Splinter: The Perene Perversity [Is Abortion Murder?]

We all know that abortion became legal in the U.S. through fraud. The woman wasn't raped, but that couldn't deter the laws from being invalidated. Later that woman pretended to feel regret for what happened, as they all do later...

This culture of death that considers us to be expendable (misandry, anyone?) wants to justify genocide, with the argument there are many humans inhabiting this planet.

It's funny, women adopt animals but never poor children. I guess it takes some effort to raise one alone without leeching from men or the government, and history has proven that women fail in all aspects of their pathetic lives (single mothers are not good influence).

And what is the logic of abortion? If there is 50% of chance that a developing fetus is human, we are willing to commit an act that has 50% of chances of being a homicide.

It is a moral decision that is always chosen without any certainty.

Remember that it was never proven by the other side a fetus is not human (nevermind the fact that if women have rights to dispose of whatever is inside their body, so our banks should be allowed to burn our money invested there, since without men there would be no pregnancy, women by this logic are mere deposit safes and don't own 100% what's inside them - besides the right to self-mutilation not having been granted for anyone that wishes to do it, in this case only women, if we assume the fetus is not human); so the reasonable thing would be to preserve the life of the creature and discover later our efforts were in vain for a mere thing, or to kill it, and find out too late it was a human.

Are we morally authorized to pull the trigger if we knew there is 50% of chances to kill an innocent creature? If we think the fetus is a thing, we are tossing a coin, choosing either heads or tails.

For that reason alone, there is no hypothetical or real benefit that justifies the life of a human being to be gambled.

Pro-abortion activists resent these arguments simply because the decision to commit an abortion precedes the very discussion. They only want to rely on them to justify the acts, that were already decided with or without such debates.

These people would not concede they are wrong even if was proven the fetus is human, let alone moral evaluations of the risks involved. They want to risk doing it, even if the chances are 0%. It's a question of honour: I want to do it and you are oppressing me (there you go, victimhood again!), the hell with any logic.

Again this is the irrational and crude wish to kill humans and value something else... I don't know, perhaps animals because they resemble women themselves? Animals only rely on the material world and their senses. They are not better than humans if you only consider their intelect. And yet no one sees this FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE. Nowadays, animals are deemed equal or better than humans.

When the fetuses are not killed, they survive to provide them later with material gain (as Esther Vilar would put it, "children taken as hostages") or validate their existences.

Bottom line:

These people are all incapable or unwilling to understand the notion of "species".

Species is a bunch of common traits, inherent/inseparable, that defines individuals, once and for all, and this nature is shared by all of us.

Belong to the same species, and I mean, all the time, even those who are not yet born, and when they are born if happen to have the same common traits. It's not hard to grasp that cats generated 2 centuries in the future, when they come to exist, will be cats, not apples.

The desire to abort a child denies that notion. For all pro-abortion supporters, there are no inherent characters, but A SOCIAL CONVENTION that all people who are alive/already born can, as they wish, choose to apply to anyone that was not born YET.

Whoever decides if the fetus belongs to mankind is A SOCIAL CONSENSUS, not the nature of things.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Can you see the level of mental confusion to believe in this idea? Sure it's not a mere confusion, but the chaos that derive from a very twisted, wretched mind.

On rare occasions the supporters admit everything I mentioned, since it would become clear that, if being human is a social convention, we would have no guarantee that later this will not be revoked, denying the human condition of the feeble-minded, crippled, homossexuals, blacks, gypsies or whomever befits their agenda, and is inconvenient for the moment.

Do you understand what is behind of all these seemingly innocuous patterns of behaviour?

The irrational desire to have the authority to confer to whatever person they wish the status of human, animal, thing, whatever. Why shouldn't they be the judges of that, uh?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It does not surprise me that so many of these worms (most of them politics) are what I called embodiments of illusions. All their acts and emotions are faked and their capacity to commit evil deeds is incommensurable. Their agenda, is clear to me, is nothing more than spread their dysfunctions.

Make no mistake, gentlemen, all these moral values and socially shaped behaviours are always imposed on each of us on a daily basis, and we are manipulated in so many ways that is astounding.

To admit that everything they want is what I explained would be the same as displaying a badge saying "I am a socio/psychopath". But if their whole lives are lies, that will never happen, will it?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It's up to us to uncover all this BS that permeates our lives.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I would suggest Poe's Law is in effect.

Then again, to that end, I would also wonder why anyone would put in the effort.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I suspect it is. The whole thing is overcalculated, and reeks of too much effort.

