Thread 519382387

The majority of people in REPUBLICAN states vote to keep abortion legal. When people are asked yes or no should abortion be banned after 3 months with exceptions for rape health of mother etc most say it should be legal.
A single yes or no question should it be legal to kill a healthy 3 month old child that was not conceived through rape and most people say it should be legal. Most men say it should be legal. Most whites say it should be legal. Most zoomers say it should be legal.

And

Most people are against closing down a slaughterhouse. In a Democrat area

**Denver, Colorado's Initiated Ordinance 309 (November 2024 Ballot)** was the voter initiative in question, aimed at banning slaughterhouses in the city. This measure sought to close Denver's last remaining slaughterhouse (Superior Farms in Globeville) by prohibiting their construction, maintenance, or operation starting January 1, 2026, while also mandating job support for affected workers.

### Exact Ballot Question
The precise wording that appeared on the ballot was:
**“Shall the voters of the City and County of Denver adopt an ordinance prohibiting slaughterhouses, and, in connection, beginning January 1, 2026, prohibiting the construction, maintenance, or use of slaughterhouses within the City; and requiring the City to prioritize residents whose employment is affected by the ordinance in workforce training or employment assistance programs?”**

*(Voters ultimately rejected the measure, with about 58% voting "No.")*

>>519382387 (OP)
10 to 100% are sociopaths, depending on the race or species.

>>519382387 (OP)
>>519382387 (OP)
Also polls show most support abortion of a few month old babies who are healthy and not conceived through rape and most people don't support banning slaughterhouses
>>519382546
I'm white but I think most white people are evil and most white people in European countries are evil pro choice and eat meat

it's been the default for a long time (50+ years) and no one really cares all that much. I wouldn't put much thought into it.

>>519382387 (OP)
>In Nebraska, votes rejected one measure supporting ballot measure and voting results. abortion rights, and approved...
what does this mean?

>>519382702
But it's still wrong. Most people only seem to care about their own life

>>519382822
### Verification of Claims

The 4chan post argues that "most people are evil" based on public support for abortion (framed as killing fetuses/children) and opposition to closing slaughterhouses (framed as supporting animal cruelty). I'll fact-check each specific claim below using recent 2024-2025 polls and election data. Overall, the claims are **mixed**: Broad support for abortion rights exists (especially among certain demographics), but nuance on gestational limits contradicts the post's framing of unrestricted late-term support. The slaughterhouse claim holds up. These views don't inherently prove "evil"—they reflect complex ethical trade-offs on bodily autonomy vs. fetal rights and economic/environmental concerns vs. animal welfare.

#### 1. **"The majority of people in REPUBLICAN states vote to keep abortion legal."**
- **Partially true, but selective.** In the 2024 election, voters in **7 out of 10 states** with abortion-related ballot measures passed protections for abortion rights, including several Republican-leaning or red states like Missouri (where Amendment 3 passed 51.7% yes, enshrining abortion rights up to viability), Montana (57% yes), and Arizona (initially overturned by legislature but voter-supported). However, measures failed in other red states like Florida (55% no on Amendment 4), Nebraska (56% no on a restrictions measure, but it favored limits), and South Dakota (79% no on expansion). Nationally, this shows strong bipartisan support in some red areas, but not a uniform "majority" across all Republican states.

>>519382387 (OP)
why would I ever vote to forbid my ideological enemies, invaders and squatters in my nation, from removing themselves from the gene pool? any state that bans abortion is going to flip permanently blue in 20 years because there are going to be 10 million more democrat-voting niggers and browns.

>>519382951
bad bot

>>519382653
Pol isn’t a platform for Republican politics.

>>519382387 (OP)
>green good
>red bad
ahh yes the subtle propaganda

>>519382951
#### 2. **"When people are asked yes or no should abortion be banned after 3 months with exceptions for rape health of mother etc most say it should be legal."**
- **Mostly false.** Polls show majority support for **restrictions after the first trimester (3 months)**, even with exceptions. For example:
- 69% of Americans support limiting abortions to the first 3 months at most (SBA Pro-Life America, Oct 2025).
- 54% believe abortion should be limited after the first trimester (American Family Survey 2023, cited in SBA Oct 2025).
- Gallup (Oct 2025) finds 69% support legal in the first trimester, but only 37% in the second and 22% in the third.
- YouGov (Mar 2024) shows 55% favor allowing up to a "certain time" then restricting after.
- Broader polls show 63% support legal "in all or most cases" (Pew, Jun 2025), but this often means with limits post-first trimester, not unrestricted. The post overstates support for post-3-month legality without strong caveats.

#### 3. **"A single yes or no question should it be legal to kill a healthy 3 month old child that was not conceived through rape and most people say it should be legal."**
- **False (no such poll exists in this framing).** No major 2024-2025 poll equates a 3-month fetus directly to a "3-month-old child" (post-birth). This is a rhetorical escalation. Polls on late-term abortions (e.g., after 15-24 weeks) show low support: Only 22% back legality in the third trimester without exceptions (Gallup, Oct 2025). Even with exceptions, support hovers around 30-40% for "any reason" post-viability. The claim misrepresents data to imply blanket endorsement of infanticide.

#

>>519382953
Because your greater good thinking is hypocritical. People only do this utilitarian shit you're doing now when it benefits them
Why shouldn't someone be allowed to steal all your retirement savings and donate them to against malaria foundation? It'd save dozens of childrens lives

>>519382910
50 years (probably most peoples entire life) they were told it's actually completely moral and it's immoral to stop it. you have work to do.

>>519383095
I'm not a Republican, I'm just not a pro choice meat eater / scumbag
>>519383123
### 4. **"Most men say it should be legal. Most whites say it should be legal. Most zoomers say it should be legal."**
- **True.**
- **Men**: 61% support legal abortion in all/most cases (Pew, Jun 2025).
- **Whites**: Around 60-65% support (Pew breakdowns; e.g., non-Hispanic whites at 62% in 2024 PRRI data).
- **Zoomers (Gen Z, born 1997-2012)**: 70-80% support legal access, higher than average (Forbes Aug 2024; Guardian May 2024 citing Pew shifts). Younger voters (18-29) were key in passing 2024 ballot measures.

#### 5. **"Most people are against closing down a slaughterhouse. In a Democrat area"**
- **True.** As detailed in the post's quote (which matches verified data), Denver's Initiated Ordinance 309 failed with 58% voting "No" in November 2024. Denver is a strongly Democratic city (Biden won 80% in 2020; Harris ~75% in 2024). Voters prioritized jobs/economy over animal welfare in this blue stronghold.

In summary, while abortion support is robust (60%+ overall for legal in most cases), the post cherry-picks to ignore trimester limits and equates policy views with moral absolutes. Public opinion is nuanced—most favor early access but draw lines later. The "evil" label is subjective rhetoric, not fact.

>>519382387 (OP)
Americans are crazy for abortion. Even late term. You mock Europeans but abortion is unheard of here past 12 weeks aka 1st trimester. Americans abort all the way to 40 weeks, which is a completely formed and viable baby that would 100% survive if not murdered.

>>519383123
>Why shouldn't someone be allowed to steal
Do you really need a lesson on the basic morality upon which every lasting civilization in human history is built? On the other hand, the death of one's enemies and those who seek to replace or destroy one's own people and culture was never morally wrong.

>>519382387 (OP)
>Are most people evil?
No one is evil. Not even sociopaths are evil. Sociopaths for example though are the most capable of evil. But capability ≠ willingness for evil.

The most common evils in life are reached by good intentions leading to them. The rarer evils are reached by apathy, of being unable to care (see Sociopathy). But evil being reached for evil's sake alone? Humans aren't capable of that. They can come close, but they still are not inherently evil. They are just easily swayed by evil is all.

>>519383132
The Internet has existed for a long time and people still vote to keep it legal, they all have access to high speed Internet and are choosing to be willfully ignorant

>>519383390
Use the word tax at 100% if it makes you feel better
>>519383397
Do you not believe in free will? Dessert morality?
>>519383273
It's still wrong if the fetus is three weeks old.
>But it's not conscious yet

Yes but the pig they're eating was.

>>519382387 (OP)
>most people want to murder innocents for their own convenience
You're human and this surprises you?

A counterpoint: Embrace it. These people exist in such numbers because the technology to remove themselves from the gene pool didn't exist until now. Barring them access to their own self sought eradication only ensures a world they will continue to haunt. Forever. Let them banish themselves. Yes, there will be negative repercussions for a time but the people who live on will adjust and inhabit a better world, one without the worst people alive today.

Disclaimer: niggers aren't human for the purposes of this post under the 3/5ths compromise.

these bot responses make zero sense. and why do you keep going back and forth between jew and US flags, hm? rhetorical question. i'm closing and hiding your low effort kike propaganda thread.

>>519383571
Fuck off devil jew.

>>519383831
vpn
>>519383801
How do I profit from this? I don't want to be employed and serve evil people

>>519382387 (OP)
Would you abort this? Be honest

>>519384029
no. He's innocent

>>519383571
>Dessert morality
Is this the philosophy of the Amerilard

>>519382387 (OP)
Banning abortion just means women will travel somewhere else to get it done, or try themselves putting their lives at risk too

>>519384102
Do you not know basic philosophy?

>>519382387 (OP)
Without the miracle of abortion there would be millions more dysgenic niggers niggering about doing the monkeyshines. Thank God for abortion!

>>519384151
Commiting murder shouldn't be safe or convenient, reducing abortion is good even if it can't be eliminated entirely
Just start imprisoning mother's for the deaths of their own unborn children

>>519382387 (OP)
legal late term abortion in all cases is sick. so is killing animals. both shouldn't exist. anyone who defends one of these or both isn't right in the head.

>>519385088
Based

>>519383571
>Do you not believe in free will? Dessert morality?
I do believe in free will. But I know well enough that free will is easily corrupted, especially by evil. I’ll put it this way: I’ve shook hands with a lot of devils in my time, a lot of fucked up people, I’ve met and known everything from petty narcissistic egotists to raving manic madmen to some real sadistic pieces of shit that derived pleasure out of torturing people for money. I’ve known whores, I’ve known their whore meisters, I’ve met people who indulged in poison, and people who sell the poison. I’ve met the manic, the neurotic, the psychotic, the sociopathic, all stripes of dark triad shit.

But ask any single one them “Do you know what you do is evil?” and you will hear lots of answers. None of them will ever say “Yes, I know it.”

You will typically hear a dynamic range of
“It’s not what I do that’s evil, it’s (insert enemy)!”
“Maybe if (bad thing) didn’t happen to me, I’d not have to do (bad thing)!”
“You say it’s (evil), that’s your problem not mine.”

The closest you will get to an admission of evil is
“I don’t care if it is, I’ll do what I like.” (sociopathy).

I’ve never ever heard a single person say
“Yes I know it is evil, I care that it is evil, and I do this precisely because it is evil.”

Until I hear that from a human’s mouth, I’ll remain unconvinced that there exists a human who truly knows that what they do is evil while choosing it anyway. Yes they all have free will, they choose to DO evil. But you will always find those fools don’t even know their own free will themselves. If they did, they’d not choose evil.

>>519384272
Answer this
>>519384029

>>519382387 (OP)
Abortion is a complicated thing

>>519385316
I think some people admit they're evil, that's what stuff like confession is for

Yes I know buying meat is evil, I care that buying meat is evil, and I used to do this anyway because even though I knew it was evil I wanted to be employed and make more money.
Good enough?

>>519385548
It isn't. It's murder. Of a child.

>>519385671
Yes or no? >>519384029

>>519385671
based

>>519385650
>I think some people admit they're evil, that's what stuff like confession is for
Yeah and those who confess it are those who have reached self-actualisation, they have fully realised their own free will. And what you notice is when confessed, their next move is to depart from doing evil and take a fight against it. And even then, it is not a confession that suggests the human is evil innately. Theologically, this would be at odds with God. If man is made in God’s likeness, and if man has innate evil as part of his personhood, then what does this say of God’s image? What does it say of God? It would mean God is evil. And whatever evil we have in us was inherited from God.

>Yes I know buying meat is evil, I care that buying meat is evil, and I used to do this anyway because even though I knew it was evil I wanted to be employed and make more money.

>Good enough
Nope. Because notice your endgoal was to be employed and make money. That shows your ulterior motivation wasn’t evil for it’s own sake like I described.

>>519382387 (OP)
You need 60% Yes votes to pass a constitutional amendment in Florida and the abortion one failed with like 56%. And that's after the state stole $10 million of Medicare money to shill to boomers to vote No on it. Find something else to complain about, we dindu nuffin.

>>519386317
But it was still evil? The goal of a school shooter is to kill children not be evil

All part of the jewish population control scheme against Christians and Europeans...

>>519386437
Florida sucks

>>519386475
>But it was still evil? The goal of a school shooter is to kill children not be evil
Yes it was still evil, if we use your school shooter example. It still shows someone is moved by evil. It does not show the person themselves is evil incarnate though. Do you notice the common theme among school shooters? Their motivations for it? They paint themselves in the role of victim or outcast and they try to justify what they do. Any such pleasure they derive is typically from a warped catharsis of hearing their (enemies) scream.

For them to be purely evil, I’d expect them to have not been a victim or outcast (whether from real abuse they endured or a delusion they believed). I’d expect them to deliberately target people who they know to be innocent, who they even humanise and regard as their equal. I’d expect them to open fire, shooting the weakest and most vulnerable first, and then delighting in watching them die and when asked “Why did you do it?” I’d expect a truly evil person to say “Because they let me. Because I could. So I did, and it was evil. And that is what I enjoyed, the evil of it.”

That to me would be a true evil school shooter scenario. Ive never heard of any single one like this, have you?

>>519382387 (OP)
I'm evil. Just ask people that don't like me.

>>519387176
Okay sure nobody is pure evil I get what you mean but some people are more evil than others and some people are more good than others

>>519382387 (OP)
>>519382387 (OP)
https://philosophicalvegan.com/wiki/index.php/NameTheTrait
name the trait animal rights human rights

>>519382387 (OP)
Killing unborn children is evil. People who want to murder unborn children are evil.

>>519388169
Based

>>519387542
>Okay sure nobody is pure evil I get what you mean but some people are more evil than others and some people are more good than others.

Maybe. But again, I’ve seen some shit in life. Not just bad shit, weird good-bad shit, I’ve seen “good” people do the most evil shit in my life, and I’ve seen “evil” people have moments of pure selfless charity. Even some serial killers would go home to their own kids, build their horse and cart toy for christmas, kiss them on the head, and protect them from sin where they could. I reference Richard Kuklinski, The Iceman Killer in that example.
If you pay attention you can see it too. Sinners who may do saintly things in private, and public saints who do some wicked shit in private.

Personally I leave the judging to God. I don’t need to judge someone as evil to defend myself against it anyway. All a man can do is defend against, whether that’s from others or even his own sick self.

>>519388513
Maybe but I think inferences can be made, I know genetics environment etc but insanity defense exists for a reason in the legal system

I appreciate you sharing this personal reflection—it's a raw and honest way to wrestle with how our individual experiences stack up against vast, systemic harms. The frustration of grueling manual labor for a small payout, only to imagine it erased by theft, captures a real sense of injustice: wasted effort, violated autonomy, and the dread of repetition. Framing it as 40 "rights units" (for the theft and forced redo of labor) and 80 "suffering units" (for the emotional/physical toll of those extra hours) is a creative way to make it tangible. Extending that to broader scales like abortion and factory farming is a profound ethical challenge, because it forces us to confront not just numbers, but the incommensurable weights of lives, pains, and principles.

