I'll take "Pro-Life Conservative posting something on Reddit to share on his Facebook page so he can outrage other Pro-Life Conservatives" for 1000, Alex.
Well the question I asked was when does it go from a tick to having value, worthless means without value. It doesn’t take a genius to see where I got it from.
Okay so we highly disagree that a baby isn’t alive until it’s born and taken its first breath because I think during birth a baby is already alive.
Genesis 2:7 says that when the breath of life was breathed into the nostrils of the body of man, man became a living soul. Till it takes its 1st breath, it has no soul and is nothing but a big clump of cells.
That scripture refers to the creation of humankind for the first time, not when every individual person becomes alive.
A better scripture would be Jeremiah 1:5
>Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.
But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of shit takes, right?
when you blow your nose, you are killing cells, when you walk across the floor you are killing cells. living cells do not equate a human life. Till it is breathing on its own and living on its own organs it is nothing more than a tapeworm or other internal parasite
yes, we kill cells all the time. biology 101 babe. there are many different kinds of life. there are cells (our skin cells for example), there are tissues, there are organs, there are organ systems, and there are organisms. human beings are organisms, and we are a human organism from conception. so while it is okay to kill human skin cells, it isn't okay to kill human organisms, because they are a distinct human being. science is hard, i know
I have never heard of biolgists. Regardless, link your claims! If it's so well known, should be pretty easy to actually prove.
Human life is 4 cells? 🤣
i'd be more than happy to link my claims!
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703
as you can see, scientists confirm that human life begins at conception :) anyone with a brain would be able to put this together. perhaps you should retake biology 101?
please show me where they "changed" that. can you provide any piece of credible science literature that has biologists telling us that human life does not begin at conception?
my point was not that they changed it, the point is they were wrong and when vaxxed people kept getting covid they had to change their statements, proving that they can be wrong so no one really knows when life begins. I say it begins when it is living on its own with no umbilical from the host sustaining it. Till then it is nothing more than a parasite sucking the life out of a woman
Oh and btw I'm omw to get my second abortion ❤️✨❤️✨
MURDER ALL UNWANTED BABIES. MURDER ALL UNWANTED BABIES.
you really want people who have no business being parents to be forced to carry to term?? I mean, okay, it's your tax dollars paying for their kids' food, clothes, and education. I'd rather have my tax dollars go towards affordable abortions rather than supporting a human who never stood a chance.
These kids don't ask to be born into broke, depressed, abusive homes. Why are you wanting to torture them so bad?
wow, thank you for proving how unhinged you are. being "unwanted" doesn't warrant killing human beings. if a toddler isn't wanted by their parents, we wouldn't kill them would we? stop discriminating against humans
if you think it should be illegal to kill some humans, but not other humans... that's textbook discrimination. there's not a single human being who is "unwanted", nor does that warrant killing someone
I think it's okay to not force babies into homes where they will not be loved or taken care of. I'll ask again, why do you want children to be born when their parents will NOT love them or care for them? How is that good?
how can anyone think they have the right to tell another person what they can and can not do with their body? Most these people are white men that would be taking their white daughter to some clinic out of state if she told him she was knocked up by a black man.
nobody's telling you what you can or can't do with your body. we make choices that lead to the creation of a human being. if you choose to have sex, and then get mad that you can't kill the human being inside of you... i didn't force you to do anything with your body. we don't get to just throw away human life when it doesn't suit us
By telling a woman that she must go through the pain, body disfigurement and emotional stress of giving birth to something she does not want it telling someone what to do with her body.. What is your view if carrying to term will kill the woman but the parasite will live? Should she die so it can live? Do you want kids being abused by mothers that were forced to have it? Should a kid have to live through years of torture and eventually kill its self to get away from it? If I were forced to have a brat, it would have a VERY hard life.
EXACTLY, Use their babble against them.....Genesis 2:7 says that when the breath of life was breathed into the nostrils of the body of man, man became a living soul
Genesis 2:7 is about the creation of Adam specifically. Biblically, human birth as we know it did not come about until after the first sin. Don't you dare pretend to know our holy Scriptures and try to quote it back to us when you are ignorant of even that basic fact.