To the other, that is not necessarily comforting; that magnitude of effort for this manner of joke is kind of sick in and of itself.

 

I think it's worse than murder. It's genocide. Thank you for pointing that out, calling it a murder really does not give anyone an idea of its scope. As for all remarks about animals, I'll elaborate further in another thread.

If I had to choose between commiting an evil deed and letting fate to decide whatever will become of someone, I would choose the latter every single time.

You ASSUME (and now we are really talking about ASSUMPTION, make no mistake about that) the unborn child, if given the choice, would rather DIE rather than strive to overcome all these difficulties. This is the lamest excuse EVER. It really screams moral laziness to me. Abortionists are disgustingly self-serving.

I can apply the same reasoning to EUTHANASIA, specially in cases in which the person recovers, yet no one considers that might happen. It's funny that we want to be dictators to decide who can be considered human, or should die. And such decisions are never weighed by responsibilities, such as when we condemn a person to be killed for a crime they did commit, no one considers there's a slight chance they might be innocent.

Please don't mention the United States as an example of anything, should I equate that country with other barbaric states that continue to use death penalty? That is not the wisest way to measure the worth of any one of them, you should rather stick with individuals to pass judgement.

I don't expect any consistence from women, feminists prevented the male pill from reaching the market because they want the right to give birth and end it for themselves. There is no such thing as unwanted pregnancy, all of them were planned, women decide if there is going to be a relationship in the first place, and as for rape... Well, do I need to elaborate how many men had their lives destroyed by false claims? Sure this is, in MOST CASES, another excuse women give for a convenient way out.

The problem with society nowadays (and women, since the beginning) is that no one wants to be accountable for anything, everyone should be exempt, and women are ALWAYS, ALWAYS guilty of that kind of manipulation.

They ALWAYS want to be considered victims. Cheap psychological tricks won't work with me, I studied how women and their supporters operate, there are many methods they use, including self-abasement. I am surprised no one sees this clearly as I do.

And when you want to hold them accountable, they always pull the "it's my nature", "men are oppressing me" cards.

Our society is completely reversed, all the morals, values and laws, we have all forms of art imparting this inversion. No one neither notices this, nor is aware that is more prone to believe in what is evil and become suspiscious of what is good.

When there's a conflict between a man and a woman, you can always observe that women are depicted as weaker, and the victims from any situation. Mostly because women complain a lot, and they have the habit of expressing their feelings in a peculiar way, they are very apt to do that. Have you noticed their capacity to devise movie scripts, soap operas, intrigues, romances?

What women want? They want more rights, for what purpose? What they have achieved so far? To create a better life for themselves and society, or rights to destroy even further their lives and society's?

When women are allowed to do anything, they get drunk, drugged, smoke more, have more heart attacks, all sorts of diseases (including STDs), which leads to a sense of guilt, we see teenagers and adults with unresolved feelings of guilt due to these issues, meaning that this freedom given to women in society it was not something that contributed to their development.

This is what we should be concerned about. Any society that caters to the whims of women without questioning them is on the verge of destruction.

So all you have to offer me as a counter-argument is that the laws/courts decide in favor of women? As for changing the plight of men, don't hold your breath if you think things are going to stay the same forever. Men are opting out relationships and seeing them/society (women) as they really are, not what they wish to be.

I don't need to remind you that not only abortion, but practically every law that exists benefits women and forces men to foot the bill.

Did you know that in France men are forbidden by law to attempt to find if their child is theirs? That didn't prevent many from doing tests elsewhere. Some courts even decide that NOT being the biological father does not grant a man the right to stop paying for child support.

Ultimately, this is a zero-sum game. For a woman to win SOMETHING, a man needs to lose everything, and a life ended, if necessary. The only scenario I agree for an abortion to happen is when the mother's life is threatened.

Women have won many fights, but the battle of the sexes has been lost. And men have won. Now, more than any time in history, we are aware how the female mind works and what to expect from them.

Some men think that society is collapsing because of that knowledge. I disagree and think we are living in the true age of enlightenment.

And you seem to be last person qualified to lecture anyone about ethics, which in my book is even worse than being scientifically illiterate. Grow a conscience before uttering more nonsense.

 

Poe's Law, yeah, seems likely. Might be unconscious, though - the guy might actually think he is letting it fly, not sending it up.

 

He's not fond of Vegans either - here are more complete versions:

http://www.mgtowhq.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7918
http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showthread.php?15569-The-Revolutionary-Mentality-Devaluing-Humans

 

Well, ain't this a wonderful klausterfokken...