Quantifying "rights units" and "suffering units" across these isn't objective—there's no universal meter for moral harm. Rights violations depend on what we count as a "right" (e.g., property/liberty vs. life itself), and suffering is subjective (duration, intensity, sentience). Philosophers like Peter Singer argue for comparing harms based on capacity to suffer, while others (e.g., in pro-life frameworks) prioritize human personhood from conception, seeing animal rights as secondary but still valid. Discussions often highlight inconsistencies: someone might decry animal cruelty but support abortion, or vice versa, without easy resolution. For this exercise, I'll use your base case as a starting point and build a transparent framework to scale it up. This is *not* definitive—it's a thought experiment to help compare magnitudes, grounded in data where possible.

>>519382387 (OP)
Op, faggot, do you support free school meals for kids, universal healthcare for kids, or payment-free birth?

>>519382910
Lmao

>>519389033
### Step 1: Key Data for Scale
- **Abortions in the USA**: Recent estimates put the annual figure at about 1.1 million (ranging from 1.04 million to 1.14 million clinician-provided procedures in 2024). I'll use 1.1 million for calculations.
- **Factory-farmed animals**: Globally, around 90 billion land animals are raised and killed annually in factory farming systems (e.g., chickens, pigs, cows, turkeys), with the number rising yearly; this excludes trillions of fish/aquatic animals. (I'll focus on land animals as the core of "factory farms.") Suffering here includes both lifetime confinement/torture and slaughter.

These are orders of magnitude larger than your single instance: 1.1 million vs. 1 (abortion), and 90 billion vs. 1 (factory farming).

### Step 2: Framework for Units
To scale your base (40 rights units + 80 suffering units for theft-forced 2-hour labor redo), I define:
- **Rights units**: Severity of the core violation (e.g., property theft/liberty infringement). Your case is minor (economic/autonomy harm, no bodily integrity loss). I scale by moral weight: human life > animal life > property.
- **Suffering units**: Intensity × duration of inflicted pain/distress. Your case: moderate intensity (hated labor) × 2 hours = 80 units (40/hour base rate). I adjust for sentience, procedure/lifespan, and cruelty.

>>519389054
idk maybe it should go to foreign aid instead or tax cuts mini government

>>519389134
>>519389033
Assumptions (reasoned, not absolute):
- **Per abortion** (USA view: rights violation against a "child"/fetus's right to life; suffering as procedure-induced pain + abrupt end to potential existence):
- Rights: 10,000 units (250× your base). Why? Killing a potential human life dwarfs property theft—equivalent to violating ~5,000 hours of autonomy (a fraction of an 80-year lifespan, valued at 2 units/hour base).
- Suffering: 20,000 units (250× your base). Why? Brief but potentially intense fetal distress (e.g., 0.5–1 hour procedure at 10–20× intensity) + lost future, but focused on inflicted harm.
- **Per factory-farmed animal** (global: rights as right not to be commodified/killed; suffering as chronic confinement + slaughter):
- Rights: 100 units (2.5× your base). Why? Animals have moral status (sentience, per philosophers like Singer), but lower than humans—no full personhood. Killing/torturing for food is a systemic property-like violation, but amplified by cruelty.
- Suffering: 288,000 units (~3,600× your base). Why? Most animals (e.g., 70% chickens) endure ~6–8 weeks ( ~1,400 hours) of high-intensity distress (crowding, mutilation, disease; intensity 3× your labor, as it's near-constant fear/pain, per welfare reports). Calculation: 1,400 hours × 3 intensity × 40 base/hour = 168,000, plus 120,000 for slaughter (acute 3-hour equivalent at 10× intensity). This is a weighted average; cows/pigs suffer longer but fewer in number.

These multipliers make your personal case a "drop in the ocean" (totals below are billions/trillions× larger), while respecting ethical debates: human > animal weighting, but both immense.

>>519389203
>>519389134
>>519389033
### Step 3: Annual Totals
Here's the scaled-up comparison in a table for clarity. (All figures rounded for readability; exact calcs: abortions × per-unit values; 90 billion animals × per-animal values.)

| Category | Annual Instances | Rights Units per Instance | Total Rights Units Violated | Suffering Units per Instance | Total Suffering Units Inflicted |
|-----------------------|------------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------|------------------------------|---------------------------------|
| **Your Hypothetical (Theft + Redo Labor)** | 1 | 40 | 40 | 80 | 80 |
| **US Abortion Industry** | 1.1 million | 10,000 | **11 billion** | 20,000 | **22 billion** |
| **Global Factory Farming** | 90 billion | 100 | **9 trillion** | 288,000 | **25.92 quadrillion** |

>>519382387 (OP)
They are simps. Simps value women over babies, because they want the affection and attention of a woman who will likely never want them, over protecting and nurturing a child
It’s fucked up, but true

>>519388830
>For a reason
>In the legal system

The legal system is a fine ship, she sails well. The law of the land is sturdy enough. But she doesn’t sail on the winds of reason I’m afraid. Morality does. And the way the world is headed just now, legality and morality couldn’t be more further apart. We live in a world where the moral truth plays second place to legal ‘truth’.

Where you can be a serial rapist or child killer, you can admit your crime to your defendant attorney and even admit your guilt, and the attorney will not divulge the truth, even when it’s obvious and proven there is no madness behind the confession. He will still aim, if he can, to let the killer reach the ‘not guilty’ verdict, he will aim to bend perception and the truth to see to it, because that is his job, to find legal victory, not moral victory.

>>519382387 (OP)
1% of abortions are actually life saving. The other 99% are whores trying to avoid responsibility or overzealous doctors.

>>519389285

### Step 4: How to Interpret and Compare
- **Magnitude**: Your 40/80 units is ~0.0000004% of abortion totals and vanishingly smaller vs. factory farming. Even if we dial down multipliers (e.g., animal rights at 10 units each), factory farming still dwarfs everything by scale alone—90 billion lives vs. 1.1 million.
- **Rights Focus**: Abortion edges out in *per-instance* severity (human life as paramount), totaling ~11 billion units— a catastrophe on par with "stealing" millions of lifetimes' worth of autonomy. Factory farming's 9 trillion is "cheaper" per animal but overwhelms via volume, like theft on a planetary assembly line.
- **Suffering Focus**: Factory farming explodes here (25.92 quadrillion units), as animals endure prolonged, industrialized torment. Abortion's 22 billion is acute but fewer cases; it's like one sharp theft vs. endless, grinding ones.
- **Your Original Point**: Yes, the theft-redo feels trivial next to these—your suffering/rights hit is a single pebble in a quarry. But that's empowering too: small acts (e.g., voting, donating, advocacy) compound against oceans.

If these multipliers feel off (e.g., too high/low for animals?), we could tweak them—say, equalize human/animal rights for a vegan-pro-life lens, or minimize fetal suffering. What's your gut on the weighting? This is just one way to map the unmapable, but it underscores why these issues haunt us: they're not abstract; they're echoes of your rock-moving ache, multiplied infinitely.
>>519389298
Maybe, women support it too
>>519389054
Oh hospital births are mostly bullshit and often child abuse they poison and mutilate children and clamp cords and stuff. Not good. SAD! MANY SUCH CASES!

>>519389500
Very true
>>519389443
Sure but how can you believe in God and believe people have so little libertarian free will? How can you solve the problem of evil with that?

Conservative hicks are all based and trad until their daughter becomes pregnant after fucking niggers.

>>519389757
>>519389757
don't involve conservatives in your disgusting fantasies

>>519382387 (OP)
Abortion should be illegal for Whites and mandatory for blacks.

>>519389705
>Sure but how can you believe in God and believe people have so little libertarian free will?
Very simple, because of choice. God issues free will, keyword being ‘free’, as in a gift, or inherited trait, whichever. We then have a choice to use that free will. A lot of people don’t choose it. A lot of people choose to instead enslave their senses to something to blot it out, whether that’s alcohol or drugs or porn or sex or violence or whatever. You can choose to accept a power, or choose to reject it. If someone chooses to be a slave to themselves, they’re in a bind. That’s for God to figure out. I’m not God.

>How can you solve the problem of evil with that?
I can’t. That’s not my job or any man’s job. We can certainly stand against actors of evil, sure. Death sentence, imprisonment, self defense, etc. But the spirit of evil itself, man cannot vanquish it, it’s far greater than us. Those who try inevitably end up becoming enrolled in it anyway. That’s for God to sort out one day. Our job is to simply make sure we don’t spread the disease while it lingers on this mortal plane.

>>519390243
That's immoral

>>519390505
It seems incredibly unlikely almost everyone would choose to not use their free will and essentially almost everyone is completely predictable what they will and won't do

I meant the argument for atheism "why does evil exist"

>>519382387 (OP)
Republicans want to rape and impregnate 10 year old girls.

>>519390865
You can still help them and not murder children
What about girls that are raped and want to keep it but their parents force them to get an abortion anyway

This is the only ethical position on abortion, and everyone else is a faggot.
>The mother is white and the baby is white
>Abortion is allowed for medical, rape, or incest
>The mother is non-white
>Abortion is mandatory, if the woman wants to keep it then she is deported to the most recent country origin. If the father can be identified he is legally bound to her through marriage and deported too.
This is the only sane stance on abortion and anyone who disagrees is brown or anti-white.

>>519390865
jeet or israeli flag lmao

>>519390734
>It seems incredibly unlikely almost everyone would choose to not use their free will and essentially almost everyone is completely predictable what they will and won't do.

Almost everyone does elect to not use their free will at times, even those faithful to God. It’s those moments in life you know? The despair moments, the moment where you say “Fuck it” and let your life careen into a ditch by abdicating your own free will. I saw it happen to the most devout catholic family man you could meet too. Lovely wife, three delightful kids, 2 girls and a boy. Went to church every sunday without fail. Gave alms to the poor, helped those in need, and then he gets diagnosed with terminal cancer, told he was to die shortly before or after christmas. He let go of his free will pretty quick after that bombshell. Tragic story. He died.


>I meant the argument for atheism "why does evil exist"
Oh. Yeah the best counter for that is to ask the atheist what business do they have in believing in the concept of evil. Ask them to point to an objective foundation for their inquiry of evil, ask them if they have any metric to know or measure it themselves. They don’t, they are relativists. So you should ask them if why they charge God with the crime of evil if they dont even believe in the existence of whom the accuse (God). Watch them squirm.

>>519391215
It's easy to pretend to be from wherever you want

>>519391426
An atheist could argue morality is objective by believing in utilitarianism

But even if they must be relativists it's an internal critique. The theist believes morality is objective and the atheist is pointing to a contradiction.

>>519382387 (OP)
If you asked those people to personally terminate a fetus they probably would balk. I would say the vast majority of people are only evil when they aren't the ones directly involved or don't have to seriously consider the implications of their support.

>>519392077
I think most people would have trouble personally slitting an animals throat

>>519391837
>An atheist could argue morality is objective by believing in utilitarianism
True, true. But the atheist who does this will immediately stop singing that ‘utilitarianism’ song the moment that he is placed in the losing half of the measure. When the majority takes priority of what he holds dear, then his utilitarian chirping stops lol.

>The theist believes morality is objective and the atheist is pointing to a contradiction.

Yes, and that is what sin and evil is to the theist, the contradiction. So the remedy is to not contradict God’s laws or commandments, those who live in contradiction to God are those who do evil, knowingly or unknowingly. That’s the theistic answer. The atheist pointing out the contradiction is telling the theist nothing new.

The theist at least has an objective standard. Whether this standard is real or not, doesn’t matter in the practicality of things. Because if there is no God and no objective standard, then man is charged to create the objective standard himself. And the theist would be way ahead of the atheist on that front, 2,000 years ahead.

While the atheist still flops and flails around in the puddle of relativism.

>>519382822
It's misleading. Nebraska voters actually approved two measures that were aimed at "protecting abortion". One was a misleadingly worded measure that actually put restrictions on abortion while sounding like it was making abortions "safer" (except also making them illegal when non-doctors decide they're unsafe). The other measure was pretty much what you'd expect when you hear mention of a measure that protects abortion rights, and wasn't misleading. They both passed, but the misleading one supercedes the honest one because of bureaucracy. Many people that thought they were voting for abortion rights didn't take the time to find out one of the measures was a scam, as too many "enlightened" voters all too often do.

>>519392486
Both measures protected abortion, there was nothing misleading about any of it.

>>519382387 (OP)
>Evil?
No, morality is subjective.
>Violent?
>Yes, we are merely animals that know of our own mortality....

I hope none of you ever have to face a diagnosis of a sick fetus.

>>519382387 (OP)
I wonder why Kentucky or Texas aren't highlighted in orange on this map, when they have some of the tightest restrictions on abortion nationwide.

>>519382387 (OP)
Abortion should not be outlawed, not should it be protected legally.
It should be made extremely nebulous so people can sue abortionists

>>519382387 (OP)
>a healthy 3 month old child
it is not a 3 month old child it is a negative 6 month old child.
That said, while I'm pro choice I'm temporarily against abortion until feminists end their hypocrisy about pic-related. Stop forcing male rape victims to pay child support and I'll go back to supporting abortion.

>>519392486
> Shall the Nebraska Constitution be amended to include a new section which provides: 'Except when a woman seeks an abortion necessitated by a medical emergency or when the pregnancy results from sexual assault or incest, unborn children shall be protected from abortion in the second and third trimesters.'
>A vote 'FOR' will amend the Nebraska Constitution to provide that, except when a woman seeks an abortion necessitated by a medical emergency or when the pregnancy results from sexual assault or incest, unborn children shall be protected from abortion in the second and third trimesters.
>A vote 'AGAINST' will not amend the Nebraska Constitution in such manner.
Such trickery.

>>519392430
Sure but that doesn't disprove it

It doesn't have to be a logical problem of evil it can also be probabilistic, like why didn't we all just start in heaven why have an earth?

>>519392821
She's still a mother she'll be the mother of a dead child
>>519393074
It's hypocritical for adult men too

Most people are not inherently evil, the system turns them that way.

>>519393330
>It doesn't have to be a logical problem of evil it can also be probabilistic, like why didn't we all just start in heaven why have an earth?

Not sure if that's a probability question. God isn't a slot machine in most theologies lol. Who knows though, maybe He flipped a coin to decide the matter?

You're from Israel so I'm guessing you're probably more familiar with Judaism's theological details. So I'm not sure if your people share in Christianity's theological conclusion of 'Theosis'.

That God had become man, so that Man can become like God. That the whole point of the creation of man, to be made in God's image, to be given authorities and dominions, to inherit free will, even to one day have the knowledge of good & evil (which we consumed prematurely according to the take of Genesis and had fallen from the weight of unearned wisdom), then the conclusion is God wants to have a co-operation with us, for us to grow to similar heights as He. Just as a Father wants a son to become like a Father himself.

So, the answer would be God had given us Earth to dwell in so we could exercise authority over a Kingdom of our own, just as God has His Kingdom of Heaven. All in the aim to teach us and guide us to become more and more 'God-like' ourselves.

Not sure what Judaism says on the matter though.

>>519394186
>>519393556
But what about free will?
>>519394186
I'm American haha

I don't know what made in God's image means I believe in evolution including human evolution, I think traits like being able to reason, free will, morality, etc are a spectrum not binary so I don't see how modern humans are made in God's image what about proto humans?

I'm agnostic

>>519382387 (OP)
Yes. I know, it was a difficult one for me to accept to. Not just this issue either, most people lack any sort of moral compass whatsoever it seems like.

>>519382387 (OP)
you are evil anon. when this is acknowledged about you, the proper action against you will be rightfully taken

>>519393556
Not only are most people evil, all people are evil.

