Something a Liberal Co-Worker Told Me When I said Life Begins at Conception

Something a Liberal Co-Worker Told Me When I said Life Begins at Conception | SHE SAID BABIES REALLY AREN'T HUMAN UNTIL THEY'RE OUT OF THE WOMB AND START BREATHING THAT'S JUST SOMETHING HEARTLESS LIBERALS SAY TO MAKE T | image tagged in memes,thats just something x say | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
22,033 views, 174 upvotes, Made by SpursFanFromAround 27 months ago memesthats just something x say
Thats Just Something X Say memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
23 ups, 3 replies
Confession Bear Meme | WITH THE MANY FORMS OF BIRTH CONTROL WE HAVE THESE DAYS, THERE'S NO REASON FOR ABORTIONS BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION I GUESS | image tagged in memes,confession bear | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
29 ups, 1 reply
But Thats None Of My Business Meme | OR WE COULD JUST KEEP OUR PRIVATES TO OURSELVES AND WAIT FOR THAT ONE SPECIAL PERSON BUT THAT'S NONE OF MY BUSINESS | image tagged in memes,but thats none of my business,kermit the frog | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
16 ups, 1 reply
First World Problems Meme | BUT HOW ELSE CAN I GET ON MAURY IF I USE BIRTH CONTROL? | image tagged in memes,first world problems | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
17 ups, 1 reply
One Does Not Simply Meme | ONE DOES NOT SIMPLY GET ON MAURY WITHOUT BEING WHITE TRASH OR GHETTO TRASH | image tagged in memes,one does not simply | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
0 ups
Maury Lie Detector Meme | THINKING TO GET ON MY SHOW BECAUSE YOUR PLAIN TRASH THE LIE DETECTOR DETERMINED THAT WAS A LIE | image tagged in memes,maury lie detector | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
10 ups, 6 replies
What about a woman who gets pregnant against her will (i.e. a victim of r*pe)? It does happen sometimes.
reply
14 ups, 4 replies
It wouldn't matter. A wrong committed against you doesn't justify you committing a wrong against another person.
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
I may not entirely agree, but I do see your point
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Thanks. In my view, the key to the debate is the question of whether the baby/fetus in the mother's womb is a human being or not.

If he or she is a human being, then nothing could justify abortion, regardless of what happened in the past to the mother. The baby has the same rights that any human being has.

