Abortion

why abort when you have contraceptives? are you some sort of retard that likes disease?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (240x240, 123.13K)

What about instances of rape?

usually I'm somewhat morally conflicted on the issue, but after talking to pro-life retards I briefly become convinced abortion should be mandatory

Abortion is an integral part of reproductive healthcare and therefor should be a right. The state should provide free abortions for any woman who may want one.

Attached: dedgruz.jpg (600x400, 41.35K)

Because even contraceptive have a failure risk.
Because at some point you consider you can trust your partner enough to avoid STD even without protection and you're too confident in knowing your own body's rythm.
Because you have start over sexual education for every education, every year and that knowledge about sexuality and reproduction isn't innate for us poor humans (my grandmother used to think men could get pregnant in her late teens) and sometimes teenagers get curious before the message get through their skulls.
Because people commit mistakes and to have the possibility to limit the damages caused by mistakes is a good thing.

Abortion is viscerally fucked up but understandable in certain circumstances. Ideally traditional courtship and marriage would be restored and it would become unnecessary.

also this

1. Abolish patriarchy.

2. Promote female-female romantic relationships instead of hetero ones.

3. Party has a matchmaker and common households/marriage is based on shared values and sustaining communism rather than "love"/lust.

There: I've just solved abortion.

most arguments for abortion in present day are actually just liberal moralism. its putting the bourgois material comfort of women over a human life and using bourgois liberal notion of "rights" to do so.

personally people are gonna do w/e they wanna do at the end of the day but i do think abortion isnt cool.

Where abortion is possible with drugs they should be OTC and 100% free. Where it requires a procedure it should be walk-in, no questions asked. If OTC abortion pills are available you'll see very few of the latter anyway.

a parent can pretty much always "afford" a baby except in extremely rare circumstances in the urban third world. it wont be fun or comfy but they can get by. most parents abort children not because they literally cant afford them but because it is too much to deal with and they just dont want to put up with it.

which, you know it is what it is. but there is an active choice they are making and they are not angelic blameless victims.

is meant for

Single parenthood in the lower class statististically lead to more problems for the children, especailly for lower class women that indeed can't afford baby sitters to look for their offspring while they have to work.

This but unironically

...

life in general is full of problems. life is not good or comfortable. even the very wealthy have their issues with depression and anxiety. we might laugh at them but they are there, in the same way the very very poor in the third world might laugh at our rates of depression and anxiety while having such high rates of obesity(opulence)

...

Why would you condemn a child to live with parents that "put up" with him and don't love him?

"condemning" a child to live? they get to live and experience life, the nly thing that matters.

life is not good. it is not a happy place. for anyone. this is a western myth. all people suffer. life is suffering. and that is okay. because alongside suffering there is joy and pleasure, and various other experiences that one will see before one dies. its a lucky ass gift and privilege no matter how much it sucks(barring extreme exceptions) if someone one day figures on account of their own experience that they want to die, fine. but you dont get to kill somethig because you think their life is not worth experiencing because you think it will be too hard.

Single parenthood is shit, both for the child and the parent, and this is something we should all be able to agree on. Kids that grow up on poor, single parent homes grow up in abysmal conditions and are very likely to be headed to jail.

Now, this doesn't mean I support abortion. I would be willing to support a ban on abortion if we had policies that guaranteed basic resources for all children: Quality education, aggressive anti-hunger programs, daycares and after-school programs to foster individual talents, more pro-family policies (not retarded anti-LGBT garbage, I mean tax breaks and extended parental leave), and so on. But the problem with conservatives is that they're all moralistic about abortion but want to leave children to their own resources once they are born. They don't even want to fund public schools!

So within this framework, I would support abortion, but I believe that in an ideal (communist) society, abortion would not be needed.

Depends on the class.

There needs to be better birth control methods and artificial wombs need to be developed and fetal transplant. Of course better economic conditions. Also gene editing therapy in-vitro to cure deadly diseases. That will reduce abortion. As for abortion itself allow unrestricted up till 20 weeks then after that only for medical and allow induced early births or transpants into a surrogate or artifical womb.

Tedious process here so I don’t have much of a say. You do you.

Good question

Attached: meme arrow having kids.jpg (468x418, 33.48K)

Why is absence of pain "good" instead of "not bad" while abence of pleasure is "not bad" instead of "not good"?

