They should but that's not the point, the point is you shouldn't stop them from getting abortions over a mistake. Condoms break sometimes, the pill doesn't work sometimes, shit happens. Even those who have sex responsibly can still get preggers and that's the point of having abortions be available.

> Telling people they shouldn't be allowed to get abortions and they should just have sex more responsibly is retarded, stay out of other peoples lives.

Bruh, are you actually fuckin retarded. I'm not even anti-abortion but jesus fucking christ you are dumb.

Those are some heavy consequences you nonchalantly talk about. The issue about pregnancy is that it doesn't just affect that one person, it affects the people around them.

It's two peoples choice whether or not to have the kid - and ultimately it's the choice of the woman. Anyone else is irrelevant until the kids born. If you choose to have the kid then it is your choice, if you choose not to have the kid that is also your choice. No one has a right to tell someone to have a kid or not to have a kid.

Why is it two peoples choice to have sex to make a baby, but the ultimate choice is the woman's? What about the father? He has no say? Why not? Did he not also take part in making the child? Does he not suffer if the mother decides not to keep the baby and he wants it or vice versa?

Uh, because you can't force a woman to birth a child and you can't force her to get an abortion?

That's true, but that's not exactly what I was asking. If the child is born the father is seen as it's his responsibility to give the woman money for the child if he doesn't want it. Why? The woman isn't responsible if she decides not to keep the child to do anything for the father that wanted to keep it. It was both that made it, but only one has the choice on whether it lives or dies. Just seems unfair. I'm glad you have it all figured out with that one sentence.

No really that's the reason. You can not force a woman to give birth or have an abortion. That's why the choice is ultimately hers. It's not entirely fair, but given the circumstances there's nothing to do about it. Alimony / child support is a completely different story, I want to say it has a good reason for existing somewhere but it's hard to tell given every single fucking court in existence will give women child support no matter what the circumstance is. That, however, is a different issue for a different day, and is in many ways a lot harder to solve because it can actually be solved.

Sex has consequences just like everything else in life. I have sex, but I have sex with knowledge that I can get pregnant. All I'm saying is don't play a game and not expect to lose and get mad when you do.

That consequence is either having a kid or abortion (assuming no miscarriage). That's not a terrible consequence if you can prepare yourself for either. Telling people they shouldn't be allowed to get abortions and they should just have sex more responsibly is retarded, stay out of other peoples lives.

They should but that's not the point, the point is you shouldn't stop them from getting abortions over a mistake. Condoms break sometimes, the pill doesn't work sometimes, shit happens. Even those who have sex responsibly can still get preggers and that's the point of having abortions be available.

> Telling people they shouldn't be allowed to get abortions and they should just have sex more responsibly is retarded, stay out of other peoples lives.

Bruh, are you actually fuckin retarded. I'm not even anti-abortion but jesus fucking christ you are dumb.

Those are some heavy consequences you nonchalantly talk about. The issue about pregnancy is that it doesn't just affect that one person, it affects the people around them.

It's two peoples choice whether or not to have the kid - and ultimately it's the choice of the woman. Anyone else is irrelevant until the kids born. If you choose to have the kid then it is your choice, if you choose not to have the kid that is also your choice. No one has a right to tell someone to have a kid or not to have a kid.

Why is it two peoples choice to have sex to make a baby, but the ultimate choice is the woman's? What about the father? He has no say? Why not? Did he not also take part in making the child? Does he not suffer if the mother decides not to keep the baby and he wants it or vice versa?

Uh, because you can't force a woman to birth a child and you can't force her to get an abortion?

That's true, but that's not exactly what I was asking. If the child is born the father is seen as it's his responsibility to give the woman money for the child if he doesn't want it. Why? The woman isn't responsible if she decides not to keep the child to do anything for the father that wanted to keep it. It was both that made it, but only one has the choice on whether it lives or dies. Just seems unfair. I'm glad you have it all figured out with that one sentence.

No really that's the reason. You can not force a woman to give birth or have an abortion. That's why the choice is ultimately hers. It's not entirely fair, but given the circumstances there's nothing to do about it. Alimony / child support is a completely different story, I want to say it has a good reason for existing somewhere but it's hard to tell given every single fucking court in existence will give women child support no matter what the circumstance is. That, however, is a different issue for a different day, and is in many ways a lot harder to solve because it can actually be solved.

www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/magazine/stop-sign.html
Here you go.