If it's not a human being, then it's foolishness to speak of the rights of a clump of cells. That's why I think that's the key question.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I agree, but I would say the debate hinges on "personhood". Possibly a minor semantic difference though.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Why do you say that? Not trying to attack you. I'm just curious what you would see as the differences between the terms "person" and "human being" that might influence the debate. You might well be right.
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up
I agree 100%.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
See Numbers 5:11-21. long story short The Lords says to Moses "go tell the Israelites if they suspect you wife of cheating to take her on down to the priest and have him "curse" the child out of her womb.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
You're using that verse out of context, though. The child was the Lord's child even if the wife was cheating. Only the Lord has the right to take a life, because it is His life to take.
That's why abortion is wrong, it is not your right to kill something that isn't yours in the first place.
reply
6 ups, 3 replies
So God can kill babies but I can't. Got it.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Think about it this way, you let your kid borrow your phone to play a game. The kid is in possession of the phone now, but it's still your phone. So you can take it away if you want to.
reply
3 ups
reply
1 up
I can spank my child. You cannot. :-)
reply
1 up
Because God is the creator of all existence and we're not.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
But isn't God supposed to be our standard for what's right and wrong? Why is it wrong for us to do something that it's right for him to do?
reply
2 ups
Because He is perfect and we are not. There are things God can do that is physically impossible for us to do.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Every point that was made with the Israelites was pointing to our relationship with God. The entire Old Testament is the revealing of WHO God is, it is the execution of the law on mankind for our sin, it is the foreshadowing of the need for a savior, the foretelling of the savior and a love story of God's love for us.
The marriage relationship mirrors our relationship with Christ as His bride. When we walk away from "our first love" we reap death and destruction. There is no life apart from Christ ... only death.
Much like the discussion of the she bear the other day ... the prophet cursed them but it was God who called down the judgment.
These passages at face value, standing alone, do not seem to follow what we have been taught about God. But ... He does not change. Same yesterday as today as tomorrow. Praise God for His mercy.
reply
1 up
In both of those passages someone is getting cursed. It just does not seem very nice to go around cursing people, especially not women and children. Pretty funny about those kids though, tryin to rusltle that prophet and God made those she bears rustle them kids to death.
reply
0 ups
I've read it.
reply
0 ups
That's a good point. I've never thought about it that way before.
reply
10 ups, 2 replies
I believe all children, no matter the disability or the circumstances, are a gift from God. Good things can come from bad situations and I believe every child deserves a chance at life.
reply
2 ups
Well said!
reply
0 ups
????????????????????
reply
9 ups, 2 replies
If that woman had a gun she would have a less chance of being **ped.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
The website seems to automatically censor the word.
reply
0 ups
Oh. :( that's too bad. I apologize for calling you guys pussies.
reply
1 up
Maybe. But if she had one, I bet she would have less chance of being **ped twice.
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
I would make an exception to that for sure. An old classmate had that happen to her. She still decided to have the child though. But I would have sympathized either way.
reply
0 ups
I agree with you. I think abortion should be legal but if someone chooses to not have one in that situation I don't fault them either way
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
Would you let a woman who was **ped kill her two year old child because the child resulted from the **pe? No of course not. The "rape exception" is a ploy, it doesn't actually make any sense. Unfortunately too many prolifers don't have the conviction to stand up and explain why aborting a baby is murder regardless of the circumstances of conception.
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
Killing a two year old child is not even the same thing as having an abortion
reply
10 ups, 2 replies
The difference between aborting a baby and killing a two year old is about the same as the difference between killing a two year old and killing a four year old.
reply
0 ups
Well said!
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
So by that logic, aborting a one-day-old embryo is like killing a two-year-old child. They are not even the same thing. You're comparing apples and...apple seeds
reply
9 ups, 1 reply
They are both human beings, tekbarrier.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
A one day old embryo is not a fully formed human being. Now, is it considered a "person"? That's the issue.
reply
1 up
Some handicapped people are born not fully formed. Are they considered a "person"? Yes, of course! People are people, no matter how small.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
There isn't such a thing as a human being who is not a person. "Non-persons" is a category invented to justify genocide.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
No government, nor any individual, has a just power to legally "de-person" any one of us, born or preborn.

The proper purpose of the law is to side with the innocent, not against them.
1 up
That's exactly right.
reply
0 ups
Do you see how that's kind of a circular reasoning thing, in a way? I mean, that's the issue, isn't it - are they different categories, or are they the same category?

I agree with what Chov wrote. They're both human beings. That's the main thing that counts. The other differences you could cite are differences of circumstance (where it is located, and whether it's dependent on someone else) or appearance (size and features). I don't see those differences as being fundamental to the issue of whether abortion is ethical or not.
reply
0 ups
True. There's a 2-3 year difference. Other than that, though...
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
That is a verrrry small percentage and is always used as a smokescreen to deflect from the elective abortions. I will say I have battled to make sense personally, with that issue for a lot of years. How just is it reasonable to kill the baby that resulted from **pe or incest, but not the one responsible for the crime? In order to to make any reasonable conclusion about the issue, you have to be able to separate elective abortions from those that are needed because of medical and or criminal reasons.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I agree that pregnancies caused by **pe are a small percentage compared to pregnancies not caused by **pe, however some pregnancies are caused by **pe, and that is a legitimate thing to discuss
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
For sure its legit! **pe has hit so very close close to me with family members. Three of them to be exact so I do have very strong feelings there and would have agreed that it be their choice on what to do. All I am saying is that those cases are different from abortions of convenience.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I agree with you that they are separate issues :) ...for the record, I'm smiling because we agree, not because of **pe :o
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I knew you weren't smiling at **pe, and yeah, I usually find if we take the time to listen to each other, more often than not there is more common ground than not.
reply
0 ups
I didn't think you thought that, I just wanted to make a dumb joke :p poor taste perhaps, but oh well
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Not just your opinion, and even worse its free.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Yeah, but that's too easy I guess.
reply
0 ups
You would think taking some free pills would be less invasive than getting vacuumed like a car... but what do I know?
reply
13 ups, 1 reply
reply
5 ups
:,(
reply
13 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
It's a double standard. That's one of the many problems in our society and how people look at life as something that can just be thrown away with no regards for anyone's feelings.
reply
11 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
New world order
reply
10 ups, 2 replies
I'm impressed how mature this discussion has been Well done guys.
reply
2 ups
I truly have never seen a more intelligent, curious, respectful bunch of people in all my years on the internet lol And sometimes they're even funny.
reply
0 ups
:}
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
how? this really makes no sense.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Science proved life begins at conception to say otherwise is anti-science.
reply
1 up
Ah. That makes some sense.
reply
[deleted]
7 ups, 2 replies
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
One of two things they can do, Just suck it up and take care of the kid or give him to someone who can take care of him/her!
reply
[deleted]
1 up
yep or douse the flame, that makes three things.