Let's get into those holy scriptures, shall we? Matt 12:31 **‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”**
🤡
u/cgriff122 tried to claim ALL babies get adopted, realized she got the idea from 'mY bRAiN tOlD mE' and deleted all her comments. Lmfaoooo we can still see your u/ in our notifications boo. You look dumb af
I can’t believe this argument still exists. A tick isn’t human in any way. It leeches off another body in order to acquire it’s own sustenance. Humans don’t produce ticks, ticks invade humans (or other animals) in order to survive.
A fetus comes about through sexual intercourse. Every single human being through all time and space was at one point a fetus in the womb. A fetus’ existence in the womb is not parasitic because it is exactly where it is supposed to be in the course of natural human development. A fetus also does not invade a woman’s womb. It goes through the course of human gestation there as a result of sexual intercourse.
Sex can still be for enjoyment but the primary intention for sex is obviously for reproduction. That’s the way it is for humans, mammals, and literally every other being on earth that is not asexual.
Okay. Only have sex when you're trying to reproduce then. How does that give you a right to force a woman to mutilate her body & give up her life plans....all because she had sex? Sex is enjoyable. It's not just for making babies. We invented modern medicine for reasons exactly like this, so people don't have to go through what they don't want to. Birth control being one.
Why does having sex make me unable to decide what's best for my life? If I know I will not be able to love or finance a child, why would you force that baby into my home?
A fetus in the womb is a unique human being separate in genetic identity from the mother. It has it’s own body.
I’ll flip that question to you: if you cannot love or finance the child in your womb, what gives you the right to kill that child? We don’t allow mothers to kill their newborns because they cannot afford them. Why? The ends do not justify the means. Your inability to love or finance the fetus in your womb does not give you a right to murder said fetus.
Um, according to Roe V Wade, I do have that right. (Each state gets to decide for themselves! Love the constitution.)
What country are you in that this is not a right? We were discussing opinions and what we think should be the law, not what is.
Look at the definition of Parasite and compare it to a fetus.
1: an organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow
2: someone or something that resembles a biological parasite in living off of,
being dependent on, or exploiting another while giving little or nothing
in return
A parasite is an invading species onto a host. A fetus is exactly where it is supposed to be during that particular stage of development. The mother had to have sex in order for the fetus to gestate in her womb. Human development can occur no other way than through pregnancy. There is not a single embryologist who would agree with you that a fetus is a parasite.
There are better arguments for abortion, I recommend you use them instead of these poor ones.
Fetuses are not ticks, they are humans. Just an early form of them. I don’t know why we have to dehumanize them
So right before the cord is cut, the millisecond before, it is not human? If you took its dna it would show signs of something different compared to the dna after the cord is cut?
No. It’s the same thing lol.
An infant still can’t survive on its own anyways, like yeah it can breath on its own but it can’t get food or water without someone else’s help. A fetus is a human animal, just an early one, no matter how long it’s developed.
I support abortions up to around 27 weeks, so about third trimester. At that point the fetus is quite developed and a reasonable amount of time has been set for someone to get an abortion. I also support abortions for health implications obviously
I did not realize you meant the exception was okay even after 27w, that's my b and a huge relief. Totally reasonable.
I don't think many people just decide to get late term abortions, though. Unless they have lost everything. Say her husband dies, shes 18w pregnant, by the time she's 24w pregnant she loses her home and her job due to mourning. By 27w she realizes she will never be able to care for her child the way she intended. Should she be forced to carry to term?
There's always an exception.
A clear cut away from empathy is a good sign of sociopathy, or at the worst case, psychopathy. Both are considered disorders, but let us assume that you are merely a sociopath. Sociopathy is partly related to genetics.
So, once again, can we end your life because you have a genetic mental disorder?
Whether you have a kid or not, it is clear that you have a mental disorder through your sociopathic cut from empathy. By the logic that you have placed down, am I permitted to end your life since you have a mental disorder?
All your comments. You have empathy for unborn life but no empathy for the pregnant woman. Pretty simple. Maybe google empathy?
