality and claim they weren’t alive

0

Anonymous #7 15h

Omfg that’s your choice! If you and your mother mourn them, that means they mattered to you and I would mourn them too. If you didn’t, neither would I.

4

Anonymous #5 15h

„Educate” Educating myself as we speak. Sorry do textbooks count? I’m not sure if you think they’re denying women’s rights, let me know if I should throw away “Embryology at a glance” by scientific lecturers and take to your social media instead!

0

Anonymous #5 15h

You just said they weren’t alive lmao

0

Anonymous #7 15h

It is not objectively true… like at all. Question: burning building, 1 week old crying baby versus a hundred frozen embryos, you can only save one. If you say baby, by the logic you’ve used you would be condemning 100 children to death, which by simple math is the wrong choice. If not, it is clear embryonic life does not carry even remotely the same weight as something already born. Please answer this.

2

Anonymous #7 15h

I never claimed they weren’t alive, if I did that is my mistake, I do not hold that belief. Alive like a plant, not a person. Both are alive, they do not have the same value.

1

Anonymous #7 15h

Again, unborn life at different stages does not hold the same moral weight as something born. Again, for the millionth time, the mother’s life is more important. You’ve also failed to acknowledge literally any of the socioeconomic points I’ve brought up- I don’t think that’s a mistake on your part.

5

Anonymous #7 15h

I never said that??? I said not alive LIKE A HUMAN IS ALIVE- still alive, just more like a plant than a person. Again, this rock means nothing to me, but if someone said “hey this rock is an heirloom and holds a ton of emotional purpose to me” I am now inclined to respect that persons beliefs. Doesn’t mean I’ll ever think of a rock like that, but I won’t stop them from doing so.

3

Anonymous #5 15h

Girl I get it. I don’t even think you’re getting rage baited, I think this one genuinely believes what they’re saying and thinks they’re smarter than anyone else while simultaneously twisting facts to fit their narrative. Yikyak sucks for debating and they’re set on this moral framework. Either reality will hit or they’ll get attention some other way but I rather use this app to unwind and troll over entertaining a grown up child left behind. Enjoy your freedom like I have 🦅🫡

5

Anonymous #7 15h

Being a woman also absolutely does NOT absolve you of being cruel to other women. I have nothing against women who would never get an abortion and believe life starts at conception- they can do what they want. Thats what CHOICE means. But when they take that away from others it becomes a problem: anti choice is pro forced birth, and there is no way around that.

5

Anonymous #6 15h

Thanks. Needed this tbh. Hard to ignore real life consequences to online rhetoric, but yeah… ❤️‍🩹

1

Anonymous #5 14h

Waiting for an answer to this btw…

6

Anonymous #5 14h

Ah yes. My sibling whose death I mourn is actually the same as a rock. How stupid of me to think that they had any sort of inherent value as a human being and to not be ok with children like them being killed every fucking day in the US. I just have to accept they are morally equivalent to a rock and their death is the same as me losing a treasured item and not a fucking human being. Clearly you’re morally superior here!

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

Your argument was this will never affect me. It absolutely fucking does. It affects me that you compare unborn human children to a clump of cells. It affeczs me that you would consider any children I may conceive as functionally worthless outside of my own personal opinions. That is going to fucking affect me.

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

If they’re human and alive how the fuck are they not a person???? How can you say a human being has no value?????

1

Anonymous #7 14h

Omg I’m not saying your sibling is a rock it was not at ALL a 1:1 comparison- rocks aren’t living for one, and the unborn are, even if I’ve explained why that’s different from those who are born. Inherent value as a human being, sure. We place different values on different stages of life. We cannot force the other to beleive differently. I’m not trying to be morally superior I’m trying to explain to you why stripping choice from thousands of women is KILLING THEM.

7

Anonymous #5 14h

Do you think socioeconomic points justify violently murdering an innocent human being? Also for the millionth time, abortion is permitted if the mother’s life is at risk. We aren’t weighing the fetuses life against the mother. We are talking about 99% of abortions where the mother will not be harmed if she doesn’t kill her own child. Yes. A human beings life at any stage holds the same exact value.

0

Anonymous #7 14h

The fact you think this is about moral high ground and not women dying horribly from medical malpractice in huge numbers baffles me.

6

Anonymous #5 14h

It must be so hard for you to explain to me how my dead sibling is like a rock or a plant. So sorry this conversation is emotionally draining for you.

0

Anonymous #7 14h

It won’t affect you, because your personal beliefs are concrete in your own right, because you HAVE CHOICE OVER YOUR OWN BODY. I mean physically, literally, BY LAW affect you. It doesn’t. But it does kill women everywhere when that choice is taken away.

6

Anonymous #5 14h

It clearly isn’t because again abortion bans don’t affect maternal mortality outside of poverty and any developed country that restricts abortion more than US pro choice states has many times lower maternal mortality rates.

-1

Anonymous #7 14h

Still haven’t answered the fire question.

7

Anonymous #5 14h

It is completely fine for you to think I’m morally bad and not want to interact with me- that’s fine. You’re entitled to that. You are not entitled to the autonomy of thousands of women who don’t share your beliefs.

8

Anonymous #5 14h

Um, no we don‘t? Who said that humans at different stages of development have different worth? Do you think an infant is worth less than an adult human or an elderly human is worth less than a younger one? What???