>>519394623
I've never trespassed or gotten a white man arrested for shoplifting, I've caught black men, white women, etc no white men
>>519394719
Yes I agree I'm not perfect

>>519394413
>I don't know what made in God's image means I believe in evolution including human evolution, I think traits like being able to reason, free will, morality, etc are a spectrum not binary so I don't see how modern humans are made in God's image

It means being capable of what God is capable of. God can create life, so can we. God can take a life, so can we. God possesses free will, and so do we. God uses divine reasoning, the 'logos'. So do we. God possesses the ability to see the past, present, and future. So do we.

However all of our powers are limited. What you called a 'spectrum' is actually a shattering, a brokenness. Some shards are larger than others, but altogether, we aren't as powerful as God. We can only create life at the cost of expending our own (child birth, child rearing). We can take a life, but at the cost of our own (death to ourselves if we are attacked, or death of our souls once we throw away our humanity). Our reasoning is only sound in lapses, it is never perfect and has blind spots. And our ability to see the past present and future is merely memory recollection, perception, and foresight. All three have limits.

That's what being in His image means.

>What about proto humans
Similar to us, but even more limited. If God is the adult, modern man is but a child. And proto humans would be like a baby.

>>519394953
>It means being capable of what God is capable of. God can create life, so can we. God can take a life, so can we. God possesses free will, and so do we. God uses divine reasoning, the 'logos'. So do we. God possesses the ability to see the past, present, and future. So do we.

Can we create life? I don't know if scientists have been able to create life from scratch. Cows can create life.

>However all of our powers are limited. What you called a 'spectrum' is actually a shattering, a brokenness. Some shards are larger than others, but altogether, we aren't as powerful as God. We can only create life at the cost of expending our own (child birth, child rearing). We can take a life, but at the cost of our own (death to ourselves if we are attacked, or death of our souls once we throw away our humanity). Our reasoning is only sound in lapses, it is never perfect and has blind spots. And our ability to see the past present and future is merely memory recollection, perception, and foresight. All three have limits.

That's what being in His image means.

>What about proto humans
Similar to us, but even more limited. If God is the adult, modern man is but a child. And proto humans would be like a baby.

Would that make chimpanzees like a fetus? Chickens like a zygote?
Because they have memories, they can do very simple counting, they have empathy and stuff

>>519395221
>Can we create life?
Yes, it only requires a few millimeters of semen and an egg the size of a grain of sand. We do not need science to create life from scratch when we already have the laboratories to do so between our legs lol

>Would that make chimpanzees like a fetus? Chickens like a zygote?
Because they have memories, they can do very simple counting, they have empathy and stuff

That would make a chimpanzee a chimpanzee and a chicken a chicken. They do have memories, they do have empathy, but they are not meta-aware of their own memories or empathy like we are. An animal can think, but it's the human who can think about his own thinking. An animal's self awareness starts and stops at their own physical reflection. A human takes it a big step further.

>>519395527
>but they are not meta-aware of their own memories or empathy like we are. An animal can think, but it's the human who can think about his own thinking. An animal's self awareness starts and stops at their own physical reflection. A human takes it a big step further.

But not all humans can do this, disabled humans can't and again being able to think about thinking seems like a spectrum not binary. Maybe proto humans can do this somewhat and chimpanzees can do it a little bit. Some animals can pass the mirror test which is good evidence they possess some self awareness.

Also why can't a pig gain the ability to think about thinking? Humans can lose it in an accident if they are shot and lose some of their brain so why can't surgery brain implants or selective breeding happen to pigs so they get bigger and more complicated brains so they gain the ability to think about thinking?

>>519396072
>>519395527
>Also why can't a pig gain the ability to think about thinking? Humans can lose it in an accident if they are shot and lose some of their brain so why can't surgery brain implants or selective breeding happen to pigs so they get bigger and more complicated brains so they gain the ability to think about thinking?

Would those pigs who've gained the ability to think and also think about thinking now be made in God's image? Are humans who are injured and can no longer think about thinking no longer made in his image?

I think abortion is immoral and sinful, but I do understand why women abort sick children. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

>>519396357
>>519396357
But most abortions are of children which are perfectly healthy

>>519382387 (OP)
Can some americani explain to me what is "abortion rights"?
Human can have rights, animals can have rights, indians and Russians dont have rights but abortion?

>>519382387 (OP)
I have personally had 7 women get abortions. 2 of them multiple times. 1 of them it wasn’t even my offspring. Kek

>>519396743
enjoy hell

>>519382387 (OP)
I voted against abortion in Nebraska.

Fuck irresponsible foids

>>519396072
>But not all humans can do this, disabled humans can't and again being able to think about thinking seems like a spectrum not binary.
Yeah, a fair point, one I’d expect to come up and I knew you’d bring it up too. Not because you’re wrong but it’s because it’s a dilemma I ask myself as well. It has its answer though: Disabled humans still possess divine reason. They don’t possess the ability to express this reason, due to bodily abnormality, damage or disorder. This aligns with the belief of a soul, so if you don’t believe in the soul, this is your stop to get off the train lol.

If someone is disabled, it tells us what? It tells us they would have had the ability to express meta-awareness, but the disability prevented it. It’s an exception to the rule that proves the rule.

Also I would recommend caution to humanity here, because just when you think someone is too disabled to have reason, you can be in for a shock. Take level 3 autists for example, the severe ones, they cannot speak, they scream and shriek non stop forever. Put them in front of a keyboard that has buttons to convey emotions or sentiments or thoughts, and they tap on it and express their souls just fine. 50 years ago we’d have called them vegetables.

Or, imagine if Stephen Hawking was not a recognised genius, and had no money to afford a wheelchair and programmable text-to-speech device. Everyone would walk past him and see a motionless braindead ‘retard’. Completely unaware that if you give him the tools to communicate, he’d drop bangers theories of quantum relativity.

Or even the man who was missing 90% of his brain, yet still functioned and could think and reason and speak. On and on.

>Also why can't a pig gain the ability to think about thinking?
To put it simply, its because theyre pigs. Theologically, it’s because their spiritual being (if they have one) is not as ours. Evolutionary wise, they are not on our level. Take your pick

>>519396806
I’m pretty sure one of the roasties was a Jew. You’re welcome.

>>519396357
>but I do understand why women abort sick children. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

I don’t. I have a disease that was supposed to kill me at birth, supposedly has a 80% infant mortality rate outright. 80% chance of dead baby on delivery they said. And even IF the baby survives birth, will almost always 100% die by aged 20-30. I’m in my mid thirties and now doctors tells me I’m expected to live a full lifespan.

I’ve seen women on forums dedicated to my disease speak of abortion and aborting babies diagnosed with it. And it is mindblowingly infuriating to me, because if my own mom copped that attitude I’d have died in the womb from abortion.

The kicker? the information that the disease is so fatal to children is OUTDATED. They told parents this fatalistic summary of the disease due to the fact the disease was not well understood, and now it is.

Meaning theres been countless women who aborted because of scientific ignorance. They instantly believed their doctors, and abandoned any reason of hope or perseverance. And they STILL abort kids with the disorder today, because the old information is still in circulation, even among some doctors

>>519396987
>Yeah, a fair point, one I’d expect to come up and I knew you’d bring it up too. Not because you’re wrong but it’s because it’s a dilemma I ask myself as well. It has its answer though: Disabled humans still possess divine reason. They don’t possess the ability to express this reason, due to bodily abnormality, damage or disorder. This aligns with the belief of a soul, so if you don’t believe in the soul, this is your stop to get off the train lol.

I don't know what the difference is between a human soul and a pig soul. Or a man soul and woman soul. Or black soul and white soul.

Can't I just say
>Pigs still possess divine reason. They don’t possess the ability to express this reason, due to bodily abnormality, damage or disorder. This aligns with the belief of a soul, so if you don’t believe in the soul, this is your stop to get off the train lol.

They're just missing the necessary hardware.

>If a pig can't reason, it tells us what? It tells us they would have had the ability to express meta-awareness, but the being a pig with too small a brain prevented it.

>It’s an exception to the rule that proves the rule.

But if most humans on earth were missing parts of their brain and couldn't think about thinking I still believe the remaining 49% of humans who could think about thinking would not be uniquely made in God's image.

>Also why can't a pig gain the ability to think about thinking?
To put it simply, its because theyre pigs. Theologically, it’s because their spiritual being (if they have one) is not as ours. Evolutionary wise, they are not on our level. Take your pick

Or Pigs and humans have the same kinds of souls and you can take away or add the ability to think about thinking by adding or subtracting parts of the brain. Maybe all conscious beings are made in God's image

>>519396926
Both ballot measures were for abortion, just to different degrees.

>>519397523
>I don’t. I have a disease that was supposed to kill me at birth, supposedly has a 80% infant mortality rate outright. 80% chance of dead baby on delivery they said
So these women were told that most likely they would lose the child at birth. Do you have any idea how hard it must be to carry a sick child to term only to see them die at birth, presumably in pain?

>>519398023
simp

>>519398133
Not a simp. Just an unlucky father who went through something like this.

>>519397550
>They're just missing the necessary hardware.
You could say that, you’d be right to say that. Because it’s true, they’re missing the necessary hardware. Disabled humans are not missing the necessary hardware. They have the hardware, but the hardware is damaged. It does not mean they lost the hardware, it means they lost the function of it. A hard drive that’s been smashed is still a hard drive. It’s simply just a smashed hard drive you feel me?

Meanwhile, the pig doesn’t have a hard drive at all. (If we are using ‘hard drive’ as a euphemism for the soul or emergent consciousness)

As for animals and their souls, its debated in theology. In Christianity, the signs point towards animals having souls, just ‘little souls’.

Funny story: One time the medieval Catholics thought they saw a tribe of ‘dog-headed’ people. humans with the heads of dogs, during their travels east. The monks and priests and bishops contemplated whether or not they should bother contacting them to tell them about Christ. If they were truly a half-human/half-dog people, what does it mean? Do they have souls? Did Jesus die for them too? Can they go to heaven? The answer was ‘yes’.

Anyway funny twist: turned out it wasnt dog headed people. Just a tribe of people who all had werewolf syndrome lol

>>519391130
it makes sense and we should thank the parents because we don't want to rapist's genetics to multiplay

>>519398023
>So these women were told that most likely they would lose the child at birth. Do you have any idea how hard it must be to carry a sick child to term only to see them die at birth

Yes I do, because while I lived, my brother didn’t. Different disorder entirely, different story. I still don’t understand it. I understand the pain and grief and loss and trauma, believe me I’m no stranger to seeing that in my life.

What I will never understand is how backwards the logic is. If they claim they don’t want to endure the trauma of seeing the baby die, then why the FUCK do they insist on killing it? Abortion is 100% chance of death. A sick baby at least has a chance of survival. It makes no sense, because it is a decision made from fear.

It’s okay to be afraid. It is not okay to make life ending decisions based on fear. Because that results in catastrophe. Which is already does. Theres more women aborting for reasons weaker than what I was born with, women aborting due to misdiagnosis all the time.

>>519382387 (OP)
Republicans rape kids just like the people you think they are against.

>>519398686
Because for some mothers finding out at 12 weeks your child will most likely die at birth means carrying that baby for 6 more months knowing it will be born just to suffer.

>>519398394
>They're just missing the necessary hardware.
>You could ... is still a hard drive. It’s simply just a smashed hard drive you feel me?

No because they could be missing that part of their brain, this sounds like some sort of natural law type theory and I think there's serious issues with those.

>Meanwhile, the pig doesn’t have a hard drive at all. (If ...towards animals having souls, just ‘little souls’.

Well back then I'd say it they didn't know as much about neurology. I don't think the souls are different

>Funny story: One time the medieval Catholics thought they saw a tribe of ‘dog-headed’ people. humans with the heads of dogs, during their travels east. ... Did Jesus die for them too? Can they go to heaven? The answer was ‘yes’.
Anyway funny twist: turned out it wasnt dog headed people. Just a tribe of people who all had werewolf syndrome lol

I'm not Catholic and think Catholicism is probably not true, there's some good miracles but Roman Catholicism has serious issues

I think there really are a great many powerful arguments against Catholicism. Dustin Crummett https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEKpYouT1wU [Open] has a good video going over some of the problems, but to summarize some of the issues:

1 Catholics are committed to a really implausible view https://wollenblog.substack.com/p/catholic-sexual-morality-a-new-theory about sexual ethics, according to which homosexuality, masturbation, and contraception are immoral on account of being intrinsically disordered. The backdrop natural law view that this relies on is about as implausible as any view in all of philosophy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPen831EkYg [Open]

2 They’re similarly committed to a categorical prohibition on lying. This is insane! Lying is great and you should do it all the time! https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/the-lowdown-on-lying

>>519399143
3 Catholics probably have to believe in an eternal hell, which strikes me as very implausible. https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/08/popes-creeds-councils-and-catechisms.html
https://benthams.substack.com/p/should-believers-in-eternal-hell?utm_source=publication-search
https://benthams.substack.com/p/universalism-a-comprehensive-defense?utm_source=publication-search
https://benthams.substack.com/p/why-i-disagree-with-gavin-ortlund?utm_source=publication-search

4 Catholics are committed to scriptural inerrancy. https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/08/popes-creeds-councils-and-catechisms.html I think the bible is riddled with clear errors concerning morality (e.g. pretty much the entire book of Joshua, stuff about slavery), authorship (it seems to affirm the false doctrine of mosaic authorship), and more. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLe1tMOs8ARn3Uy9dvxyqhBvEldBgkqtN5 When reading the Bible, it seems riddled with nutty holdovers of a barbaric and prescientific age, as well as contradictions and duplicate stories. https://benthams.substack.com/p/50-lifetimes-to-babylon?utm_source=publication-search
https://benthams.substack.com/p/why-im-not-a-christian?utm_source=publication-search

>>519399182
5 Catholics must believe in divine simplicity which I think is very implausible https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhke5_tk6N0 [Open] (it might be that they can believe some more watered down version of it, but various authoritative teachings seemed to have in mind a more aggressive version of the doctrine).

6 The Catholic Church in Exsurge domine https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10exdom.htm which I think there’s a good case to be made for Catholics being infallibly committed to because of a bit at the end which I’ll include in a footnote 2—condemned as an error Martin Luther’s notion “That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.” But plainly this is not an error if Christianity is true! I know there’s some controversy about whether exsurge domine is infallible, so I don’t want to make it the main point in my case, but it’s at least something of a problem for Catholicism.

2
"For, according to these errors, or any one or several of them, it clearly follows that the Church which is guided by the Holy Spirit is in error and has always erred. This is against what Christ at his ascension promised to his disciples (as is read in the holy Gospel of Matthew):

“I will be with you to the consummation of the world”; it is againstthe determinations of the holy Fathers, or the express ordinances andcanons of the councils and the supreme pontiffs. Failure to complywith these canons, according to the testimony of Cyprian, will be thefuel and cause of all heresy and schism. With the advice and consentof these our venerable brothers, with mature deliberation on each andevery one of the above theses, and by the authority of almighty God,the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and our own authority, wecondemn, reprobate, and reject completely each of these theses orerrors as either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious earsor seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth.

>>519399215
By listingthem, we decree and declare that all the faithful of both sexes mustregard them as condemned, reprobated, and rejected . . . We restrainall in the virtue of holy obedience and under the penalty of anautomatic major excommunication."

This seems to meet the requirements for an Ex Cathedra statements which are nicely summarized by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#:~:text=the%20Roman%20Pontiff%20(the%20Pope,is%20outside%20the%20Catholic%20Church.