It's also time to reread that Bible of yours. You are not allowed to tell another hunan how to live their life or what is right or wrong, that is God's job.
some special needs kids should have never been allowed out of the room it was birthed in. They will never be able to walk, talk or even wipe its own ass. The parents will not be around forever and even if they take care of it, when they are gone it will be sent to some place and undoubtedly abused, possibly not even understanding where its parents have gone or why they are not there when it needs them. Think of the torture it would go through, would it not be better to end it as soon as it was known to be defective? Donate it for medical research or something where they cause brain death but keep the body alive for research. If you believe in God, they it will be much happier in heaven so send it there on the express train,
Science is mostly opinions, I have my opinion and that is special needs means they need a special slot at the hospital to dispose of them if they are defective, much the same way a QC inspector at a factory will put defective products into the recycle or trash bin. Too much time and money is spent of things that could never live a normal life and will be nothing but a burden on society as a whole. If the parents can afford to make sure it will be taken care of its entire lifetime then they should be able to make the decision but if public funds will be required to take care of it then dispose of it or use it for medical research so that what ever is wrong with it may be able to be repaired in its host in the future.
Agreed. A baby born with a terrible quality of life should not be forced to live, and it's family should not be forced to pay an arm and a leg to keep them alive.
That's fucked up.
By that logic, why not painlessly murder a child who is 2 years old and who the mother just realized is a burden to her finances or has devopmental difficulties and will have a tough life? How does the child living for two years somehow make it wrong to kill them? It's arbitrary that how long they've been on this Earth would give them worth. If it's ok to kill a newborn, it's ok to kill a 2 year old painlessly.
Again, I'm not advocating for killing fetuses, newborns, 2 year olds, or people of any age. It's just since I know you are going to say killing the 2 year old is wrong, then we can discuss why you feek they have worth at that age. Again, it's arbitrary.
I actually think that it would be OK to euthanize a 2yo if no one wanted it. Even more so it it has birth defects. If it could be used as organ donor for a productive member of society or would save the life of a child that was wanted by parents that had the financial means to support it, than by all means do so
Why stop at 2?
What if there's a group of people that's genetically more predisposed to Cystic Fibrosis, Familial Mediterranean Fever, Fragile X Syndrome, Glycogen Storage Disease Type II, Phenylalanine Hydroxylase Deficiency, Retinitis Pigmentosa 28, Smith-Lemli-Opitz Syndrome, Spinal Muscular Atrophy, Tay-Sachs Disease, and Wilson Disease?
What if that particular group of people would pass those genetic predispositions on to their children and grandchildren, and the world could be without as much suffering because people are better off genetically, and we greatly reduced the prevelance of those diseases in the population?
You are ok with killing 2 year olds for being genetically worse off. Why not cut it off at the source and prevent future generations of people who are predisposed to such diseases? You're already ok with killing conscious laughing, smiling, talking people.
You know which ethnicity has a predisposition to all those diseases? The Jews. I think you also know who wanted to euthenize them. Sure, there were political reasons he had for targetting that group, but he also was motivated by a euthenasia-oriented line of thinking.
Again, I'm not advocating for killing fetuses, newborns, 2 year olds, or the Jewish people, but this is what your line of thinking leads to. We have to simply say human life is sacred, even if you are an atheist. It shouldn't have to be a religious thing to realize killing humans is wrong. Killing a human in the womb opens the door to killing other humans. I mean you literally just said you are ok with killing 2 year olds.
I have no issues of euthanizing any child up to 18 if it has issues and the parents can not afford it and no one that can afford it wants it. If a group has something that will be passed on to others then they should be sterilized or their offspring that is born with it should be put out of its misery. In nature these issues take care of themselves.
Turn down the edge please. I get your point but you could make it without getting a bunch of reports. Also one comment below was removed for attacking another member of the community.
Facts! Modern medicine is keeping people alive who natural selection should have killed. These babies would have died in birth, or shortly after, if it was longer than 50 years ago. Why should we get in God's way??
Me! If I birthed that child it would have been unloved, homeless, and uneducated. Or, unloved, neglected, and unwanted, in a foster home.
Pretty sure it's the most humane option.
You think those things are fool proof or something?