and if you want to go dprk then there is four ways with high mortality,
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
The fact that the younger generation accepts this as commonplace and cannot hear how tragic and depraved it is ... lays squarely at our generation's feet.
It's not too late though. I have faith that these very types of discussions can help the younger generation get a glimpse outside this culture.
Culture changes one heart at a time.
(oy, this comment is so sappy and schmaltzy I'm getting the ....)
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
I mean if you really have to be negatice about abortion it could be described as automutilation at best. I prefer to see it as a procedure which in most cases follows as a wise decision after careful consideration. I guess we shouldn't be too judgmental about each other when we don't really know how it's like in their shoes
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
There are lots of shoes in the world. If you are making that case there is no way one person could ever relate to another person about anything. But personal experience and situational factors for not justify the taking of an innocent life. And it is not a "wise" decision. It is merely "a" decision.
And you have not heard judgment of people in my comments. If you found any you put it there. I did however say that the older generation needs to accept responsibility for allowing things to get to this point.
It sounds like you have some personal experience with this maybe. If that is the case I am sorry. It is rarely a nonchalant decision. It is always sad. And it certainly takes its toll.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
No i haven't i however see it as something which one day might be a necessary solution, I never know what happens in the future. I am entitled to call that a wise decision because after all that is my opinion. Moreover i don't see it as a problem that abortion is available, I wouldn't know why i should and nobody could convince me otherwise. If it is a necessary evil you'd rather not take then the alternative might be less pretty. I never said it should be an easy decision, indeed it is the Early stage of life which is valuable and irreplaceble. What type of person calls it murder when the stage after simple mitosis is abrupted, while they would not admit to destroying more valuable things in life by simply living in a modern society. It's a certain judgementality in general i am refering to, nothing personal. Thanks for understanding.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
It seems like you have thought about this quite a bit. So, I am sure that you realize that you cannot even get an abortion before 6 weeks pregnant. At that stage the baby has a heartbeat. It is not one stage out from mitosis lol (Incidentally, your body uses mitosis throughout your life to grow and repair itself)
I don't believe anyone can convince anyone else of anything. People make up their own minds. But if we care to be around other people we are apt to share our experiences, thoughts, opinions and beliefs. Wise people do their best to hear one another. But I certainly would not think I could "convince" you of anything. Influence you to think about what I have to say .. I hope so. :-)
I will leave it at that.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Yes this isn't normally my cup of tea. Even with this insight you've pointed out, I dare say abortion is relatively innocent yet also a somewhat harsh reality. We shouldn't Let it keep us down and think less of people because of it. Even if you are not for abortion yourself in the first place. That is my point! Let people live their lives and be their own judge. And hope they know what they're doing ;)
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
That would be " let people live their lives and be their own judge" if only they weren't hurting someone else. Abortion almost guarantees the death of someone else. An innocent human being someone else and that's something as a society we should address not ignore.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 3 replies
I don't think that we should. I am not familiar with the process and whether or not it would be considered painful to the subjects involved. If so then there should be focused on scientific ways to make it more humane.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Human offspring are human beings, persons from conception, as only a person can be human. Calling them a fetus doesn't change the fact that they are human beings. They're fetal human beings.

