Sorry, but inaccurate. It may be described as a commensal relation at minimum.
The foetus propagates the parents genes and contributes towards the perpetuation of the species which from a biological perspective which is good. In a parasitic relation, the host only loses and the parasite only gains. In motherhood, the body is actually going out of its way to actually accommodate the baby and in return the baby does confer some positives from modulating the immune system to make the mother less susceptible to allergens to downright increasing infection fighting capabilities (see foetal microchimerism).
I feel this need to add this: I know this is a meme, and that I'm very pro choice.
Ya know? Gotta say.....when I watched the pro-life vs pro-choice clash thats been taking place the past 10 years, I didn't see this coming. I'm usually pretty good about seeing things coming, but I had no clue that the end game of abortion bans was just a ploy to save tapeworms inside peoples bodies.
i could understand attending your brother's church to support your brother (and give them advice). if one of my siblings (not the dipshit one) was clergy of some sort or a church musician and i lived nearby, and their church was not preaching something absolutely repellent, yeah i'd goto support them. i know what it's like to be performing to an empty room. i have not had the heart to check my internet viewership at the last church.
Wait until the pro-lifers discover the antibiotics they pop when they're sick kill organisms inside of them... Life is sacred when it's not their bodies.
Def restrict them, feeding them by the fuckton to cattle because you're too lazy to figure out a way to keep that many of them in sanitary conditions is how you get civilization-ending superbugs.
This is really the whole thing, regardless of how developed the baby is.
Imagine a fully formed child or adult with a liver problem. Science comes up with some way that someone of similar genetics can be physically connected to them and filter their blood for them and keep them alive while they wait for a transplant. Should the person who can physically sustain another person's body be legally required to do so?
As to the "playing god" thing, I was actually quite amazed at how touchy the IVF doctors were about that issue. They had some interesting rules about what they would and wouldn't tell the parents about the offspring options. I'd have to go ask my friends about it again for all of them, but I remember one of the rules was the doctors wouldn't tell them the color of the eyes before choosing.
I believe that ethical doctors do this. I also believe there are some unethical doctors out there who don’t give a shit and allow their patients to select for all kinds of traits. Ultimately, there is no way to know unless someone talks about it.
My first challenge to you would be to go look into the eyes of infertile people and tell them that “not everyone deserves a child, it’s not a right, it’s a gift.”
It’s easy to argue on the internet behind your keyboard. Much much harder to say your shitty beliefs out loud in front of people.
Here is my second question for you. A hypothetical.
You are at a fertility clinic, and a fire breaks out. You run past a room almost engulfed by flames, and see a little 4-year-old child in there, screaming for help.
As you go to rescue this child, you notice that the other side of the room has hundreds of embryos in Petri dishes. Babies, according to your beliefs.
You only have time to save one of those things. A 4-year-old child or hundreds of babies.
I could and would say "Hey, I don't think IVF is moral. I don't think murder is justifiable."
I do not have time to save hundreds of petri dishes at once. IVF is also immoral as it creates so many human persons and only chooses one to live. I call the fire department after saving the child and pocketing as many petri dishes as I can
You could and would, but have you? I can assure you you’ve met many people who were conceived via IVF. Have you told them their parents are murderers to their face? Again, it’s super easy to hold these beliefs behind a keyboard.
The hypothetical only allows you to save one of these things. The 4-year-old child or hundreds of embryos. Which do you save?
I will say that I actually have more respect for anti-choice people when they are also anti-IVF. At least you’re consistent, so there’s that.
What are your views on capital punishment? I hope they are consistent there too.
Your body is a temple for the tapeworm. God sees you when you murder His precious tapeworms, and you’ll be made to answer for your sins when that big ole judgin’ shindig in heaven goes down. Can’t say I didn’t warn ya.
I know this is just a shitpost but if you consider religious opponents to abortion believe that humans are made in the image of God and have infinite value compared to other things like tapeworms, you'll understand their position.
I think the iconoclast issue is long over for all the christianity cults. It's only the muslims that still have those proscriptions, unless there is another minor religion somewhere that addresses the image thing.
the point is, the term murder exists for purposes of determining sentences and punishment for crime. if we as a society decided that homicide and regicide were of the same magnitude, we'd call them both murder. we don't. we call one murder and one assassination. not sure what your point of redefining air means.
People who have not arrived at a position by logic or reason can never be dissuaded by logic or reason. This is humor, because trying to debate or convince an anti-abortion terrorist that they are not only wrong but evil would be pointless.
they are evil, but they are not illogical. there seem to be a confusion between logic, which is objective, and morality, which is not. they are reaching the logical conclusion of pro-life from their morality, which is evil.
i think the mentality of "they are evil, therefore they are not logical, therefore there is no point trying to talk to them" is very unconstructive. because it rules out the possibility of change. if you think they cannot be changed, what else can you do? wait for them to all die, then we'd all be living in paradise? or throw 40% of US citizens in prison?
