Drake Hotline Bling

How many? 3?

Have you ever heard of a teen pregnancy?! What about women with damaged genitals?!

So how many?

I guess if you hadn't dropped out by the time you were old enough to go to high school, then you would've seen what I mean. And maybe you've watched so much porn of women with healthy genitals that you've forgotten that not all va**nas look like that.

So now you're going to get nasty with me? It was a serious question.

u an alt of john f kennedy

What makes you say that?

Have you ever considered how many infants have died from being brutally torn apart, merely because they were seen as nothing more than an "inconvenience"? Infanticide is one of the worst genocides in human history, as well as one of the least acknowledged. Why does the wellbeing of a criminal mother matter more to you than the life of an innocent infant? They are both human, after all. Or are "all humans are equal, but some humans more equal than others?" The Nazis also believed that some humans weren't "real humans". Are you a Nazi?

I never said that I support infanticide. Where did your argument about criminal mothers come from? And lastly, your argument about Nazis is completely farfetched. Mere human blood cells are also not real humans, nor are human gametes; they're all just parts of a human being.

"I never said that I support infanticide."

Yes you did. You said that you support abortion.

"Where did your argument about criminal mothers come from?"

If abortion is criminalised, then women murdering their babies is a criminal act.

"your argument about Nazis is completely farfetched"

Is it, though?

"Mere human blood cells are also not real humans, nor are human gametes; they're all just parts of a human being."

Human life begins at the point of conception. If we look for when human life begins, we use scientific criteria that can be found it pretty much any biology textbook. And there is certain criteria that we use for distinguishing between a living entity and a non-living entity. We can look at various characteristics that distinguish humans from every other form of life, but one of the best ways of doing this is through DNA. And at the point of conception, every piece of genetic code that makes you uniquely human and uniquely you is already present. At the point of conception, a new human has formed. Your life began at the point of conception, as did mine, and so did every other human that has ever existed. So human life begins at the point of conception, which means that all foetuses killed by abortion are human. And since the definition of abortion is the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, and the definition of murder is the killing of one human being by another, abortion is murder, and abortion supporters are responsible for a mass infanticide.

https://banned.video/watch?id=5ebc5477244ac5001d2386ff

"Abortion is wrong because only criminals support it" and "Supporting abortion makes you a criminal" make your argument a begging the question fallacy, also known as circular reasoning.
Plants are also alive, yet they're not sentient. Those "babies" have to have their brains and nervous systems fully developed for the outside world. Otherwise, there'd be no biological point in being able to feel.

Again, there is certain criteria that can be used to distinguish between a living entity and a non-living entity. There are various characteristics that distinguish humans from every other form of life. And at the point of conception, every piece of genetic code that makes you uniquely human and uniquely you is already present. At the point of conception, a new sentient human has formed. And all humans are created equally under God.

No, it is not sentient. And even if they were, that doesn't make them equal to us, just like how we eat pigs, even though they're sentient. There are actually plenty of animals that eat their own unborn young, meaning that it's a natural biological process, just like eating animals. And are you trying to tell me that dogs are lower than humans but that human embryos are equal?

Pigs are not human, though. Foetuses are human because they have human DNA.

You were making great arguments until this comment. No organism with the animal DNA that allows it to feel pain deserves to suffer. DJFoxy is making a burden of proof fallacy, as he is relying on that it's true that those babies can't feel pain. And if abortion becomes accepted, women would want to get even more abortions than they'd currently desire because they wouldn't have the incentive to responsibly use contraception.
In case you're wondering how I got here, it's because DJFoxy got me to come back to ImgFlip, so I decided to check out his latest comments.

What does human DNA have to do with anything?! Embryos can't even feel pain!

"Whether you believe in God or not, we're all gonna die at some point. And when babies from unwanted pregnancies are born, they end up living miserable lives because they're often poor."

How do you define a "miserable life"?

Lack of (good) food, homelessness, lack of clothing, bad hygiene, bad education, crime.

So it is okay to murder an adult if he/she is in a deep, painless coma?

No, because the adult already has a soul. The adult had no plans of dying before it went into the coma, and it already has a circle of people it knows who wouldn't want to see it die. But if an adult did die in a coma, it wouldn't be as bad, especially if it's an assisted suicide.

"Lack of (good) food, homelessness, lack of clothing, bad hygiene, bad education, crime."

So all humans that face the possibility of what you consider a "miserable life" should be murdered? I'm pretty sure all humans face such problems at some point in their life. Do you want to murder every human?

No. Like I said, adults can feel pain, and they've already grown attached to other folks.

"How can you find contraception immoral if that's exactly what prevents abortions?! And you're calling me anti-science?! I can totally understand why someone would oppose abortion, as it seems immoral on the surface, but there's not even a valid way to claim that contraception can possibly have a victim."

I believe that contraception is immoral because the Bible says so, and as a practicing Traditional Christian, I respect that.