Legal only in the event of a medical condition that necessitates it

It's interesting that so many people here are just bad Hellenistic Gnostics but they consider themselves secular and unique in history.

There's a whole book answering that question and more! At least it probably does; I've never read the thing.

Attached: better-never-cover.jpg (583x835, 294.88K)

For fuck's sake, I'm an antinatalist and this is embarrassing.

Attached: 1388903455932.gif (347x196, 1.94M)

Abortion is wrong because it is killing a person without their consent, therefore it should be banned. Conception is likewise wrong because it is creating a person without their consent, who is vunerable to suffer further aggressions throughout their life (such as abortion), therefore it should also be banned. The only way to absolutely prevent abortion is to prevent conception from happening in the first place.

...

Well yeah, that and you'll both have permission to have one night stands, sex isn't important, companionship and community are.

Take it from an oldfag that antinatalists and the rest of their negative existentialist comrades in arms (n1x, Rebel, the shitloads of anons back then with the annihilist flag, etc.) were the first to absolutely shit up this board because they spammed their off-topic bullshit fucking EVERYWHERE and at times the whole fucking board was just /existentialistpol/ and not Holla Forums because they just couldn't see fit to discuss fucking anything but that. It's no surprise that the board culture that flourished here back in early 2015 which I remember had a very optimistic, hopeful, and creative nature to it suddenly vanished when people who wouldn't shut the fuck up about how their life sucks and therefore everyone else's life sucks too started flooding the board in masses. Antinatalists, nihilists, overall depressed losers who applied that to their worldview, fucked this board in its infancy, probably before even the 200 ISP mark.

Whatever comforts you all at night

Would you want to live in a country where abortion is illegal?

poal.me/iy786d

QUESTION:
What are the economic aspects of the attack on women's reproductive rights? Why is it so important for the right, apart from their hypocritical moralist arguments, to curtail women's right to choose abortion? Is there an economic side to it, or is it only a matter of "principles"? Although, of course, the same principles do not apply once the child is born and is in need.

WOLFF:
While there are multiple reasons for the right's focus on abortion, since you ask about an economic side or reason, let me offer a comment. Middle and upper income Americans who want abortions have been able to obtain them through much of history by using their money to go to where they are illegal or to purchase them illegally. Banning legal abortions is mostly a problem for poorer people who cannot then access abortions. They will thus have more children which (1) adds to the available labor pool (pushing down wages as more people compete for jobs), and (2) adds to the costs and responsibilities of parents correspondingly less likely to engage in risky political or labor union action to improve their jobs and incomes. Allowing legal abortion gives millions of families a way of taking control over so important a decision as having a child and as such might well encourage families to want to take parallel controls of other important life decisions like economic decisions (about jobs, income distribution, govt programs, etc.); the system instinctively works against this. Another way to get at this is to see the right as a complex political alliance. That alliance includes capitalist employers who worry that they are too small a percentage of the population and thus need a mass base to ally with. If they can find a religious institution having difficulty holding onto its flock, a deal can be struck that advantages both sides. Business gets a mass base of people organized into, say, churches, who will endorse and support pro-capitalist govt policies, while the churches get business support for institutional imperatives like opposition to abortion. In the US, the Republican party has long depended on such an alliance to exist.

rdwolff.com/atcosta/what_are_the_economic_aspects_of_the_attack_on_women_s_reproductive_rights

Attached: Richard-Wolff.jpg (1280x720, 61.06K)

Doesn't matter or mean anything.

I mean, I was told there isn't a word for "love" in Yiddish. Is this true?

I never want to relive this. I remember one thread where some user was discussing his genuine fear of death and the whole thread became filled with blackflags saying how death is actually great, that non-existence is like sleeping or "being before you were born", and how revolution could come about by mass suicide because it would starve the bourgeoisie of workers. Black flag was like the designated shitposting flag. If I was at my house I would post the "never relax" meme someone made.

Read
Wolff is unfortunately making a neo-malthusian argument for legal abortion (labor pool, improved conditions by population reduction, etc.)

The only philosophical question worth answering is: Why go on?

If you can't answer that, you're doomed and so is your revolution.

That sounds awesome, pity I wasn't around here in early 2015. What happened to those anons?