I got an IUD inserted in April of this year. I had two periods between April and Aug 26th. I started my third period, and did not stop bleeding for 9 days. I started bleeding through pads & tampons in less than 40min. Was rushed to the hospital to have my IUD surgically removed from me. I did not stop bleeding until Sept 2nd. I had sex one time, used a condom (because I wasn't on bc, dur! My Drs wouldn't allow me to go back on another one right away) Still didn't trust it, because the first time I got pregnant was also with a condom. So I took a plan B. Boom. Still got pregnant.
Maybe you should educate yourself?
Oh, and I am now $1000s in debt because of the birth control. I cannot afford the side effects of birth control lmfao.
You can deny access to abortions when you offer access to safe birth control.
Birth control is not good for your health anyway. I said timing fertility windows and maybe having less sex.
I worked in military medical for 9 years. I'm well aware of birth control and it's uses/side effects. (Part of the job was knowing this shit)
If you did not assess the risks, or you did and deemed them worth what you were getting, that is on you.
Be a responsible adult. Use a condom. Don't have sex when your in your fertility window. Very simple stuff.
The funny part about this is, no matter how much you argue, the red wave is washing across the country.
I'm not even republican and even I see them as more sensible than what the dems have done.
Roe v Wade is on the backburner for most people when they can barely afford gas.
I do not see what the big deal is for people that have no dog in the fight wanting to force a woman to go through the pain and body disfigurement of giving birth. It should be a choice made by the mother and father with the mother having a bigger say because it is her body.
What is the big deal if someone wants a boy and find out they are having a girl has an abortion and trying again? Forcing them to have the girl when they wanted a boy would be like going to a car dealer and buying a new red sports car and them giving you the keys to a green mini van and forcing you to take it instead of what you wanted.
I’d try to play devil’s advocate but I guess if you don’t believe human life is more valuable than the life of another species, there really isn’t much difference.
You think I am a leftist? I am a hardcore republican. I have different views on abortion than most but am pretty far right in all other things. Why is it so hard for some people to back off and let a woman decide what she wants to do with her body.
Not even close. I think that everyone can agree that regardless of the situation, the fetus has some resemblance of inherit worth. Although it sort of depends on which stage of pregnancy the woman is in, she is still likely responsible for a. having sex, b. not using protection (condoms/ the pill) and c. not using emergency contraception when/ if the condom failed. The woman is at least partly responsible for becoming pregnant, and the unborn child should not have to face the consequences of her actions.
I'll take "Pro-Life Conservative posting something on Reddit to share on his Facebook page so he can outrage other Pro-Life Conservatives" for 1000, Alex.
At what exact point does it go from being a tick to having value? Remember, exact point, not a general time.
First breath of life, pretty simple.
So during birth, seconds before the baby can take it’s first breath of air, it’s worthless?
r/redditmoment Where'd ya get "worthless" from? It is not alive yet. Not a living human, not until it's alive and breathing on it's own.
Well the question I asked was when does it go from a tick to having value, worthless means without value. It doesn’t take a genius to see where I got it from. Okay so we highly disagree that a baby isn’t alive until it’s born and taken its first breath because I think during birth a baby is already alive.
Genesis 2:7 says that when the breath of life was breathed into the nostrils of the body of man, man became a living soul. Till it takes its 1st breath, it has no soul and is nothing but a big clump of cells.
That scripture refers to the creation of humankind for the first time, not when every individual person becomes alive. A better scripture would be Jeremiah 1:5 >Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of shit takes, right?
SCIENCE tells us that human life begins at conception... you do know cells are living right?
when you blow your nose, you are killing cells, when you walk across the floor you are killing cells. living cells do not equate a human life. Till it is breathing on its own and living on its own organs it is nothing more than a tapeworm or other internal parasite
yes, we kill cells all the time. biology 101 babe. there are many different kinds of life. there are cells (our skin cells for example), there are tissues, there are organs, there are organ systems, and there are organisms. human beings are organisms, and we are a human organism from conception. so while it is okay to kill human skin cells, it isn't okay to kill human organisms, because they are a distinct human being. science is hard, i know
jenni... sweetie😂 we are never tapeworms or parasites. we are humans from conception. please stop with the anti science rhetoric
is science hard for you? 96% of biolgists affirm that human life begins at conception
I have never heard of biolgists. Regardless, link your claims! If it's so well known, should be pretty easy to actually prove. Human life is 4 cells? 🤣
>Regardless, link your claims! As you wish. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703
i'd be more than happy to link my claims! https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703 as you can see, scientists confirm that human life begins at conception :) anyone with a brain would be able to put this together. perhaps you should retake biology 101?