 

I can't get high enough to take our new neighbor seriously. I mean―

"We all know that abortion became legal in the U.S. through fraud. The woman wasn't raped, but that couldn't deter the laws from being invalidated. Later that woman pretended to feel regret for what happened, as they all do later..."

(#334064/783↑)​

―the way it's styled to offend from the outset, I find myself flipping a coin between reaction formation provocateurism or else naked self-interest in the face of some neurotic stress brought on by self-perceived exposure.

Nor do I play a doctor on television, so, you know, whatever.

It's a pretty good parody apt impression of ownership culture, nearly perfectly capturing its fragmented, frenetic, fearful state of mind.

 

I am sorry, but I am not the one deciding if something lives or dies based on my selfish desires.

I believe there's something greater than me or anybody else. It's called the Truth.

Everyone is capable of seeing things as they really are. However, society only creates confusion in our minds. That can only happen when the informations are not only falsified, they are also emotionally charged.

What lies beneath all these deceptive appearances, all the smiles and passionate speeches.

The truth is quite simple, very clear, but it can't be seen in any ordinary stone. It's more rare than a diamond. Our eyes are dirty and can't tell what it is even when we find it.

When in doubt, we only need to be logical. Does it make any sense what is said or they are trying to manipulate you into doing their agenda? Inferior minds are easily deceived by these cheap tricks. When we are in an emotional state, this can't be achieved easily.

To overcome all of it we only need to have independent and critical thoughts. Then the truth will appear.

They would if people like you, who ironically want to be exempt from any decision, didn't decide things for them.

It's funny how the LAWLLLLL (as Stallone would yell in that JUDGE DREDD movie) is used to support abortion in this thread, yet completely forgotten when suicide (another form of murder) is on the table. I guess the scientists are too concerned about enforcing death and the lack of purpose to even think about valuing life and other things, such as the possibility of the diseased recovering and suddenly euthanasia not being an option anymore.

And you also didn't consider the many cases where the family decided for the sick. How convenient...

I am sorry, but I have a hard time considering the advice of whoever thinks the questions: who am I? Where do we go? What is our role here? Why should I do this, or believe in that? irrelevant.

In my opinion, the decision to die degrades our ENTIRE experience because it reduces everything to what the material world has to offer.

And not only scientists, but everyone wants us to not feel important, even though WE ARE (because we are thinking beings and change the world around us).

Yes, male pill. Boycotted by feminists with the argument that men would lie when they took it. As if men were known for doing that, and women didn't have children for the sole purpose of leeching men or validating their existence.

Women can do anything they want with themselves, as long as they don't use men for their agendas. The idea that men can claim any right certainly terrifies all women, since all men only exist to serve their needs.

Please produce me any woman that can get pregnant without the help of a man. If you do, then it will be 100% their creation.

[X]Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)

Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women. Examples:

“You need to get over your fear.”
“Step up and take a chance like a man!”
“You’re afraid of a strong woman!”
Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and stupidity. The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks. One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks. As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.

CHECK...

[X]Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) – The Brown Shirts Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint. Examples:

“You’re one of those right-wing wackos.”
“You’re an extremist”
“You sound like the KKK.”
“… more anti-feminist zaniness”
Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).

CHECK...

I love when shaming tactics are used as arguments.

You want me to list the things women aren't held responsible at all? How about more than the number of stars in the Universe?

[X]Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)

Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:

“You misogynist creep!”
“Why do you hate women?”
“Do you love your mother?”
“You are insensitive to the plight of women.”
“You are mean-spirited.”
“You view women as doormats.”
“You want to roll back the rights of women!!”
“You are going to make me cry.”

Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or “argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).

AND CHECK...

On that point I am forced to agree with you. Because all these MGTOW communities are, in fact, not doing what I always did when raised these issues. All their complaints are a result of cognitive dissonance. They don't truly believe all they know, but I do. And I know better.

[X]Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) – The Sour Grapes Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems. Example:

“You are just bitter because you can’t get laid.”
Response: In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth. In other words, one may submit to the accuser, “What if the grapes really are sour?” At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called “circumstantial ad hominem.”

Please make it stop...

Of course I am to blame for your sheer ignorance about the fundamental nature of women and their clique. People like me are a menace because we remind you the truth can't be hidden forever.

I think women should have unlimited rights.

I propose they should continue to:

Be lazy, indolent, parasites, dumber, demanding, have policies for marriage, divorce, inheritance, widowhood, old age and life (while the number of working women decreases). Women should also continue to have psychological control.

