[ home ] [ q / qa / zellig / brabant / drenthe ] [ overboard ] [ v ] [ archive / telegram / zelligwiki / club / booru ] [ execution list / pph ] [ Rules / Contacts ] [] [ log in ]

/zellig/ - Ongezellig

IAZ and soft NAZ
Name
Options
Comment
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

ZWABAG

File: 1746455226736.png (23.89 KB, 387x586, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.81975[View All]

Would maya be one of those feminist foids who always bitch about "Men are trash" considering how much of a heccin 24/7 terminally onlinerinos NEET xhe is
75 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.92030

>>92004
>>92005
>>92021
>>92022
i would like to further add that we did not DISCOVER what qualifies as life, we DECIDED what qualifies as life, which is why we don't consider viruses life. consider this, if biologists simply created a new word to refer to biological life then this debate about the ethics of aborting non-sentient matter wouldn't exist because, once again, all ethical arguments against early abortions boil down to semantics.

 No.92039

i can pretty much summarize all of this by saying "something's status as life is not what determines if it warrants ethical consideration. possession of sentience is what determines if something warrants ethical consideration."

 No.92050

in my opinion, abortion should only ever be used as a form of euthanasia.
if you know for a fact your baby is going to live a fucking horrible life because of an incurable disease or deformation, i think it's justified to end their suffering right then and there.

 No.92051

>>92050
this is true, but notice how people supporting euthanasia don't pretend some suffering people are not alive or not people, trying to justify abortion by redefining crucial terms belongs to not even wrong category, it's a failure to understand the is-ought distinction

 No.92053

>>92051
Us women like to kill our babies lol

 No.92057

>>92056
this is really stupid.
a tree can literally never become sentient, in comparison the zygote can.
what are you talking about?

 No.92058

>>92056
>all ethical arguments against early abortions boil down to semantics
semantics is about meaning of words
>ethics are based on phenomenon in the natural world and the natural world is not affected by our subjective classifications describing it.
and this is naturalistic fallacy

 No.92063

>>92053
women who kill their babies for no actual reason just hurt their reproductive success which they personally may be fine with, but will eventually remove such preferences out of the gene pool

 No.92069

>>92063
it's a taught thing.
women are encouraged to be entitled and immature nowadays.

 No.92073

>>92057
preventing the existence of sentience is not killing. saying aborting a zygote is murder because it prevents sentience from eventually existing is like saying wearing a condom is murder because it prevents sentience from eventually existing.
>>92058
>semantics is about meaning of words
yes, i know.
>and this is naturalistic fallacy
how so? i'm saying that ethics should transcend language. people against early abortions use the argument "life begins at conception" despite life being nothing more than a subjective classification. it'd be like saying sponges deserve ethical consideration because they're animals. you wouldn't brutalize a hagfish, so you wouldn't brutalize a sponge either, right?

 No.92075

why do you niggers want disgenic subhumans to reproduce so much? if you want to keep the fertility rate up it should be through polygyny by a select few.

 No.92076

>>92073
meds, i didn't say it was murder.
i was just saying a zygote is not the same as a tree.

 No.99043

>>91999
>when people say "life begins at conception" they're exploiting the connotation of the word "life" to make it seem like biologists are saying "a fertilized egg is a person deserving of rights"
this conflation of layman definitions with rigorous, scientific definitions is one of the most common symptoms of science illiteracy.
"that's just a theory, not hard science!"
"dark energy? dark matter? that sounds like some mystical stuff!"
"the big bang must've literally been an explosion because it has "bang" in its name!"
"the Cambrian explosion must've happened so fast, just like how an explosion happens fast!"
"biologists say life begins at conception, that means a person is created a conception!"
this is responsible for basically the entire abortion debate. the same way people believe dark matter is a mystical phenomenon because they associate the word "black" with black magic witchcraft, anti-choice people believe that a life-form is automatically a person because they associate the word "life" with sentient beings.
if black matter was referred to as "non-baryonic matter", no one would think it is mystical, and if biologists said "biota begins at conception" instead of "life beings at conception ", no one would be fighting for the rights of zygotes.

 No.99044

>>99042
This is the Dutch Tranime with Soyjaks website sir

 No.99045

>>99043
*they associate the word "dark" with black magic witchcraft

 No.99046

i called it black matter instead of dark matter, sorry

 No.99047

File: 1753587516407.png (293.17 KB, 624x624, 1693877227317.png)

>that's just a theory, not hard science!
>dark energy? dark matter? that sounds like some mystical stuff!
>the big bang must've literally been an explosion because it has "bang" in its name!
>the Cambrian explosion must've happened so fast, just like how an explosion happens fast!
>biologists say life begins at conception, that means a person is created a conception!

