Argument thread

ok, so measles sounds good to you. You do you man.
wait don't. fukc you, I'm just starting another argument on this thread

 

i'm ethically anti-vaccination. sickness is a necessary evil to control the ballooning population, and by vaccinating we allow the population to continue to grow unchecked. just wait until you see what happens when the world population really explodes and we start seeing the consequences... might want to re-examine your "LOL antivaxxers are so dumb and im a genius" takes then......

 

i agree there's too many people. way too many. no hope at this point. just wanna see the world end xD

 

this forum is tl so i dr

r/oof

 

This is why we have war to help cull yhe population. Although yeah, it's weeding out the pussies for sjre

 

hi eli remember me

 

covington catholic students did nothing wrong

 

octo has a point, the real reason anti-vaxxers exist is because they want the human race to become stronger and evolve into super humans, vaccinations are just nurturing of the soft and weak humans who cant handle a harmless case of severe Measles, vaccinations are keeping progress and evolution at a standstill. I say we take a stand against Vaccinations, LET THE WEAK DIE.

 

Damn

 

so you'd let yourself die if you are weak. idek when ppl are joking sometimes

 

yeah i'm just joking, but that is probably the mindset of some anti-vaxxers

 

that's not the point i was making at all...

 

hangover is stupid

 

your mum

 

Doesn't seem much cause for argument there

 

the new "Reproductive Health Act" is a ghastly name for the allowance of a greater window to decide to murder your child, to the point that some have been born premature but completely healthy. further evidence of the erosion of morale and the greater success of degeneracy.

 

well first off, the law changes barely anything. Abortions were and remain legal in NY. The change I assume you care about it is relation to abortions after the 24 week period. This was previously illegal, but now an exception has been allowed for mothers who are at a serious health risk and for fetus’s who are either dead already or in the process of dying. This new exception DOES NOT grant abortion rights after 24 weeks to everyone.

You state that its been so bad that babies are being born prematurely. I don’t understand the relevance to the legislation in question. Either way, the legislation literally passed 3 days ago. No one has been affected by it yet. The abortion rates and demographics have remained the same as they were. There have no cases reported in which a mother has recieved an abortion for a 24+ week fetus.

Whether you believe abortion is moral or immoral, your statement is objectively wrong

 

"well first off, the law changes barely anything. Abortions were and remain legal in NY. The change I assume you care about it is relation to abortions after the 24 week period. This was previously illegal, but now an exception has been allowed for mothers who are at a serious health risk and for fetus’s who are either dead already or in the process of dying. This new exception DOES NOT grant abortion rights after 24 weeks to everyone."
"to everyone" is the key bit there. But actually it might. The possibility still exists in the vaguely worded legislation that I believe may be used in loose interpretations to justify murdering a child rather far along into his or her's development. There's no reason to argue that particular point however, as we will never agree when there is an acceptable time to murder a kid, as I believe it is never acceptable.
"Either way, the legislation literally passed 3 days ago. No one has been affected by it yet. The abortion rates and demographics have remained the same as they were. uh duh? There have no cases reported in which a mother has recieved an abortion for a 24+ week fetus. "again duh, it just passed. If you mean in general though, there has been cases after 24 weeks, even if there was serious health complications, it has happened. http://barryyeoman.com/2001/10/i-had-an-abortion-when-i-was-six-months-pregnant/ Obviously my fear is that it will happen without severe health complications, but minor complications used as excuses to justify an unwanted child. But this legislation was passed with the goal of terminating a baby after the predetermined cutoff for legal abortions so if you think it won't happen for some loosely defined reason, time will prove you incorrect.
"You state that its been so bad that babies are being born prematurely"
That's actually not what I've stated. What I have stated is that the children can be murdered (or aborted) at a stage far enough into the pregnancy that said time is equivalent to that of a baby born prematurely. So essentially the line they draw between baby murder and "abortion" is whether or not the baby is still in the mother's body, not whether or not the baby is fully or nearly fully developed and can survive outside the womb. I see no difference between dismembering a child in utero, poisoning a child in utero, or sucking a child out of the fetus and stabbing it if it's laying on the table; both cause the unjustified loss of innocent life, however when the death of the child is caused by a doctor, or now as a result of the legislation, a nurse or other lower level medical personnel, it's legally okay and on one side of the isle considered moral. Essentially what this bill does is change the "my life is at risk" to, "my health is at risk" for murdering of babies after 24 weeks, as you've sort of touched on, yet the bill is very arbitrarily written and loose, as I have stated. "my life" and "my health" aren't synonyms. We have yet to find out what the bill will actually accomplish obviously, as it has been given no time to allow for more dead kids so far, but the desire for continued degeneracy leading to kids being killed has caused a significant enough outcry for the state of New York to instill this piece of legislation.