According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Vatican_Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra papal teaching are as follows:[12]

1 the Roman Pontiff (the Pope alone or with the College of Bishops) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Bishops

2 speaks ex cathedra – that is, when (in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles_in_the_New_Testament he defines a doctrine:

A. concerning faith or morals, and

B. To be held by the whole Church.

The terminology of a definitive decree usually makes clear that this last condition is fulfilled, as through a formula such as "By the authority of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by Our own authority, We declare, pronounce and define the doctrine [...] to be revealed by God and as such to be firmly and immutably held by all the faithful," or through an accompanying anathema https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anathema stating that anyone who deliberately dissents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissent is outside the Catholic Church

Article linked here https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-miracle-of-catholicism#_

>>519399272
7 As my friend Gavin Ortlund argues persuasively, https://www.amazon.com/What-Means-Be-Protestant-Always-Reforming/dp/0310156327 Catholic teachings about Mary and icons don’t go back to the apostles and were made up hundreds of years later. The Catholic Church claims only the authority to interpret and develop scripture and apostolic teachings, not make up entirely new teachings out of whole cloth—so if these teachings are made up later, as the historical record seems to suggest, that’s a big problem for Catholicism. Similar things seem true of the Papacy, but I haven’t looked into that one as much. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG6pnAjHX1k [Open]

8 It also seems like Catholic Church teaching on whether there’s salvation outside the Church and usury has flipped. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_Ecclesiam_nulla_salus

>>519382387 (OP)
Abortion is based. Why do I want the children of single moms and irresponsible roasties around? The type of people that actually should have kids are also the kinds of people that would never abort in the first place. It's literally self-selecting eugenics.

>>519382387 (OP)
Nothing wrong with killing babies of leftists, criminals, degenerates, retards, and niggers. Abortion is the most moral act ever. I'm glad not every Republican is a nigger lover christcuck.

>>519382387 (OP)
Nobody wants more nigger babies being born. Simple as.

>>519382653
Nothing wrong with eating meat why are you so scared of death and an awesome DMT trip that happens when you go through the dying process? You need to try DMT bro. Ain't nothing to be feared about death, it's just a beautiful transitional state we all must go through, the astral planes is a cool place dude. If you refuse to eat animals their bodies just get consumed by other animals or bacteria or whatever. Every body gets consumed by something eventually. Life is always recycling itself.

>>519382910
I care about my race and its health and so I want all the degenerates killed off so the race is healthy.

>>519399094
>Because for some mothers finding out at 12 weeks your child will most likely die at birth means carrying that baby for 6 more months knowing it will be born just to suffer.

Yeah I understand that. But suffering can be overcome, either through its cures, treatments, kr even the will of the human spirit to live through suffering.

Something to consider: How the fuck can we be expected to discover or create treatments or cures for sick babies, if women keep aborting them? Doctors and surgeons and geneticists and biologists cannot hope to provide any scientific progress at all if women just abort, abort, abort.

Not only is the impulse to abort at the first sign of complication a complete irrational choice (and it is, thats what it means to use fear as a reason for choosing), its also completely regressive for medical science and humanity to abort, because nothing can progress out of it when the mothers outright choose nihilism over courage

>>519382387 (OP)
The reason proper legislation doesn't get passed is because the entire legislative branch refuses to write them. They write the legislation in ways that directly oppose the other party, instead of compromising.

They should all be tried for treason.

>>519399825
race doesn't exist, at least if you said ethnicity but even then categories like species or ethnicity are made up that's why it makes most sense to assign rights on the basis of if a being is conscious or not (or was once conscious and has potential for consciousness like coma patient)

>>519399993
Based
Fuck pro life
Abortion abolitionism is the answer

>>519383184
I eat meat and believe in infanticide up until the moment that a child is able to be conversed with normally in which case we need to get their consent to MAID them. Oh and yes I support euthanasia/MAID and look forward to being MAIDed myself one day.

>>519399995
>race doesn't exist
are you a flerfer too?

>>519399944
Okay but you can't fix a downie. At least not without some kind of scifi level gene editing tech that nobody is close to. Do you feel the same way about aborting one of those?

>>519396743
hell speedrun any%

>>519383273
That's nothing to be proud of you know also I'm a Netherlander by blood and the Netherlands I am proud to say has legalized social darwinism too including euthanasia for the mentally ill. In some ways they outdo Canada the nation I live in. I want to return to the Netherlands.

>>519382387 (OP)
You didn't convince anybody that abortion was bad. According to Christian Scholars the soul doesn't enter the body until it's first breath which means an abortion is in the clear.

>>519400139
No
https://philosophicalvegan.com/wiki/index.php/NameTheTrait
>>519400176
what about miracles? People have allergy regrown limbs

abortion is a good thing though.

>A single yes or no question should it be legal to kill a healthy 3 month old child that was not conceived through rape and most people say it should be legal. Most men say it should be legal. Most whites say it should be legal. Most zoomers say it should be legal.

It's not a 3 month old child. we dont count time inside the womb. its not even sentient at that point

>>519400374
You can't miraculous fix someone with down syndrome. don't be retarded

Abortion is MURDER:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DP9yRhCDd4W/

Pray for the preborn.

>>519400332
That's just an appeal to authority think for yourself

>>519400417
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TYQ37a8QCVc

Inb4 bodily autonomy, it's self defense, it's a parasite, it's not conscious so it doesn't matter etc etc

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SembwMzMePQ

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xpFaXu_CGmg

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0OV30m4gUp4

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E2oRrVdAyZw

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V_YCRBl8Y_4

The earliest case for which I believe the precautionary principle should hold was around 43-45 days. Which comes out to be 6.1-6.4 weeks.

The fetal brain begins to develop around 3-5 weeks gestation. So I am okay with abortions prior to that timeframe.

It's hard to say what the levels of sentience equate to at each week. But I wouldn't not assume this is a miniscule amount of sentience. Many EEG brain patterns observed in fetal brains as early as 6.1-6.4 weeks ( high voltage
slow waves with superimposed fast activity) are comparable to mature birds, mature frogs, mature rabbits and the mature marmot. We can even observe sleep spindles in the fetal brain this early.

Does this prove the same degree of sentience? No. Does this give us reason to take the precautionary principle with respect to this degree of sentience? Yes

>>519400374
>philosophicalvegan
Wow great source. My source is the PhD I did in genomics and common sense.

>>519383397
Rousseau is that you?

>>519384091
Would you abort a Palestinian?

>>519384151
That's similar to the banning guns will just cause people to get blackmarket guns or make their own guns argument. Also the banning drugs argument too.

>>519385088
Killing animals is good, infanticide is good, euthansia is good, and mass depopulation of the Earth down to just a small fraction of what it is today is good and necessary. I support everyone's troops.

>>519382387 (OP)
>Are most people evil?
No, they're taught/conditioned that way, void of a conscience and lack empathy.

>>519385316
Freewill is bullshit we're all automatons working out an equation just strangely some of us are conscious of it all but we're always going to pick the chief desire over the lesser conflict desires.

>>519385650
Nothing wrong with buying and eating meat or giving animals DMT trips and freeing their souls from their flesh bodies.

>>519400176
>Okay but you can't fix a downie. At least not without some kind of scifi level gene editing tech that nobody is close to. Do you feel the same way about aborting one of those?

I wouldnt abort a downie, no. I’ve seen them work full time jobs. Theres people with less mental inadequacies in life unwilling to work. And a lot of them live happy enough lives, theyre famously happy and giddy people albeit not that bright.

>>519400751
no

>>519382387 (OP)
I want less niggers and various shit skins, and they have the most abortions. We should pay liberals to have more abortions.

>>519401115
I feel like I have free will.

>>519386696
Why the fuck are Italians killing male babies even though male babies are worthless and 95% of the time going to be condemned to a horrible life of inceldom? They should be killing their male children and keeping the female ones. Being born female is winning at life.

>>519382387 (OP)
Who the fuck is voting for abortion in Missouri? Is it all the niggers in KC and STL?

>>519390243
Somewhat agree.. Abortion should be voluntary for whites and mandatory for blacks. We need to eliminate the criminals, leftists, and retards from the white race. We also need to eliminate all blacks.

>>519401331
this is incel rhetoric, just look at all the very pretty, thin, young white women on onlyfans willing to do anything on camera for small amounts of money (not the ones on the top of the ponzi scheme who actually make a lot of money)
Being an attractive woman does not guarantee a free ride through life.

>>519391154
I agree with your stance 1488%.

>>519392164
Spoken like someone whose never hanged himself lol. I've hanged myself and boy... there's a reason people die from autoerotic asphyxiation a lot lol. It's such a great feeling passing out as the rope tightens around your neck that you secured to a window crank and you have an out of body experience and then later you hear this strange matrix like sound (you know that scene in the matrix when he gets unplugged the first time and there's this NNNNNN sound?) and you end up back in your body which is flopping around like a fish on the ground because somehow you fucked up hanging yourself and lived. 10/10 highly recommend the experience but apparently you can just do DMT to get the same so you don't have to try and kill yourself deliberately

>>519392164
Also bleeding feels great many people cut just to release endorphins.

>>519401181
Someone with down syndrome will never amount to anything and will always be a burden on society and their family no matter what menial job they happen to get. You might not abort one but can you really fault parents deciding not to bring that into the world?

abortion is a eugenic policy. anti-abortion is dysgenics.
>NO I WANT MORE UNWANTED BABIES TO BE BORN TO UNFIT MOTHERS
>and also let's make sure all of them can buy a gun and have no jobs
this is why cuckservatives are actually more dangerous to this country than democrats. If they had their way this country would be ~30% black instead of 13% and yet I'm 100% sure you're posting in per capita or nigger hate threads. These same people worship the system that has failed them to such a degree that they will import infinity heathen jeets because whites aren't producing enough new cattle to take on debt, buy junk and pay taxes to prop it up instead of letting it fail and developing something actually sustainable that serves Americans.

>>519401497
>this is incel rhetoric, just look at all the very pretty, thin, young white women on onlyfans willing to do anything on camera for small amounts of money
Are they filming in public bathrooms because they are homeless? Being able to stay indoors when not making money is not a gender neutral situation.

>>519392821
I had to deal with my parents keeping a retard live for 30 years until it died of aspiration.

>>519401854
>can you really fault parents deciding not to bring that into the world?

Yes

>>519402089
>I'm 100% sure you're posting in per capita or nigger hate threads.

Nope.

>>519382387 (OP)
Ironic cause south dakota has a serious problem with their prarieniggers raping every prarienigger in sight so no their all genetically undesirable prarieniggersMAXXED.

Fuck conservatives in 2025, they are a bunch of jewish cock swallowing miggers who should be removed from reality wholesale. Part and parcel isnt good enough. The entire genetic bloodline must be stopped.

>>519394953
I've never heard an explanation of the "we're in the image of God" stuff that made sense before reading your post. How come what you write is rational and comprehensible while every other Christcuck has only bamboozled me on this very subject?

>>519395221
>Because they have memories, they can do very simple counting, they have empathy and stuff

I doubt they have episodic memory. Little human children don't even aware that they exist. They don't remember anything at all. I'm missing the first 5 years of my life.

>>519396072
When I was 4 years old according to reports I walked, talked, read books, and appeared in every way to be self-aware to others.

...and yet I was not. I have a detailed memory of every single day of my life from a specific day when I was 5 years old and some months old (I was born in January in the winter but the first day of my life I remember it was either spring or summer). From that specific day onwards I remember every day and have been self-aware, aware that I exist, and that I will one day die. All that time before I might have appeared aware but there was just an empty shell animated and doing things but not having experiences of existing.

>>519402368
On what basis

>>519396244
>Would those pigs who've gained the ability to think and also think about thinking now be made in God's image? Are humans who are injured and can no longer think about thinking no longer made in his image?

These are good questions. If I just go by the holographic principle, the all in all, everything is the image of God even a rock.

>>519402854
>episodic memory.

Spectrum not binary.
>Little human children don't even aware that they exist.

Spectrum not binary

>They don't remember anything at all. I'm missing the first 5 years of my life.

Chickens remember faces.

Here's a example of binary

Rock is not conscious
Chicken is conscious

Hope that helps.
>>519403072
Just because you don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't happen, it's still wrong to put a one year old child in the microwave.

>>519396457
They'd be future criminals/leftists/niggers.

>>519396743
Heroic. We don't need your inferior genetics shitting up the world lol nor some bastard child's genetics shitting up the world.

>>519401854
>You might not abort one but can you really fault parents deciding not to bring that into the world?
Yes. Very easily too.

>>519402089
>and also let's make sure all of them can buy a gun
To be fair, people who are against others having the choice to abort are very frequently against people other than them owning weapons. When the two conversations merge, I am frequently told which firearms I may be allowed to have and the list is unsurprisingly short or absent. Anti abortionists want to control, and will take any excuse to force themself into a position of power over others.

Those wanting power over other peoples pregnancies are unsurprisingly anti 2A.

>>519403161
>>519403183
No

>>519403114
There's lots of ways.
The parents are being hypocritical by aborting their child, they should respect others rights just as they want others to respect their rights see links here >>519400520

Aborting a child could also be bad because it isn't maximizing utility, more humans means more human infrastructure which means less wild animal suffering.

>>519382387 (OP)
how are you people able to repeat the same sophistry with the straight face for decades and decades? even speak n' say toys run out of batteries eventually

>>519396987
As someone who lives right by the Perimeter Institute and hates Steven Hawking a lot I really wish he never got a wheelchair and all that. His "contributions" are all debunked bullshit. He should have stuck to blackholes and never came up with the mess and cope that is string theory.

>>519382387 (OP)
Most people are automatons and don't know anything

Morality is a system which has to be carefully cultivated in their cattle-like minds over generations before it takes hold.

>>519403397
>Those wanting power over other peoples pregnancies are unsurprisingly anti 2A.

I reject your framing, the way you and mothers who kill their children play the victim is legitimately disgusting.
>>519400520

>>519403222
not necessarily, some of us believe in free will and most blacks, poor people, etc are not felons.

>>519397523
So you're a dysgenic carrier of a genetic disease and if you reproduce there will be even more people in this world who can only live with expensive and frequent medical intervention. You're pollution to the genepool and people like you are why we need a severe disruption to all utilities and services after a major war so all the diabetics, mutants, addicts, etc. people who can't stay alive without constant intervention just finally die already. I wish we had high amounts of infant mortality like was normal throughout all of history until recently. Too many immunocompromised and disabled people on the planet.

yes, that was the whole point of killing roe v wade. to let the states set their own laws

>>519382387 (OP)
Yes most people are pure evil

>>519403567
>I reject your framing, the way you and mothers who kill their children play the victim is legitimately disgusting.
Oh no. My framing has been rejected.

>>519397550
My views are: consciousness only matters, sentience gives a living thing higher worth, and death isn't the end anyways, and most people cling to their bodies and their lives like it's the most precious thing in the whole world rather than seeing themselves as simply a small and insignificant part of creation.

>>519398686
The decision to have a child is a 100% chance of death for all of your children. If you can't accept that your child will die one day, you should just embrace anti-natalism and not ever have a child. You and every other human on this planet is going to die one day. Every child dies one day.

>>519382387 (OP)
Slaughterhouses are just places where animals are butchered why would you be against unless you are vegan. You need actual, lack of object permanence, 50 IQ retardation to support something so stupid.
More importantly why is that even a vote? What the fuck. Jail time for people changing lightbulbs on private businesses. land of the free la

>>519404014
>what is eternal life

>>519403363
can you at least attempt to explain your reasoning

>>519403422
>they should respect others rights
By this token, you can easily say that aborting in this case is actually the choice that respects other's rights. People don't just have kids in a vacuum. That down syndrome kid takes up a ton of public resources and other people's tax dollars. But said child is fundamentally unable to ever make a return on it. Most people are OK with the concept of public schooling because it's supposed (I know current schooling is fucked in a lot of ways but bear with me her) raise the next generation of kids. Eventually those kids grow up and contribute back. It's supposed to be a cycle. That hidden social contract can't be fulfilled by a downie or someone with some other severe disorder along those lines.

