Thread 509400140

If life begins at conception, why do you measure age from birth? If you reallly beleived that, a 3 month old newborn should be a year old.

Checkmate.

Because your parents probably don’t remember the date/time of the bust that made you.

>>509400140 (OP)
Imagine every time you think about your age that you get reminded of that time your father busted a fat nut in your mom. No thanks, I rather not have that image pop in my head every time I see my birthday.

>>509400140 (OP)
0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3...1

>>509402544
That thought is kinda hot, ngl.

>>509400140 (OP)
worst korea recently changed newborns starting age from 1 to starting at 0 (like the zogged west) to normalize ritual unborn baby slaughter. (always dehumanize those marked for death)

>>509400140 (OP)
Here is the secular case against abortion:
First you must agree that human life is valuable by default. If your opponent disagrees, shake their hand, you’ve won.

If they agree human life is valuable, then you need only point out that an unborn human:
>Cannot be anything but alive (biological)
>Cannot be anything but human (Homo Sapien)
>Cannot be anything but an individual (Unique genetic code at conception)
So, termination of the unborn is killing an alive human individual.

From there the discussion becomes when is it okay to kill an alive human individual. We have precedence for this:
>Self Defense (Death or serious harm to the mother, less than 1%)
>Mercy (Short and painful death of the child, less than 1%)
I’d also suggest impressing upon your adversary that you ARE in fact pro-choice, which means you value consent. Valuing consent means:
>Rape (2% of all cases).

Those are the sensible exceptions. 3% of cases. 97% of abortions are done out of convenience, and there is no other precedence for killing an alive human individual for this reason. From there the onus is on your opponent to justify that killing in a way that is not unique to the situation of the unborn. Covering the 3% of cases where they have an argument up front, they will have nothing sensible. They will try to name many things (location, consciousness, pain, age, etc) but none hold up to scrutiny when applied to other matters.

This is one issue that has actually been solved by logic. They have only emotion left from here.

>>509400140 (OP)
>literally cannot say precisely when someone is conceived its just a best guess
>use this is a measurement instead
You're not as smart as you think you are.

>>509402886
Solid post, anon

>>509402886
The main argument against it need only be the behaviour of those that are for it. You don't have to prove Jeffrey Dahmer was wrong, it's self evident. Either your opponent supports it because they're sick in the head or they aren't and they're against it.

>>509400140 (OP)
because, historically speaking, people rarely knew when they had actually gotten pregnant, while the day that the child is actually delivered is hard to mistake

>>509402721
Why is it always germans.

>>509402886
I'm against abortion (except for sensible cases), but the consciousnesss part is sort of a big deal. Being alive can be defined either biologically or mentally, and biologically arguably doesn't matter in comparison. Someone who is brain-dead but alive gets agreed to be allowed to die. If we made a human clone but with a brain incapable of thought or feeling, it would just be a piece of meat and its fate doesn't matter. Stressing the importance of consciousness over biology is a valid route to take here.

In the olden days, people would only remember their birth year, and they would become a year older on the 1st of January

>>509402886
read this post and thought it needed a herald like paul bettany from 'a knight's tale'
"BEHOLD!! Our a-non, the straight! the not fake! slayer of shills, and true fren. from thread to thread he posts destruction upon zog and troons and coombrain faggots quiver and report to jannies, to no avail!! BEHOLD."