Abortion is the killing of one person by another. Abortions cause a life to end masking the word killing with abortion doesn't take away what it does.

I ask because i think killing innocent human beings is inhumane, I'd like to know if you agree .
[deleted]
0 ups
Why? What if I disagree? What's it to you? I stated you should not judge each other for having other values. Do you disagree with that? You reasoning is flawed because words do not mask anything and what you are talking about has a vocabulary which are 100% appropriate to use, they are: "abortion" and "fetus". It is what it is and everyone knows it. Don't call it killing because that word is less accurate. Don't call it a human being because there's a word for it: fetus. Enough said. And you say "innocent" which is completely irrelevant to say about a fetus. Draw your own conclusions and don't derive them from other people it gives a sense of self worth. Free advice.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
"Don't call it killing because that word is less accurate."

Enlighten me, what does an abortion do to a prenatal baby or person?

" Don't call it a human being because there's a word for it: fetus. "

Well what do you think a fetus in a human being is ?

"Enough said. And you say "innocent" which is completely irrelevant to say about a fetus."

Tell me how a prenatal human being could not be innocent?
[deleted]
0 ups
I'm not going to explain the definitions look it up. Who do you think I am?

You say fetuses can't not be innocent, don't you? So should it make sense to call mushrooms innocent then?
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Would you agree that innocent human being should be painlessly killed ?
[deleted]
0 ups
The correct term is fetus not human being and aborted not killed. If you read my previous answer you can clearly see I am against needless suffering. Why ask?
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
It may explain everything, but that doesn't mean it's logical. For instance, the flying spaghetti monster creating the universe may explain everything, but it's not logical.
reply
4 ups
reply
[deleted]
3 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
It doesn't surprise me, judging by the content of the meme.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I'm impressed that an anti-abortion meme got to the front page.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Yes, but this site seems very conservative. At least, more conservative than I would have guessed.
reply
0 ups
That's true.
reply
0 ups
More than it used to be! I think the Liberals got aggravated and left.
reply
2 ups
It's true tho
reply
2 ups
Right on
reply
3 ups
Worst meme ever
reply
2 ups
Completely true
reply
2 ups
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
So if I don't adopt a child from Africa, I'm hypocritical?
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Your meme shows a black child from a third world country, so me assuming he's from Africa doesn't make me a "white Christian ashole republican." It actually makes me observant. Read the title of your meme. And this has nothing to do with my meme.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Your assuming, thinking isn't your strong point is it.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I'm not assuming anything. You seem like a very angry person toward people with differing views from yours and you resort to childish antics to somehow "prove a point." You called me an azzhole and a republican. I am neither. So you are the one assuming. I merely asked if you were a feminazi and you "put me in the white Christian asswipe republican" category. Sorry to burst your assumption bubble.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Yes I'm angry. I'm tired of all the bs. The right wing puts out. Making Democrats out to be evil. We are not. We care about everyone and everything. We see the world as a whole. I see that people are saying mentally challenged people need to pack heat. Really? I see that people that are against abortion want to kill those entering abortion clinics. This is fudging stupid childlike mentality. I could go on. I'm done at some point in my life I have to stop feeding the trolls.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
1) I'm not a troll. I've been making memes on here (mostly jokes, but sometimes serious like this one) for months now.

2) I don't have any desire to kill anyone, whether or not they're aborting children or not. I will never walk into an abortion clinic and bomb or shoot up the place.