 No.99063

File: 1753607021121.png (142.7 KB, 459x460, file.png)


 No.99066

>>99043
>big science words make big impact on me therefore they do on everyone else
thank you for this unique (not really) insight into a redditor's mind

 No.99095

>>99066
>big science words
what does that have to do with anything? people aren't confused because the words are too big, they're confused because they're conflating the common definitions with the scientific ones.

 No.99171

Maya seems like the kind of foid to have sex with her dog

 No.99172

>>91999
I think abortion is bad because women want it

 No.99173

>>82990
Women shouldn't have rights because they're a clump of cells

 No.99174

>>82521
I think child sacrifice to moloch had way more sovl

 No.99175

>>82109
The foid that types this definitely got penetrated by her dog at least once

 No.99176

>>99171
ev&oe that would be coco

 No.99178

>>99176
Mayafail projection

 No.99179

>>82990
We're all a clump of cells on a spinning ball floating through space so nothing hecking matters but don't you ever say the n word!

 No.99180

>>82521
I heard that child sacrifice was common in ancient times because it gave people magic powers o algo

 No.99181

>>99180
now it gives women a magic power to evade responsibility

 No.99186

>>99173
I believe this unironically

 No.99188

File: 1753645150767.jpg (22.51 KB, 640x640, phase1.jpg)

>Your abortion is: You aborted a celebral palsy retard

 No.99189

File: 1753645168500.jpg (39.21 KB, 1000x1000, phase2_neutral.jpg)

>Your abortion is: You aborted a healthy child

 No.99190

File: 1753645192143.jpg (43.76 KB, 1000x1012, phase3_uncanny.jpg)

>Your abortion is: You aborted a future genius

 No.99191

>>99188
>>99189
Please stop

 No.99192

File: 1753645212240.png (378.4 KB, 874x1323, phase5_uncanny.png)

>Your abortion is: You aborted a king

 No.99193


 No.99194

File: 1753645266077.png (39.24 KB, 1000x1000, phase8_uncanny.png)

>Your abortion is: You aborted the child that would save the world

 No.99195

File: 1753645282760.jpg (28.04 KB, 954x955, phase16_uncanny.jpg)

>Your abortion is: You aborted God

 No.99198

File: 1753645685316.png (682.89 KB, 1066x1080, ClipboardImage.png)

>your abortion is: >>99193

 No.99209

>>99198
Nigga go back to yt shorts

 No.99210

Mr dweller infiltrated this website it seems

 No.99218

Mr Dweller VVON

 No.105586

>>99043
it's interesting how you never see anti-abortion activists attempt to define the word "life", despite "life begins at conception" being their central argument.

 No.105587

>>105586
Life is defined biologically as something which meets these criteria:
> cellular order
>sensitivity or response to the environment
>reproduction
>growth and development
>regulation
>homeostasis
>energy processing
All of these are met by a fetus
>in b4 no reproduction
The cells of fetae reproduce, so they do meet this classification. Fetae are factually alive, but that’s a separate question from whether they have personhood, and thus rights.

 No.105596

>>105587
exactly, and if you asked them why we should have ethical consideration for matter which meets this criteria, they're probably respond with a circular explanation like "because it's life". anti-abortion commentators purposely exploit the connotation of the word "life" to their predominantly religious viewers to make it sound like scientists are saying souls are created at conception.
imagine if vegan activists began arguing that we shouldn't hurt sea sponges because "science confirms they're animals". that may seem like a reasonable argument for someone who doesn't know what animals are because they likely think the word "animal " is a synonym for sentient creatures, the same way the religious right thinks of souls when they hear the word "life".

 No.105599

>>105596
Scientists don’t say anything about souls because even by religious understanding they’re immaterial and so outside of the scope of science. But if you bring stuff like souls into the debate you’re entering the realm of religious morality. That’s considered objective by believers, and best challenged with scripture rather than vague semantics.
If you (fourth person, not YOU you) start from a point of view”I don’t care about religion so no one else should” you’ll just talk past people with different axioms.

 No.105600

>>105596
I swear there has to be a secret foid on the Zarty echoing radfem talking points in words words words paragraphs for the past few months PLEASE TELL US YOU'RE THE FEMALE ZARYAN!!!

 No.105601

>>105600
>female
>zaryan

 No.105602

>>105601
I have gathered top WEF funded soyentists and they have caculated in a snopes approved peer reviewed study that there will be exactly one female Zaryan within the Zarty's entire history, and my Foid Detector TM has captured a foid signature lurking on this very thread… it has to be the one. Do you know what kind of discovery that would make? I would be the most revered man in soyentific history right along with Dr Soyberg and Fauci ximself…



[Return][Go to top] Catalog [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home ] [ q / qa / zellig / brabant / drenthe ] [ overboard ] [ v ] [ archive / telegram / zelligwiki / club / booru ] [ execution list / pph ] [ Rules / Contacts ] [] [ log in ]