Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Pro Life ?
Aleksib | 
Finland Waterfuk 
or Pro choice ?
2019-03-23 16:10
#1
God | 
Poland henlo 
pro skribblio player 😎😎😎😎😎
2019-03-23 16:11
+1
2019-03-23 16:11
saluted
2019-03-23 16:12
actually, fuck off the emojis then saluted
2019-03-23 16:12
lul😎😎😎😎😎
2019-03-23 16:18
yu fokin wot m8 😎😎😎
2019-03-27 14:02
bich why u bully me
2019-03-27 20:30
#7
 | 
Cyprus ASKING_ON_HLTV 
henlo Henlo
2019-03-23 16:12
#3
chrisJ | 
Netherlands Dvid 
pro shellshock.io player here
2019-03-23 16:11
Pro Life.
2019-03-23 16:12
no chance for abortion ? not in any case ?
2019-03-23 16:13
Except in those cases where the mother's life is in serious danger because of her pregnancy.
2019-03-23 16:29
#93
Liazz | 
Europe nyoha 
+1
2019-03-24 13:11
what about pregnancy caused by rape?
2019-03-24 13:17
The baby isn't really the one to blame, is it?
2019-03-24 17:29
#136
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
you are pathetic and have literally 55 iq
2019-03-24 18:41
#146
 | 
Romania cyber8 
Adoption is the best option in this case.
2019-03-24 18:50
#147
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
i wouldnt want to live a life like that, tbh
2019-03-24 18:51
You dont get to kill someone because they inconvenience you.
2019-03-26 01:23
#255
 | 
Denmark dR_JaCkPoT 
But you do get to kill someone if somebody impregnated you against your will? "Sorry you got raped and that you are inconvenienced for 18 years, but life is life sry m8" BURGER BRAIN ALERT
2019-03-27 22:00
So you think that you should be allowed to murder someone if something bad happens to you. Good standard dude. Sad how dumb you are.
2019-03-27 23:19
#337
 | 
Australia SaltyPaper 
Agreed, it is 100% the rapists fault and the baby has to be killed for no reason other than, "it stuff my life up". The baby is conscious and alive, to kill that would be the same as suffocating a toddler... Pro choice is an awful idea, the baby may be part of your body, but it is alive and has got separate DNA. Abortion is never a good answer and like someone else in the thread said, foster the child. Guys, please dont choose Pro-Choice... It is murder and the fact that it is legal in a lot of countries, makes me physically sick. If you get an abortion, your murdering a child. Thanks for reading, Saltyy
2019-03-27 23:59
#352
 | 
Denmark dR_JaCkPoT 
Your logic doesn't check out here. You say you can't "kill" someone if you are inconvenienced with a baby (by mistake) But you CAN kill someone if someone else makes you pregnant against you will (rape) How is that "pro life" ? I'm pro choice, I think it's fucked up that you want to force an unwanted child to thw world who would grow up in bad conditions. It's a lose-lose situation for everybody.
2019-03-28 09:01
I never said that... Do you know how to read? I said just because something bad happens to you that doesn't mean you can murder a baby. I love how people like you go to the emotional argument of, the baby will live in bad conditions. So you went from you can murder a baby if it inconveniences you, then you can murder a baby if something bad happens to you. Now you are saying that you can murder someone who lives in bad conditions. You have no intellectual consistency.
2019-03-28 14:13
#363
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
+1 stupid leftists/liberals :(
2019-03-28 14:14
#365
 | 
Denmark dR_JaCkPoT 
I don't even know what you are trying to say I'm saying: If you are pro-life I assume you DON'T think its okay to "murder a baby" (lmao) just because a rapist impregnated you. Life is life, right? Or maybe you are pro-life, with exceptions?
2019-03-28 15:06
Im pro-life with the only exception being if the mother were to die if she gave birth. Just because someone is raped that does not give them the right to murder a baby.
2019-03-28 15:08
#367
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
+1
2019-03-28 15:09
#369
 | 
Denmark dR_JaCkPoT 
Okay, at least you are consistent in your pro-life stance, my bad I was just assuming since most of you are pro-life with a bunch of exceptions. Still a fucked up view though.
2019-03-28 15:12
Well then we can agree to disagree. I would say pro-choice is a fucked up view.
2019-03-28 15:14
I would rather than not
2019-03-27 05:31
Unwanted children aren't less human (in case you didn't notice).
2019-03-24 18:52
#151
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
i couldnt give less of a fuck about what is human and what is not, (in case you didnt notice) you have children literally dying out there every fucking second, the only impact and aborted child has on the world is positive: he doesnt lead a proably complicated life and doesnt ruin his parents life only to be fucked up in the future for abuses and coping with being unwanted
2019-03-24 18:54
"I Couldn't give less of a fuck about what is human and what is not". Of course you couldn't. You're a fully fledged psychopath. Sistematically ending a human life at it's very start because he or she might have a hard time afterwards? KILLING "in order to avoid further suffering"? You're so paradoxical, it's depressing.
2019-03-24 19:28
#154
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
if you think an aborted child experiences more yet any kind of suffering than a nonwanted dysfunctional born one you are just delusional
2019-03-24 19:29
I never said that. By the way, should we be allowed to terminate the lives of all unwanted and dysfunctional people in the planet?
2019-03-24 20:01
#176
 | 
United States stephcurry30 
we already do through death setences, lifetime jail, euphanasia
2019-03-27 05:34
Not all unwanted & dysfunctional people in the world are necessarily criminals or terminally ill.
2019-03-27 14:06
#355
 | 
United States fatburger 
?? what
2019-03-28 09:20
5 iq argument lmao you're such a selfish twat
2019-03-27 21:39
"Selfish twats" are monsters like you who kill the unborn out of convenience. Nice "rebuttal", though.
2019-03-27 21:44
i'm pretty sure you're the typical retard to care about a kid who hasnt even been born yet but when you see a homeless kid in the streets you just pass him by, you don't even have the decency to look him in the eyes. as a said, you're a hypocrite selfish cunt, period
2019-03-27 22:00
I couldn't expect a weaker response from you. Should we straight up kill all homeless people then? Should we prohibit the poor to have children in fear that they might - JUST MIGHT - fail next generations by not providing their successors with proper care? Are you Stalin or what? You literally defend that lower class individuals are better off DEAD than struggling in any way, yet I'm the "hypocrite selfish cunt"? The more you talk, the dumber you sound.
2019-03-27 22:49
No, I'm just saying that if you don't care about others then you should let them decide what they wanna do with their bodies, and don't come with the stupid argument "uhHgh But They'RE CarrYing Al ifE in Their BellY", that's nonsense bullshit. And I've never said they're better off dead, I won't take the responsability for your stupid reasoning, stop drawing dumb conclusions. As I said, you're just a stupid hypocrite little fuck who doesn't even care about the kids, you're getting carried away by your worthless morals; selfish and stupid morals. There's no point on arguing with you. You got your points, I got mine. And tbh I couldn't care less about what you think, I won't try to change your thoughts. Just leave it there.
2019-03-28 01:29
Supporting the idea that innocent beings should be systematically slaughtered for the sake of promiscuity shows that the only one who doesn't care here AT ALL is you. By the way, it's no surprise that pro-death barbarians often label scientific positions they dislike as "nonsense bullshit". That's the best y'all can come up with when playing reasonable is not an option, after all. Given the functional illiteracy displayed so far, it's safe to say that you're just a horny piece of garbage with no morals whatsoever who's also not willing to take any responsibility for the things you do with your genitals. Let alone a human life. There's no point in arguing with you indeed. You're so irrational and angry, this could be very wearisome. Only time (and some books because you clearly don't read a thing that challenges your biases) can persuade you otherwise anyway, so let's leave it at that.
2019-03-28 04:18
#356
 | 
United States fatburger 
"selfish twat" hes not the one who wants to kill a baby cause they didnt "want it"
2019-03-28 09:21
why is the mom's life worth more than the baby's?
2019-03-27 21:52
It's not. No human life is more valuable than another.
2019-03-27 22:16
#354
 | 
United States stephcurry30 
u watch monster?
2019-03-28 09:14
pro choice. if humans dont really have that much power until they are 16/18, and parents can decide things like NOT vaccinating their children, then why cant parents decide not to have a child.
2019-03-23 16:13
im pro choice but honestly parents can decide not to have child before getting her pregnant lol
2019-03-23 16:14
because a condom works 100% of the time... as proven
2019-03-23 16:15
it does tho unless u break it
2019-03-23 16:17
idk about that edit: interesting edit, bro
2019-03-23 16:19
about what? u cant get pregntant if the guy is using a condom because the sperm wont go to the oompa lompas . If you break it because u dont know how to put a condom then its a different story
2019-03-23 16:19
in perfect conditons you have only 98% chance that a condom works
2019-03-23 16:21
0/8 bait
2019-03-23 16:21
mad cuz true ?