3) Most democrats I've encountered do not care about anyone but themselves. Most of them hate anyone who disagrees with them. God forbid someone is against non traditional marriage or murdering innocent children still in the womb. And God forbid someone believes a human life is more important than an animal's.
reply
0 ups
Well you just met a man who cares about everyone. I can say the same about republican Christians. I grew up in a Methodist house my grandfathers and uncles being ministers. I've had enough of Christian bs. As long as they are in control we are better off. Sorry I don't buy it.
reply
0 ups
Zing!
reply
[deleted]
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Just so you know i'm back lol doing some laundry and up voting your meme's and comments. LOL you are the first person I have had to do two shifts to finish! You have A LOT of featured memes!
reply
1 up
A lot of these older meme comments on my older memes don't have any upvotes due to the hack back in December. I should go back and do some upvoting as well.
reply
2 ups
reply
[deleted]
1 up
A little levity!
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 2 replies
I really don't think it begins at conception; at least, personhood doesn't. I think it begins when brain activity starts.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I disagree, but respect your opinion. Thank you for your comment.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
S'alright if you don't want to respect something you don't agree with, guy, I can handle it :P In any case, I'm definitely against mid to late term abortion, and I'm not an irresponsible shit, so I'll never get anyone pregnant by accident (besides which I plan to adopt anyway). So, I'm not a malicious element by your standards, at least in what I practice. What I preach might not be in sync with that.
reply
1 up
However, there are many people out there that fit my description.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Then people in comas or brain dead are no longer persons?
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
A brain dead shell that was once a person is no longer a person in my opinion, yes. Brain death is tantamount to the complete absence of thinking and sensation. Comas however can be different.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Well , you're entitled to your subjective opinion but objectively a persons rights should not be taken away because of a medical condition. All a person should be required in order to meet and qualify as a person is , be a human being.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
There are dogs that are better human beings than human beings. Living, thinking, feeling. Those are what constitute personhood to me. A comatose person may have brain activity, is alive, and may be sensate. That constitutes living. Brain death IS death, however. That is not subjective; you do not recover from brain death. Your brain is dead. Literally. The mass of cells left behind doesn't have any more value than any random bastion of bacteria.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Ok but you don't take away the personhood of the human being because of their medical condition like brain dead. That human being is or was still a person.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
If you're brain dead, you don't think. You don't feel. You don't breathe on your own. You don't swallow your saliva with any voluntary reflex.
That's not a person. That's a corpse with a few working organs left. I'm not denying it WAS a person. But, dead is dead.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Dehumanizing people for any reason isn't reasonable.
It's no different from racism or genocide. Developmentocideism
reply
0 ups
If brain death is tantamount to death, and you claim they should be treated as persons, are you suggesting the dead have rights? I'm curious to know how you rationalize that.
reply
0 ups, 4 replies
Usually when the dead exercise their right to vote, someone risks getting arrested for fraud.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Is a zygote human? It's human in the sense it came from a human. It could become a human. It's alive. But, it is not feeling. ****It may as well be a plant***

I can't continue with someone like this . Reason and common sense are no longer being used.
Again you're using a medical condition to give or take away personhood in this case now you want to say they have to have feelings in order to be a person. If that's the case people with Peripheral Neuropathy are no longer a person. People with leprosy, not a person. A puppy might have personhood rights? This is getting ridiculous.
A person is and can only be a human being.
There isn't such a thing as a human being who is not a person. "Non-persons" is a category invented to justify genocide.
No government, nor any individual, has a just power to legally "de-person" any one of us, born or preborn.

The proper purpose of the law is to side with the innocent, not against them.
0 ups
"
Again you're using a medical condition to give or take away personhood in this case now you want to say they have to have feelings in order to be a person. If that's the case people with Peripheral Neuropathy are no longer a person. "

Nice straw man. I said FEELINGS, not the ability to feel (re: touch). "Feelings" refers to the mental capability of feeling anguish, joy, etc.

You just twisted that around to suit your argument. At no point did I say the ability to feel pain was an exclusive factor; I've been emphasizing consciousness and emotion the whole time, with pain being a secondary consideration.

If you really want to put words in my mouth, you'll just be arguing against your own straw man, not me.
reply
0 ups
The semen and egg are not thinking and feeling.

Semen and eggs are not in themselves human beings this is a distraction of the issue at at hand. Human beings are the result of the combination of the two. No one argues for sperm rights.

"Life" doesn't begin at conception; it begins well before conception. Cells are alive. That's living. That's life. That doesn't matter; what matters is personhood, and that does not exist without awareness/consciousness, which do not exist in a braindead person or a fetus only a few weeks old.

A person is a human being. When you became a human being , congratulations: you became a person. No government, nor any individual, has a just power to legally "de-person" any one of us, born or preborn.
The proper purpose of the law is to side with the innocent, not against them.