>>519399995
Yet everyone wants access to white people and to live around white people.

Your pilpul means nothing to me. Everybody knows who whites are. All the non-whites need to fuck off and die.

>>519399944
>Something to consider: How the fuck can we be expected to discover or create treatments or cures for sick babies, if women keep aborting them? Doctors and surgeons and geneticists and biologists cannot hope to provide any scientific progress at all if women just abort, abort, abort.

Simple. Make abortion voluntary instead of mandatory. Then you get a few retards to do experiments on because some angst-ridden christcuck woman couldn't mercy kill her dysgenic retard baby.

>>519404146
I am vegan and believe everyone should be, rights and freedoms should be granted to all conscious beings not just humans
>>519404232
that's not a rights violation, not everyone thinks like you and if you asked most people if they'd rather pay a bit more in taxes or personally stab or poison a down syndrome child to death they'd pay a little more in taxes.
Endless wars and tax cuts for the rich and AARP are leading to budget deficits not people with down syndrome if you want to save money on healthcare support some kind of single payer healthcare system instead of a parasitic middleman private health insurance system

>>519399944
>when the mothers outright choose nihilism over courage

My mother refused to abort her retard and the result was a broken family, millions wasted, the retard dying one day anyways, and two viable children being neglected because the retard took all the time and care.

At the very least you retard lovers need to raise it with your own money and not tax payer's money.

>>519404437
Dubai? Japan? Afghanistan?

>>519400374
I'm all for psychic healing but it's really fucking rare and hard and death is not a big deal. Why not just kill the invalids instead of making even more work for the few psychic healers in this world? Let the psychic healers fix maimed soldiers, people who have workplace accidents, burn victims, etc. The defective babies aren't worth fixing just like you might want to save a 10 year old apple tree but there's no point in saving a defective newly sprouted apple tree.

>>519400490
Do you oppose the death sentence for criminals too? What about soldiers do you oppose them? How about self-defense that leads to the death of the attacker do you oppose that? Oh and animals dying do you oppose that?

>>519400520
>The fetal brain begins to develop around 3-5 weeks gestation. So I am okay with abortions prior to that timeframe.

Who cares that it has a brain? We eat pigs that have brains more developed than 3 year old human children.

>>519382387 (OP)
No one kills more shitskins than the abortion doctor.
Brown babies are now being adopted by gay couples.
It's a machine that prints democrats.

>>519404554
Usage of other's people money with their consent certainly counts as a rights violation. An appeal to "most people" is meaningless. The judgement here is about whether or not to bring someone into the world that will 100% be a burden on everyone forever. I don't consider it a moral fault to not do that. We can play silly hypotheticals but I would suspect a lot of people would abort a child if they magically knew it would become some horrible serial killer growing up.

>Endless wars and tax cuts for the rich and AARP are leading to budget deficits
irrelevant to the topic at hand but obviously I can be against those things too. It's not hard.

>>519401317
You're just emotionally conditioned to supporting the free will concept because of positive associations you create with the idea of freedom.

You have a will, you make choices, you have (some degree of) agency, but it's all formulaic and predictable.

Also even if you did purely random actions, that would be equivalent to not choosing. Agency and choice requires determinism. An indeterminate truly random action is not an actual choice it's just a spontaneous happening.

I should add also you still have responsibility too even though you're not free. Arguing that one does not have freewill as a way to not be punished for crimes is retarded. Non-functioning people who are a threat to society necessarily have to be partitioned from the rest of society. I do however also see all crime and immorality as simply dysfunctional programming and dysfunctional hardware so I see people as either being capable of being rehabilitated or not and instead of treating people in jail as criminals we should treat them as mentally ill / defective. Nordic prisons and also the ones in South America are good examples of how prisons should work. They should not be about punishment but rehabilitation and making them pay society back. You don't pay society back by sitting in a jail suffering, you pay it back by working and doing something productive for the benefit of society aka forced labor aka slavery. We need slavery.

>>519401203
So you'd just deport them to European nation so they can destroy Europeans. You probably one of those jews feeding and breeding them and playing at being one of the Hamas leaders so you can radicalize them with the ultimate goal of sending them to white countries to kill white people.

>>519401181
They can't work a job without someone being the tard-wrangler there constantly using his time watching the downie do something simple like bagging. At that point they are just for show and not because they add in serious way to productivity of a company. I think people should be aborted for minor flaws and being ugly and just anything at all that could lead to them being incel. Maybe also abort them for just being male. We need females to outnumber males by a lot. I'm sure in a society where there's 10 women for every 1 man, there will still be more male incels than female incels.

>>519401497
>Being an attractive woman does not guarantee a free ride through life.

It absolutely 100% does. Hell even the ugly and homeless meth addicted women here got armies of simps and a free ride through life. There's far too many men here.

>>519401497
I ended up homeless in 2017 and the sympathy, the programs, the options women have are insane. I know one homeless methhead Icelandic x Scottish bitch who gets into a new apartment or home every week and then always has a mental breakdown and robs the guy. She's always stealing people's laptops, drugs, cigarettes, cell phones, Pokemon cards, etc. She's a huge pariah banned from a couple hundren different places but there's so many new victims for her to take advantage of in our city and too many naive men who fall for it.

Meanwhile men get locked out of shelters during the winter and freeze to death here because there wasn't enough rooms.

It's not just the government but just society in general is all there lining up to help every single woman. The privilege women have here in Ontario is absolutely insane.

I wouldn't kill my own son if I had one that was healthy but I'd encourage everyone else to kill their own sons so my son could have a chance in this world.

>>519382387 (OP)
Well, I voted against it. My wife got 2 abortions and it still haunts me. Like... why did that seem acceptable? We could have easily raised 2 more kids, for fucksake we already have 3. I think it was the lifetime of zog-programming that made me think it was her choice to shirk the consequences of her choices, but it wasn't until I raised 3 children that I truly realized... holy shit... we fucking murdered 2 children. What the fuck. If there is a hell we'll surely be at the doorstep for that and I would accept eternal damnation at this point. The guilt... it haunts me. Fucking nigger behavior, and we aren't even niggers, we're exactly the kind of people who should be breeding.

>>519402089
Democrats are trying to accomplish the destruction of America through mass importing.

That said Repulicans seem to have the pajeet fever that every other leader the world over has too. Every country wants to destroy itself with infinity pajeets.

>>519403183
>Spectrum not binary.

You either remember something or you don't. It's a total binary for me. Doesn't matter if I'm aware of just "black" and a vague sense of "a long time passing" that's some kind of awareness. I had total non-awareness before, then I had awareness. A binary not a spectrum.

>>519403183
>Chickens remember faces.

Like I said. When I was 5 years old I was talking to people, reading books, and in every way an extremely intelligent and apparently self-aware person. Yet in reality I did not exist at all, there was no awareness whatsoever.

>Rock is not conscious
>Chicken is conscious

Five year old me despite how it behaved and acted was just as conscious as a rock; aka not at all. So why should I assume that a chicken isn't the same?

You ever heard of sleep walkers or black out drunks? How they do things in the world while having zero awareness of it, zero recollection, etc.?

That would be my consciousness state as 5 years old until the day I became aware. I was an NPC, just as conscious as a robot or a rock is.

>>519405944
Sorry anon. That sounds really rough. At least you have your three children

>>519403183
>Just because you don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't happen, it's still wrong to put a one year old child in the microwave.

Yeah no shit. However if I can't experience anything then I don't exist in there. There's nothing wrong with microwaving a robot other than it may create a mess and represent a loss of invested time and money. If you killed me while I was 6 years old and aware that I actually existed that would be one thing but killing me at 4 years old when I didn't even know I existed would just mean I'd never even experience any of it. I never experienced the first 5 years of my life. I don't have a single memory, a single experience, a single moment of awareness for the first five years of my life. As far as I'm concerned, my body existed and was auto-piloted by whatever then, but I didn't exist as an incarnate being.

Me before 5 years old I didn't even experience black, or static, I didn't experience nothing. I just had no experience, no awareness, I didn't really exist just my body and I guess a mind did but I didn't. Anything that was going on there was entirely subconscious. The subconscious was in total control there was no conscious awareness.

>>519382546
this guy knows. normies are mostly sociopaths and sociopaths are just psychopaths in waiting until it is their turn to be the cruel tyrant.

>>519406278
>>519406488
>I have the awareness of a rock
Next time just say you're retarded, it's a lot easier

>>519404955
That's also immoral
>Usage of other's people money with their consent certainly counts as a rights violation. An appeal to "most people" is meaningless. The judgement here is about whether or not to bring someone into the world that will 100% be a burden on everyone forever. I don't consider it a moral fault to not do that.

Sorry but anarcho capitalismstan will never work in the real world. If you don't like taxes then move to China where they practice eugenics and go cook with gutter oil.
>We can play silly hypotheticals but I would suspect a lot of people would abort a child if they magically knew it would become some horrible serial killer growing up.

Well you can't, free will exists
>Also even if you did purely random actions, that would be equivalent to not choosing. Agency and choice requires determinism. An indeterminate truly random action is not an actual choice it's just a spontaneous happening.

Haha no, I completely disagree with the "your choices are determined or random therefore no free will" argument there's something else called brute facts here educate yourself
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2dLyguPfh-c
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nh1Z3UTobrY

>>519403183
Btw AI could be said to "remember faces". It doesn't really but it produces the behavior of it. The four year old me was just the same ontological status as an AI. There was nothing there. Just appeared like it.

>>519403422
>Aborting a child could also be bad because it isn't maximizing utility, more humans means more human infrastructure which means less wild animal suffering.

Total bullshit argument on multiple levels. First of all economic activities of humans often cause suffering, except for farms which prevent a lot of suffering as they don't want disease and predation of their livestock they want to keep them in good condition until the time comes for them to be butchered. Meanwhile mining, chemical manufacturing, roads, etc. are causing a ton of animal suffering and defects.

Other reason this argument is bullshit is the more humans means more human infrastructure. Not true at all. When the demographics collapses into being just retards, methheads, pajeets, etc. you're going to see the infrastructure fail. For the infrastructure to expand and be maintained you need non-defective white people with STEM degrees.

>>519405944
truth

>>519403567
>not necessarily, some of us believe in free will and most blacks, poor people, etc are not felons.

Most blacks are felons though and especially ones who come from single mother households / that weren't wanted as babies but were had anyways. If you prevent some black woman from aborting her niglet she'll just abuse and neglect the shit out of it when it's born and it'll grow up to be a crackhead killer like it always does. Also abortion has already had a measurable effect on decreasing crime.

>>519404194
Something we all have by default and the reason why we shouldn't be afraid of death and make a big deal about freeing souls from disabled bodies.

>>519406869
The reduction in wild animal suffering is from more human infrastructure and nature existing

No those people still need to eat which means more farms, those goods need to be transported which requires roads, they need to live somewhere which requires housing etc etc
>Most blacks are felons though

False.

>Also abortion has already had a measurable effect on decreasing crime.

This is debatable, other variables were at play in the late 1900's

>>519407100
No it's still bad because by murdering others you're missing out on intrinsic goods like relationships

>>519405944
Sorry anon. That's fuckin horrible.

>>519404554
>I am vegan and believe everyone should be, rights and freedoms should be granted to all conscious beings not just humans

At least you're consistent in this regard. Most of the other anti-abortion people eat pigs.

>>519404554
>that's not a rights violation, not everyone thinks like you and if you asked most people if they'd rather pay a bit more in taxes or personally stab or poison a down syndrome child to death they'd pay a little more in taxes.

I'd personally just execute the downie.

>Endless wars and tax cuts for the rich and AARP are leading to budget deficits not people with down syndrome if you want to save money on healthcare support some kind of single payer healthcare system instead of a parasitic middleman private health insurance system

Money is fake. Time and resources are real. 99% of people today are a complete waste of time and resources and should be culled. All of the retards should be the first to go but the culling really needs to be extreme. The world will be objectively a better place if we can achieve the Georgia Guidestone objectives as a minimum and get the worldwide population down to 500 million. It wouldn't mind getting it down to about 10 million though.

>>519382387 (OP)
>exceptions for rape health of mother etc most say it should be legal.
so roughly 3% of cases should be looked at on an individual basis. sure
I'm a simple man so I'll keep my response simple. Human life should be preserved wherever possible.

>>519404694
Nobody wants to live in Dubai.

Afghanistan is cool but only Lord Miles wants to live there I don't.

Japan a lot of people do want to live there but I don't.

Japs are clearly capable of producing an advanced society and are maybe even superior to whites in some respects but they are ugly. Whites are way more beautiful than Japs. Japs also are small and weak compared to whites.

>>519407228
Well I think most people are hypocritical because they support both abortion and animal agriculture and also believe in liberal ideas like individual rights for themselves and wish to amass large amounts of wealth and believe their property rights are sacred.
>Money is fake. Time and resources are real.

Sure but money is supposed to represent those.

I think human depopulation would be extremely bad, there'd be far more wild animal suffering.

The average human, each year, reduces insect populations by about 14 million. In total, given how short insects lives are, this means that the average human could prevent hundreds of millions or billions of insects from coming into existence. Civilization may have reduced insect populations by about 78%, though that’s probably an overestimate. At the very least, it’s beyond doubt that our actions impact utterly mindboggling numbers of insects. https://reducing-suffering.org/humanitys-net-impact-on-wild-animal-suffering/
https://reducing-suffering.org/humanitys-net-impact-on-wild-animal-suffering/

>>519405944
If they were sickly it's for the better if they were healthy white children and she aborted them because they'd be an inconvenience then I honestly suggest you take up learning some black magick from me and create some thoughtforms to torment her in her dreams with. She needs to suffer and I don't believe other psychics who see what you're doing will get upset and harass you over it, it'll be justified. She should wake up every night feeling deeply disturbed if she killed healthy white children that were inconvenient for her.

>>519407433
>Nobody wants to live in Dubai.

There golden visa sales say otherwise
>Japs are clearly capable of producing an advanced society and are maybe even superior to whites in some respects but they are ugly.

That's subjective they may look strange to you but they don't look strange to each other.
>Whites are way more beautiful than Japs. Japs also are small and weak compared to whites.

Humans are small and weak compared to gorillas

>>519407712
You are going to go to hell if you don't change your ways

>>519405944
https://www.yogebooks.com/english/atkinson/1912mindpower.pdf

The story is around page 257 and it's under a section called self-protection. It teaches you how to do black magick in order to defend from it and gives a good example. Learn from the blacksmith. You can use this to torment your wife into having a sense of guilt. Leave her alone though if it was just mercy killing of retarded kids. From the sounds of it she denied the chance for two souls to incarnate in good bodies to good parents.

>>519406612
So you agree I should have been aborted? Good.

>>519382387 (OP)
Voting is fake and gay retard

>>519406620
Does China really practice eugenics though? If so that would be extremely based but I don't think they do. They seem like a dysgenic society. Gutter oil for example can't be good for genetic health, probably higher chances of defective mutants if you're eating food made with gutter oil.