2019-03-23 16:22
well its obvious not true since u have no idea how condom works. You are obviously a virgin
2019-03-23 16:22
learned that at school nt
2019-03-23 16:24
lmao school aka leftist propaganda. Nice one bait
2019-03-23 16:25
because you obviously did testing at a bigger scale than them
2019-03-23 16:26
If you believe condoms work in 100% of all cases you need to get your brain checked
2019-03-24 18:54
rename to VirginGuy buddy
2019-03-26 01:41
Abstinence works 100% of the time
2019-03-27 05:34
Because the baby has already been made in this case. Parents have autonomy over the well-being of their child, but they also can't abuse/murder them. You've also made the mistake of thinking that because society has laws in place that grant people full adult-hood status at 16/18 that it means they do not have rights until that threshold. GOVT doesn't grant you rights, they can only take rights way since humans are subjugated by GOVT. And parents always have the choice to use protection, if a baby is conceived 99.99999% of the time it is the fault of the parents, the baby shouldn't have to pay for their mistakes. Also, the reason people don't vaccinate their children is because of misinformation and in some odd cases, for religious reasons, they usually believe that they are doing things for the benefit of their child. The issue with the vaccine issue is that while you want kids to be vaccinated, you also don't want the GOVT to come in and force people to get injections, because the slippery slope exists as a concept. Also, if you give the GOVT the power to violate religious freedom, that could also be abused in the future. I only believe in abortion in the scenario that the mother AND the baby are both in danger and you can only save one realistically. "Abortion" would be the choice to save the mother in that scenario. If someone is raped and doesn't want the baby, then I'd opt for support for the person so that they can afford to have the baby, and then put the baby up for adoption when it is born.
2019-03-23 16:23
+1, wise stance.
2019-03-23 16:40
Wow... People actually have tume to write this on hltv
2019-03-24 13:35
Well-thought out responses are better than shite bait meme nonsense.
2019-03-24 14:52
Yeah of course. Your response are on point.
2019-03-24 22:44
#138
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
the baby WILL pay for his parents mistakes if brought to life in an unfavourable scenario, only way to sapre the baby from a possible life of pain and suffering is to not have it at all aka aborting
2019-03-24 18:43
"Your Life is/will be difficult therefore it is not worth living" wtf? Just because a baby is born in an unfavorable situation, it doesn't mean that they can't still live a meaningful or good life. It is then the responsibility of the parents to try to give the baby the best life they can. Adoption or fostering also exists as an alternative. If we decide whether someone's life is worth living for them based on the logic of whether it will be difficult or not, then I guess we should just kill people in inner cities, people with diseases, and people with disabilities. We tread on very scary ground if that's the logic we use to determine if someone should live or not. If a rich person loses all their money and would rather die than live as a poor person, is that rich person then justified in killing their already born child as their life would be difficutlt? Also, we're talking about the POSSIBILITY of pain and suffering, it is not a 100% chance, killing a baby based off of such shoddy logic is ridiculous.
2019-03-24 20:32
#293
 | 
United Kingdom Hamshanks 
Do you not think its unfair that a rape victim who had no intention of having a kid is forced into having it? Or do you feel a support structure is required to give rape victims a better option but ultimately leave it up to them?
2019-03-27 22:39
Like, I said, I'd opt for economic support for the person until they deliver the baby and afterwards until they can put it up for adoption or keep it. Being raped doesn't mean you then have the right to kill the baby that was unfortunately born out of that situation. My heart goes out the person raped, but that doesn't mean that because you were wronged you are allowed to wrong the baby who has committed no sin.
2019-03-28 08:06
#357
 | 
United States fatburger 
you think its more fair to punish the child??
2019-03-28 09:23
#358
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
Ofc he is a leftist. Sadly.
2019-03-28 09:31
#373
 | 
United Kingdom Hamshanks 
I was asking for an opinion? I think they should be made to have the baby personally but congrats on guessing opinions
2019-03-28 22:29
Pro choice. It is the logical choice.
2019-03-23 16:14
#71
 | 
Brazil adre221 
How can it be logical if it's impossible to defend in an argumentation?
2019-03-24 12:56
#139
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
that only means that you are not logical
2019-03-24 18:43
#160
 | 
Brazil adre221 
What? Elaborate
2019-03-26 01:18
Pro Player 😎
2019-03-23 16:14
press x to doubt also fuck ur emoji
2019-03-23 16:15
#15
 | 
Sweden newerth4nu 
Life obviously
2019-03-23 16:16
So u would want a mother thats been raped to carry out a child when she is in a shitty situtation in life with no money to support the baby ?
2019-03-23 16:18
#21
NiKo | 
Sweden Flippee 
Yes he does, he is a man that wants power over women
2019-03-23 16:19
Your attempt to pathos is fucking disgusting. Act like a man, use facts no emotions. In my opinion she would first needs to prove it was a rape, or it would be abused too easily. Fake rape accusaitons happen all the time. Then enforce DNA paternity test. Once the fucker is found, made him pay for the baby's needs. You don't run away from your responsabilities.
2019-03-23 16:25
Guess im retard but idk wtf pathos means. Also im not talking about in which case woman can prove she has been raped yada yada... Im talking about when a woman HAS BEEN RAPED. Would he still be pro life ? making the kids life horrible along with the mothers.
2019-03-23 16:27
Pathos is when you try to make your interlocutor emotional to strengthen your facts. Mostly used by leftists, women and weaklings. Exemple: "You are against immigration but... but... what about the poor little kids starving or drowning in the sea ? What about them ??" More than 90% of women know their attacker when they are raped. Fact. Make the fucker pay. For the 10% left... is it worth legalizing abortion ? Why should the kids' life necessarily be horrible ? Plenty of kids were raised by single mothers or grandparents, adopted by another family, lived in orphanage... are they all miserable ? On the contrary, are you necessarily happy living in a normal family ? Too much doubt to normalize abortion for me. It should be only legal if the mother's life is at risk during pregnancy.
2019-03-23 16:38
Well now that u gave me the definition of pathos.. idk what to say. I was only stating facts in my original comment. I was legit asking a question that no1 answered.
2019-03-23 17:03
It's also a proven fact that rape babies live significantly worse/neglected lives than other children raised in the same scenario minus the rape.
2019-03-24 17:55
Of course, and so does babies living with poor and uneducated parents. Or born in criminalized ghettos. Or homeless. Or disabled. Do you want to exterminate all of them just because they will statistically "live significantly worse/neglected live" ? Be human. You can't justify murder with some stats.
2019-03-24 18:02
I never suggested any of those things. You seemed to be under the impression that the only person being affected by a rape pregnancy is the mother so I educated you, nothing else.
2019-03-24 18:38
#140
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
yes i want to, you fucking PATHOS user, they are a waste of sapce and only live to experience their own suffering, be a man and dont maka claim to emotions, bitch.
2019-03-24 18:45
#217
 | 
Other notAbait 
LOL men)) But i agree, earth is too fucking full of people.
2019-03-27 21:33
Make the fucker pay? Are you serious? Do you think it's easy for mothers to get money from the fathers of the children? Can you imagine the time it takes and the troubles associated with it?
2019-03-27 06:01
How is it not easy ? Women win more than 90% of any marital trials (even if they are guilty). A women could beat her children, she would still win the custody. Women manage to steal money from the fathers/ex-husbands all the time for no reason, I don't see how it is so hard.
2019-03-27 16:57
Also, no need for time or troubles? You just need a law forcing him to pay and if he doesn't, well... seizing. Just like any other judicial measures.
2019-03-27 16:59
Well then consider yourself lucky with your country's judicial system. In Czech Republic, the majority of single mothers face poverty and the system is very forgiving to the ex-husbands, i.e. they aren't forced or pressed enough.
2019-03-27 20:40
Sadly my country's judicial system doesn't work so efficiently, I was only saying it is how things should be done in my opinion. The system here in France might be good for divorce cases but there are very few measures to avoid fathers fleeing parenthood and leaving mothers alone outside of marriage.
2019-03-28 02:47
#57
 | 
Sweden newerth4nu 
Yes, also adoption exists
2019-03-23 18:47
nice... u have no clue wtf this thread is about...
2019-03-23 18:49
#62
 | 
Sweden newerth4nu 
abortion yes/no i think, you talking about something else?
2019-03-23 20:18
well gz u got the point of the thread but not the point of this argument.
2019-03-23 20:20
#174
REZ | 
United States bunnery5 
I hate this argument to generalize abortion since it is such a SMALL percentage of cases. arguing for a small exception does not make the big idea okay.
2019-03-26 19:53
#17
 | 
Sweden Div-\ 
Pro choice.
2019-03-23 16:17
Pro-life 99% of the time Pro-choice in exceptional circumstances.
2019-03-23 16:19
What would those circumstances be ?
2019-03-23 17:23
To save the mother's life or the baby from terrible deformities.
2019-03-23 17:47
i get that mothers life is in danger but if ur "Pro Life" why u wanna kill a baby just because he/she has deformities ? its still life.
2019-03-23 17:48
Well, I never said that "i wanna kill a baby". First, I'm speaking of deformities that will lead to the rapid death of the infant only, not aesthetic ones. Babies are sometimes born with the doctors knowing they wont live past the first few weeks, never actually acknowledging their own existence. Secondly, I do not say you should abort in these kind of situations. It simply seems reasonable to offer the choice to the parents of keeping the baby or not in that specific and difficult situation.