It's not a moral wrong to decide not to conceive a child in the first place, because at no point did you kill a thinking, feeling thing.

Agreed.

If there's no brain activity, there's no thinking, and the being is insensate.
So, if the fetus hasn't yet developed brain activity, terminating it should be no heavier a moral fault than masturbation.

Wrong a fetus is an innocent human being not a sperm.

If you want to argue, "But, that WOULD have been a person!" then my response is, "Yes, then so WOULD every semen and egg cell if they were combined,

If they successfully combine n you have a person.

so I suppose we should ban all sex, allow only a privileged few to expel semen after giving the remainder of male society a vasectomy (so they stop out-producing female eggs), and make damn sure that every cell gets used and that every woman be obligated to make no egg go to waste via fertility clinic, as else we are all murderers?"

Those embryos you're describing are human beings , ask any emryologist in a fertility clinic.

Honestly, "when life begins" is the wrong argument. The argument is what constitutes personhood, when it begins, and when it ends.

Only humans can be persons, when we became human we became an individual person.

If killing a 4-cell zygote is murder, then masturbation or even just choosing not to get pregnant in the first place may as well be considered murder.

Masturbation and sex are not the same.

Google image "zygote."
If you can honestly tell me that thing has thoughts and feelings, I'll just be plain disappointed.

It's a human being , but give it a few years.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Part 2
And this is coming from a vegan. I actually do value life (personhood sense, which I grant to animals). I, myself, would never have (well, insist upon for my partner) an abortion of any kind because I am not an irresponsible dumbass. I take control over my sexual life. They're called condoms, and idiot can buy them; it astounds me how many people drop the ball on that or how many women insist, "I THINK I would know if I was ovulating, Charles!"

You might not have ever heard of NFP , look into it. No need for artificial condoms and yes with NFP your wife can say , honey this week I'm fertile would you like to make a baby or should we postpone and have sex after I've ovulated.

I'm not going to really get into it about animals but i can tell you i love them as well and they should be protected and treated with the dignity they deserve. I also believe animals in their mothers womb should have the right to life.
0 ups
You don't seem to understand the distinction between human and person.
Personhood has a few prerequisites, and here you are defending the brain dead, as if there was a person left to defend.

personhood, n. "the state or fact of being an individual or having ***human characteristics*** ***and feelings***:
Note: human characteristics--- this applies more to our mindful qualitative state. It could not refer to a statue with human form, for instance, for it is inanimate. Therefore, an animal can have personhood for sharing any such mindful characteristic.
Note: and feelings. The braindead and 4-celled zygote do not have feelings. You cannot have nerve cells when you're limited to 4 cells, nor a brain to receive the signals.

A braindead human and a pre-brain human distinctly lack anything that makes them people.

You're arguing absolutes with no frame of reference.
Is a zygote human? It's human in the sense it came from a human. It could become a human. It's alive. But, it is not feeling. It may as well be a plant.

A braindead "person" or a zygote are innocent in the same sense that a rock is innocent.

If you're braindead, everything you ever were is gone. Every memory, every laugh and cry, everything. And if you don't yet think or feel, then you've never even had those things to begin with.

I believe animals in the womb should also have the right to life--- but only because you cannot gauge the consent of the mother to confirm otherwise, and because I do not know when these qualities begin to form in the various animal fetuses.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
We're not talking about legal rights to vote obviously an embryo is underage and a dead person is underground.

One question... When did you become a human ?
0 ups
When I developed consciousness. Not all dead are put underground. You follow the word "tantamount", yes? The way I see it is this: contraception is not a moral wrong. The semen and egg are not thinking and feeling.

This is why Christians don't put "Masturbation: the Hidden Holocaust" bumper stickers on their cars.

"Life" doesn't begin at conception; it begins well before conception. Cells are alive. That's living. That's life. That doesn't matter; what matters is personhood, and that does not exist without awareness/consciousness, which do not exist in a braindead person or a fetus only a few weeks old.

It's not a moral wrong to decide not to conceive a child in the first place, because at no point did you kill a thinking, feeling thing.

If there's no brain activity, there's no thinking, and the being is insensate.
So, if the fetus hasn't yet developed brain activity, terminating it should be no heavier a moral fault than masturbation.