If the masses would be capable of doing that then they would also be capable of revolting and fighting against armed police and military until oppression is over. If someone loves life and fears death then he is not willing to sacrifice his life for a revolution, the problem with the world is that there are too many people like this and too few people that hate life and yearn for death and therefore are motivated to actually change things and capable of giving their lives for it.

"Optimists"/natalists will always be slavish hedonistic cowards.

Yeah, but why though? The whole point of revolution is to feel good afterwards, you act like reincarnation or afterlife is real.

Also I want to point out the irony that if most people or a substantial amount of people were pessimists then we would already be living in a earthly paradise. Of course such a people will never be truly satisfied even with such a wonderful but ultimately meaningless world where nobody still doesn't choose to be born into.

So that the people that are making you feel bad die. So that Good triumphs over Evil.

Speak for yourself, for me revolution is to end oppression by killing oppressors, it doesn't matter whether I live afterwards.

No, I act like my life is meaningless after accomplishing it's intended purpose that I chose for myself.

...

This thread turned so shit so quick

Free will doesn't exist, good and evil are spooks and your feelings change on the time of day or what clickbait you read.
Most of the oppression you feel is stories from strangers and bad 19th century metaphysics from people that thought the radio and magnets were paranormal.

Why do anti-natalists ruin fucking everything?

Attached: deaf girlI.mp4 (480x480, 1.16M)

Anti natalism like anti theism is fedora tier trash

There are enough kids in the world that go unwanted in orphanages but nooooooo your genes are so fucking important you gotta make one of your own. Fuck outta here. Adopt or cut them off.

Attached: f0f12858dcb843c04cd7d793354af915c2b719736ae4c5b8251df53a36b2fde6.png (567x561, 377.31K)

Attached: tenor.gif (220x124, 129.18K)

Abortion is a-ok, unless it’s my child getting aborted. Fuck that.

Attached: Stirner.jpg (501x525, 46.92K)

fuck outta here

This book looks like it was written by a depressed porky teenager. Depression is a bourgeois issue, not a issue real people face.

You’re retarted

Spooks be gone. There is plenty of land left on Earth for people. Also in a century or so Mars will be terraformed and any overpopulation problem can be solved through free homestead land on other planets.

If that's true then why are those billions people still alive and why do they create more living beings to preserve that life they supposedly hate so much?

Anti-natalism is the highest form of religious thought. Every religion teaches about the meaningless of material life and teaches against attachment of it.

"Love of the world is the root of all evil." - Muhammad

"I spit on my life. Death in battle would be better for me than that I, defeated, survive." - Buddha

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." - Jesus Christ

Of course a brainlet like you wouldn't know that.

We literally had a similar thread in October of 2017. I'm trying to find it in the archive but there is pockets of stuff completely missing from it so idk. The thread was where this take came from, which I found actually pretty decent.

Attached: Ur-Misery.png (1488x318, 122.11K)

Abortion is unironically one of the most capitalistic-minded things one can do. Anyone who doesn't condemn abortion has no right to call himself a 'leftist'.

yep really being a boon to the working class by consuming resources and producing nothing.

the bible says 'be fruitful and multiply'.

Anti theism is only stupid because it becomes pseudo religious. Religion is retarded too lmao.

Yeah, but you gotta tow that party line and fulfill that imposed stereotype. If you don't think borders are gay and that scrambling babies isn't a divine right; you're a heretic and might as well be a nazi.

I can't wait for boomer pinkos to pass away into the night.

...

The attitude towards abortion like it's no big deal and womyn rights matter a lot more than some baby who isnt really a baby because reasons is plainly capitalist

I bet you like tranny faggots like Contrapoints

Day after pill.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (876x493, 447.79K)

also in development: male contraceptives.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (569x642, 338.36K)

No difference between that and abortion.
Simply don't conceive.

Do we take the volcel pill?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (220x280, 69.62K)

Reproduction will also be collectivized after the revolution. Every single fertile women is collectivized and they have zero right to terminate an asset of the state, if they don't want to be a mother of the state then they can be sterilized. Sorry, but if you have the power to create life then you will be treated like it; humans are not magical meat machines with divine rights. This is exactly like any other service, just instead of hands or brains it uses the womb.

That's the Book of Genesis in the Tanakh/"Old Testament", I was quoting Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew. Jesus was not fruitful and did not multiply, just like he disobeyed and contradicted many other commandments of the Tanakh. The anti-natalist Gnostic Christians rejected the Tanakh.