I'm not the moron who is trying to say that the reason stop signs are red is because of how light travels when in reality it was just how people react to the color red, moron.

www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/magazine/stop-sign.html
Here you go.

If you're not ready for a kid, then you're honestly not ready for sex.

If you're not ready to get involved in a car crash, you aren't ready to drive

>your logic
let people do what they want with their bodies, and a fetus doesnt have brain activity till week 8

you mean comparing "accidents" you mong

lol no

That is probably the stupidest thing I've heard all year.

What the fuck? Sex doesn't cost anything, having a kid and raising it sure as shit does. You're the type of prude who thinks you have to get married to have sex and that it must be solely for the act of reproduction, but trust me you can have sex without having a kid just fine. People who are ready for children 99% aren't virgins.

Sex has consequences just like everything else in life. I have sex, but I have sex with knowledge that I can get pregnant. All I'm saying is don't play a game and not expect to lose and get mad when you do.

That consequence is either having a kid or abortion (assuming no miscarriage). That's not a terrible consequence if you can prepare yourself for either. Telling people they shouldn't be allowed to get abortions and they should just have sex more responsibly is retarded, stay out of other peoples lives.

They should but that's not the point, the point is you shouldn't stop them from getting abortions over a mistake. Condoms break sometimes, the pill doesn't work sometimes, shit happens. Even those who have sex responsibly can still get preggers and that's the point of having abortions be available.

> Telling people they shouldn't be allowed to get abortions and they should just have sex more responsibly is retarded, stay out of other peoples lives.

Bruh, are you actually fuckin retarded. I'm not even anti-abortion but jesus fucking christ you are dumb.

Those are some heavy consequences you nonchalantly talk about. The issue about pregnancy is that it doesn't just affect that one person, it affects the people around them.

It's two peoples choice whether or not to have the kid - and ultimately it's the choice of the woman. Anyone else is irrelevant until the kids born. If you choose to have the kid then it is your choice, if you choose not to have the kid that is also your choice. No one has a right to tell someone to have a kid or not to have a kid.

Why is it two peoples choice to have sex to make a baby, but the ultimate choice is the woman's? What about the father? He has no say? Why not? Did he not also take part in making the child? Does he not suffer if the mother decides not to keep the baby and he wants it or vice versa?

Uh, because you can't force a woman to birth a child and you can't force her to get an abortion?

That's true, but that's not exactly what I was asking. If the child is born the father is seen as it's his responsibility to give the woman money for the child if he doesn't want it. Why? The woman isn't responsible if she decides not to keep the child to do anything for the father that wanted to keep it. It was both that made it, but only one has the choice on whether it lives or dies. Just seems unfair. I'm glad you have it all figured out with that one sentence.

No really that's the reason. You can not force a woman to give birth or have an abortion. That's why the choice is ultimately hers. It's not entirely fair, but given the circumstances there's nothing to do about it. Alimony / child support is a completely different story, I want to say it has a good reason for existing somewhere but it's hard to tell given every single fucking court in existence will give women child support no matter what the circumstance is. That, however, is a different issue for a different day, and is in many ways a lot harder to solve because it can actually be solved.

You don't have stop signs as red because it's easier to see, you have it because people associate it with caution. The entire reason stop signs and lights are red is strictly because of the human reaction to the color, which is biology not physics. The people who came up with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices actually wanted to use yellow with black lettering, but it was revised to red with white in 1954 because of railroads and traffic signals. The reason given? Because people associate red with stop.

As for the connection between how we react to red and the color of blood, I have no articles and I could be wrong, but as we aren't doing a formal debate where we would have to have such information beforehand, you can look it up your damn self. There's a huge difference between a professional debate where you need to have your sources for your claims to prove your point and the internet, one of which is on the internet we're all equally able to look up sources to prove or disprove each others claims. Feel free to prove me wrong on that one, I'm more than willing to admit to being wrong if you want to provide an article for me.

I'm not the moron who is trying to say that the reason stop signs are red is because of how light travels when in reality it was just how people react to the color red, moron.

www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/magazine/stop-sign.html
Here you go.

#2

Look if people were as tasty as cows and didn't have horrible side effects on the human body. I'd eat people

Why not?

Yeah, fuck that notion.

I did say "almost"

One a pie graph, they'd probably take up about 4%

Oh I see, couldn't the lack of genetic diversity be that they have to quarantine healthy devils?