If you want to argue, "But, that WOULD have been a person!" then my response is, "Yes, then so WOULD every semen and egg cell if they were combined, so I suppose we should ban all sex, allow only a privileged few to expel semen after giving the remainder of male society a vasectomy (so they stop out-producing female eggs), and make damn sure that every cell gets used and that every woman be obligated to make no egg go to waste via fertility clinic, as else we are all murderers?"

Honestly, "when life begins" is the wrong argument. The argument is what constitutes personhood, when it begins, and when it ends.

If killing a 4-cell zygote is murder, then masturbation or even just choosing not to get pregnant in the first place may as well be considered murder.

Google image "zygote."
If you can honestly tell me that thing has thoughts and feelings, I'll just be plain disappointed.

And this is coming from a vegan. I actually do value life (personhood sense, which I grant to animals). I, myself, would never have (well, insist upon for my partner) an abortion of any kind because I am not an irresponsible dumbass. I take control over my sexual life. They're called condoms, and idiot can buy them; it astounds me how many people drop the ball on that or how many women insist, "I THINK I would know if I was ovulating, Charles!"
0 ups
(Part 2)
Honestly, you seem human-centric, and that I find to be disheartening (a very generous word choice coming from me, I assure you).

If people actually paid the smallest amount of thought into what makes personhood material, they'd realize that animals possess it, and all the emotions we have in varying degrees.

It's ruinous to a person's humanity when they can love a dog and slaughter a screaming pig before its family after keeping it penned up in a gestation crate most of its life, then complain about China's dog slaughter festival, as if the complainer was any the better for it.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I hope at least most of this is a joke.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I don't joke about these things.
reply
0 ups
no one jokes about these things, except for weird sickos.
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
lol!
reply
1 up, 1 reply
[image deleted]
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
It depends who you're killing. Killing someone who hasn't committed a crime like an unborn child is murder, regardless if the law allows it. Killing someone who has already murdered an innocent person (i.e. the death penalty) is not murder. Killing someone in self-defense is not murder.
reply
1 up
I agree
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
What most people don't seem to understand is that we are pro-CHOICE, not pro-baby-killing. Now, honestly, the only reason there should be abortions is because the baby will kill the parent if it is allowed to carry full term, and anyways, if the baby's gonna kill the mother when born, the baby's is probably gonna die too. Otherwise, people should be using some f**king CONTRACEPTION!!!
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Pro choice means you'd better not only fight for the right to end a child's life, but also for a woman to prostitute her body out. You think we have rights to our own bodies? Tell a man or a woman to go work the street corner and see how long it takes before she's arrested.
reply
0 ups
1) I never said any of that, 2) if a woman or a man willingly makes the decision to prostitute his or her own body out, while i do not a agree with that choice, I believe they have that right.
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up, 1 reply
If you don't have a womb you shouldn't eve have an opinion on what Women's Rights are.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
If the child is a part of me, I most certainly should have a say whether or not the child will be destroyed.
reply
1 up, 3 replies
Only if you plan to take care of the kid... if not it'll be her decision. So keep it in your pants if your not going to take responsibility.
Oh, well, that' it for explanations, as I "never cast pearls before swine", so consider yourself honored that I have given you a reply.
Now, go and bomb an abortion clinic or shoot out a Planned Parenthood, as I'm sure you would gladly do, you troglodyte.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You sound very angry at men in general. Are you one of those whacky feminazis?
reply
0 ups
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Not in the slightest, the concept of the moral dilemma takes into account the circumstances surrounding an action. So in the as it relates tot he Death Penalty or self defense for that matter the innocence, guilt, and threat level of the person being killed comes into consideration. For war things like national defense, who is the aggressor, what is the threat level of the opposing country as well as their history honoring treaties comes into consideration. What you describe is a system of ethics that lacks nuance, deep thought and avoids all considerations of context in favor of consistency or order to silence those who disagree with you.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
I'm against murder against the innocent. The death penalty is killing someone who committed a violent act (murder, **pe, whatever else...) against another innocent human being. Killing an unborn child is wrong because this child committed no crime and therefore is innocent.
reply
1 up
Yup.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Well, all im saying is that pro-life wouldn't be the proper term unless somebody fits those categories, maybe anti-abortion or pro-birth, as that narrows down the issue. Pro-choice is the accurate term because that is specific to abortion.