2019-03-23 17:54
so basically ur pro choice
2019-03-23 17:58
#22 You are twisting the words a bit. Being pro-choice means one thing: the mother can chose to keep a baby or not, whatever are the reasons. In that regard I'm not pro-choice since I believe 99% of abortions made in Western countries should be outlawed, meaning that I also believe 99% of woman should have no say in the decision. It's like if you said that I wanted every criminals executed just because I support death penalty. You can't be "basically a pro-choice". You're either pro-choice or you are not, and I'm not.
2019-03-23 18:05
okay well... Pro life is = making abortion illegal unless it kills either mother or baby. pro choice is having the ability to make a choice when u simply cannot support the baby and grow it with the standards everyone should be grown with.
2019-03-23 18:08
So by your definition I am neither of those ? Well, I'm fine with that. In fact I never called myself that way. "pro choice is having the ability to make a choice when u simply cannot support the baby and grow it with the standards everyone should be grown with." But It's not really true ? Because everywhere there is abortion choice, the mother doesn't have to prove anything. She just goes to the abortion center and the future baby is removed as easily as you remove a tooth. The standards are not defined nor nothing. And the pro-choice people are fine with that. It might be your stance on the matter, but you have to understand that the immense majority of the pro-choice are more extreme and want choice no matter the situation. Maybe you are not pro-choice either but really in between, just like me ?
2019-03-23 18:16
#79
 | 
Brazil adre221 
There is no ''in between'', since it's either A) an innocent individual, therefore it would always be unethical to kill him/her B) not an individual, therefore it can be killed Since point A is correct there is no circunstance where abortion would be justified.
2019-03-24 13:01
2 reasons I midly disagree 1) As I already said, sometimes abortion can save the mother's life - how is it ethical to kill the mother (and not even be sure to save the baby) ? 2) Ethical is not enough to justify anything. To guarantee the survival of your family or your country, sometimes you have to do unethical things. War is not ethical, spying is not ethical, meat industry is not ethical, medical tests on animals are not ethical, Yet we still do it.
2019-03-24 17:50
#161
 | 
Brazil adre221 
1) Acting to kill an innocent is unethical no matter the consequences. If the baby dies as a result of saving the mother's life that's one thing, but if you purposedly kill them you're a murderer. 2) Ethics are above everything. Any unjustified violation of private property is unethical. Things involving animals are not related to ethics because animals have no rights, unless of course if the animal in question is someone's private property.
2019-03-26 01:21
#25
 | 
Russia avocadosatlaw 
pro-whocares😎
2019-03-23 16:21
alot of people cares... imagine not having a stance in this matter lmao... flag checks out
2019-03-23 16:23
#35
 | 
Russia avocadosatlaw 
flags doesn't checks out when finns started to care about people that not their relatives😎😎😎
2019-03-23 16:26
emoji tells enough
2019-03-23 16:28
#39
 | 
Russia avocadosatlaw 
emojiless pleb spotted😎😎😎
2019-03-23 16:28
Do you know that without abortion Russia would have more than 300 millions inhabitants today and would be a superpower ?
2019-03-23 16:41
#45
 | 
Russia avocadosatlaw 
woah i didn't know that, thx for the info +1 another useless fact in my brain😎😎😎
2019-03-23 16:43
"Pathos is when you try to make your interlocutor emotional to strengthen your facts. Mostly used by leftists, women and weaklings. " #42 - That's yourself. Next comment you make is of zero factual subsance. Nice one dawg.
2019-03-27 23:18
How has #44 anything to do with "pathos" ? You clearly misunderstood my point. #25 said "who cares" like abortion could be a meaningless question and I simply showed him that the question of abortion always has cataclysmic consequences on the long term, giving a factual exemple with his country. johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-.. -> here is a proof of my factual statement, with a few dozens sources to back up my claim.
2019-03-28 02:38
Pro-losers maybe?
2019-03-23 16:33
turks can relate
2019-03-23 17:04
but muh
2019-03-23 18:45
#149
 | 
Europe crosst 
you are the most retarded fin ive met yet
2019-03-24 18:51
ty man
2019-03-27 22:20
#58
Lekr0 | 
North America Kolinaa 
Pro Choice obviously.
2019-03-23 18:49
why its obviously lol ?
2019-03-24 11:44
#338
 | 
Australia SaltyPaper 
Do not worry my friend, he is from NA.. xD
2019-03-28 00:05
i think pro players live quite the normal life it might be a little different because of the job they have
2019-03-23 18:51
#61
 | 
Finland ToxicDUD 
dont kill babies out of convinience
2019-03-23 19:18
pro choice doesnt mean killing a fetus for fun...
2019-03-24 12:51
#66
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Maybe, but there is no justification for murder.
2019-03-24 12:52
there is no justification for making a kid suffer just because mother was raped
2019-03-24 12:53
#70
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Your argument fails because it tries to defend unjustified killing, if the baby is innocent, it's impossible to defend it's murder in an argumentation.
2019-03-24 12:55
so u just killed pro life
2019-03-24 12:56
#73
 | 
Brazil adre221 
''Pro life'' is the only ethical, therefore correct point.
2019-03-24 12:57
are you drunk ? you dont seem to be able to understand anything i say...
2019-03-24 12:58
#76
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Then make it more clear.
2019-03-24 12:59
"there is no justification for making a kid suffer just because mother was raped" how much more clear i can make that wtf....
2019-03-24 13:01
#81
 | 
Brazil adre221 
I think you may have a miserable life, therefore I can kill you.
2019-03-24 13:02
Its about giving the kid opportunities and being able to support him, bring food to the table.
2019-03-24 13:03
#86
 | 
Brazil adre221 
You can't kill an innocent because you think they might not have a satisfactory life, it's in clear violation of ethics, so it's ilogical and not defensable in an argument.
2019-03-24 13:06
babies cant recognise themselves in the mirror until around 2 year old... abortion isnt killing humans, its killing bunch of cells. also we should aim to give best life possible to babies. also like u said "You can't kill an innocent because you think they might not have a satisfactory life" im not talking about when they MIGHT or MAYBE. im talking about WHEN.
2019-03-24 13:09
#100
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Since it's proven through argumentation ethics that human individuals capable of reason have right to self-property, and it's proven ontologically and biologically that a zygote has all characteristics that makes a human individual (most importantly potential of developing reason), it's therefore proven that everything after a zygote is already a human individual that has rights to self-property, so killing them without justification (justification is proof of guilt, not convenience) will always be murder, so it's not possible to defend in an argumentation without being contraditory (since the act of arguing always agrees with the fact that humans have right to self-property). Those are a priori ethical facts, therefore they cannot be refuted.
2019-03-24 13:18
okay well alot of "proven by facts and studies" in here but where is the links to those studies ? also fetus might have all the physical charasteristics to make a human but no way in hell they can decide for themselves.
2019-03-24 13:21
#109
 | 
Brazil adre221 
I just said those were a priori arguments and then you ask for links to studies?? Studies are a posteriori, an inferior class of knowledge to a priori. I think your lack of knowledge about epistemology is showing. Not being able to decide for yourself doesn't take away any rights, or else you'd be able to kill people if they were temporarily unconcious.
2019-03-24 13:24
#68
 | 
Portugal Antzrede 
Choice obviously
2019-03-24 12:53
why "obviously"
2019-03-24 12:54
abortion is murder
2019-03-24 12:59
+1
2019-03-26 01:30
#84
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
"I am kinda stuck in between the two, I mean I wanna kill babies yet I still don't want to give women a choice."
2019-03-24 13:04
so ur pro life ? or pro choice ? very vague comment my friend...
2019-03-24 13:05
#87
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
That was a troll obviously, I am pro life.
2019-03-24 13:06
yea troll but i wanted to know ur real stand
2019-03-24 13:07
#91
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
I think abortion is just legal murder. I would see the world and take my chance rather than be killed before I even get born. The life of the unborn child is his own, not his parent's not anyone else's.
2019-03-24 13:09
babies cant recognise themselves in the mirror until around 2 year old... abortion isnt killing humans, its killing bunch of cells. copied from my comment above.
2019-03-24 13:11
#94
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
Based on that, would killing a 6 month old baby be legal? He doesn't recognize himself in the mirror either, and we are all a bunch of cells.
2019-03-24 13:12
is putting animals down fine ? ofc i dont want babies to be put down after birth or close to birth. i only used that because u made it sound like we are killin fully fledged human beings out here.
2019-03-24 13:14
#96
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
Being unconscious doesn't make them less human.
2019-03-24 13:16
u kind of went around my question there.
2019-03-24 13:17
#102
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
I actually answered it.
2019-03-24 13:20
nah u didnt u went around it.
2019-03-24 13:21
#105
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
Fine, repeat it and let's see whether I answered it or not.
2019-03-24 13:22
"is putting animals down fine ?" "Being unconscious doesn't make them less human." okay well nice answer.. ur basically saying babies are animals. ok.