Many of them are illogical, or have logic descending from extremely dubious axioms.
For example, "abortion is murder of an innocent baby" + "allow abortion for rape or incest" don't square well together, but see commonly seen together.
The "abortion is murder" crowd is against it up until it personally affects them.
I once had to dodge a punch because in an argument with someone I used to go to church with as a child, I brought up his own daughters getting pregnant as teens and him taking them 3 states over to get abortions.
Apparently "that's different and you know it"
Besides, who gives a shit whether their logic is internally consistent when they can just ask sky daddy to forgive them and they'll get into heaven no matter how many (according to them) babies they murder.
Lol, I'd say its only different if she were raped or if he knocked her up himself. Doubt that was the case (and/or that he'd admit it if it were the later).
What's extra wild to me are those who stay logically consistent through that patch; that is they believe abortion even in cases of rape and incest is still immoral and thus should be illegal.
I've got a family member with that take and I was legit speechless when she said that to me, esp since I consider her one of the more rational and compassionate members of my family.
Their logic is "women are cattle that exist to breed" and so there's literally no argument in favor of abortion you can ever make.
The only thing that ever convinces them is if a woman becomes a person to them, so perhaps a daughter or other family member, and so they're able to justify her abortion because she's a person. This will never be applied to a woman they don't know.
Is it logically equivalent? I mean they both drain their host, they both require a host to survive, and usually one dies when removed from the host.
Are conservative Christians going to care? Of course not because NO ARGUMENT WILL EVER BE ENOUGH for them. They believe a sky fairy will save them from eternal suffering that the same sky fairy sends them to for not believing hard enough that sky fairy exists. Logic isn't important to them.
The thing that never ceases to baffle me with religious people is when they're faced with terrible hardship, catastrophic life events, disability or unending suffering, and they thank the Lord for sending them a just test of their faith.
Well, I have a disability, and if there's a magical sky fairy out there responsible for it, you can go fuck yourself, you mean piece of shit.
An organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host. The ends to the mean is worth the sacrifice to most mothers and often intentionally planned for or accepted, but yes, a fetus qualifies.
As far as using it as an argument, no, it won't work for various reasons. But as presented as a question of definition...
I get where you're coming from. It's kind of annoying when other pro-choice people smugly treat pregnancy and sometimes even children as inherently undesirable all the time. But like other people have already pointed out, the purpose of the post was never to convince anyone, it's just being funny.
107 replies
Sometimes I swear the Feds are aliens in disguise. I mean just look at RFK jr
Killing tapeworms is murder, but they're parasites rather than humans so we don't care.
To be 100% accurate, the human fetus is also a parasite.
Sorry, but inaccurate. It may be described as a commensal relation at minimum.
The foetus propagates the parents genes and contributes towards the perpetuation of the species which from a biological perspective which is good. In a parasitic relation, the host only loses and the parasite only gains. In motherhood, the body is actually going out of its way to actually accommodate the baby and in return the baby does confer some positives from modulating the immune system to make the mother less susceptible to allergens to downright increasing infection fighting capabilities (see foetal microchimerism).
I feel this need to add this: I know this is a meme, and that I'm very pro choice.
I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but parasite still fits. The definition says nothing about generic source.
Are those designations mutually exclusive?
Don't give them ideas.
Tapeworms are full of human DNA as well (your blood)
Which one contains human DNA?
It's self-defense.
Killing mosquitoes is a murder too. And I'm all for mosquitocaust
Killing tapeworms is covered under the stand your ground law
only if killed with a firearm, the second amendment doesn't protect anti-tapeworm drugs...
I thought it was our constitutional duty to consume a tube of ivermectin every day
Nothing bad can happen, it can only good happen
But abortion isn't? Lol
Ya know? Gotta say.....when I watched the pro-life vs pro-choice clash thats been taking place the past 10 years, I didn't see this coming. I'm usually pretty good about seeing things coming, but I had no clue that the end game of abortion bans was just a ploy to save tapeworms inside peoples bodies.
Didn't see that one coming.
This ad has been brought to you by the first worm parasite to ever be appointed US Secretary of Health and Human Services.
he has one too many pig tapeworms and toxoplasma in his brain.
The worst Chris
Actor best known for playing laughably dumb characters, turns out to actually be laughably dumb.