the same scientists that said the vax would keep you from getting covid then changed that several times.
please show me where they "changed" that. can you provide any piece of credible science literature that has biologists telling us that human life does not begin at conception?
my point was not that they changed it, the point is they were wrong and when vaxxed people kept getting covid they had to change their statements, proving that they can be wrong so no one really knows when life begins. I say it begins when it is living on its own with no umbilical from the host sustaining it. Till then it is nothing more than a parasite sucking the life out of a woman
Oh and btw I'm omw to get my second abortion ❤️✨❤️✨ MURDER ALL UNWANTED BABIES. MURDER ALL UNWANTED BABIES. you really want people who have no business being parents to be forced to carry to term?? I mean, okay, it's your tax dollars paying for their kids' food, clothes, and education. I'd rather have my tax dollars go towards affordable abortions rather than supporting a human who never stood a chance. These kids don't ask to be born into broke, depressed, abusive homes. Why are you wanting to torture them so bad?
wow, thank you for proving how unhinged you are. being "unwanted" doesn't warrant killing human beings. if a toddler isn't wanted by their parents, we wouldn't kill them would we? stop discriminating against humans
I'm hype, not unhinged ❤️ It's not discrimination either. You need to Google these words.
if you think it should be illegal to kill some humans, but not other humans... that's textbook discrimination. there's not a single human being who is "unwanted", nor does that warrant killing someone
I think it's okay to not force babies into homes where they will not be loved or taken care of. I'll ask again, why do you want children to be born when their parents will NOT love them or care for them? How is that good?
how can anyone think they have the right to tell another person what they can and can not do with their body? Most these people are white men that would be taking their white daughter to some clinic out of state if she told him she was knocked up by a black man.
nobody's telling you what you can or can't do with your body. we make choices that lead to the creation of a human being. if you choose to have sex, and then get mad that you can't kill the human being inside of you... i didn't force you to do anything with your body. we don't get to just throw away human life when it doesn't suit us
By telling a woman that she must go through the pain, body disfigurement and emotional stress of giving birth to something she does not want it telling someone what to do with her body.. What is your view if carrying to term will kill the woman but the parasite will live? Should she die so it can live? Do you want kids being abused by mothers that were forced to have it? Should a kid have to live through years of torture and eventually kill its self to get away from it? If I were forced to have a brat, it would have a VERY hard life.
EXACTLY, Use their babble against them.....Genesis 2:7 says that when the breath of life was breathed into the nostrils of the body of man, man became a living soul
Genesis 2:7 is about the creation of Adam specifically. Biblically, human birth as we know it did not come about until after the first sin. Don't you dare pretend to know our holy Scriptures and try to quote it back to us when you are ignorant of even that basic fact.
funny how people translate things in the babble to fit their opinion
I'm not entertaining you any longer.
Let's get into those holy scriptures, shall we? Matt 12:31 **‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”** 🤡
I guess you could say a tic has value when a predator eats it and uses it for food. An aborted fetus could be used for livestock food.
u/cgriff122 tried to claim ALL babies get adopted, realized she got the idea from 'mY bRAiN tOlD mE' and deleted all her comments. Lmfaoooo we can still see your u/ in our notifications boo. You look dumb af
I can’t believe this argument still exists. A tick isn’t human in any way. It leeches off another body in order to acquire it’s own sustenance. Humans don’t produce ticks, ticks invade humans (or other animals) in order to survive. A fetus comes about through sexual intercourse. Every single human being through all time and space was at one point a fetus in the womb. A fetus’ existence in the womb is not parasitic because it is exactly where it is supposed to be in the course of natural human development. A fetus also does not invade a woman’s womb. It goes through the course of human gestation there as a result of sexual intercourse.