2019-03-24 13:23
#111
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
"is putting animals down fine ?" Am I supposed to say no to this question? I don't see any point behind it neither any relevance to this argument.
2019-03-24 13:26
telling me that just because they are unconcoius doesnt make them any less human...
2019-03-24 13:28
#120
Luminous | 
Tunisia me_ 
"i only used that because u made it sound like we are killin fully fledged human beings out here."
2019-03-24 13:29
#123
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Animals don't have rights.
2019-03-24 13:30
#112
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
in no way he did say that. lmao
2019-03-24 13:26
that was me in that quotation...
2019-03-24 13:27
#99
Liazz | 
Europe nyoha 
pro choice people disgust me, just a bunch of brainwashed leftists who think killing children is ok
2019-03-24 13:18
so right wants kids AND mothers to suffer because they been raped in a shitty situatuation in their life...
2019-03-24 13:18
#110
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
how does a kid suffer? how does the mother suffer if she gives the kid to an adoption center? dont tell me "the kid will have no parents then, so rather kill it" if u think this you are disgusting.
2019-03-24 13:25
if every kid who where being aborted were adopted there would not be enough parents to adopt. i would love it if every aborted kid could get adopted... im pro choice but im a realist.
2019-03-24 13:27
#117
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
thats a problem. people just fuck as much as they can without thinking much of the consequences. if u cant afford a child dont fuck.
2019-03-24 13:28
lol dont have sex.......
2019-03-24 13:29
#340
 | 
Australia SaltyPaper 
You said it wrong bro,"Lol, I don't have sex" is right Lemme quote that real quick "Lol, I don't have sex" ~Waterfuk 2019
2019-03-28 00:10
thats a knee slapper
2019-03-28 18:00
#382
 | 
Australia SaltyPaper 
Thx bby, no homo, don't make me abort my baby pls babe
2019-04-03 22:36
#119
 | 
Brazil adre221 
That's not the most precise argument. Abortion is murdering innocents, therefore it's incorrect, regardless of everything else.
2019-03-24 13:29
#122
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
did you comment to the wrong person?
2019-03-24 13:30
#124
 | 
Brazil adre221 
No, it was you. When you try to argue that the kid or the mother doesn't suffer, it's imprecise, because that's irrelevant. The only reason abortion is wrong is because it's murder, so even if the mother or the kid do suffer, it'd be wrong to abort, because it would be an unjustified killing.
2019-03-24 13:32
#125
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
yeah ofc. but the other guys argument was its ok to kill the child cuz it will suffer anyways.
2019-03-24 13:34
#116
 | 
Brazil adre221 
The right are in sync with truth, logic, and reason, so they make the only ethical and correct argument, while the left are intrinsically contraditory for violating ethics.
2019-03-24 13:28
#107
 | 
Turkey TrMan4161 
31+69= şak şakxşak
2019-03-24 13:23
0 scene
2019-03-24 13:24
#113
 | 
Israel Xpicyy 
pro kda
2019-03-24 13:26
Contrary to what many people are saying, pro choice is actually the rational alternative and pro life is the one based on sentiments. Abortion can be beneficial to the would-be mother, whereas not having a choice does no good.
2019-03-24 16:15
This is dumb. Of course it is not about being rational, it is about being human. By your logic, you are in favor of exterminating every disabled people because it would be the most rational and efficient thing to do and it will improves society greatly. If you want that, congrats, you are nazi. If you don't, congrats, you are based on sentiments too.
2019-03-24 17:53
First of all I was just pointing out the flawed thinking of many people in this thread. An argument can be built upon on sentimentality and still be viable. However, the slippery slope you are implying is in no way viable. Killing an unborn fetus in the early stages of development is in no way comparable to killing disabled people. So we have the argument of utility against the argument of protecting life. Both are viable arguments, but personally I lean towards pro choice.
2019-03-24 21:50
#164
 | 
Brazil adre221 
That's a very crucial mistake you make, being pro choice is in no way rational, infact it's contraditory in essence. Why? It can be proven through a priori synthethic judgements that abortion is unethical, and since ethics are a priori knowledge, they are a class above utilitarism and a posteriori. Any proposition that violates ethics immediatly enters perfomatic contradition, since agreeing to humans having rights to self-property is an a priori condition of any argumentation.
2019-03-26 01:31
i agree men
2019-03-26 01:35
I agree with synthetic a priori statements and categorical imperative to the point that every action can be associated with either being good or bad, regardless of the context of the action. One could say that killing is bad and I would agree with it. But I don't think good and bad can be directly associated with right and wrong. Is it wrong to kill one to save 5? Or to save 1, 000? Or to save 1,000,000? You get my point. Categorical imperative is a good basis for ethical thinking. I think its merit is in that it is relatively unambiguous and doesn't leave a lot of room for exploitation. But at the same time it doesn't leave a lot of room for compromises either. You did a bad thing, you did a wrong thing, end of story. I believe categorical imperative is too simplified, and needs to be able to take into account the context of the action as well.
2019-03-27 16:36
#190
 | 
Brazil adre221 
I'm using Kant only to demonstrate the validity of the arguments (epistemology), I'm not using his moral philosophy. It can be demonstrated through argumentation ethics that the right to self-property is a transcendental, a priori condition of any argument. The right to self-property is granted to any individual that belongs to an ontological class that has potential to develop reason, and therefore argue. This is also a priori knowledge. With those facts elucidated, it's concluded that abortion (murder of an innocent individual) is impossible to defend in an argumentation without entering perfomative contradition. What you display ''I think, I believe'' is clearly only your subjective opinion, and not fact, your statement that ''pro-choice is rational, pro-life is sentimental'' is refuted, because defending abortion is contraditory in essence, while defending ethics is logical and correct because it is fundamented in a priori truth.
2019-03-27 20:49
There is a good reason I use phrases such as "I think" and "I believe". That is because we have not cracked ethics. I cannot sincerely claim to know anything when it comes to ethics. At least that's how I've learned to think. "It can be demonstrated through argumentation ethics that the right to self-property is a transcendental, a priori condition of any argument." Care to elaborate? How can it be demonstrated? I am trying to see your point, I truly am. I am intrigued by your almost mathematical view of ethics, I am even open minded to change my own views. But I cannot do so unless I understand clearly.
2019-03-27 21:25
#232
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
+1
2019-03-27 21:42
#133
 | 
India otgps 
Pro choice
2019-03-24 17:56
neither
2019-03-24 18:42
#141
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
so many retarded opinions on here, kids forum after all
2019-03-24 18:46
its hltv, everyone here is a conservativ alpha-male with a 30 cm dick who has a IQ above 130
2019-03-24 18:49
Pro choice until the baby has hit the 5 month then it can actually act on its own.
2019-03-24 18:48
#145
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
he is inside the woumb dude, he doent even know nothing exists beyond that
2019-03-24 18:50
#166
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Flag checks out.
2019-03-26 01:32
flag checks out
2019-03-26 19:44
#175
 | 
Brazil adre221 
I don't know if this is a troll or what but you have to be either very dumb or very dishonest to defend abortion
2019-03-27 05:18
#143
 | 
Romania cyber8 
Pro life all the way,women who want to kill their own children deserve no choice.
2019-03-24 18:49
nothing to do with this but everytime i put cl_righthand 0 in my config its still on cl_righthand 1 in game though ? why
2019-03-24 18:51
#224
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
you have to execute the config everytime. either u add the exec command to your launch options so it does it automatically or you open your console manually each time when the game boots and put "exec config.cfg" in the console.
2019-03-27 21:38
#ProFreedom
2019-03-24 19:30
prolife men
2019-03-26 01:31
If you are too dumb to use a condom you are probably too dumb to raise a kid as well
2019-03-26 01:35
men shouldn't interfere on women's choices.
2019-03-26 01:36
unless its about murdering a human being
2019-03-26 01:39
+1
2019-03-27 20:31
#173
 | 
Canada Bucket0 
Pro csgo player
2019-03-26 19:46
#179
 | 
Panama xemzex 
Imagine not being pro choice in 2019 luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuul
2019-03-27 05:56
#191
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Imagine being a doctrinated liberal puppet
2019-03-27 20:51
#193
 | 
Panama xemzex 
Found the pro choicer lul I bet you believe in religion omegalul
2019-03-27 20:52
#194
 | 
Brazil adre221 
I believe in logic and truth, something that is the exact opposite of the left (I categorize leftism as a disease that causes brain damage)
2019-03-27 20:53
#196
 | 
Panama xemzex 
Because someone cares about what you think lul
2019-03-27 20:54
#197
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Leftism is at a very advanced stage in you, you already have brain cancer. It's evident because you can't end a comment without saying ''lul'' like a demented retard
2019-03-27 20:56
#199
 | 
Panama xemzex 
You seem to have even more leftism than I do cuz you can't tell what's bait lul, but that's too much to expect from a brazilian
2019-03-27 20:57
#201
 | 
Brazil adre221 
how the fuck am I supposed to know when people are pretending to be a retard and when people are actually retards.
