Why did he even show up lmao

“Would a mother be hurt more by losing a two year old or three four week fetuses?” “I can’t imagine a world where I care about female preferences or emotions, so they are equal.”

I'm not even pro-life and I am stunned by the stupidity of your argument.

Its funny bc I remember the right wing kept spewing hateful memes about how certain races/people couldn't understand hypotheticals and it related to some iq race 4chan bullshit, fast forward to today, all right wingers act so upset and offended when asked a hypothetical.

Lazy argument In a burning building, in one room lies two 85 year olds In the other a 5 year old child Everyone on this planet saves the 5 year old, moral value is not directly tied to actual counting value Doesn’t give me the right to kill the 2 old people if I choose to

Your hypothetical is retarded though. He answered it, you didnt like/expect his answer. It completely moved you off your point lmao. This is an example of what im talking about, you try to dictate the flow/tempo/topics inside of a debate and if you cant then you get stuck

Why can't these pro lifers just be honest? Of course, you're going to be infinitely more devastated if you lose a baby that you've actually held in your arms and formed a bond with for 2 years over a 4 week old miscarriage.

What kind of stupid fucking argument from this meth-addled retard is this? Would it be better if this kid or these kids died? What the fuck is that?

He wants all of them to die? Geez

They’re all babies, so there is no “worse” option. Your hypothetical is retarded, but so are you so it makes sense

I appreciate this argument. it begins to color where we as humans view life. It doesn't mean a 4 week pregnancy termination can't hold value or meaning but it's clearly obvious that one holds greater weight for us as individuals and a society.

What's the point though? The relevant question is when does life start. Even though based on some subjective judgement call, hypothetically, it would be "worse" to murder Ned Flanders than Homer Simpson... murder is still bad.

1. Parents grieve way more for a 5yr old than for a 95yr old grandparent. That doesn't mean the elderly have less right to life or can be killed. You'd save the child in a burning building triage scenario, but that doesn't license euthanizing grandma. Just as a mother might grieve far less for an unwanted pregnancy she aborts at 4 weeks than for a wanted toddler. That subjective difference doesn't make the fetus sub human. Emotional attachment tracks bonding, familiarity, and development not intrinsic value.

Hypotheticals don’t exist for them they can’t wrap their brain around something that they didn’t ever hear about

Why are not debating @paleochristcon ? Are you afraid? Serious question. You said @Asmongold shouldn't be allowed to continue unchallenged yet you pick and choose who challenges you? How is that a real challenge? All serious people are waiting for an answer.

The worst part is you probably thought this was clever. lol.

Noooo you cut out your response to that... " You want all of them to die"

Not really a relevant hypothetical though, I'd prefer my 2 year old live over three 100 year old relatives, but it doesn't mean those 100 year olds don't have legal protections & moral value to me

Hard to say. Losing a 2 year old would mean you had been raising them for 2 years, and hit several significant milestones with them, and losing a 2 y/o is much more rare than a miscarriage. If that was ur answer, that wouldn't mean the 2 y/o is more valuable than the fetuses, tho

This is a bad gotcha. They’re all equally bad you midwit.

Hypothetical scenarios in this debate are often not genuine attempts to understand the issue. You are using it to force someone into a moral dilemma and then present that as proof of a broader claim. That kind of argumentation is unproductive and manipulative.

The Liberal worldview in a nutshell. A set of the worst case scenarios being used as the basis for living.

This hypothetical is irrelevant. We see all these situations as tragedies and it doesn’t answer when life begins

He's right it's a stupid hypothetical that denies real emotion in favour of point-scoring

Destiny, that is the most ridiculous example. He doesn't have to choose any of those dumb scenarios. You don't get to choose another person's feelings. You complete dunce

You are just upsetty spaghetti because he said all of the loses are morally equal. And you can't comprehend that answer because life inside the womb to you is a clump of cells.

Which is worse, the fbi finding the CP on your computer or you getting stabbed in the stomach by BLM

I'm pro choice but the father should have equal say since it's half his and is financially responsible

What's worse? Being kicked in the left testicle? Or Having right testicle flicked 3 times?

I hate when men try to talk about women’s issues. They have no idea what we deal with in maternal health

Pro-choicer doesn’t get he asked a false dichotomy

Why even play into this retarded ass question, low IQ tricks

He might have been dropped on his head as a baby. ... I would want all of them.. lol

That's not what he's saying at all. He refuses to play the game, that doesn't mean he doesn't understand the rules.

Why do you even say anything? Ever? You are an absolute retard

Hypothetically don't work in arguments due to the fact they are not facts but made up.