Did you know that the overwhelming number of fertilized eggs that are destroyed are in fertilization clinics?

If you care about the unborn you should focus you attention there.

a fertilized egg isnt a viable human until it attaches to the uteran wall. and most pro lifers arent crazy about non-natural fertilization for people that dont have fertility issues either.

If life begins at conception, the rest is irrelevant. The government could force woman to receive fertilized eggs and carry them to term.

a child is not conceived until the fertilized egg attaches itself to the uterine wall.

Conception is the fertilization of an egg by sperm. Full stop.

Attaching to a uterine wall takes 5-6 days after that point, but this is irrelevant since the argument is that life begins at conception, not when the blastocyst attaches.

you're wrong, i fully understand what the official anti-choice narrative is, i'm just explaining to you how it doesn't work out that way, never has, and how your alleged goals could actually be achieved by means that don't take women's rights away.

most importantly, it is not your or the government's job or right to decide that, no matter how entitled and deluded you are, no matter how grotesquely simplistic your takes on the human psyche are. what you're intending there is not "tough love", it's plain and simple disenfranchisement.

by the same "logic" i could argue that it would be a net benefit for society to lock all you anti-choice fundamentalists, all the religious nut jobs, away. it would greatly improve society as a whole. unlike you, however, i know that this is not my or the government's right to do, you are free to believe what you want, and i would argue in favour of that freedom against anyone questioning it, even though you people are a massive detriment to every rational and reasonable society.



pr? what are you even on about? you think i'm running for office or something?
you're clearly just throwing shit at the wall, hoping something sticks. let me reiterate: pathetic!

you explained your position, i explained mine. yours will make society as a whole worse, not just increasing overall suffering, but also taking fundamental rights away from half the population, as well as disproportionally hurting poor and minority women. mine would reduce abortions more effectively without restricting people's right to self-determination.

you're the middle east on this issue, i am western europe.



that's not true. conception is simply the sperm entering the egg, which occurs well before attachment to the uterus.

you're just well off on 2 counts, pro lifers are upset at the killing of a viable human being, not the destruction of a fertilized egg strictly. if pro lifers were trying to attack mothers that have eggs that fail to attach to the uterine wall you'd have a point, but no one does even mention that. its a microscope on the termination of a baby attached already to the uterine wall. secondly pro lifers arent exactly pro fertilization clinics, so your gotcha attempt that they should focus more attention to something they're not overwhelmingly in support of is silly. pro lifers are largely ok with medical exemptions for abortion, as they're for medical exemptions for non-natural use of fertilization clinics.

you act like pro lifers would hear about dumpsters full of fertilized eggs at a fertilization clinic that were discarded and not used for invitro procedures and shrug, or even that they're unaware of the butchery that takes place on that side of medicine. pro lifers are overwhelmingly for married couples naturally conceiving and carrying to term children, and not much else.



i concede openly this is semantically correct, but not in context pertinent to the landscape of narratives on both sides as the user claimed it is.

its akin to a conservative saying to a BLM supporter "oh but you're ok with crime in chicago on YOUR streets", like wtf, no, they arent ok with that at all.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 8 2021 10:38am

You're not running for office. You're on a safe space on the internet where you can post anonymously with no consequences and yet you are still too much of a coward to own the reality of your views.

*biologically

also, just because anti-choicers aren't truly principled with their appeals to emotion (no shit!?), don't for example advocate for billions of dollars to be put into research to prevent miscarriages (which they also don't call baby-killing or even murder, stupidly ignoring both the definitions of baby and murder), in practice very much DO distinguish between early life inside a womb and viable life (radicals wanting to charge women with murder for abortion are fortunately the exception), doesn't mean one can't hold that inconsistency against them.

the entire miscarriage argument is silly, abortion is intentional, miscarriages arent, and if they're caused by intentional actions such as drug use or w/e pro lifers want the mother punished.

as someone dead center on the issue i find the strawmans and fringe baiting on this topic not only frustrating but a real cause why we're not rehashing such old case law in such a stupid way as we are.