2019-03-27 20:59
#202
 | 
Panama xemzex 
Signed up date doesn't check out You should already know that
2019-03-27 21:00
pro life
2019-03-27 20:31
Pro choice, pro freedom.
2019-03-27 20:51
#195
 | 
Brazil adre221 
There is no freedom in a society that violates ethics.
2019-03-27 20:54
How is it a violation of ethics? How about protecting life that already exists and has full conciousness? Having a baby is a huge task. Not having the option could mean, that you never get an education or is forced to live a life close to bankruptcy. Having a baby at the wrong time in your life, could make things take a turn for the worse. Forcing it on someone, could also mean that the baby isn't brought up in an envoirment that actually wants it and takes care of it. I find that to be much more inhuman, to simply force these individuals. People always use the "what if it was you" - I would never have known or even have been concious if the decision was made. And making it illegal, will create a black market, every time.
2019-03-27 21:24
#211
 | 
Brazil adre221 
It's a violation of ethics because it's an agression against a innocent individual. It doesn't matter the context, since I'm not defending an utilitarian stance, although the utilitarian argument could be done and it would also be easily won. I base my argument on argumentation ethics, which is a priori, meaning that all unjustified violence against innocents is wrong, in all cases. Your subjective opinion is irrelevant.
2019-03-27 21:26
Being an individual, implies that you have thoughts and emotions, which is very far from the case here. Also, you completely disregard any of my arguments for it. Not really me being subjective here is it? You would rather fuck up two lives (or more) than one potential.
2019-03-27 21:31
#220
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
"Being an individual, implies that you have thoughts and emotions" sooooooo.... lets kill everyone who is disabled/in coma/old?
2019-03-27 21:35
Being disabled is a completely different thing. Being cold is dead, so... yeah? And having no thoughts or brain activity, is usually the reason for pulling the plug on a coma patient, because you're just keeping tissue alive at that point.
2019-03-27 21:39
#228
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
bad bait
2019-03-27 21:40
#226
 | 
Brazil adre221 
No, being an individual implies you have potential to develop reason. That's why a zygote can be categorized as such. You make arguments that are on a different class to what I use (a priori is superior to a posteriori), that's why I disregard it. A posteriori arguments are always prone to human subjectivity, that's why the foundation of my arguments are all a priori.
2019-03-27 21:39
Your foundation of your arguments are religious. You don't even want to talk about how you would rather fuck up two lives than one.
2019-03-27 21:41
#233
 | 
Brazil adre221 
It's very evident you have absolutely no clue about the validity of arguments, or the study of knowledge (epistemology), therefore your ignorance makes it impossible for you to understand simple truths. Which argument that I made was religious? Don't be an idiot.
2019-03-27 21:44
Again, you dodge my conclusion. You would rather fuck up the many, for one. That's against human nature.
2019-03-27 21:46
#240
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Go look up the definition of a priori, a posteriori, then read a little bit of critique of pure reason, then come back. Otherwise it's going to be impossible, you're simply too stupid as is. Also you ended your comment with a fallacy of nature. Good job.
2019-03-27 21:50
Go look up the definition of an argument. Because you do not grasp the concept. You ignore everything thrown at you, and repeat the same bullshit. You won't even comment on ruining current lives, even though that is just as unethical. How you convince yourself that one, potential, life is worth more than an adult, is up to you. But you won't find many outside religious extremists who will agree with you, therefor I made the connection, to you being a religious twat. I stand corrected, you're just a twat. I am an INTP, in case you have the slightest idea of what that implies. One is smelling bullshit from a mile away. And in this case, this is some theoretical mindfuck, that doesn't apply to the real world.
2019-03-27 21:58
#280
 | 
Brazil adre221 
#270 If after that you persist to utilize logical fallacies in your points then I'm afraid to say there is nothing else I can do. I wasn't trained on how to educate retards.
2019-03-27 22:23
Yes I read 270, maybe you should acknowledge that it is purely theoretical, and doesn't work in the actual world. The whole base of your argument, depends on people following rules and generally being decent human beings. The world is not like that, it's not perfect, and we have to accomodate that, sad as it may be. It's not that anyone LIKES abortion, but you completely disregard the fact, that everywhere it's made illegal, and even in countries where it is legal, black markets have risen to take their place. Those black market operations often kills the baby, and leaves the mother with serious wounds, or death. So it is only logical, to offer a safe service to these individuals, so that we can atleast keep one of them safe. No country or group of people have ever succesfully stopped abortions, it's impossible. We are dealing with people, so we have to start analyzing from there. What you are doing, is extremely theoretical, and implies everyone is doing what they are told and, ironically, doesn't have a will of their own.
2019-03-27 22:47
#326
 | 
Brazil adre221 
My argument doesn't depend on anything, it simply proves that ethic is correct and that it's contraditory to defend an ethic violation in an argument. My argument clarifies the truth, simple. As for the said ''black markets'', it SHOULD be unsafe to perform abortions. Do you want a safe enviroment for criminals to kill? ''No country or group of people have ever succesfully stopped abortions, it's impossible.'' This is a historicist fallacy, which is trying to use something in the past to predict the future. It's impossible to predict the future due to human subjectivity, you can only speculate, such is the study of praxeology. You have to understand that defending abortion is busted from an ethical stand point, and if it's unethical, then it's wrong on every other point as well, because utilitarist arguments needs to have a priori basis in order to be valid (in this case it's ethics). Don't mistake this with moral judgement, I couldn't care less with what people do with their bodies, I don't have problems with things like having no restriction to people buying drugs, but since abortion necessarily involves an agression (unjustified violence against an innocent), the only possible point to defend in an argumentation, is being against abortion.
2019-03-27 23:30
#198
 | 
Brazil UKita 
Pro choice, obviously. Our own body is one of a few things that is totally ours and we should be able to do whatever we want with it.
2019-03-27 20:57
#203
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Yes I agree. For that reason I'll utilize my body to gently pick up a firearm and pull the trigger pointing to your head. After all it's my body and I can do whatever I want with it.
2019-03-27 21:00
#205
 | 
Brazil UKita 
Nt but i advise you to have some English lessons. You should do whatever it pleases you to your own body. Typically someone who is pro life is threatening someone's life with guns (why I'm not surprise?)
2019-03-27 21:10
#207
 | 
Brazil adre221 
So a pregnant woman has two bodies? You are the one who should take a lesson, search for truth and consistency before leftism eats your brain as a whole.
2019-03-27 21:13
#209
 | 
Brazil UKita 
No, but it is her body that it is creating the circumstances to make it possible to generate that other body (btw life does not start right at the fecundarion). It is easy for you to say something like that considering that you are not the one delivering it. You can say something like "just give it to adoption" but just a few kids get adopted in our country and when the child turns 18 you can turn your back because it is by themselves now. Every pregnancy should be wanted to secure the chances that this child get a proper life instead being a unwanted and forgetted living being.
2019-03-27 21:25
#219
 | 
Brazil adre221 
She has the obligation of providing to them until they are fully developed, since she and the father were the ones who put them on that incapacity. Even if she didn't consent, the child is still innocent, so she has ''negative homestead'', you can't kill an innocent because it's convenient to you. It's a contradition on itself, impossible to defend in an argumentation. Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 are completely irrelevant, since it has no a priori basis, and this is an ethical discussion (which is a priori). And yes, life doesn't start at fecundation, it starts earlier, but the individual starts at fecundation, that's why starting from the zygote, they already have rights.
2019-03-27 21:33
#231
 | 
Brazil UKita 
"She has the obligation" --> you say like if it is a unquestionable truth. "She and the father" --> sometimes the father runs away and leave the mother alone "Even if she didn't consent" --> so you are basically saying that a pregnant women due to rape has the obligation to carry the memories of the rapper with her for 9 months "Life stars even earlier" --> wtf man? "The individual start with fecundation" --> no it doesn't Your logic is broken
2019-03-27 21:42
#247
 | 
New Zealand NewZealand 
Dont fuck random black guys and the father wont run away.
2019-03-27 21:53
#249
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Yes it is. You could argue against that by actually trying to make a point against it, since I justified it in my comment. Completely irrelevant. She has not the obligation of carrying any memories, agression against an innocent is always unjustified, that's my only conclusion. Yes, it does, or before becoming a zygote, the sexual gametes are dead? Yes it does, it's called ontology and biology, which concludes this fact My logic is completely consistent and it's based on a priori truths, not utilitarism.
2019-03-27 21:54
So you would rather fuck up two lives, in the case of a woman not being able to provide for her child? Or rather, you would rather have children starving, than never have felt any pain what so ever. You make it sound like people make these choices for the fun of it.
2019-03-27 21:26
#215
 | 
Brazil UKita 
+1 it is easy because it will never happen with him
2019-03-27 21:31
He's clearly some religious nut job. They are the only ones fighting simple math and logic.
2019-03-27 21:32
#221
 | 
Brazil adre221 
''Simple math and logic'' You defend points that are ilogical and contraditory by definition, while trying to use a posteriori to refute a priori. What a shame, you seem to have everything messed up.
2019-03-27 21:35
You would rather fuck up two lives, than one who has never had a thought or is even aware of its own existence. You sir, are a nut job by definition.