Playing to his strengths, I suppose?
as soon as the news came out about him attending a far right church of his brothers, and him whining about not getting "lead roles" broke his mind.
i could understand attending your brother's church to support your brother (and give them advice). if one of my siblings (not the dipshit one) was clergy of some sort or a church musician and i lived nearby, and their church was not preaching something absolutely repellent, yeah i'd goto support them. i know what it's like to be performing to an empty room. i have not had the heart to check my internet viewership at the last church.
It's no longer acting if they're just being themself.
Itsa meee, Chris Pratt.
Life begins at infection.
Wait until the pro-lifers discover the antibiotics they pop when they're sick kill organisms inside of them... Life is sacred when it's not their bodies.
Billions of them. Each tablet is a genocide. Ban antibiotics now!
(But, actually don't.)
Def restrict them, feeding them by the fuckton to cattle because you're too lazy to figure out a way to keep that many of them in sanitary conditions is how you get civilization-ending superbugs.
Yes, the widespread misuse and abuse of antibiotics is a huge problem. Don't tell the antivax RFK fans about it though, you'll give them new ideas.
Wouldn't it be nice if more folk were just reasonable about things? Life would be so much easier and more fun.
he prefers raw milk, that has been sitting at room temp for a while.
Are they anti vax but pro antibiotic?
a bacterium is not equivalent to a human being
Fuck off
Pushing your stupid superstition ain't changing anyone's minds
A non-viable fetus is not equivalent to a baby.
define "non viable"
Nonviable:
”a nonviable fetus.”
"a nonviable idea."
Source: The American Heritage Dictionary, 5th Edition
Thanks for the definition
I think abortion is wholly different from getting a nonviable fetus removed as it cannot develop nor live
All fetuses are non-viable without being allowed parasitic access to the mother's bodily resources.
This is really the whole thing, regardless of how developed the baby is.
Imagine a fully formed child or adult with a liver problem. Science comes up with some way that someone of similar genetics can be physically connected to them and filter their blood for them and keep them alive while they wait for a transplant. Should the person who can physically sustain another person's body be legally required to do so?
So far, less invasive versions of this say no: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McFall_v._Shimp
You can't even force dead bodies to donate organs.
all children are non viable without being allowed parasitic access to the parents resources
even the ones that are born
::: spoiler Non viable: adjective: :::
I am curious, how do you feel about IVF? Should infertile people get to do it? It destroys embryos in the process. And it’s “playing god.”
As to the "playing god" thing, I was actually quite amazed at how touchy the IVF doctors were about that issue. They had some interesting rules about what they would and wouldn't tell the parents about the offspring options. I'd have to go ask my friends about it again for all of them, but I remember one of the rules was the doctors wouldn't tell them the color of the eyes before choosing.
I believe that ethical doctors do this. I also believe there are some unethical doctors out there who don’t give a shit and allow their patients to select for all kinds of traits. Ultimately, there is no way to know unless someone talks about it.
https://ewtnvatican.com/articles/church-ivf-teaching-catholic-belief
My first challenge to you would be to go look into the eyes of infertile people and tell them that “not everyone deserves a child, it’s not a right, it’s a gift.”
It’s easy to argue on the internet behind your keyboard. Much much harder to say your shitty beliefs out loud in front of people.
Here is my second question for you. A hypothetical.
You are at a fertility clinic, and a fire breaks out. You run past a room almost engulfed by flames, and see a little 4-year-old child in there, screaming for help.
As you go to rescue this child, you notice that the other side of the room has hundreds of embryos in Petri dishes. Babies, according to your beliefs.
You only have time to save one of those things. A 4-year-old child or hundreds of babies.
Who do you save? Be honest.
You'll never get a decent response from them
They're stupid, and deep in their cult
I think they just come here because they have a humiliation fetish
I could and would say "Hey, I don't think IVF is moral. I don't think murder is justifiable."
I do not have time to save hundreds of petri dishes at once. IVF is also immoral as it creates so many human persons and only chooses one to live. I call the fire department after saving the child and pocketing as many petri dishes as I can
I really haven't. No one walks around telling people how they were conceived
If I only have two choices, I would choose the embryos, and keep them frozen until someone is ready to adopt them.
thanks
Capital Punishment and the overall construct of "punishment over rehabilitation" are bad.
Your body is a temple for the tapeworm. God sees you when you murder His precious tapeworms, and you’ll be made to answer for your sins when that big ole judgin’ shindig in heaven goes down. Can’t say I didn’t warn ya.
ITT - people perfectly fine with being disingenuous.
Wanking into a hankie and flushing it down the toilet is mass murder.
Hey dudes, I'm running a church for murderers.
Wait, that might actually be true
ThAt is a DOLPHIN FETUS
Oh gods I masturbated to a dolphin fetus? I'm going to dolphin hell!
How are you not on the fucking Tesseract ban list with those kinds of comments?
i don't fucking know. maybe he likes my brand of insane?
vice versa?