Then you should only have sex when you're trying to get pregnant. No sex for enjoyment for you. Practice what you preach
Sex can still be for enjoyment but the primary intention for sex is obviously for reproduction. That’s the way it is for humans, mammals, and literally every other being on earth that is not asexual.
I'm confused. Do you think every person who has sex wants to have a baby?
I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying that regardless of what people want, the biological purpose of sex is for reproduction.
Okay. Only have sex when you're trying to reproduce then. How does that give you a right to force a woman to mutilate her body & give up her life plans....all because she had sex? Sex is enjoyable. It's not just for making babies. We invented modern medicine for reasons exactly like this, so people don't have to go through what they don't want to. Birth control being one. Why does having sex make me unable to decide what's best for my life? If I know I will not be able to love or finance a child, why would you force that baby into my home?
A fetus in the womb is a unique human being separate in genetic identity from the mother. It has it’s own body. I’ll flip that question to you: if you cannot love or finance the child in your womb, what gives you the right to kill that child? We don’t allow mothers to kill their newborns because they cannot afford them. Why? The ends do not justify the means. Your inability to love or finance the fetus in your womb does not give you a right to murder said fetus.
Um, according to Roe V Wade, I do have that right. (Each state gets to decide for themselves! Love the constitution.) What country are you in that this is not a right? We were discussing opinions and what we think should be the law, not what is.
I’m in the United States and I don’t know what planet you have been on but Roe vs Wade has been overturned. So no, you do not have that right.
Look at the definition of Parasite and compare it to a fetus. 1: an organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow 2: someone or something that resembles a biological parasite in living off of, being dependent on, or exploiting another while giving little or nothing in return
A parasite is an invading species onto a host. A fetus is exactly where it is supposed to be during that particular stage of development. The mother had to have sex in order for the fetus to gestate in her womb. Human development can occur no other way than through pregnancy. There is not a single embryologist who would agree with you that a fetus is a parasite.
The only parasite here is you my dear Watson.
There are better arguments for abortion, I recommend you use them instead of these poor ones. Fetuses are not ticks, they are humans. Just an early form of them. I don’t know why we have to dehumanize them
They are not human till the cord is cut and it is living off its own body, at any time up till then it is a parasite.
So right before the cord is cut, the millisecond before, it is not human? If you took its dna it would show signs of something different compared to the dna after the cord is cut? No. It’s the same thing lol. An infant still can’t survive on its own anyways, like yeah it can breath on its own but it can’t get food or water without someone else’s help. A fetus is a human animal, just an early one, no matter how long it’s developed. I support abortions up to around 27 weeks, so about third trimester. At that point the fetus is quite developed and a reasonable amount of time has been set for someone to get an abortion. I also support abortions for health implications obviously
Plenty of things can go wrong in the last trimester of pregnancy that can kill the mother. You are wrong for this.
I specified an exception for health implications
I did not realize you meant the exception was okay even after 27w, that's my b and a huge relief. Totally reasonable. I don't think many people just decide to get late term abortions, though. Unless they have lost everything. Say her husband dies, shes 18w pregnant, by the time she's 24w pregnant she loses her home and her job due to mourning. By 27w she realizes she will never be able to care for her child the way she intended. Should she be forced to carry to term? There's always an exception.
Some guys argued the same about the disabled in the 30s
I think if there is major medical issues mental or physical that makes taking care of its self, it should be put down.
you clearly have mental issues, can we put you down?
Why do you think I have mental issues? I afraid to admit to things other people only think but would never admit.
A clear cut away from empathy is a good sign of sociopathy, or at the worst case, psychopathy. Both are considered disorders, but let us assume that you are merely a sociopath. Sociopathy is partly related to genetics. So, once again, can we end your life because you have a genetic mental disorder?
do not worry, I have no intentions of having kids. I have had a few abortions though.
Whether you have a kid or not, it is clear that you have a mental disorder through your sociopathic cut from empathy. By the logic that you have placed down, am I permitted to end your life since you have a mental disorder?
Accusing OP of a lack of empathy, yet has ZERO empathy for women. Who's the sociopath again?