2019-03-27 21:38
#230
 | 
Brazil adre221 
What I'd rather do or not is irrelevant, the fact is it can be concluded that abortion is always unethical, because it is an agression against an innocent, regardless of every circunstance, abortion will always be wrong and contraditory to defend in an argument. But since the left loves opinions, inconsistency and fraud, trying to argue with you would be banging my head on the wall.
2019-03-27 21:41
It's not irrelevant, it's the whole fucking point. You would rather have rape victims carry the child of their molester. You would rather have KIDS have KIDS. You would rather see people live in misery. Those are FACTS, proven over and over again, all over the fucking world.
2019-03-27 21:45
#241
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
1) You would rather have rape victims carry the child of their molester. - adoption etc. 2) You would rather have KIDS have KIDS - don't fuck if you can't raise a child. it's simple. If you still fuck then face the consequences - a baby. 3) You would rather see people live in misery. - well no but majority of abortions are without a valid reason. 4) Those are FACTS, proven over and over again, all over the fucking world. - what FACTS are you talking about?
2019-03-27 21:50
1) Not every kid is adopted 2) It happens anyway, and in places where they are not taught the consequences. Also, kids get raped and married away to men decades older than them all the time 3) So you would rather remove the option completely? 4) Do you even know anything about the 3rd world or life outside your moms basement? Fucking google it you mongoloid, instead of questioning something that is huge topic for the UN. edit: EVERY time governments regulate or simply make things illegal, a black market appears instead. The black market for abortions often means death or severe injuries to the people involved. Even if I don't like abortions, I would rather have the option to have them done safely, rather than risking both lives. It's not a nice thing, not at all, but it's better than the alternative. Life isn't perfect, and this is a great example.
2019-03-27 22:02
#261
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
1) imgur.com/a/mk7SOjw 0.085% of abortions are because of rape. Those babys will be able to be adopted - if these are the only adoption cases. 2) "it happens anyways" is not a reason to kill a baby. as i already said: dont fuck if u cant raise a child. face the consequences. - things like this would be clear to everyone if there would be proper sex education at home/school. 3) as stated in #1... we cant fully legalize something beacuse of a 0.085% minority. 4) can you please explain what FACTS you are talking about instead of insulting someone? I cba to read all the previous comments of yours.
2019-03-27 22:07
Look, legislation never actually stopped anyone. It's illegal to kill people, but it happens anyway. Catch my drift? And you picked one state, in a first world country, good job cherrypicking. Can you please just educate yourself? You even admit that these things happen, even by your florida statistic. And you're willing to give those women the "fuck you". Solid human being.
2019-03-27 22:12
#265
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
brainwashed leftist npc. can't argue with people like you.
2019-03-27 22:13
safeabortionwomensright.org/tag/black-ma.. You can't even argue against the fact, that it would just create a black market, as it has done everywhere, even in first world countries in the past. There was a reason why it was made legal in the first place. But hey, let's just disregard that for you princess
2019-03-27 22:17
#269
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
stop baiting. not funny at all.
2019-03-27 22:17
This is where any intelligent human being would have an arguement against it. Calling me leftist is as far from the truth as humanly possible.
2019-03-27 22:18
#275
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
we were arguing before all the time. i provided you with facts and logic and all you did was replying without arguments but your own personal feelings which are irrelevant. and then you randomly use a biased leftist pro abortion website. stop answering please. this is waste of time.
2019-03-27 22:20
Please, pinpoint my personal feelings. Because i fail to see them. My position on this, is based on the fact that millions of women each year, get pregnant without their consent. AND that pregnancies often ruin more lives than they create. That, is simple math. You're still stuck on the "killing is wrong", which is a very emotional response (EQ rather than IQ).
2019-03-27 22:22
lol denmark welfare state talking about people not being able to eat I guess lets nuke africa because they have starving people!
2019-03-27 22:06
Well that was a bit of stretch. It's quite clear that you don't know how things work in Denmark. It's not like a single mom always has time and opportunity to take an education, and still be able to take care of her kid. Sure, it's much more likely. But this wasn't a discussion of where abortion should be made legal or illegal.
2019-03-27 22:09
poor danish single mom cant go out every friday saturday and sunday to get her pussy filled with a different dudes seed, she has to compromise and work and take care of her kid with the help of the government! omgg!
2019-03-28 22:51
Poor italian men, still living at home with mom in their 30's incapable of taking care of themselves, while they hate on immigrants, who had the balls to leave home.
2019-03-29 20:30
did I ever mention italy or immigrants lul
2019-03-30 08:53
And I never mentioned Denmark. double lul
2019-03-30 18:41
#214
 | 
Brazil UKita 
You don't even know me and call me a leftist. You are the one who needs to learn
2019-03-27 21:30
#222
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Yet I can still easily refute your points.
2019-03-27 21:36
#236
 | 
Brazil UKita 
Just because you think that you own a unquestionable truth. The same logic that you follow said oneday that caucansian man where supperior than everyone else
2019-03-27 21:45
#251
 | 
Brazil adre221 
What I think is irrelevant. I can prove my points very easily using with universal knowledge, while you use subjective opinion and is by definition contraditory, when you assume that you can defend violating ethics on an argumentation. The last part of your comment doesn't even make sense.
2019-03-27 21:57
#253
 | 
Brazil UKita 
Subject oppinion? I gave you facts about the situation of our country, yet you still ignore it
2019-03-27 21:58
#270
 | 
Brazil adre221 
This will be my last effort to explain. The argument that I'm using (argumentation ethics) is concluded aprioristically, meaning that, it's a form of knowledge that is INDEPENDENT and comes BEFORE experience, it's the basis of the argument. Argumentation ethics proves that agreeing to ethics is an a priori condition to any argument. All of the arguments that you used are a posteriori, meaning that they are empirical, they are not concluded through ideas, and they are not universal, because they the reality seem through humanity's subjective senses, knowing all of that, they cannot be used to counter a priori arguments, that's why I ignore all of them. They are irrelevant. That's the same thing as me saying slavery is wrong because it's an ethical violation, and you saying that slavery is good for the economy, you cannot use utilitarism against ethical arguments. There, if after that you still didn't understand, then you are either too dumb, or dishonest. I sincerely hope MEC didn't make you retarded enough to not understand this, because it's impossible to explain better than this.
2019-03-27 22:17
#282
 | 
Brazil UKita 
Not dumb, just dealing with facts that, by your "a priori" logic, are irrelevant. I do not have anything with MEC either, I'm a lawyer who attend to university without it.
2019-03-27 22:24
#290
 | 
Brazil adre221 
So you do understand that a posteriori can't be used against a priori, due to a priori being universal and rational, while a posteriori are subjetive to the imprecision of human senses? And since my ethical arguments are correct, and they are a priori, it's irrefutable that abortion, being a clear violation of ethics, is impossible to defend in an argumentation without entering perfomative contradition?
2019-03-27 22:32
#316
 | 
Brazil UKita 
I'm not saying that abbortion is wonderful and everyone should try it. I'm saying that there is more than the single fact that can not be putted aside. Of course it is a type of violence, but it better than a unwanted child living a negligent life. There is more problems involved and they should not be considered irrelevant as you say. It is easy to put a child in this world, difficult is to give it a proper life mostly if this child is not wanted. Is it worth to give a child a life that it does not deserve just because we are not allowing people to control their own bodies?
2019-03-27 23:01
#321
 | 
Brazil adre221 
All violation of ethics are unjustified. Abortion is a violation of ethics. Ethics are a priori. All of what you said are a posteriori. A priori > A posteriori. Therefore it's impossible to be coherent and defend abortion at the same time. Very easy to understand.
2019-03-27 23:18
#218
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
guess what smartass. the body inside your body isnt your body
2019-03-27 21:33
#239
 | 
Brazil UKita 
Yeah, but it gets some time untill you can call it a living being with rights
2019-03-27 21:47
Life
2019-03-27 20:58
Pro choice to an extent. First off, i thought you couldn't have these kinds of topics on hltv because hey, let's censor opinions on a public chatting platform. Regardless, my opinions on abortion really don't matter until day 25 or so of pregnancy. After roughly 4 weeks, the embryo has a beating heart. Law, at least in where I come from (EDIT: New Jersey), states you are deceased if both your heart and brain are dead, therefore, you are living if you have a functional brain and heart. With that being said, I think if a women chooses to have an abortion, law should close off that window of opportunity after day 30. I used to think it should be illegal after day 25, which by then is just the heart, however, to make my stance more agreeable to a more general public, I side with the development and growth of the heart and brain. Source for the NJ Law if you're interested braindeath.org/law/newjersey.htm
2019-03-27 21:06
#206
 | 
Brazil adre221 
It can be categorized as an individual since conception, granting them right to self-property. This is the only ethical conclusion, also, you don't basis an ethical problem on ''making your stance agreeable to a more general public'', you either defend the correct thing or you don't. Edit: When I wrote ''this is the only ethical conclusion'', I didn't especify what. Abortion being murder is the only ethical conclusion.