Im not really hear to debate abortion, becuase that is a tricky topic, but Ive found that the issue has been put to rest in other countries by just legalizing it, most of Europe, Australia, Canada, all majority christian nations, have legalized abortion, because they realize regardless of what they do, either side not will shut up, depending on the outcome.

We also have to realize that PP does FAR more than abortion, I think the statistic is that 3% of PP's customers go there for abortion, abortion is in the tiny minority and people are trying to defund it completely, it just seems really silly to me.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Yeah, like selling murdered children's body parts on the black market. But that's besides the point and another argument altogether. I'm anti-murder, not pro life. I believe that if a man (or woman) takes a life of an innocent human being, they should be put to death and quit being a drain on our society and tax payers. One bullet costs far less than housing a person in prison for the rest of their lives. But I respect your opinion, even if I don't agree with it.
reply
0 ups
Dug this thing up from my notifications:

The thing is, pro life means no death at the hand of the people who call themselves pro-life. Its not a matter of morals, which is commonly what people see pro-life as, but a matter of "I dont want to kill anyone, regardless of anything"

Abortion is an issue that will never, ever EVER EVVVVER have an adequate answer. Many countries have just put the subject to rest and let people have the choice because no matter which is being picked, the same amount of people will be angry and both sides have very strong arguments, but pro-choicer have many arguments going for them:

-P.P. videos were proven to be in an unregulated facility, might not even be in america.
-The selling of fetal tissue has also shown to have been freak incidences that have stopped.
-Abortion in the case of **pe is extremely justified, because nobody wants a **pe baby, even though it only makes up a small percentage of diseases.
-Stem cell research is helping with research in Autism, Asperger, Alzheimer's (many A diseases), which on top of that, they have to get the parents consent before doing this
-There is also the idea that, say somebody gets drunk, has unprotected sex and then gets pregnant, if they are stupid enough to do that and they are afraid to tell their parents, they will try to find a way to give themself a miscarriage, possibly harming or killing themselves

The pro-lifers have 1 argument, but it is a hell of an argument for sure.

-Nobody knows truly when life starts, for all we know the fetuses could be conscious and feels what is happening.

I would not want to be born into adoption or into a situation where me and my family couldnt afford it, I wouldnt want to be born knowing that either, I was an accident or my parents didnt want me.

I am pro-choice because i believe the pros outweigh the cons. Granted, i think that there should be some kind of limitation (as in the number of times you can do it in a set period of time) because using abortion as birth control is so stupid. I think i should say, I am Canadian, but I also follow some American politics. A big theme in our election was the economy and the enviroment. But it seems like in the US, the biggest themes have been 3 things that arent a problem up here: Abortion, Gun Laws and Socialized Medicine. So in the interest of america, you guys need to follow the rest of the world and start worrying about problems that can destroy the country, like national debt
reply
0 ups
I posted this one because I feel like it showed why I stood this way on the issue, if you can find ways tp prove me wrong, go ahead, im open to it, and I will debate it.
reply
0 ups
I have a friend that is all of those. She is from Germany. She owns her own successful business here in the states. and claims people suck. That only animals love unconditionally. In 1941 she never would be allowed here. Redstonejunkyard Ty.
reply
1 up
And why is that? What about the child's right to live? Why should the woman have the right to kill a child but no right to w**re her body out? All this fighting to give the woman right to kill her child, but nothing to give her the right to sell herself for sex.
reply
1 up
But a woman had to be born to have an opinion.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
i could give a shit for freedom
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Oh really?? Then emigrate to Cuba, Vietnam or any other Communist country and let know how that works out for ya!
reply
0 ups
*living in Laos...
I love Jesus not a constitution.
Flip Settings
Thats Just Something X Say memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
SHE SAID BABIES REALLY AREN'T HUMAN UNTIL THEY'RE OUT OF THE WOMB AND START BREATHING THAT'S JUST SOMETHING HEARTLESS LIBERALS SAY TO MAKE T
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back