The Bible never said anything about contraception being wrong. And if the Bible really did say so, reason demands an answer to why the Bible would command such a thing. That was also a different time when the Israelites needed to reproduce to help to convert the pagans. How do you even know that the Bible is telling the truth?

You brought up non-human species, so I explained the differences between humans and non-humans. And just because embryos can't feel pain does not mean that they can be brutally torn apart. They are human.

But pigs can be torn apart? How can DNA possibly be a justification for a pig suffering when an embryo that can't even feel pain is considered a victim?!

"No. Like I said, adults can feel pain, and they've already grown attached to other folks."

No. Like I said, just because a human cannot feel pain does not mean that he/she isn't human. And whether or not one is human should not depend on what relationships they have with others. That is bizarre, fallacious and anti-science. It is a scientific fact that human life begins at the point of conception. Abortion is murder.

I've already told you that there's no point for a soul to bedwell a human who hasn't yet attained the ability to feel pain. Therefore, abortion is akin to contraception.

"The Bible never said anything about contraception being wrong."

Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death also.

"How do you even know that the Bible is telling the truth?"

Because, unlike you, I have faith in our God.

Which verse is that? I hate to sound like I'm pushing the goalpost, but maybe not every translation says that. Many Protestants (especially those in the right, ironically) know that the Greek Jews and later the Romans changed the Bible (including the 10 Commandments) to suit Roman values.

Your last sentence is a begging the question fallacy. You don't have to believe the Bible to believe in God.

"You also didn't answer my question about why God would oppose contraception."

Yes I did, and I will not repeat myself.

No, although you have explained what makes you believe that God opposes contraception, you didn't explain why God would oppose contraception. If the Bible is God's word, then everything it says has to be there for a reason; otherwise, it can't be God's word, as an all-loving God would never make laws arbitrarily. You also didn't answer other parts of my last comment, like why you believe the Bible to be God's word, and why you believe that Protestants are heretics.

"No, because the adult already has a soul. The adult had no plans of dying before it went into the coma, and it already has a circle of people it knows who wouldn't want to see it die. But if an adult did die in a coma, it wouldn't be as bad, especially if it's an assisted suicide."

I hate it when libturds try to claim that foetuses are just clumps of cells, as if people who are born are somehow more than clumps of cells. And yet if you ask them if God exists or if there is such thing as a spirit or soul in a religious debate, they'll say no. But if you ask them if there is such thing as a spirit or soul in an abortion debate, they'll say that some humans do have souls.

If there's no God and we're all going to die anyway, and the earth is going to be engulfed when the sun finally goes nova, and the universe is tearing itself apart anyway, then how can they make an argument for any life mattering, if there's no God in charge of it all and no reality outside of this universe?

Whether you believe in God or not, we're all gonna die at some point. And when babies from unwanted pregnancies are born, they end up living miserable lives because they're often poor.

"And how does the fact that pigs are not human mean that pigs don't deserve human rights?!"

Are you serious?! It is called "human rights" not "pig rights". Human rights are for humans, hence the word "human". Duh.

"an embryo that can't even feel pain is considered a victim?!"

Just because a human cannot feel pain does not mean that he/she isn't human.

SMFH! Your argument about pigs not deserving human rights is a begging the question fallacy, also known as circular reasoning. Your circle goes like this: "Why are they called human rights? Because they're for humans. Why are they for humans? Because they're called human rights.". Making an argument that was already included in the premise gets me nowhere. An egg cell is also a human because it has human DNA. The ability to suffer is the only logical means in determining whether or not a being should suffer. If it can't feel pain, it has no reason to be treated as any other human would.

How is that a bad argument?!

"I've already told you that there's no point for a soul to bedwell a human who hasn't yet attained the ability to feel pain. Therefore, abortion is akin to contraception."

And I already told you that I hate it when libturds try to claim that foetuses are just clumps of cells, as if people who are born are somehow more than clumps of cells. And yet if you ask them if God exists or if there is such thing as a spirit or soul in a religious debate, they'll say no. But if you ask them if there is such thing as a spirit or soul in an abortion debate, they'll say that some humans do have souls.

If there's no God and we're all going to die anyway, and the earth is going to be engulfed when the sun finally goes nova, and the universe is tearing itself apart anyway, then how can they make an argument for any life mattering, if there's no God in charge of it all and no reality outside of this universe?

Also, since human life scientifically begins at the point of conception, contraception is not murder (although I still find it immoral). Take your bizarre anti-science views someplace else.

"And I already told you that I hate it when libturds try to claim that foetuses are just clumps of cells, as if people who are born are somehow more than clumps of cells. And yet if you ask them if God exists or if there is such thing as a spirit or soul in a religious debate, they'll say no. But if you ask them if there is such thing as a spirit or soul in an abortion debate, they'll say that some humans do have souls."
You're making an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy. I never said that God doesn't exist. And I think even Atheists believe in souls; they just believe that they were created by our brains and not by God. Have you ever considered the souls (which we know definitely do exist) of the folks who have to get abortions?