2019-03-27 21:23
So I'm getting the idea you're very against the whole abortion idea completely. I'm not going to argue opinions, I'll just state mine and leave it at that.
2019-03-27 22:17
#273
 | 
Brazil adre221 
I don't have opinions though. I have knowledge that leads me to conclude to universal truths.
2019-03-27 22:19
ok maybe i gotta respond, wow you're a hardheaded some of a bitch aren't you
2019-03-27 22:40
#296
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Can you refute any of my arguments?
2019-03-27 22:42
I mean for starters, yeah, it's the general assumption that people don't care about others, and then that unethical concept becomes more intense as you get into specifics. However, disregarding the values of the unethical positions of abortion, ethics can be illogical in in certain situations. There are so many ethical standings that can interfere with others, and that they can be used against each other in a debate. On your side of the table is murder, on someone else's side is disregarding the freedom of choices from people who can actually take a reasonable stance themselves. Legally, it's silly to give them the right as an individual, when can't even be considered a full human. I lie more in a middle ground in the pro life/choice debate, however, i lean a bit more to the life side, and I still see how giving something that is a human a set of human rights.
2019-03-28 03:09
#237
suNny | 
Argentina Sunnie 
If we say that freedom is being alive .. Technically "Pro choice" is being in favor of life .. I'm at the whatever you want it to call side where you let people to choose and live their life however they want ..
2019-03-27 21:45
#242
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Unless when they are violating ethics, in this case killing an innocent.
2019-03-27 21:51
#259
suNny | 
Argentina Sunnie 
Well, of course!, but I thought it is implicit to say that you must not kill others to deprive them from their liberty, isn't it?
2019-03-27 22:04
#262
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Abortion is by definition murder
2019-03-27 22:08
#289
suNny | 
Argentina Sunnie 
Whatever .. I'm not going to discuss that specific point here .. I hope Abortion be legal in Argentina soon, that's it ..
2019-03-27 22:30
#292
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Acknowledging that it's impossible to defend your point, you cower in your own dishonesty, refusing the truth and preferring to embrace ideological contraditions in favor of convenience?
2019-03-27 22:37
#360
suNny | 
Argentina Sunnie 
Hahaha, use the words that you want .. Science explains this entire topic very well, if you choose to believe in something else (such as God or whoever) it's up to you .. Abortion will be a legal thing sooner or later :D
2019-03-28 14:11
#361
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
"Science explains this entire topic very well" what?
2019-03-28 14:11
#364
suNny | 
Argentina Sunnie 
What, what?
2019-03-28 14:18
hello I am pro choice to buy a fucking condom but pro life to not kill babies :)
2019-03-27 21:51
#244
 | 
New Zealand NewZealand 
I'm pro life for whites, pro abortion non whites
2019-03-27 21:51
Pro life, no one should decide over the future of a human being, USA is the land of the free and therefore, aborting is an infringement upon the 1st amendment. The baby isn't a part of the woman body but rather his own self with a genome, a different DNA, different genetic code and so forth. The moment the baby is aborted he loses all of that, alongside both his future and his right as an individual, killing a baby out of selfishness isn't tolerable. However, I do think that it should be allowed in a few circumstances like in the case of a rape, but in this case this must not go over 1 month. Or else she must bear the baby up until its birth. Besides, ruining a baby's future not to hold responsabilities isn't morally correct either, as its the parent's fault and their own incompetence which resulted in the making of a baby, not the baby's fault. I only see 3 answers to the situation, the condom, the abstinence and more radically the castration of the male or female feature.
2019-03-27 21:57
#254
 | 
Brazil adre221 
How are there circumstances that allow killing an innocent?
2019-03-27 21:59
In the case of a rape, or if it threatens the mother's life but in that case the baby must only be partially formed if not at all.
2019-03-27 22:13
#276
 | 
Brazil adre221 
That's unjustified, you can't purposedely kill an innocent. It's an ethical violation.
2019-03-27 22:20
Fair enough.
2019-03-27 22:24
pro choice ofc
2019-03-27 21:57
#257
Toxic | 
Croatia ^BCko^ 
Pro life of course, abortion should be absolutely illegal except for cases where it threatens the mother's life. And if the woman was raped, she should be given money from the government throughout they pregnacy and the baby put to adoption after birth. Taking/giving a life is no woman's choice in any other circumstance, if she can't take care of a child, she can put it for adoption.
2019-03-27 22:02
#274
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
said a guy who has nothing to do with birth beside 5-sec fun. Easy to say what others have to do.
2019-03-27 22:19
You mean besides feeding and protecting/housing the woman and baby like 99% of men throughout the history of mankind? Yeah, 5 secs just about covers it.
2019-03-27 22:25
#285
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
yeah that is why we have so many single mothers because the man stays by her side forever. Maybe in your rainbow country
2019-03-27 22:26
Yeah and you sure know exactly how many single mothers you have in yours, right?
2019-03-27 22:27
#297
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/3.. This the full numbers. proportional 1/5 of all mothers are single mothers (data 2012) in germany. So yes I know
2019-03-27 22:42
This statistic shows the number of single parents in Germany by gender in the years from 2000 to 2017. In the year 2017 there were about 416.000 single fathers in Germany and about 2.203.000 single mothers. HJAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
2019-03-27 22:46
#304
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
Yeah funny but you see your idealize rainbow fantasy doesn't exist in the real world.
2019-03-27 22:47
No, what's funny is how fucked you krauts are.
2019-03-27 22:48
#307
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
oh yeah we dont kill each others or let our women at home. Sorry that we dont live still 2000 years in the past that is why your country is a shit place.
2019-03-27 22:49
Sure, when I visit Albania I'll look out for all the sword fighting in the streets
2019-03-27 22:51
#312
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
I dont visit Albania. But we have many refugees from there that cry all day long.
2019-03-27 22:55
#325
Toxic | 
Croatia ^BCko^ 
Talks about shitty countries and lives in modern Germany HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
2019-03-27 23:26
#303
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
sooooo its okay to kill a baby because it will be raised by only the mother? or what are you trying to say?
2019-03-27 22:47
#305
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
#274 #285 maybe read the whole comment idiot.
2019-03-27 22:48
#309
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
cba to read every single comment on phone while laying in bed. edit: oh ok
2019-03-27 22:51
Just as people are not morally obligated to give their organs to save someone else, women are not obligated to lend their body to another person (assuming the fetus is considered a person). Contraception is of course the best course of action (which requires sufficient sex education), but that's not enough, even the most safe methods like condoms are far from their optimal prevention rate in practical use, and rapes are a thing.
2019-03-27 22:02
#278
 | 
United States Freakmode 
pro choice... but the choice comes before having sex (obviously not including rape)
2019-03-27 22:22
#281
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
One simple thing. If nature has something against abortion it would kill the mother too. All other is moral bullshit from the church. I am absolutely fine with the law in my country the first 3 months you can make abortion by free choice. After that only medicine issues. What isn't okay is to allow an abortion in 8 months or so on when parents hear the child as a down syndrome (atm it is possible to make abortion very late). Also, children that dont even get the body for birth should always be allowed to have an abortion. 11-12-13 years old kids aren't made for that and 90% of them get it by rape.
2019-03-27 22:24
#287
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Fallacy of nature. You enter in contradition since in an argument you necessarily have to accept that starting from the zygote, it is an individual with rights to self-property, since the rights to self-property is an a priori condition of every argument, and the zygote has the characteristics that composes an individual, which is mainly the potential of reason, so by definition it has rights.
2019-03-27 22:27
#291
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
Nature has one rule survival of the fittest. So there is no contradiction. It is a fact. Something that overrules our whole existence. That it is also an "individual" that says nothing about the right of survival. We humans can choose some of our rules sure and I am fine with it as it is in my country. When I can read 11 year kids is to forced to give birth after rape by her father I have to puke. Or when an adult women dies cuz her baby is already dead inside but abortion isnt allowed i have to puke to such shit humans that force them to do that. It isn't morality correct! The person that gives birth is more important as the baby.
2019-03-27 22:36
#295
 | 
Brazil adre221 
''Nature has one rule survival of the fittest. So there is no contradiction. It is a fact. Something that overrules our whole existence'' Can you prove this aprioristically? No, you cannot ''choose your own rules'', ethics has always existed and it always will, you cannot legalize murder because you wish for it. Simply put, violating ethics will never be defensable in an argumentation, because it will result in a perfomative contradition (accepting ethics is the condition of every argumentation). Morality is subjetive. Also, if the baby is already dead, then it cannot be classified as an abortion.
2019-03-27 22:41
#301
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
Ethic always changed over the years. So you can choose your own rules. Dunno why you think ethics is a constant. Ethic is always depended on the time of society. Every country has its own ethics. Saudi Arabia has death sentences Europe dont. So we chose. But you can still believe ethic has always the same rules MONKAGIGA. You are such in the wrong way with your argumentation. There is absolutely no contradiction in my argumentation but yours is full of it. "Can you prove this aprioristically? " I should prove something that is our whole existence it is the same question as I should prove you 1+1 is 2 and not 3. I guess you should read some of Kant's theory about how humans get knowledge. There are two ways. Experience or "empirical. "survival of the fittest is empirical and dont experience.
