Ahh, so you are from /pol/. Yet another example of crippling autism + /pol/ = huge retard
everyone who you don't like is pol. it is the bogey-man.
Every post that you make which isn't about abortion is a tacit admission that you can't argue yourself out of a paper bag.
Source? At first glance it seems 92% we don't know the reasons.
idktbqh
Yeah I would consider "im too poor" to be elective. If a literal junglebunny can raise a kid you can do it. No excuses.
Lol says the guy who makes up definitions for words, only sees the world in black and white and can't see anyone else's point of view due to debilitating autism
He's using a /pol/ meme, dude.
The duty someone has to their child is not one which concerns bodily autonomy, and if someone does not live up to their duties, the child is taken away and put into foster care, so it is not without limitations.
The people who wrote the Declaration of Independence couldn't even decide if "humanity" included black people, and you want me to dogmatically defer to them on the matter of what constitutes personhood? We've come a long way since the 18th century, you know, and I think you'll find that even back then, the general attitude towards abortion was not in line with what modern pro-lifers suggest should be policy.
It continually amazes me when pro-abortion advocates act like abandoning your child to fostercare is just completely morally fine.
Your bodily integrity is not being violated when you put a baby in yourself.
There is no rapist. You are making up dumb hypotheticals to justify murdering babies.
If you want to argue rights philosophy you have to use rights philosophy. You don't get to just make up your own.
This sounds like a coherent right and like you're on the side of good by the way you phrased it, but the "development" you're talking about is removing rights, not expanding them, and I will not pretend otherwise because you know how to frame things in your favor.
Sir you sperg out whenever we, the people who think it's murder, refer to it as murder in our own posts. You're the one who can't see other's points of view.
I never said it was morally fine, but what it does illustrate is that the responsibility parents have towards their children have limitations, and it is for the good of the children that they do, otherwise there would be many more children left in abusive circumstances.
The difference between rape and consensual sex is that the former goes against a person's will, and there can often be a fine line between the two. A sexual act which starts out as consensual can become rape if one of the participants makes it known that they no longer want to continue while the other does not respect this wish.
I'm not sure which "natural rights" your argument is supposed to be based on, because natural rights as traditionally conceived (by Locke and others) come with the caveat that one person's rights end where another person's rights begin. If we are to assume that a fetus is a person (a notion I don't agree with, but for the sake of this argument I'll assume that they are), then they do not have the right to reside within someone else's body against that person's consent.
I don't see how the recognition that certain rights should extend to animals constitutes a removal of said rights.
To where?
I didn't come from there. However, since you're a right-wing tard who joined here in 2019, I am guessing you did
Sure I've been to /pol/ and I've been to kiwifarms. I don't feel the need to talk about either constantly.
You suggested it as a reasonable and acceptable course of action. You're saying it's morally fine. By saying that the responsibility has limitations you are saying that the methods people use to abdicate those responsibilities are absolutely fine and acceptable. No, that responsibility does not have limitations.
No, because once the person exists, it's a person. You don't get to fucking end them once they exist. You have gone past the point of no return. You cannot remove them without murdering them. You chose to get into that situation. You are now stuck with it. That's that. No one cares if you consent to the consequences of your choices that you don't like. You still chose them.
They literally do have that right, because that "someone" is their fucking mother. What is wrong with you people? Stop using vague language like "someone else's body." It's a very specific person's body, with a specific relationship to the fetus that obligates them to care for that fetus, and who made that fetus themselves by conscious choice and put it in their body by conscious choice.
everything you don't like is a Polish meme
Powerful take.