Oh, and continue to be inferior in matters of justice, honesty, conscientiousness, reasoning, virtues, and never accomplish anything of great, genuine, original and permanent value.

You see how magnanimous I am? I want things to stay as they always were.

In the meantime, can I ask something in return?

Please? Pretty please?

LEAVE MEN OUT OF IT. DO NOT INVOLVE US IN ANY WAY. AND THAT INCLUDES USING THE STATE TO PERPETUATE ALL OF THIS.

 

Better than having no brains at all. Yours was certainly hijacked by aliens and it's now subject of study in a distant corner of the Universe. Guess that explains why they only return to stick probes in our asses and do experiments in animals.

Who do you think pays for this procedure? Certainly a woman never did such a thing. If it's the State realizing the abortion, then a man paid for it.

Even employed women only PRETEND TO DO HARD-WORK, so I'll reject the argument that a single woman financed this.

And I am sure 90% of cases fit in your pathetic examples. Most men who pay child support were tricked into thinking the child was theirs and the woman is never punished for such acts, but hey, that doesn't matter, a man always has to pay for everything (even when there's no child involved).

And the concept of family in the minds of these judges was only created a few centuries ago. So that means before we decided murders should be punishable by law, they never happened? Like I said, the family was relevant for the human evolution on Earth. Thousands of years ago we praised our descendants/generations.

Now someone may be asking: what if a family is not only based on blood ties, instead it is only supported by love/affection? HOWEVER, IT'S NOT THE IDEAL FAMILY in the end.

Ask a kid who lost his parents and is being raised by godparents: "would you like that your parents were alive?". A grandson (that lives with his grandpa) if asked "would you like that both your parents were living together, peacefully, with you?" would also answer yes.

And that's why the State should protect the so called TRADITIONAL FAMILY. Nowadays this was completely destroyed, thanks to women's liberation, mostly. And what is the solution for this sorry state of affairs? To give more rights to them, I am sure.

There is an article that explains the reasons behind it:

http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

Everyone stands to lose as long as that virus of the mind and cancer of the soul which is the feminine is not recognized as it is.

Here are a few truths for you:

Femininity and masculinity are just labels for me and are only telling what to expect from someone's mind, if it is or can be ever conscious of reality and itself. I have yet to see a sage woman, yet I have always seen masculine/feminine men.

The simpler the truth, the harder for woman to have anything to do with it. A woman appears to be an adult, but has the mind of a child. A woman lacks an internal life and has no direct relationship with anything. The closest they can come is through others.

Their personality is flexible, they take things and drop them easily. They commit the same mistakes over and over again, never learning from them. All analyzing is superficial, a woman is never affected by abstract thoughts, led by firm resolutions, and can't be truly moved by what is absent, past, future, remote.

And I am not even mentioning the charges of "pretending to be thinking human beings", all emotions faked and never felt, cold, callous, only concerned about themselves/other women and only seeing men as tools, etc.

This is what ALL OF you should know BEFORE trying to defend abortion.

If you don't possess that knowledge then you simply cannot even discuss anything else.

You are very kind.

And for the users asking if I am jesting, sorry to break this to you, but every single time I post a message on the internet, it is in earnest.

And someone to think that I am somehow inventing things or joking is what really saddens me, since I studied all of this for a long time BEFORE conveying any opinion or information to ANYONE.

You can be DEAD SURE I not only believe in everything I say but also have ENOUGH evidence to support every single one of these claims.

To disagree with my findings is one thing.

I respect and understand that.

Now, if you have never read the same books, articles, saw the same videos, listened the same comments, or had the same discernment in your life experiences, then perhaps you should reserve judgment for the time when you are qualified for that.

If you think that I am trying to win anything here, then you clearly don't know me and are not honest with yourself.

I can listen to all sides of an argument and even change my ideas if needed. There's no shame in that. All I ask is plausible evidence and a respect for logic.

And no one is giving me either.

 

WTF???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? there aren't enough drugs in the world to make sense of what i just read. just what the hell?

 

Mod Hat ― Free advice

Look, I'm not going to make your decisions for you, people, but come on, I think we all see what's going on here.

Our new neighbor might well be determined to braid his own rope and hang himself by it, but it is anybody's own decision to take that sort of wilful provocation seriously.

Our neighbor is advised to be civil or be elsewhere; if there is any way I can encourage you to save yourselves the stress of trying to deal in any serious context with that manner of brainless excrement, I might beg you spare your own effort and refuse him the dignity of pretending he serves any use to the human species.