0

Anonymous #7 14h

…unborn stages of development. Obviously a baby has worth equal to an adult, if not more so- im not arguing that grown people have less or more value than others. Again, in the context of the unborn, beliefs.

8

Anonymous #7 14h

Omfg yes they do. They do. Directly and massively.

8

Anonymous #5 14h

I didn’t get the notification for it, sorry. Are the embryos going to be implanted? Do we know they’ll survive and grow? If not I’ll prioritize the toddler who has a better chance at survival. That’s basic triage. You do realize triage has nothing to do with human worth right? I’d also choose to save a healthy toddler over 100 toddlers with terminal cancer in comas. Sorry

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

You’re not entitled to kill innocent human beings because of your beliefs.

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

So you’re saying that it doesn’t affect me that little kids the same exact age as my sibling that are murdered in the US every single day?

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

They do not. Poland, bans abortion entirely - third lowest maternal mortality rate in the whole world. Belarus, bans after 14 weeks - second lowest. Germany, bans abortion after 12 weeks and only allowed after counseling - less than half maternal mortality rate compared to California. Malta - also less than half. Andorra - half the maternal mortality rate.

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

Fair enough, I’m in healthcare so I’ve actually seen the consequences of this rhetoric and it genuinely pisses me off. That’s why I’m more than willing to discuss these things with the people in my life, but this person actually pisses me off. But good luck soldier, you are much stronger than I for putting up with this bullshit. If it starts to weigh too much on your hope for our society, the block button isn’t defeat, it’s protection of your mind and time from stupid people 🙏

3

Anonymous #7 14h

Do you think maybe there are other socioeconomic factors at play here? Like, idk, general healthcare and contraceptive access, standard of living, education levels, levels of malpractice, etc? My point is that untill we can guarantee or mostly guarantee the safety of most women via these improvements, bans will only kill.

8

Anonymous #5 14h

And once we do will you ban abortion

-1

Anonymous #7 14h

They aren’t human under my beliefs, and even if they were or are, the mother is still more important.

7

Anonymous #5 14h

And yeah no shit there are. That’s my whole point. The reason US states have higher maternal mortality rates is because of higher poverty rates, not because of abortion bans. Abortion bans do not cause higher maternal mortality as evidenced by any country with more restrictive laws having better outcomes than US pro choice states.

-1

Anonymous #5 14h

They are objectively living human beings. The life of all human beings, just like any other organism, starts at conception. The mother is equally as important as her child and does not have a right to kill it. Unless you also support infanticide you agree.

-1

Anonymous #7 14h

Do we know for a fact that zygotes with survive and grow? No? Then why are we policing women’s bodies on the chance they might. Why wouldn’t you save the hundreds on the chance they might. Again, I don’t care if zygotes end up being classified as full human beings- the mother is still more important and is the one currently living and able to express her beliefs. She gets priority full stop.

9

Anonymous #5 14h

Zygotes when implanted will always survive and grow if left alone. You don’t have a right to an active intervention that kills a human being that otherwise would’ve lived. You don’t get to suffocate it or tear it apart limb from limb or give it a lethal injection. Do mothers always get priority over their children if they’re too young to express their beliefs. Huh, I wonder why you’re against infanticide. Do you just want to control women? They should always get priority after all

-1

Anonymous #7 14h

Those “kids” are inside another fully grown human being forced to make an insanely hard and painful decision for which she is likely already demonized for and will suffer from for a long time. It’s a bad situation, for which controlling someone who doesn’t want to give birth will do nothing. I said before that for me, I’m dying. Immediately. Like a lot of other women have also done when faced with the reality you propose. The carrier is more important.

6

Anonymous #7 14h

I sure hope not, but it would at least be Les morally detestable to do so, the “morally detestable” being on the grounds that it forces women to go through permanently traumatizing events.

6

Anonymous #7 14h

Even with all of this, the core belief on either side here is that I believe no one should be forced to go through a permanently traumatizing physical event and you believe the unborn should get priority despite that.

4

Anonymous #7 14h

Belief based. This is so subjective and people’s lives should not be policed based on it.

6

Anonymous #7 14h

THERE IS NO BODY TO DESTROY it is a clump of cells this is why plan B exists and again, even if it was, let’s take an extreme here and then I have to stop arguing for my own mental health because this is physically distressing to try and arguing why I should get the rights to my own fucking body. Ten years old, raped by her father. Let’s try twelve years old. No mortal danger predicted. This has and does happen. If you support her giving birth, you do not stand for life.

8

Anonymous #6 14h

Many thanks, soldier 🫡 posed a last question, then I’m gonna dip for my own damn good

1

Anonymous #7 14h

She will be harmed. Almost always.

4

Anonymous #7 14h

I think socioeconomic points justify a necessary medical procedure. Your framing is belief based.

4

Anonymous #5 13h

Yes because I believe in the reality that the unborn are human beings. Killing someone isn’t a necessary medical procedure.

1

Anonymous #5 13h

I think she’ll be less harmed than the baby that’s ripped apart

0

Anonymous #7 13h

⬆️

3

Anonymous #5 13h

Your body is a clump of cells. Wow I’m so fucking sorry your mental health is really hurt. It’s so sad you have to explain to people how their dead siblings had no inherent worth and that there’s nothing wrong with kids their same age being killed across the US every day. That must be so hard for you. I’m so glad you’re fighting for the right kill and violate the bodies of unborn human beings thanks I feel so much better.

-1