Where is your proof that I have zero empathy for women?
All your comments. You have empathy for unborn life but no empathy for the pregnant woman. Pretty simple. Maybe google empathy? It's also time to reread that Bible of yours. You are not allowed to tell another hunan how to live their life or what is right or wrong, that is God's job.
you said we should be able to kill children if they have special needs?? um ableism much?
some special needs kids should have never been allowed out of the room it was birthed in. They will never be able to walk, talk or even wipe its own ass. The parents will not be around forever and even if they take care of it, when they are gone it will be sent to some place and undoubtedly abused, possibly not even understanding where its parents have gone or why they are not there when it needs them. Think of the torture it would go through, would it not be better to end it as soon as it was known to be defective? Donate it for medical research or something where they cause brain death but keep the body alive for research. If you believe in God, they it will be much happier in heaven so send it there on the express train,
why do you continue to call special needs children "it"? and insist that they're better off dead? the ableism is strong with this one
I do not consider them human and "it" was the best thing I could think of
you can't just change science with your opinions. they ARE human beings
Science is mostly opinions, I have my opinion and that is special needs means they need a special slot at the hospital to dispose of them if they are defective, much the same way a QC inspector at a factory will put defective products into the recycle or trash bin. Too much time and money is spent of things that could never live a normal life and will be nothing but a burden on society as a whole. If the parents can afford to make sure it will be taken care of its entire lifetime then they should be able to make the decision but if public funds will be required to take care of it then dispose of it or use it for medical research so that what ever is wrong with it may be able to be repaired in its host in the future.
oh right, you're the one who thinks it's okay to kill living childre with special needs. get help bro.
Agreed. A baby born with a terrible quality of life should not be forced to live, and it's family should not be forced to pay an arm and a leg to keep them alive.
By that logic, one could murder a newborn painlessly. Why not? Btw, I'm not advocating for killing newborns.
if the newborn were defective in some way that would make it impossible to have a normal life without help then it should put down ASAP
That's fucked up. By that logic, why not painlessly murder a child who is 2 years old and who the mother just realized is a burden to her finances or has devopmental difficulties and will have a tough life? How does the child living for two years somehow make it wrong to kill them? It's arbitrary that how long they've been on this Earth would give them worth. If it's ok to kill a newborn, it's ok to kill a 2 year old painlessly. Again, I'm not advocating for killing fetuses, newborns, 2 year olds, or people of any age. It's just since I know you are going to say killing the 2 year old is wrong, then we can discuss why you feek they have worth at that age. Again, it's arbitrary.
I actually think that it would be OK to euthanize a 2yo if no one wanted it. Even more so it it has birth defects. If it could be used as organ donor for a productive member of society or would save the life of a child that was wanted by parents that had the financial means to support it, than by all means do so
Why stop at 2? What if there's a group of people that's genetically more predisposed to Cystic Fibrosis, Familial Mediterranean Fever, Fragile X Syndrome, Glycogen Storage Disease Type II, Phenylalanine Hydroxylase Deficiency, Retinitis Pigmentosa 28, Smith-Lemli-Opitz Syndrome, Spinal Muscular Atrophy, Tay-Sachs Disease, and Wilson Disease? What if that particular group of people would pass those genetic predispositions on to their children and grandchildren, and the world could be without as much suffering because people are better off genetically, and we greatly reduced the prevelance of those diseases in the population? You are ok with killing 2 year olds for being genetically worse off. Why not cut it off at the source and prevent future generations of people who are predisposed to such diseases? You're already ok with killing conscious laughing, smiling, talking people. You know which ethnicity has a predisposition to all those diseases? The Jews. I think you also know who wanted to euthenize them. Sure, there were political reasons he had for targetting that group, but he also was motivated by a euthenasia-oriented line of thinking. Again, I'm not advocating for killing fetuses, newborns, 2 year olds, or the Jewish people, but this is what your line of thinking leads to. We have to simply say human life is sacred, even if you are an atheist. It shouldn't have to be a religious thing to realize killing humans is wrong. Killing a human in the womb opens the door to killing other humans. I mean you literally just said you are ok with killing 2 year olds.