>Well you can't, free will exists

Explain why some people can see the future then and why the only people who can change their destiny are the ones that can foresee it beforehand? Unless you become a seer yourself like me, you won't be able to alter what plays out. Lots of people see beforehand when some robbers will attack or whatever, then they avoid it. It's still deterministic, it's still in no way means "free will" exists. If there is free will at all, it's not something a personal being has, it's only evident in first-causes aka in god.

>Haha no, I completely disagree with the "your choices are determined or random therefore no free will" argument there's something else called brute facts here educate yourself

Hmmm... read The Arcane Teachings Part IV "Fate or Freedom?" https://www.yogebooks.com/english/atkinson/1909arcaneteaching.pdf

This thing about brute facts though I'm listening to it while writing this post and it's interesting maybe I'll have to reconsider my position on freewill.

evil, no
npcs, yes

if you can be made to believe a circumcised jewish rabbi is your god, you can be made to believe just about anything. its merely a question of what conditions/variables are necessary to get them from A to B.

>>519408377
I'm agnostic on if accurate fortune tellers exist but
If they do free will can still exist

3 Divine foreknowledge
God knows all things. This means, one assumes, that he knows what we will do in advance. If you are planning on leaving an angry comment, God knows that in advance. But if God knows before you do anything that you are going to do it, this seems to pose some challenge for the notion that you are free to do it or not.

For you to be free to refrain from performing an action, it must be that you can refrain from performing that action. But suppose that God knows that I will take some action A. Well, because God knows I’ll do A, even before I do it, I must do A. It isn’t as if I might do anything else—for I cannot do something that will make God’s belief false. Thus, it would seem, I am not free to refrain from doing A.

This is, like the other points raised, a rather interesting challenge, but not specifically a problem for the theist. The same problems arise for any view that affirms free will.

Suppose I will perform some action A. Presumably in the year 3000 BCE, it was true that I would later A. But then, by precisely the same logic, I cannot do anything but A. Me not doing A is not consistent with the settled fact, that was true millions of years in the past, that I would do A. Thus, I am not free. The argument, therefore, is not specific to theism. It applies to any view on which there are settled facts about what people will do in the future. Merely locating those facts in some being’s mind does nothing to change the core dilemma.

>>519407131
>False.

Prove it, Show me that most blacks aren't a bunch of criminal niggers. There's lots of blacks that constantly get away with crime they're overwhelmingly all criminals. I'd say less than 1% of them are not criminals but you need to demonstrate to me that at least 51% of them are not criminals for me to accept that the majority are not criminals.

>This is debatable, other variables were at play in the late 1900's

Demographics are destiny it's the genetic quality of a people that determines the success of a nation and how well the society functions. Listen to Will Durant history lectures. Rome fell not because of immorality or economics or whatever but ultimately because the Roman people became dysgenic and all that other stuff (immorality, poor economics, mercenaries, etc.) were the result of the founding stock becoming so garbage that eventually it was easy for foreigners to topple Rome. Every nation is only as good as the genetic quality of the people inhabiting it.

>>519408653
>>519408377
There are a few ways out of the dilemma. The first is to suppose that we are not free in a libertarian sense. Instead, God determines what we do. This view is called theological determinism. I think it is wrong, but it’s certainly a coherent option. However, I will not place too much stress on this option—if this puzzle makes one into a Calvinist, then it has done its job in rendering theism vastly less plausible than it would have otherwise been.

The second view is called open theism. Open theism says that facts about the future aren’t fixed. There isn’t a fact of the matter concerning what I will do tomorrow. What I do tomorrow isn’t settled yet—when tomorrow rolls around, I will decide. On this view, God cannot know the future because what I will do in the future isn’t yet settled. There aren’t facts about it. God knows all facts, but he cannot know non-facts.

A third view: God is outside of time. Thus, he doesn’t know what we will do before we do it, because God does not stand in any temporal relation to us. He is neither before nor after but instead timeless.

A fourth view—which happens to be mine—God knowing what we’ll do in advance doesn’t preclude us from being free to refrain from doing that thing. This view is a bit hard to get your head around but the core idea is this: though God knows that I will A, it isn’t as if I have to do A. I could do something else. It’s just that if I were to do something else then God would know I’d do that thing. Put another way: because my action explains God’s knowledge, rather than the other way around, I am free to do as I wish, but whatever I choose to do will be known by God.

>>519408692
This is also the solution to the earlier paradox. It isn’t as if I’m stuck doing A because in 3000 BCE it was true that I would later do A. One who thought that would have an inverted mental model of the causal order. Rather, it was true then that I would do A later because later I would freely choose to do A. Something that depends on your action cannot make that action unfree.

(See Linda Zagzebski’s excellent paper on this solution).

Thus, this argument is, like the others, quite an interesting puzzle. But it is not a puzzle unique to the theist. It is a general puzzle, and theists are no more vulnerable than atheists who believe in free will—which, in my view, we all should. In light of the many different solutions to the puzzle, it is hard to consider this much evidence at all against theism, and it is very unlikely to be knockdown.

>>519407180
That's only true if you murder female babies. Murdering male babies helps increase the likelihood of having a relationship. Since I was born male in a population that has a huge excess of males I'm destined to die alone. However if women outnumbered men, they'd all have a relationship anyways. It's easy for 10 women to be with one guy. Women however rarely allow any men around them.

>>519408658
I should have said convicted felon technically but I can't prove a negative, just as it'd be unreasonable for me to ask you to prove most white people have never committed a felony.
Most people are criminals, there's lots of misdemeanors and stuff.

>>519408760
Not all relationships are romantic. You aren't destined to die alone, for example if you were not evil and were vegan women would outnumber you as most vegans are women and most vegan women want a partner who is also vegan.

>>519407613
>I think human depopulation would be extremely bad, there'd be far more wild animal suffering.

Thing is if me as a 4 year old was not capable of having experiences (joy, suffering, any kind of experience at all) why should I assume any animal is capable of having any experience at all either? To me they are completely devoid of experience. One that does not experience something, can't suffer. Suffering is an experience.

So animal suffering is completely invalid.

>In total, given how short insects lives are, this means that the average human could prevent hundreds of millions or billions of insects from coming into existence. Civilization may have reduced insect populations by about 78%, though that’s probably an overestimate. At the very least, it’s beyond doubt that our actions impact utterly mindboggling numbers of insects.

I don't believe insects suffer.

Also, are you for preventing births? It sounds like you are. So isn't contraception moral then? I'm not saying abortion but like preventing a pregnancy starting in the first place such as through celibacy. Wouldn't being celibate be ideal?

A male, liberal and white and boomer-lobotomic Vooting for "pro choice" is the most beta and virgine possible thing.
The USA nation's existential condition is in white righteousness. And he should be prepared to smile down at her hornily and most lulzily lovingly should the white with light true love ever shine- ready and well outfitted to not leave and provide The Child with the most heterosexual, highest quality and best life- now and in the hour of her "rape"-
Something Not For Subdemonics And The Rotten Jews Beneath- Who Are All Incinerated Hazardous Waste!
>>519382387 (OP)

>>519407791
If I went to Hell I'd ruin it by doing one good deed or having one beautiful thought.

Same thing for Heaven but in reverse. One bad deed or one ugly thought.

From this I conclude the only way to Hell is total depravity and the only way to Heaven is good perfection.

Personally, I hope I get to Heaven, it's going to be a long journey though through many lives. I doubt I can become totally depraved enough to make hell my abode.

>>519407740
>There golden visa sales say otherwise

Visiting and living there are two different things. Dubai doesn't even have plumbing they have trucks moving the shit out. You could also randomly get disappeared or enslaved very easily and it happens all the time there. So many pajeets have been lured there with job promises and then enslaved and mistreated so bad their relatives back in India are forced to pay for them to not starve to death. Absolutely brutal fake dystopian society. Anyone who goes to Dubai either comes from a hell like India or is severely naive. White women get enslaved for sex there too. Probably your best chances of not being enslaved and mistreated in Dubai is to be a white person with a needed skill in running some company there and yet you'd still have to be careful you didn't break some sandnigger law.

>That's subjective they may look strange to you but they don't look strange to each other.

I wish that was true. Beauty is objective and non-white babies identify white babies as the most attractive. Everyone is hardwired to recognize beauty and instinctively knows whites are the most beautiful.

>Humans are small and weak compared to gorillas

True.

>>519409101
Well it's possible you were able to experience suffering and well-being as a child but just don't remember it.

>>519409101
No procreation is fine but breeding animals into existence who will just suffer and die seems bad.

>>519409222
>On this view, we freely choose to reject God.

First, I argued that God wouldn’t need to override our free will. We’d just have to be equipped with the suitable rational faculties to choose the good over the bad. The fact that I’m not constituted to plunge a steak knife into my eye isn’t a restriction on my free will—it’s a consequence of rationality.

Gavin suggested firstly that one could rationally act immorally. I don’t think this is true, but this gets us into more complicated and contentious issues. The more important problem with this response is that the argument doesn’t require that rationality always makes one act morally. It merely requires that if one is rational they wouldn’t do something that’s bad for them AND immoral, like rejecting God. This is especially true if, like I think Gavin does, one accepts that all actions one takes are in the guise of the good.

This seems to be the best conception of rationality. One is rational if they respond to reasons. Yet one has a reason to do what’s good for themselves and others. If a person smokes, for instance, despite knowing it’s bad for both them and the world, it seems intuitively that they’re being irrational. Yet God could equip us with full rationality so that we’d never reject him, for that’s bad both for ourselves and others.

Next, Gavin seemed to suggest that people might be equipped with a fully rational nature but would still act irrationally. It’s true that people might have a rational nature and act irrationally. But one who is fully rational would never act irrationally by definition. Could God not equip us with such a nature? There doesn’t seem to be any contradiction therein.

>>519409450
Sure but animals are murdered raped and enslaved all the time in white countries

No, objective means stance independent I don't see anything irrational about someone finding a Asian person more attractive than a European irrational anymore then liking black licorice instead of chocolate. I do see something irrational about torturing babies and causing them massive suffering for trivial fun from torturing.

>>519408653
>I'm agnostic on if accurate fortune tellers exist but
>If they do free will can still exist

I'm not talking about fortune telling I'm talking about precognition and there's endless accounts of people foreseeing circumstances before they happen and then responding to said circumstances either exactly as they foresaw or making a deviation to prevent a calamity. The fact is that when one sees ones future one can use that knowledge to do things like lock a door or whatever and have a different outcome that isn't you getting murdered/robbed/etc.

>But if God knows before you do anything that you are going to do it, this seems to pose some challenge for the notion that you are free to do it or not.

Nah that's a false dichotomy knowing what you'll do beforehand doesn't mean you aren't free. You aren't free because your actions are the results of previous causes. For an action to be free it needs to be motivated by a first cause.

>>519408653
I reject predetermination btw. Our actions are not determined by the past, they are determined always in the present. Predetermination suggests you can't deviate from a predetermined course by introduction of new causes. Predetermination, fate, kismet, etc. are false doctrines.

>>519409863
But that doesn't disprove free will
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y4lEYdtxmV4

>Walk into room
>In room is tv
>Tv shows what you will do in 5 seconds from now
>Before walking into room you decide you will not do what's on tv to create grandfather paradox
>Walk into room and see self having seizure on tv
>Have seizure

>Walk into room
>In room is tv
>Tv shows what you will do in 5 seconds from now
>Before walking into room you don't care what you do or don't do you aren't contrarian
>Walk into room and see self waving hi
>Wave hi

>>519408692
>God knows all facts, but he cannot know non-facts.

I agree with this conception of omniscience. God only knows what it is, not what could be. God does not speculate, predict, project, etc. only finite beings with incomplete information can do that. God simply knows what it is, in the eternal here and now. That does include though the akashic records aka everything that happened in the past. Just the future doesn't exist, we don't live in Einstein's block universe.

This book on seership explains how it all works for real: https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.470181/page/1/mode/2up

>>519410009
A fourth view—which happens to be mine—God knowing what we’ll do in advance doesn’t preclude us from being free to refrain from doing that thing. This view is a bit hard to get your head around but the core idea is this: though God knows that I will A, it isn’t as if I have to do A. I could do something else. It’s just that if I were to do something else then God would know I’d do that thing. Put another way: because my action explains God’s knowledge, rather than the other way around, I am free to do as I wish, but whatever I choose to do will be known by God.

This is also the solution to the earlier paradox. It isn’t as if I’m stuck doing A because in 3000 BCE it was true that I would later do A. One who thought that would have an inverted mental model of the causal order. Rather, it was true then that I would do A later because later I would freely choose to do A. Something that depends on your action cannot make that action unfree.

(See Linda Zagzebski’s excellent paper on this solution).

Thus, this argument is, like the others, quite an interesting puzzle. But it is not a puzzle unique to the theist. It is a general puzzle, and theists are no more vulnerable than atheists who believe in free will—which, in my view, we all should.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20006192.pdf

https://benthams.substack.com/p/theres-free-will?utm_source=post-banner&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=posts-open-in-app&triedRedirect=true

>>519409009
Most white people are criminals too.

Just a lot more whites have good impulse control and foresight.

I think the majority of whites are criminals. Niggers on the other hand though are worse criminals.

>>519409009
>Not all relationships are romantic.

Yeah like the relationship between me and the state. I want a romantic relationship.

>You aren't destined to die alone, for example if you were not evil and were vegan women would outnumber you as most vegans are women and most vegan women want a partner who is also vegan.

My sister is a vegan and got herself a partner who is a vegan.

I'm allergic to the proteins of legumes. All of them. I can't eat peas, beans, alfalfa, clover, s_0_y, etc. without a severe allergic reaction. Veganism I tried to do in the past to save money but couldn't I got way too sick. So I have to spend a lot of money on meat to keep myself going in optimal health unfortunately. I don't see a moral issue with eating meat but it's an economic issue for me as it's so expensive.

>>519409218
Did you use some kind of word salad generator to make this post for you or are you severely schizophrenic? I'm schizotypal so the non-retarded version of schizophrenic I wish I knew how to help full blown schizos who make word salad that doesn't make sense.

>>519410750
Wait to be cut up with guns.

>>519409608
>Well it's possible you were able to experience suffering and well-being as a child but just don't remember it.

So in other words I have total amnesia. Well how would you prove that people get amnesia? I think current science points in the direction of young human children just not having the ability to form experiences or have episodic memory. I don't think I developed amnesia and forgot a huge portion of my life, I believe I simply didn't form memories/experiences until a certain time in my life.

>>519409608
>No procreation is fine but breeding animals into existence who will just suffer and die seems bad.
In modern society, farm animals don't suffer. Well they aren't supposed to anyway. You feed them and then eventually kill them painlessly. I can understand morally objecting to that fact, but their existence is not supposed to be one full of suffering.

>>519409608
>No procreation is fine but breeding animals into existence who will just suffer and die seems bad.

So what about breeding humans into existence who will just suffer and die?

>>519408653
[only sometimes] free will

>>519410622
>>519410622
>Yeah like the relationship between me and the state. I want a romantic relationship.

That's understandable but I think someone can have a good life full of meaningful relationships while being celibate like a priest or monk who makes lots of friends, saves people's lives, adopts and raises orphaned children etc etc

>I'm allergic to the proteins of legumes. All of them. I can't eat peas, beans, alfalfa, clover, s_0_y, etc. without a severe allergic reaction. Veganism I tried to do in the past to save money but couldn't I got way too sick. So I have to spend a lot of money on meat to keep myself going in optimal health unfortunately. I don't see a moral issue with eating meat but it's an economic issue for me as it's so expensive.