Only after we castrate anyone that refuses to take it.

He was literally God and already made everything, what's he going to screw?

Lmao what
Anyway assuming current pace of technological """progress""" goes uninterrupted, people will be able to conceive sexually. Once that happens the abortion debate becomes moot because the question of life is materially answered in reality as being totally meaningless. Corporate and state production of human being or machine humane hybrids becomes an inevitability.

Idk, how do we live in society that stresses independence and self-sufficiency while existing in a system that forces us to be dependent on those who control production and breeds parasitism of the highest degree? How is it we live in a consumer driven economy which promises satisfaction and happiness through commodity consumption yet find suicide rates and unhappiness higher then ever? How do we have noticeably concerning number people who don't even make enough to pay for rent or healthcare or proper food stating that the system is working while they die from cancer or complications from malnutrition? How do we have self proclaimed pro-family individuals supporting legislation which would incentivize people not to have kids or abandon them? How do we have mass entertainment and access to such and yet mass dissatisfaction? I could go on, but people wanting to die and yet continuing to live and have others live is in ways the essence of modern capitalism.

Attached: 6e684d001a894fcbcdde4dc36a8c00082907e77845c7b881bd412c7cfd153ff4.png (368x367, 322.61K)

*conceive asexually

Fascism wouldn't be gaining ground if leftists would actually appeal to the working class. That's how a fucking billionaire got elected, because all trump had to say was "lmao America first" instead of "women and sexual deviants first"

Nope obviously the solution to Trump is to purchase pink pussy hats en masse so a hat company can profit, really jump-starting the revolution there

Dude just fuck off with your Jordan Peterson religiosity it doesnt mean anything and no one gives a shit

Get out.

Read up on morphogenesis, epigenetics and instinctual imprinting. Test tubes produce brain dead retards, only good for organs and meat.

There's a reason ducklings are afraid of a hawk's shadow and not a seagull's.

>Kill all white babies
ftfy

Show me how life is now meaningless. It can be materially shown, can it not?

Attached: a7954f6722e0d39442eac39afade298d4238725dfb7512b675f0f7219737c663.jpg (405x270, 52.89K)

American leftist

Western European leftist

Eastern European leftist

Asian leftist

Latin American leftist

African leftist

Can't prove a negative.

He isn't sayingTrump is a fash. All he's saying is that both fascists and Trump have been winning/gaining ground in America because currently they're doing a better job at appealing to the working class of America. I think there's more to it than that but that's effectively what he's saying.

Pretty sure there are more kinds of American leftists than Christcoms, dude

Others might have a different take on it but I think like becomes sacred or exalted because it is not something humans have full control over. Yes obviously humans are what do it but a human cannot simply make another. The act of sex is required, already striking most people on this board off from it, human beings then have little control over the makeup of the life that occurs and is then birthed. Humans are merely the conduit of this acrivity, not the masters.bonce life can simply be made like a human makes a tool, it loses its sacred aspect. It is no longer divine. It becomes totally within the realm of human control. A human can reproduce asexually, with a woman with or without sex, or with a number of humans, and then have full control over the characteristics if that life before it is born.
Now that life is so fully under the control of humans it is no longer mystic, as say the fire was once to ancient humans. It is now just another tool. No longer to be revered. It is easy and cheap and of no consequence. Another human tool

You cannot manage what you cannot measure. The very concept of accounting for political personas that someone fancies for the day is absurd. You have to count the party memberships, that is unfortunately the only thing we can count; the closest thing to a mildly popular leftist party in America is the Green Party.

Proofs?
Yeah but that's only because muh jews and WASP """tradition""".
There is literally nothing wrong with this.
Revolutionary defeatism is good.

Attached: new game yun nerd.jpg (960x932, 162.13K)

Nope. The Trinity/Homoousion was made-up and imposed by Constantine's Council of Nicaea, pre-Nicene Christians differed widely in their view of the nature of Jesus, the New Testament itself is extremely vague and not explicit at all. Modern-day Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe Jesus is God.

Also:
That's the Devil. Read Gnosticism.

Attached: no9.png (401x514, 130.46K)

Yes. The left has allowed the right to beat it at its own game.