"If there's no God and we're all going to die anyway, and the earth is going to be engulfed when the sun finally goes nova, and the universe is tearing itself apart anyway, then how can they make an argument for any life mattering, if there's no God in charge of it all and no reality outside of this universe?"
Because the earth is gonna get engulfed billions of years after we die. And just because Atheists don't have a god doesn't mean they don't have morals.

"Also, since human life scientifically begins at the point of conception, contraception is not murder (although I still find it immoral). Take your bizarre anti-science views someplace else."
How can you find contraception immoral if that's exactly what prevents abortions?! And you're calling me anti-science?! I can totally understand why someone would oppose abortion, as it seems immoral on the surface, but there's not even a valid way to claim that contraception can possibly have a victim.

"Which verse is that? I hate to sound like I'm pushing the goalpost, but maybe not every translation says that."

https://www.bible.com/en-GB/bible/111/GEN.38.NIV

"Many Protestants (especially those in the right, ironically) know that the Greek Jews and later the Romans changed the Bible (including the 10 Commandments) to suit Roman values."

They do not "know" that. They think that. Protestants are heretical. I am a Traditional Christian. I attend mass at a Traditional Roman Catholic group called the SSPX. I also believe that the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches are faithful as well. But protestantism and the Second Vatican Council are heretical.

"Your last sentence is a begging the question fallacy. You don't have to believe the Bible to believe in God."

How can you believe in God without believing in the Bible?

"They do not "know" that. They think that. Protestants are heretical. I am a Traditional Christian. I attend mass at a Traditional Roman Catholic group called the SSPX. I also believe that the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches are faithful as well. But protestantism and the Second Vatican Council are heretical."

The only good thing about Roman Catholicism is that it's big on charity, and it even fought capitalism during the Reformation. I've never heard of the SSPX, but I'm glad that you're at least open to the Eastern Orthodox beliefs, which aren't nearly as crazy. If only more folks knew that Eastern Orthodoxy is more similar to Protestantism than it is to Roman Catholicism. Since all rites of Roman Catholicism must be under the dominion of the Vatican, would you consider the SSPX to be an Eastern Orthodox church? And what makes you think that the Protestants are wrong about what happened to the Bible translations? Labeling Protestants as heretics doesn't answer my question very well, as anyone can label Roman Catholics as heretics. It's usually cult followers who have that kind of insider VS outsider mentality. As crazy as the SSPX seems to me, I'd like to know a little more about it.

"How can you believe in God without believing in the Bible?"
In the same way that monotheistic Buddhists and Zoroastrians believe that there is a creator. Just because the Bible claims to be the word of God doesn't mean that it truly is the word of God. You also didn't answer my question about why God would oppose contraception.

"But pigs can be torn apart? How can DNA possibly be a justification for a pig suffering when an embryo that can't even feel pain is considered a victim?!"

Again, pigs are not human, so they do not deserve human rights. Anything with human DNA, a foetus or a grown adult, deserves human rights. A person is a person, no matter how small.

And how does the fact that pigs are not human mean that pigs don't deserve human rights?! What about dogs?! It doesn't matter if a fœtus is a human; if it has no reason to be able to feel pain, then a soul has most likely not yet inhabited it.

"The ability to suffer is the only logical means in determining whether or not a being should suffer."

That is an extremely bizarre and fallacious opinion.

No, your opposition to this position is extremely bizarre and fallacious. Suffering is the defining point of what makes something immoral, as we're all inclined to avoid it. Therefore, if a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. No matter what the nature of the being, the principle of equality requires that one’s suffering can be counted equally with the like suffering of any other being. Beneath the many differences, there is sameness. Like us, these animals embody the mystery and wonder of consciousness. Like us, they are not only in the world, they are aware of it. Like us, they are the psychological centers of a life that is uniquely their own. Your arguments about DNA as a justification are identical to the arguments used by a racist to justify slavery & segregation. So who's the Nazi, now?

What are you saying is a really stupid argument?

If you're gonna bash my arguments, you better tell me why instead of insulting me.

What is? My argument or IncognitoGuy's?

Unrelated:
"Hey, what happened to you? Why did you leave ImgFlip so abruptly? Are you in juvie for what you said about child porn? I really miss seeing you in debates, even though your beliefs are totally different from mine. You also made great memes and templates. Since you've changed your username recently, I know you must still be alive, and likely not currently in juvie. Please come back to the ImgFlip community!"

I left because my bigoted Roman Catholic parents took away my phone for having my opinions, and I still don't have it back. I never went to juvie. RN, I'm using my new laptop that I got from my boarding school, so I can use it for the summer camp on Google Meet. It makes my day to see that someone on ImgFlip still cares.