2019-03-27 22:56
#317
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Ethics are derived from the right to self-property, which is an a priori condition to any argumentation. It's trancendental, and it's constant. The right to self-property doesn't change. Legalism and government legislation are different things from ethics and law. My arguments are the only ones possible to defend without being contraditory. Empirism and experience are the same thing, I use Kant as basis for epistemology, since I use synthetic a priori judgement. You however, should read a bunch of books on epistemology, starting with Hume, then Descartes, Bertrand Russel, and last Kant. Then you'll understand that the basis of my arguments are a priori, which cannot be countered by empirism.
2019-03-27 23:05
#371
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
Sowjetunion had no property right. It is a right chose by human societies and not a rule by nature. I have nothing more to add. Have a nice life with your stupid argumentations. Empire and experience the same thing. So 1+1=2 is 2 because we learned it this way? Haha you are a joke. Bb
2019-03-28 15:21
#375
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Rewrite your comment, but in english this time. I don't have someone to translate retard language.
2019-03-29 14:27
#376
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
ah you learned english for retards in school. Nice for you retard
2019-03-29 15:23
#288
 | 
Brazil jmarcelo 
pro life as long as giving birth doesnt affect the woman in a bad way other than the expected pain (like death or some injury). if a woman gets pregnant and just doesnt feel like taking care of that baby, then she should give it up for adoption once she had given birth to it. Also, if the woman got pregnant from a rape or something, then I think she should be allowed to abort the baby, but do it before the baby is developed enough to where it feels pain. If a woman doesnt want to have a baby then she shouldnt have sex; a condom isnt gonna work 100% of the time and the same goes for a plan b pill, and those are very known facts, so "the condom broke and i got pregnant, so i can abort" or "I took the pill but still got pregnant, so i can abort" arent valid excuses.
2019-03-27 22:30
#298
 | 
Brazil adre221 
If abortion is murder, it's wrong in every circumstance, it's impossible to justify killing an innocent.
2019-03-27 22:45
#311
 | 
Brazil jmarcelo 
but it's different cause it's a fetus inside of a woman and not born yet. If the woman knows that she can die or suffer permanent trauma from giving birth, then I think she can abort the baby as long as it's not too late into the pregnancy, and the same goes for a girl who has been raped; she can decide if she wants to go through the pregnancy and the birth, if not, she should be able to abort.
2019-03-27 22:52
#314
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Since starting from the zygote it's an individual with rights, there is no justification for killing it, because it's innocent. You can't punish an innocent for the action of others.
2019-03-27 22:58
#315
 | 
Brazil jmarcelo 
it's an innocent that fully depends from another innocent lol. cant justify harming an innocent (mother) for the benefit of another innocent (baby).
2019-03-27 23:01
#318
 | 
Brazil adre221 
The baby is unable to act, therefore he will never be an agressor. However, if the mother acts with intention to kill an innocent (the baby) she'll be a murderer. There is no circumstance that justifies acting to murder an innocent.
2019-03-27 23:06
#319
 | 
Brazil jmarcelo 
the baby isnt harming the mother on purpose, but it is still harming her. at least ry to understand what a woman who is pregnant from a rape is going through lol
2019-03-27 23:08
#320
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Harming her how? It's not a parasite, it's a completely natural phenom between members of the same species, with both advantages and disadvantages for the mother. If the baby cannot act, then it cannot be an agressor, so it'll always be innocent. Knowing that, it'll always be unjustified and unethical to kill it. Very simple to understand. ''at least try to understand what a woman who is pregnant from a rape is going through'' Such a stupid ''argument'', what is trying to understand? Giving free pass to murder? This is inconsistent and ilogical.
2019-03-27 23:15
#322
 | 
Brazil jmarcelo 
giving birth hurts... idk if u knew that already or not, so that's the "harm" im talking about.
2019-03-27 23:18
#331
 | 
Brazil adre221 
It doesn't change my point at all.
2019-03-27 23:38
#347
 | 
Brazil jmarcelo 
"Harming her how?" i was answering that. I cant change your mind on the topic, seems like u r already set on having an opinion, as you should.
2019-03-28 02:52
There's really no logical reason why you should be pro-life before the baby/fetus can feel pain (20 weeks).
2019-03-27 22:45
#313
 | 
Brazil adre221 
So people that has CIP can be killed?
2019-03-27 22:56
A person with CIP is older than 20 weeks?! Maybe I didn't work my comment great... I do not think there is any logical reason why a woman cannot choose to have an abortion provided she is not past the 20-week stage of pregnancy, as this is when the baby/fetus is able to feel pain.
2019-03-27 23:32
#329
 | 
Brazil adre221 
It's because people with CIP can't feel pain, and it appears that you are making a point that if they cannot feel pain, then you can kill them. Nevertheless, it's illogical to defend abortion in any stage of the pregnancy, because starting from the zygote, they are a individual that possess rights. Violating those rights through an agression will be unethic, and defending the violation of ethics in an argumentation (which has ethics as a transcendental condition) is a contradition on itself. So the only logical position is to be against abortion at every stage.
2019-03-27 23:37
#332
 | 
Austria raicoon1337 
+1 first smart guy on hltv 👍
2019-03-27 23:38
Can you run me through how it matters whether you're CIP or not when you're immune system is not developed enough to transmit pain in the first place? I'm genuinely worried you're not understanding my point here.. a pre-20-week fetus, for all intent and purpose, is CIP. Then explain how you can attribute an individual right to something that has no sense of self?
2019-03-28 01:41
pro freedom. so i am pro choice. but its wrong. it is just wrong. although prohibiting and marginalizing is even wronger.
2019-03-27 23:35
#330
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Killing is wrong but prohibiting murder is even wronger? wtf?
2019-03-27 23:37
no dude. ppl do it even being prohibited. and yes prohibiting is that bad. nobody has the capacity to know forehand the consequences in long run of a prohibition. anyway comon sense can substitute many minor laws.
2019-03-27 23:43
#335
 | 
Brazil adre221 
People commit murder even with it being prohibited, so that shouldn't be prohibited too? The only ethic conclusion to all of this is to be completely against abortion, which is essentially murder.
2019-03-27 23:44
The more you prohibit. The less space you have to inovate. To live. To choose. That is the general idea. Tho murder is prohibited and that is totally fine. Some tribes relied on killing unabled babies to survive and it worked, the survival rate was better that way. They lived 20thousent years that way. Bad, wrong, but necessary to their way of life. I know that abortion is murder but babies deaths are way more common, that is actually the way things are some animals breed thousents of babies and only some of them survives. All that said. The idea of denying a woman abortion seems ok but also carries some consequences for the mother and the child. We have to be pro life in our minds. Free to choose but not choosing murder. #peace
2019-03-28 00:10
Pro- Choice. early stage abortion, is the same as "killing" tapeworm or any other parasite its just a bunch of cells. there are already to many mistreated children in this world. no need to produce more. this a basically a discussion about when life begins. Sperm is "alive", is masterbation killing life, cuz they could have had a chance to make life. and many if not all discussing this subject here are men and how the hell do you feel you have any say in what women does with their bodies. and i dont think that government should have any say in such a matter or any other person than the person it self. it is something that the individual woman has to choose, they are the only one which opinion that matters, they can personally choose to be pro-life or pro-choice. men should have no say in the matter.
2019-03-27 23:43
#336
 | 
Brazil adre221 
Even though the sperm is alive, the individual starts with the zygote, since they have the characteristics that forms an human individual, more importantly the capacity to develop reason. If they are a human individual, then they have right to self-property, meaning that violating that right will be an ethical violation, making the defence of abortion in an argumentation a perfomative contradition, since ethics are a transcedental condition of any argument. Since ethics can be concluded aprioristically, it cannot be refuted by empirist arguments, it comes before them. It can only be concluded that it's only logical and consistent to be completely against abortion.
2019-03-27 23:49
Well we all agree that life is important. we just disargree on which life is more important, I see forcing someone to have a baby against their will is destroying two lives, both the mother and the baby. Aspose to saving the life of the mother mabye not in the literal sense but certainly in quality of life. i feel that the life of a living human being is more important that 10week old lump cells
2019-03-28 01:17
The real thing that "destroys" the baby life is abortion. Pretty much any life is better than nonexistence, because existence is the only thing that matters in this universe: without life and consciousness, you are nothing but a meaningless cluster of atoms submitted to the laws of physic. No goal, no purpose. Arguing that "abortion" can improve the baby life is simply false sophistic rhetoric, because this issue have only two possibilities: existence or nonexistence.
2019-03-28 02:44
Also sperm is not life but living matter, in a sense that it is made of living cells but doesn't form a being. It is technically a self-moving part of another being and sperm stays a part of you until becoming inactive,or uniting with an egg cell to become a zygote - first form of human life.
2019-03-28 02:53
#368
 | 
Estonia ropz_bestest 
but you can just give your baby up for adoption?? whats the problem?
2019-03-28 15:12
pro csgo life men 😎😎😎😎😎😎
2019-04-04 05:08
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.