Essentially everyone at the Council of Nicaea agreed with the doctrine they established except for Arius who was beaten down by Santa Claus himself.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (450x291, 329.45K)

He stated that once people are able to conceive asexually, that it is now materially shown that life is meaningless. Materially shown. He is literally making a metaphysical claim ("life is meaningless") then saying such a claim is materially supported by people being able to reproduce asexually now without actually showing how it does this. He's just drawing an arrow without any explanation of what that arrow is.
This is how it looks

Your whole argument hinges on the idea that because people did not have complete control over the ability to conceive children (it had to be shared) or control over the results of that conception, that this inability to control things gave such life meaning or at least some kind of mystic societal relevance. Its reverence gave it meaning and now that it is gone we are merely tools to be used because we are now cheap and producible. This is a ridiculous claim because it not only functions on a almost capitalist framework of viewing things ("This thing is easily producible and we have large amounts of it therefore its value is worthless and we should think less of it") but because it makes the claim that now that we have control of life that this life now looses meaning despite not showing exactly how such meaning is lost from it. It assumes meaning is derived from randomness, from the scarcity of a thing without actually showing how this was "meaning" in the first place and also attributes this "meaning" to sacredness despite not showing how this sacredness was actual "meaning" as well. Your more or less stating that the only way meaning can be derived is by the sacredness of a thing which assumes that it is the only thing that meaning can be extracted from.

Separately, in regards to your own argument, if I were to find or make a tool and I use that tool everyday and find myself attached to or concerned for the condition for that tool, despite that tool being identical to every other tool like it and plenty of it, or that tool having been constructed to my own specification, have I not given it the "meaning" you described? Respectively, if I raise and take care a child everyday and find myself attached to or concerned for the health of that child, despite that child being identical to many others and/or having been "made" in way I decided upon, have I not given or derived meaning? Is a statue meaningless to its creator because he made it and there are many like it? Is a piece of art sitting on a wall meaningless to the one who painted it because it could be made by them again easily and there are many similar like it? If we are made gods to the matter of creation, or if such a god does actually exist, does what matter we or it create or shape become "meaningless" because we or it create or shape it and could do so again for infinity? In what way does the infinitesimalness or the replicability of something determine the meaning we derive or attribute to such a thing? If such a thing is how we determine meaning, then there can be and was no meaning that could or ever be determined or derived from anything, as both we and the time we live in is and continues to grow infinitesimally small, and the uniqueness and unlikeness of our own experiences and moments continues to disappear in proportion.

"Patriarchy" doesn't exist.

I'm on mobile now and won't be able to respond fully because it's a bitch to do. Essentially what I was trying to say in my previous post that I guess I didn't say explicitly is that life becomes non sacred because to be sacred is effectively to be beyond human, or above human. We do not sanctify the human. Once we sanctify individual humans they are no longer just humans they are saints. Divine. Same goes for objects.

Once humans have total control and understanding over human life reproduction through means of technology, it no longer becomes sacred. Because if it was sacred then it would not be able to be manipulated in such a complete way by humans. The sanctity of life is materially disproven by the reality of its total manipulation at the hands of humans. In the same way that we no longer revere the moon as a divine object or God but a physical object that we have physically stepped foot on. This isn't an ideological or philosophical disproving. It is "material"

No good secular argument for banning it, fetuses don't have consciousness yet, so support legality on human freedom grounds.