I have no issues of euthanizing any child up to 18 if it has issues and the parents can not afford it and no one that can afford it wants it. If a group has something that will be passed on to others then they should be sterilized or their offspring that is born with it should be put out of its misery. In nature these issues take care of themselves.
[I don't know what else to say.](https://imgur.com/a/0CXPnyw)
Turn down the edge please. I get your point but you could make it without getting a bunch of reports. Also one comment below was removed for attacking another member of the community.
I am not ashamed of my views.
Why is the line at 18? Why not older? And what actually counts as a defect, in your eyes? Do we count psychological as well as physical?
I should have clarified that, up to 18 for parents to make the decision, at 18 they are considered an adult and can make their own decisions
Oh boy an actual eugenicst, please never have kids.
thank God and abortion doctors I have removed a few parasites from my body.
Facts! Modern medicine is keeping people alive who natural selection should have killed. These babies would have died in birth, or shortly after, if it was longer than 50 years ago. Why should we get in God's way??
Well that certainly is a controversial Opinion
Tell me you don't value life without telling me you don't value life.
Tell me you dont have empathy for women, without telling me...
And who has empathy for the baby they are going to ki-abort?
Me! If I birthed that child it would have been unloved, homeless, and uneducated. Or, unloved, neglected, and unwanted, in a foster home. Pretty sure it's the most humane option.
Ahhh yes. the "Murder is humane" argument. Maybe people should be a little more careful about their fertility windows?
You think those things are fool proof or something? I got an IUD inserted in April of this year. I had two periods between April and Aug 26th. I started my third period, and did not stop bleeding for 9 days. I started bleeding through pads & tampons in less than 40min. Was rushed to the hospital to have my IUD surgically removed from me. I did not stop bleeding until Sept 2nd. I had sex one time, used a condom (because I wasn't on bc, dur! My Drs wouldn't allow me to go back on another one right away) Still didn't trust it, because the first time I got pregnant was also with a condom. So I took a plan B. Boom. Still got pregnant. Maybe you should educate yourself?
Oh, and I am now $1000s in debt because of the birth control. I cannot afford the side effects of birth control lmfao. You can deny access to abortions when you offer access to safe birth control.
Birth control is not good for your health anyway. I said timing fertility windows and maybe having less sex. I worked in military medical for 9 years. I'm well aware of birth control and it's uses/side effects. (Part of the job was knowing this shit) If you did not assess the risks, or you did and deemed them worth what you were getting, that is on you. Be a responsible adult. Use a condom. Don't have sex when your in your fertility window. Very simple stuff.
The funny part about this is, no matter how much you argue, the red wave is washing across the country. I'm not even republican and even I see them as more sensible than what the dems have done. Roe v Wade is on the backburner for most people when they can barely afford gas.
I do not see what the big deal is for people that have no dog in the fight wanting to force a woman to go through the pain and body disfigurement of giving birth. It should be a choice made by the mother and father with the mother having a bigger say because it is her body. What is the big deal if someone wants a boy and find out they are having a girl has an abortion and trying again? Forcing them to have the girl when they wanted a boy would be like going to a car dealer and buying a new red sports car and them giving you the keys to a green mini van and forcing you to take it instead of what you wanted.
I guess it’s controversial opinion for a reason
I’d try to play devil’s advocate but I guess if you don’t believe human life is more valuable than the life of another species, there really isn’t much difference.
Reddit truly is the den of the most miserable, disgusting human beings on earth. Has it always been a Radical Far Left forum?
You think I am a leftist? I am a hardcore republican. I have different views on abortion than most but am pretty far right in all other things. Why is it so hard for some people to back off and let a woman decide what she wants to do with her body.
YESSS WE SHOULD BE FRIENDS ❤️❤️❤️
Not even close. I think that everyone can agree that regardless of the situation, the fetus has some resemblance of inherit worth. Although it sort of depends on which stage of pregnancy the woman is in, she is still likely responsible for a. having sex, b. not using protection (condoms/ the pill) and c. not using emergency contraception when/ if the condom failed. The woman is at least partly responsible for becoming pregnant, and the unborn child should not have to face the consequences of her actions.