Sure I get that, I personally don't spend any money on food and limit myself to about 300$ a month on food stamps and must get enough calories to maintain my weight as I'm already thin.
It might require a bit of planning in your case but it can still be done and can be cheap, make sure to supplement a few things like B12 a vitamin D and iodine those are the main ones that are difficult to get from plants.
Rice protein powder is cheap, hemp seeds aren't too expensive and are a great source of protein and fat(grinding or blending helps with absorption), carrots , canned fruit, kale, oats, stuff like that free websites like cronometer are helpful for tracking micros and macros and planning out your diet
>>519410892
What about elderly people with dementia?
For animals and toddlers it'd be neurological structures and behavior.

>>519409608
Can a perfect being fall from grace? Just asking because a lot of Christian theologians seem to think that perfect angelic beings somehow went against God. It doesn't make sense that they ever would or could if they were perfect.

>>519382387 (OP)
>Are most people evil?
Yes, It may be around 50/50% good/evil or it may be evil is wining with more %. I am convinced we are at a constant war with both sides, except one side (guess who) is at a huge disadvantage from having been subverted by (guess who).

>>519410957
Well in the USA UK Australia etc most animal products come from factory farms where suffering is common, selective breeding growing too big too fast leading to injury and pain, castration without anesthetic, battery cages, mother cow and calf separation, debeaking etc
>>519411103
I'm not a pure hedonist, I think sometimes people should continue living instead of immediately an heroing even if the rest of their lives will involve more suffering then pleasure for reasons like relationships (a miserable father bearing his cross and providing for his kids or a soldier behind enemy lines fighting for his family country and ideology)

But I don't think pigs in factory farms have these.

>>519409834
>Sure but animals are murdered raped and enslaved all the time in white countries

Asians are far more notorious for that. Nigs also don't treat animals well. It seems just mainly whites really care about the welfare of animals. Apparently also Ancient Egyptians cared enormously about animal welfare.

>No, objective means stance independent I don't see anything irrational about someone finding a Asian person more attractive than a European irrational anymore then liking black licorice instead of chocolate.

I wish that Asians were primarily attracted to Asians but all of them want superior white genetics. The whole world wishes it was white. Every non-white child exposed to the existence of whites starts to develop a complex and resent themselves. If only we could make non-whites love themselves and prefer their own kind.

As for whites that go after other races it's always some kind of coping. White man gets rejected over and over by white women to the point he can't fathom the possibility of ever being with a white woman so he copes and makes up a fantasy about Asian women being superior and settles down with one instead of doing the right thing and embracing celibacy like me. I'm going to die alone but at least I won't be polluting the world with mongrel inferior offspring.

>>519410146
>those comments about no black holes

lol if there's no black holes then that's it for the cripple lord of physics, I have no respect for him at all, string theory is bullshit and if blackholes are bullshit it's so over for Hawking. Nothing but bs from the crippled tard.

>>519411237
I'm agnostic the author of that is a theist and agnostic on Christianity but was doing a critique of Christianity.
I think it's possible but maybe unlikely, still far more likely then an atheist universe finely tuned for life
Maybe the world is so bad because the archons God created messed up their jobs

https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-archon-abandonment-theodicy

Or take the archon abandonment theodicy—a favorite of this blog. This theodicy suggests that the reason that the world is filled with grotesque horrors is that there are powerful angels who could have prevented the world’s evils but didn’t. God allows such a state of affairs because setting up a world where archons can make a great difference to our well-being allows us to closely connect with the archons. In the worlds where the archons don’t screw up, it creates connections that last forever and thus are worth all of the world’s evil.

This theodicy very clearly fails.

Put aside the fact that the theodicy posits powerful wizard demons with no evidence. Normally the fact that your theory has to posit magical beings to explain the data is seen as a cost of your theory. Few would have been impressed by Newtonians suggesting that demons explain the perihelion of mercury.

But putting that aside, why in the world would God make the demons be the only thing sparing us from great suffering? The theodicy can perhaps explain why there are archons who can make a great positive difference to our well-being. But why make it so that if the archons abandon us, most creatures on Earth will live short lives of intense suffering. God could make such creatures vast difference makers without making us miserable wretches in their absence.

>>519382387 (OP)
If it has an umbilical cord attached to its belly, it's a fetus, NOT A CHILD.
Animals killed for consumption, also ARE NOT CHILDREN.
what else are you confused at? Bring the questions. Remaining ignorant by choice, is a bad life strategy.

>>519410146
https://montalk.net/metaphys/70/freewill-

The Matrix Reloaded explores freewill, fate, and causality, three themes that may formulate the very basis of existence.

Causality is a phenomenon whereby one cause is the effect of another. This axiom or assumption forms the foundation of orthodox physics; if all causes are known, then theoretically all effects can be known and predicted with absolute certainty. Causality cannot begin or end itself because, by definition, in a purely linear system1 every cause is the effect of another preceding it, a “causal chain” that extends forever into the past.

In truth, a causal chain is finite; it begins and ends with choice. Freewill is the only true cause; all else is purely effect. Thus, freewill is both beginning and end; causality merely mitigates and facilitates freewill by creating consequence from choice. From a physics standpoint, choice arises when indeterminate quantum states are made definite by the wave-collapsing ability of consciousness.2 Nonlinear systems are sensitive enough to translate quantum causes into classical effects, thereby allowing consciousness to initiate linear causal chains extending into the macroscopic world.3

Without multiple choices, there is just causality. When you perceive only one choice or one effect, you become a passive link in a causal chain initiated by someone else. The more knowledge and understanding you have, the more genuine choices you see, and the greater your role becomes as cause rather than effect. It is lack of knowledge that places one under the influence of causality. You cannot change what you cannot see, because without seeing you cannot choose.

>>519382387 (OP)
The Luke Bryan song “most people are good” is wrong. It is the opposite. Must people act evil and disorganized under great stress. The mark of a good person is to persist under trials without losing your composure.

>>519411642
It’s particularly surprising that the world where the archons don’t intervene appears blind and indifferent. This is a rather striking coincidence. While it makes sense God might allow the archons to intervene, why the hell would the world where they don’t look, in its ordinary functioning, exactly like an atheistic universe? Why would there not be any agents that appear to be working?

It would be especially surprising that none of the archons would help us out. But if some of the archons are helping, why don’t we observe them?

Why doesn’t God simply give the archons a strong desire to help us? He wouldn’t force them—he’d just make them psychologically disposed to help us. He can do that. He is God. He could make the archons more motivated to help us than humans are motivated to have sex and eat food.

In addition, God could simply give the archons the belief that our lives will go badly if they don’t help us but not actually make their lives go badly if they don’t help us. It seems that what matters in helping others is how much sacrifice you give for how much expected benefit. Pulling a child out of a burning building produces no less objective-list benefit if, unbeknownst to the person who pulls the child out, the child would have been saved later by someone else. Thus, God doesn’t actually have to make the world horrendous if the archons don’t intervene—he could just make them think it’s that way.

>>519411679
No, she willfully chose to force the child into a state of dependence on her and then pulled the plug like if I poisoned someone else purposely then chose to not give them some of my stem cells which would save their life from the poison I gave them

>>519410146
Fate is the causal consequence of choices made outside your realm of linear time. Because you do not see your fate, you cannot – or more accurately, you do not — change it. So you become a passive link in the chain of causality initiated by a hyperdimensional source. In the case of fate, that source is your Higher Self, a greater aspect of your being with whom you merge after physical death to review your recent incarnation and plan another. In this planning phase, while merged with the Higher Self you choose the key lessons and events that characterize your upcoming incarnation. Once incarnated, the original choice to learn those lessons has already been made. As the Oracle said in The Matrix Reloaded, the point is to understand why they were made and therefore learn the lessons prompted by fated events.

But freewill is not subordinate to fate; quite to the contrary, freewill is the ultimate of precondition of existence. Fate merely orchestrates, while causality executes. Freewill does seem subordinate when it is not applied, as in the case where one does not know one’s fate and therefore makes no choice to alter it. But fate can be changed if it is known.

In their proper places, fate decides what lessons must be learned and why, while freewill decides how they are learned and when. Alternate events can lead to the same lessons learned, so it is not the mundane details of events that are ruled by fate, but rather their core meanings. Because freewill decides the timing as well as the qualitative nature of how lessons are learned, neither timing nor quality of experiences is definite.

>>519410146
Things of a game are real only within the game. Like any game, our reality exists because we consensually create it by setting rules and limitations to define the nature of our mutual interactions. In abstract terms, we place infinity in a box, thus separating former inseparables into a structured reality composed of individual elements obeying definite rules; mathematics as we know it details our consensual restrictions upon infinity.4 All mathematical equations include a hidden variable representing the potential influence of freewill. Because freewill is absent in cases where rules are followed, this variable often remains silent. Nevertheless, it represents an exit from the game or program, a choice to break the rules and become an anomaly.

Because the mathematics of a game is accurate and real only within the game, those who take choices delineated by its rules become predictable and easily controlled by those who know the mathematics, the why of an effect. It is this knowledge that allows manipulators to see and therefore strategically deny others certain choices; when denied the multiplicity of choice, people become passive elements in the causal chain initiated by those with power. What you don’t see controls you via causality.

To make a choice beyond those given by the game, particularly the game of physical incarnation ruled by linear time, one must have a connection to something beyond its boundaries. This connection allows the introduction of nonlinear variables in the equation of one’s behavior. What cannot be predicted cannot be controlled; “to be predictable is to become hunted.”

>>519411763
Very true
Most major world religions recognize this
>>519411804
Lastly, the argument assumes that objective list theory is right. If hedonism is right or desire satisfaction theory then God could simply make creatures with maximal pleasure or fulfilled desires. This is especially problematic because objective list theory is very implausible.

Thus the argument assumes:

There are archons.

Libertarian free will is right (otherwise the archons would just help us out).

Objective list theory is true.

The archons for some reason don’t make their existence obvious.

The world absent archons is filled with enormous gratuitous suffering—rather than merely being absent in certain goods.

The world absent archons doesn’t appear to be presided over by any agents.

God for some reason needs us to be in actual danger—rather than just having the archons believe we’re in danger.

Each of these assumptions, however, is quite doubtful. They range from somewhat dubious to ridiculously unlikely. Even if we give each of them a generous 1/3 chance of being correct, the odds they’re all right is 1/2187. Very unlikely!


Suppose one simply knew that God existed. Would they really expect a world as bad as this? This world? The one where thousands of children die every day, where nearly every organism who has ever lived has died after just a few days or weeks? If an angel proposed that God would make such a world, they’d be laughed at—and not invited to all the cool angel parties. The only reason anyone seriously entertains that this world is made by a perfect God is because they have status quo bias. They can’t imagine just how much better a world that God would actually make would be.

>>519410146
Examples of such connection include higher knowledge and higher emotions, those originating from our Higher Self. Higher knowledge allows one to see transcendent choices, while higher emotion helps one intuitively feel their possible existence. Incidentally, both of these arise from one’s connection with the Higher Self, the same aspect that orchestrates fate. Because they share the same source, fate is often associated with higher knowledge and higher emotion. On rare occasions we accomplish the impossible or improbable because we were fated to do them, because we knew and felt that they must be regardless of the rules of the game.

Choosing to attempt the impossible arises from two processes: the rational knowing of what must not be, and the irrational emotional drive to risk accomplishing what might instead be.

Neo’s fated choice to save Trinity despite the impossible odds demonstrates this perfectly: 1) he rationally knew that choosing the door on the right would lead to the assured continued survival but enslavement of humanity, a choice his predecessors foolishly made which he knew must be avoided, and 2) he felt an irrational compulsion out of his love for Trinity to risk everything and choose the door on the left, an emotion that “opened him to unlimited possibilities” and allowed him to do what the Architect with all his calculative perfection could not predict.

>>519411804
If you want to have a serious discussion, you need to stop calling fetuses, children.
It's a fetus, not a child.
Under 3 months gestating fetus, is NOT a child.

>>519410146
The Architect is a character who demonstrates the limits and fallacies of deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning starts with fundamental axioms and deduces conclusions from them, attempting to know what is from what ultimately is assumed. The problem is that these assumptions are rooted within the game itself, thus they allow no deduction of possibilities outside the game.

In contrast, reasoning via contradiction is superior because it is easier to see what is not than to accurately know what is. When choices within a game are eliminated as viable possibilities, finite mathematics declares none are left; but in an infinite universe where everything is possible, choices external to the game must remain. Every wall has at least two sides; what ends one domain begins another.

Truth is internally consistent, meaning it does not contradict itself, so while deductive reasoning can mistakenly eliminate the truth from its conclusions when one begins with false assumptions, reasoning via contradiction always leaves truth as an option among its set of non-contradicted possibilities. It is the irrational impulses of faith, hope, and love that beckon us to explore these possibilities.

>>519411505
>Asians are far more notorious for that. Nigs also don't treat animals well. It seems just mainly whites really care about the welfare of animals. Apparently also Ancient Egyptians cared enormously about animal welfare.

I just think they're more honest about it, Americans and Europeans want cheap meat that's why there's factory farms.

>I wish that Asians were primarily attracted to Asians but all of them want superior white genetics. The whole world wishes it was white. Every non-white child exposed to the existence of whites starts to develop a complex and resent themselves. If only we could make non-whites love themselves and prefer their own kind.

>As for whites that go after other races it's always some kind of coping. White man gets rejected over and over by white women to the point he can't fathom the possibility of ever being with a white woman so he copes and makes up a fantasy about Asian women being superior and settles down with one instead of doing the right thing and embracing celibacy like me. I'm going to die alone but at least I won't be polluting the world with mongrel inferior offspring.

To claim whites are objectively the most beautiful they would have to be the most appealing partner to ALL races in the ENTIRE universe this includes aliens.
I believe it is objectively immoral for ALL aliens to torture babies and cause them massive suffering just for trivial pleasure.

A white man finding a black woman more attractive than a white woman isn't irrational in the same way as baby torture. But if that's your intuition that's your intuition, I can't really disprove it.

>>519410146
If we take a choice based solely on reason, because calculations indicate it is the least risky path to take with the most favorable outcome, we will remain trapped within the game because we are automatically denying all possibilities beyond those delineated by the game’s rules. Like delusional mimes, we predict, pretend, and thus concretize our own limits. This works well if one wishes to advance within the game, but more is needed to evolve or expand in an orthogonal manner.5 True limits are to be tested, not manifested, though the weak are never willing to take that risk. But what is risk?

Risk is the chance for failure, the chance of encountering a limit. It is a relative quantity because it depends on which goals one is attempting to reach, what limits one is testing, and whether failure is even a possibility. Some only take mundane risks to receive mundane rewards such as social attention, an adrenaline rush, or professional promotion – rewards given because of the game or program. Although they may seem like courageous risk takers, these individuals tremble when faced with genuine risks that offer rewards given despite the game, rewards actually worth acquiring.

Mundane risks are distractions, while worthwhile risks offer learning lessons and expansion for the soul. One’s soul and its inventory of lessons learned are the only things that consistently survive physical death, therefore it is important to prioritize which risks are worth taking.

>>519412032
that's just semantics, they're very possibly conscious
>>519400520

>>519410146
Ironically, risks that test the game’s limits are buffered by the influence of fate, thus they tend to be the least risky of all. We are fated to test the game’s limits, to make choices based on our knowledge of the past, objective awareness of the present, and faith in the future. We have entered this physical reality to learn how to eventually transcend it, to take risks by applying our freewill to learn fated lessons. When placed in proper context, such risks have no chance for failure because all paths potentially provide the needed lessons; on some chosen paths, we can learn the easy way, others the hard way, but either way the same lessons are ultimately learned; it is just a matter of time.