Hi zizek

Black women should be banned from discussing politics

Jewish women should be banned from discussing politics

I think in this regard my point still stands. I would only add that if we were to explore this from your view, that if sacredness is to be beyond human, then have we not in this moment of exact creation made ourselves so? You said:
But what if this were the opposite? By performing such manipulation in such a way, have we not transcened this notion of being mere subjects confined to the randomness of the universe, of being beings capable of only human non-sacred actions? Have we not also transcended our current notion of sacredness, meaning we are now free to attribute the attribute of sacredness upon whatever is our creation and, conversely, upon oursleves? The sanctity of life has not in any way been materially disproven by the reality of its total manipulation at the hands of humans, it has merely been changed to now being derived from our own now "sacred" selves. We have achieved what was sacred and now have become a people who match such. You assume our actions bring all things down to a base human, but what if such things bring our base as humans up? Reverance does not dissappear with the understanding of the material object or what was once divine, the concepts of what was revered still remain and what we may revere freed from the confines of that material object. Zizek would also say that the force of ideology has not left us as well. You have said:
But by reaching such control and exactness have we not matched what we found sacred and therefore become one with such? In such a case could it not be said that the concept of being human has been "sanctified" or that humans have transcended into what was sacred? Metaphorically, you could say every man has been made a "Saint", a person who in potential matches what was once divine. And in regards to the created human, they too would or could inherit such potential by having the ability to engage in exact creation as well. I would also say we "santify" the idea of the human all the time, in the sense of things or creatures moving up to a human level which is for all concerns is above them
My argument from before was honestly more directed at the statement you made before, which was:
But to review this from your own views, hasn't life now been made less cheap and of major consequence? Do we not now bear the extreme weight of our creations actions and design as such things can no longer be attributed to random and spontaneous accident of which we are helpless to but exact and dictated creation of which we control in a truely absolute manner? Before a person could only curse towards what was a distant and unresponsive god or merely accept his spontaneously incidental reality for the manner of his condition and creation, but now there observably exists a material creator who by choice and action decided both his existence and his form of which he can lay blame or praise on. You as the creator now accept the once divine position of what was gods and usurp chance.

Women should be banned from discussing politics

Rosa would like a word with you.

If a woman gets raped or will die/Get Severely injured, Its OK to have an abortion.

If someone has an abortion to make them look less fat, That should not be allowed.

le false dichotomy

Man what is wrong with you o___o

People in the Third World is threatened by death squads, proper terrorists, proper paramilitary groups, the US military and its allies, islamic fundamentalists, drug cartels, mobs… then all of a sudden leftypol is scared by 'muh abortion'. Do me a favor First world, fuck off and die.

Attached: peopleinthe3dworld.png (364x290, 7.58K)

I actually remember tons of threads from those days where these kinds of people were announcing that they were gonna kill themselves soon, I remember even Rebel made some of those threads. It was far worse back then but the aftershocks of those days still live on in the rampant pessimism (inb4 muh schopenhauer durr) and hopelessness of this board culture.

These annihilist/antinatalist tards should either follow their own advice or at the very least get the fuck out of here. Holla Forums would be a better receptor of their faggotry. I fail to grasp why a board about revolutionary leftist politics need to host a group of depressed fucking losers who are wholly against the very basis of our tenets..

This tbh
See above

There's no secular argument for freedumbs or what constitutes consciousness.

The community should decide if a child should or shouldn't be terminated, period.

Serious question
Do you have autism?

Hell yeah

I'd be the best fucking abortionist around too. I'd be hitting numbers you need exponents to calculate.

Come up with a machine to do it more quickly, maybe two or three women at a time, I'd be the motherfucking Eli Whitney of fetuses.

I'd hang up a sign in found of the state sponsored abortion clinic which read:

Come see Dr. Deletus, he'll annihilate your fetus.

Plus that sick government pension at 20.

Attached: 3fb23c630f28d6680024ff962aac76441adc2ca9.png (400x236, 34.28K)

People in the Third World etc. then all of a sudden leftypol suffers from autism. Do me a favor first world, fuck off and die.

The turd world is a piece of shit that won't flush and communism is the only toilet powerful enough to flush it down for good.

There's no secular argument for humanity's continued existence either. better go genocide ourselves xDDDD

It's because the Left shoved itself into a cloud of postmodernist fancy. Question everything! Except the people who are ruling your lives!

Kill yourself Holla Forums

The sad thing is there are people here who actually believe that this is a logical thing.
Also;
Should one think hard enough about the subject then you will eventually find an argument for that. The thing is most people who actually do that to a great extent are nihilists and antinatalists who just wish to find further reasons for why nothing matters and to fuel their own misanthropy.

I agree, materialist metaphysics are in complete crisis mode and we've been ignoring this fatal flaw for decades now, it is incapable of answering the basic theological questions without using pseudoscience or pure dogmatic rhetoric. This is fundamentally why we have degenerated so badly for the decades and imploded into fashionable debauchery, fatalism and nihilism.

How did this happen? Compromising our axioms to become more appealing to the masses, using gutted theology as a foundation(blank slate, self determination) and the progression of the sciences as a whole.

Abortion is literally the slicing and dicing of proles before they're nine months old. It's the epitome of decadence, and the reason why it's so promoted by the media is to lower the prole population.