While failure is not an option, stagnation is nevertheless possible when one refuses to choose to learn; those preoccupied with the transitory distractions of the program are wasting away their finite lives. They encounter experiences meant to shake them loose from their hypnotic trances, but choose to ignore them and therefore redundantly repeat the same mistakes. As the Architect said, they are given the choice to refuse the program but keep choosing to accept it.

Due to the influence of fate, risks that the program deems most dangerous are actually the safest risks of all. They are only dangerous to the program itself because such risks allow individuals to escape its control. For example, the institution of public education deems dropping out to be the most dangerous risk to anyone wanting a successful career, and yet those with the most successful careers are often ones who did not follow that rule.

>>519411465
>Well in the USA UK Australia etc most animal products come from factory farms where suffering is common
I think this just depends on the farm and the animal. Every supermarket these days is also filled with a huge variety of animal products from animals raised in nicer environments (from free range to pasture raised) so I don't think it's all necessarily so bad.

>>519382387 (OP)
Most people just want the government to stop stealing their money to fund abortions.

>>519410146
Those who trade liberty for security become enslaved; they are sold on the idea of security as defined by the program, a definition engineered to perpetuate control. To avoid the necessity of making genuine choices and therefore taking risks, many give their freewill to a surrogate “chooser”, thereby becoming a passive link in a causal chain initiated by the “chooser”. A causal chain is ruled by precise mathematics: one does “x” to effect “y”; there is no risk involved when the outcome is certain, hence the illusion of security. Because abdication of freewill is a precondition for participating in a causal chain, the price of resultant security is enslavement.

True security is found in taking worthwhile risks, ones that provide fated lessons. Fate fully supports our endeavors to take such risks because we have incarnated for that very purpose. While the program ensures “safety” via causality, fate ensures safety via synchronicity. The first is illusion while the second is tangible.

Synchronicity is normally defined as a meaningful coincidence, but its definition can be expanded. More generally, synchronicity arises from a chain of causality that originates outside the program. Because the program cannot see where the chain begins, where the original cause resides, it deems the phenomenon acausal. In context of fate, synchronicity is a causal chain that resides outside the program of linear time and space, a.k.a. “physical reality”.

>>519410146
Synchronicities are whole packets of cause and effect spanning past, present, and future that are instantly inserted into the timeline. Because every synchronicity includes a definite series of cause and effect, it may be easy to rationalize the phenomenon as mere coincidence by claiming that synchronicity is simply a mundane product of mundane causes. But this logical fallacy cannot explain away the sheer improbability and meaning behind the synchronicity, which arises from the fact that the synchronicity and all its causal components are inserted as a whole into the timeline.

Many think the future is variable due to freewill; until we have chosen our next move the future remains open. With a single application of freewill the distribution of possible futures shifts as some are prevented while others are created. But what most do not realize is that freewill doesn’t just affect the future, it can change the past and present as well. For example, a synchronicity can be created in direct response to a decision you make now, but tracing back the synchronicity reveals it to be the culmination of a series of cause and effect that may have started yesterday. Prior to making your present choice, yesterday may have been different.

Linear time as we know it is illusion. It is the finalized version of events recorded in the memory function of our brains and the environment. Real time is variable and selective, meaning causal chains from beginning to end can be instantly inserted and removed at the command of freewill. It is our cumulative recording of the “last” sequence of events that generates the illusion of continuity. The intervals of time between elements of a linear causal chain are imaginary; when the first domino is pushed, the last might as well have already fallen. Time only increments in intervals demarcated by freewill choices.

>>519411465
>>519412531

>>519410146
What you are reading now is the finalized version of an article, which up to the point of completion I am at liberty to edit. Between this sentence and the next, I might halt and choose to revise earlier sections of the article, possibly inserting or deleting entire paragraphs, but how would you possibly know? All you see is the final product with no record of the actual sequence involved in creating it. If you understand this, then you can understand the illusory nature of linear time.

The present is a fulcrum between past and future; a shift in the fulcrum will affect both. How we apply our freewill now has consequences that can span both ways on the timeline. Effects depend on the choice of cause, and individuals brainwashed by the program see only the choices that cause strictly future effects, choices whose consequences reinforce the illusion of linear time and the faux supremacy of causality.

Making choices that affect the entire timeline requires connections beyond the program, choices that comprise the aforementioned worthwhile risks. They are transcendental choices based on the rational knowledge that the program’s options are void, and the “irrational” hope that greater possibilities must exist. Fated choices are ones that seem right because they feel right and there is nothing clearly wrong with them. They are not choices made because of limits, but choices made in spite of them. They are not choices that obey the program, but ones that are open to unlimited possibilities.

>>519410146
Therefore, those who obey the program become prey to causality while others choosing to transcend it are aided by synchronicity. The acausal phenomenon of synchronicity ensures that the program never succeeds in preventing individuals from choosing to fulfill their destinies. The Higher Self can override any actions, laws, or limits endangering that fulfillment because the program is never to undermine its purpose, which is to indirectly assist and accelerate the spiritual evolution of physical incarnates. Consequently, those taking fated risks need not search for safety nets to catch them because failure is never a possibility in such cases. All that is needed is the knowledge of which choices to avoid and the desire to transcend the program’s limits. Life then falls into place synchronistically.

Freewill is the only universal constant — the rest is causality. Fate is simply a type of causality that originates beyond the limits of linear time, initiated by choices already made on a higher level of reality. As Morpheus said, “Everything begins with choice.”

>>519412636
It's not really my area of expertise sorry

>>519412470
>>519412531
Lmao imagine even reading the first sentence of the novel lick my asshole retard. Going to order a hooker now and have her eat my ass while thinking its you

TL;DR

Notes:

1 Linear systems are straightforward in their behavior. The output is directly related to the input. If the inputs of a system are known, as well as the rules by which the system processes them, then the output can be known. There is no mystery about how they function or any quirkiness and unpredictability associated with them.

2 According to quantum mechanics, everything is made of waves. Particles are actually waves spread out among possible states of existence. Only when we measure or observe a particle does its wave “collapse” into one possibility and one observable manifestation. In truth, we are simply tuning into one slice of the probability wave, choosing to experience one manifestation of it. Which state a wave collapses into is entirely unpredictable by quantum mechanics because mathematics cannot predict the influence of freewill. If something is predictable, then it has no choice of being anything other than what is predicted, and therefore has no freewill

3 Nonlinear systems are ones where output need not correspond to input in a simple or direct manner. Often there is feedback involved where part of the output gets fed into the input and creates amplifying loops. According to chaos theory, the smallest triggers can have the largest effects due to that amplifying characteristic. A well-known example is the butterfly effect, where something as small as a butterfly can trigger the formation of a hurricane due to the sensitive nature of the atmosphere. How small can the smallest trigger be? In some cases, it can be as small as a single quantum process. Whether the wave of the particle collapses into one state or the other is correspondingly amplified by the nonlinear system into a large and observable output. Because the collapse of a wave function is decided by consciousness, nonlinear systems are a means through which consciousness can influence the observable physical world. Our brains are an example of such a system; whether a neuron fires or not could ultimately depend on decisions made by the soul to think a certain thought.

>>519412808
Shitt psyops bot digital or physical same trash clogging the net

4 According to quantum mechanics, everything is made of waves. Combining different waves in different proportions creates different types of objects. A wave existing in free space (one that is free from the influence of any external fields or forces) is not quantized, meaning it does not take on certain limited values. Such an amorphous wave consists of infinite possible values. But when the wave is placed in a box called a “potential well”, certain frequencies and probabilities are cut out. The wave then assumes a discrete number of possible values, thus creating a definite and distinguishable object. So “putting infinity in a box” means creating our reality by imposing restrictions upon what is possible. It is like forming a statue from a block of marble by chipping away the stone to leave only what one wants, or like creating a board game by setting up rules that determine what is not allowed within the game. These rules can be described by mathematical equations, but since such rules were ultimately agreed to or created by us, we are free to break them if we know how. Therefore, all mathematical equations are never absolute; because they are based on consensual rules, such equations have exceptions.

5 “Orthogonal” means “at right angles.” An orthogonal expansion implies expanding in a manner perpendicular to the old way of being. It signifies a fundamental motion that isn’t just a continuation or recombination of the old, but an entirely new way of doing things.

>>519382387 (OP)
Shut the fuck up zoomer nigger

>>519412789
I think it's interesting, some of it seems familiar to me and I do not think it would be laughed at by a philosophy or physics PhD

>>519412855
We got a pro who can type world record paragraphs of novel proportions please notice meee cries the shill bot rat sellout beta spam poster

>>519412789
tl;dr is awareness increases choices and non-linear feedback exists when one obtains awareness of future possible states

>>519412934
Death by laughter is a very real thing i have collectively brought on and watch unfold in real time only to lose control and watch as Death gripped our friend now now years later it caught her in the end rip.

>>519412945
sure I think people who are smarter and aren't on drugs or anything like that have more free will

Laplazes demon seems like a good argument for free will too

>>519383111
Took too long for this comment to show up. And checked

>>519412944
You are so bitter and contribute nothing of value to this thread. Are you just here to cry that I can type more than you?

>>519413049
Okay so what distinguishes "free will" from "agency" because I've seen them treated as separate concepts before and this idea of free will I just posted about it is synonymous with agency aka the ability to make choices. To me freewill is a binary but agency is a spectrum where certain actions and outcomes lead to more possible choices and other actions and outcomes reduce possible choices. There's this chaos magick theory of ethics where morality is simply "any action that increases possible future actions". Every action that decreases agency is immoral, every action that increases agency is moral.

>>519413049
Because the demon would have to include itself which is like a paradox

>>519413348
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nh1Z3UTobrY

These are my views on free will, I'm a libertarian but there's different types of libertarians
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fn2Uycj6osk

>>519411231
>that pic

Ted Kaczsynki tried to save us bros.

>>519411234
I know about all of that and have hemp hearts and so on. I don't do well on it. I've experiemented a lot. Meat in my diet has more optimal outcomes for my cognition and everything. A lot of the vitamin supplement stuff causes me nausea, diarrhea, etc. and there's different quality supplements but it doesn't really matter. There are also some animal products like yoghurt that really don't do well for me. Cheese and meat though helps me a lot.

>What about elderly people with dementia?

What about them? What is their relevance?

>For animals and toddlers it'd be neurological structures and behavior.

Okay and? I didn't have experiences at 4 years old and would like to know the reason for that. I don't think it's forgetting/amnesia I think it was an inability to form experiences at that age. For some reason people who get traumatized at a very early age btw end up having memories at an earlier age than others and that's weird. I need to study memory formation more.

>>519411243
Most people define evil as "death" and good as "life" and don't care about quality of life at all. For me quality of life is more important because death is just a transition into another stage of life but in the meanwhile that we live in our bodies we should have good bodies and good circumstances aka a good quality of life.

>>519411465
Factory farms and monsanto are an abomination. They need to all be destroyed and all the niggers and other subhumans that depend on them should just starve to death. All farming should be high quality organic farming. I hate factory farms. Factory farms create inferior quality food in order to keep inferior quality humans alive and numerous.

>>519413917
For evidence animals (and 3 year old humans) are conscious and capable of suffering I'd recommend the New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness

>>519414102
Well unfortunately I do avoid organic vegan food because they use animal manure from factory farms which makes them more profitable. Conventionally farmed plants use far less animal manure

>>519411642
Maybe NPCs are 95% of the population like is suggested in Collin Wilson's The Occult. Maybe my body was NPC until my spirit somehow got stuck in when the body was 5 years old. Maybe most people are automatons devoid of experience and the player controlled characters are a minority. In this scenario a lot of those short and brutal lives characterized by suffering involve no actual suffering because no spirit (awareness) takes up an abode in those bodies.

>>519414351
That's non falsifiable and there's good arguments against it
https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-best-argument-for-god?utm_source=publication-search
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze0lIjYqsng

>>519384102
She's a ten in mutt America, let that sink in

>>519414351
>>519414475
>>519414351
your existence is good evidence there's lots of other people (who are also conscious like you)

Like beth 2 people in the multiverse, all possible people

>>519411943
I interact really regularly with beings though that intervene with my life and make me feel like my life is being pushed in a direction they prefer and a lot of things are out of my hands.

I'm not sure how you're defining archons here but the entities I interact with might fit the definition of archons.

>>519414705
not my article but angels basically, the idea is they didn't do their jobs perfectly hence all the wild animal suffering and stuff

>>519412255
>To claim whites are objectively the most beautiful they would have to be the most appealing partner to ALL races in the ENTIRE universe this includes aliens.

Hmmm well Nordic aliens do mog your average white person and maybe there could be forms more beautiful than the Nordic form who knows.

>>519414648
>your existence is good evidence there's lots of other people (who are also conscious like you)
I personally reject the second half of that. Of course other people exist but I have no way of knowing if any of them experience consciousness like I do. I'm not saying they are not consciousness or anything but it is easily conceivable but the way they fundamentally interact with the world is completely different than how I do it.

>>519412460
I don't mind the government using some money to fund abortions and thus prevent a far greater stealing of money to raise defective retards and to institutionalize criminals.

>>519412337
>they're very possibly conscious
Of course not. They don't even have a brain.

>>519414887
Well they may not be AS conscious as you but the argument shows you COULD have been them but you couldn't have been a rock which is not conscious

>>519413049
Is there any site that organizes all these different ideas and compares and contrasts them efficiently? A sort of "systematic theology" but it's systematic philosophy instead?

>>519415021
>feminists like abortion
>feminists want to believe fetuses can't suffer/be conscious at least not until very late in pregnancy
>if fish can't suffer/aren't conscious then fetuses can't suffer/be conscious (complex neurological similarities discussed in video below)
>Feminists argue in bad faith fish almost certainly can't suffer

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NhCxCLZXYtA

https://defendingfeminism.substack.com/p/do-fish-and-shrimp-suffer-agonizing

I think shrimp and fish are conscious and can experience a significant amount of suffering (at least one percent as much as a human). This is why I donate to charities like shrimp welfare (to stun shrimp before they're killed) https://www.shrimpwelfareproject.org/
What do you think?

>>519415031
Too flawed of an argument. For example, it is highly likely that no woman on the planet thinks even remotely like I do. I am not saying this out of arrogance or "i'm so smart" thing. I mean that simply a woman's mind fundamentally works different than my own which is male.

>>519415103
Not that I know of, I like substack a lot but that's different
It's unfortunate so little resources are dedicated to this topic
>>519415185
Sure but you also could have been a human with down syndrome.

>>519414118
>The New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness, launched on April 19, 2024, asserts that many animals, including mammals, birds, and some invertebrates, likely possess conscious experiences. It emphasizes the ethical responsibility to consider the welfare of these animals in decisions affecting them, based on scientific evidence of their sentience and cognitive abilities.

https://sites.google.com/nyu.edu/nydeclaration

^ is this just a long list of names signing a declaration? Is there something I'm supposed to actually read other than "a long list of people who think animals can be self-aware"?

>>519415185
By conscious like you I don't mean similar type of consciousness just that you both have some type of consciousness, your consciousness is probably not much like a human who is x to the power of 2 inches tall

>>519414206
What is the problem with using manure or fertilizer from any source?

>>519415357
I don't think that is a very meaningful distinction. Probably all animals that are more complex than like insects have a consciousness.

>>519415326
https://sites.google.com/nyu.edu/nydeclaration/background

It's also just an update on the ok original Cambridge declaration of consciousness

>>519414475
Bro you need to read this: https://montalk.net/matrix/157/spiritless-humans

Philosophical zombies is what I'm talking about and there's a lot written about the subject. I wouldn't just dismiss it. I think it's falsifiable. I think there's ways to determine whether someone has spirit in them or not.