In some parts of the northeast it’s moida
I know this is just a shitpost but if you consider religious opponents to abortion believe that humans are made in the image of God and have infinite value compared to other things like tapeworms, you'll understand their position.
My tired brain: wait, so is this the real original sin? Since you shouldn't create images of god...
I think the iconoclast issue is long over for all the christianity cults. It's only the muslims that still have those proscriptions, unless there is another minor religion somewhere that addresses the image thing.
Iconoclasm is still alive and well in quite a few Protestant denominations
Tapeworm is an animal not a human.
Humans are animals
Didn't say we aren't.
All life is sacred!
I've seen Mr Meaty I know that tape worms are people too.
I have written out this comment and I am now just processing what the fuck my brain has summoned from the depths of my psychological hell.
I guess homo sapiens are aliens, not far off
I didn't say humans aren't animals, I said tapeworms aren't humans. They are animals. They are not humans.
What's the implication?
Killing tapeworms isn't murder because only killing a human can be murder.
Why? Murder is a classification of law. We could make killing a joke murder if we wanted.
If you change the definition of air to mean
you'll be able to walk on air, but as it stands, you can not walk on air.
the point is, the term murder exists for purposes of determining sentences and punishment for crime. if we as a society decided that homicide and regicide were of the same magnitude, we'd call them both murder. we don't. we call one murder and one assassination. not sure what your point of redefining air means.
But they do have a body and might be someone (we don't judge)
Your momma is an animal, uh, in the sack not a human.
Wait that one actually kinda worked. She's a classy lady.
Do you think comparing a parasite to a fetus is logically equivalent and a good way to convince pro life people?
People who have not arrived at a position by logic or reason can never be dissuaded by logic or reason. This is humor, because trying to debate or convince an anti-abortion terrorist that they are not only wrong but evil would be pointless.
they are evil, but they are not illogical. there seem to be a confusion between logic, which is objective, and morality, which is not. they are reaching the logical conclusion of pro-life from their morality, which is evil.
i think the mentality of "they are evil, therefore they are not logical, therefore there is no point trying to talk to them" is very unconstructive. because it rules out the possibility of change. if you think they cannot be changed, what else can you do? wait for them to all die, then we'd all be living in paradise? or throw 40% of US citizens in prison?
Many of them are illogical, or have logic descending from extremely dubious axioms.
For example, "abortion is murder of an innocent baby" + "allow abortion for rape or incest" don't square well together, but see commonly seen together.
The "abortion is murder" crowd is against it up until it personally affects them.
I once had to dodge a punch because in an argument with someone I used to go to church with as a child, I brought up his own daughters getting pregnant as teens and him taking them 3 states over to get abortions.
Apparently "that's different and you know it"
Besides, who gives a shit whether their logic is internally consistent when they can just ask sky daddy to forgive them and they'll get into heaven no matter how many (according to them) babies they murder.
This is conservative thought. Different rules for different people. In-groups to protect, out-groups to bind.
You can also see it when it's like "when I needed welfare I was down on my luck and needed help. When they needed it, they were lazy cheats"
It's poor empathy, poor reasoning, emotional dominance. They are, frankly, stupid
I absolutely love reminding my parents that they have depended on some form of socialism for my entire life
Lol, I'd say its only different if she were raped or if he knocked her up himself. Doubt that was the case (and/or that he'd admit it if it were the later).
What's extra wild to me are those who stay logically consistent through that patch; that is they believe abortion even in cases of rape and incest is still immoral and thus should be illegal.
I've got a family member with that take and I was legit speechless when she said that to me, esp since I consider her one of the more rational and compassionate members of my family.
Their logic is "women are cattle that exist to breed" and so there's literally no argument in favor of abortion you can ever make.
The only thing that ever convinces them is if a woman becomes a person to them, so perhaps a daughter or other family member, and so they're able to justify her abortion because she's a person. This will never be applied to a woman they don't know.
Being pregnant themselves under inopportune circumstances changes their mind, at least temporarily.
No one has ever told you that about right-wingers and religious extremists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_the_Vend%C3%A9e
Is a good inspiration
For some reason that link is borked on Wikipedia’s end, this should work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_the_Vend%C3%A9e
Is it logically equivalent? I mean they both drain their host, they both require a host to survive, and usually one dies when removed from the host.
Are conservative Christians going to care? Of course not because NO ARGUMENT WILL EVER BE ENOUGH for them. They believe a sky fairy will save them from eternal suffering that the same sky fairy sends them to for not believing hard enough that sky fairy exists. Logic isn't important to them.
The thing that never ceases to baffle me with religious people is when they're faced with terrible hardship, catastrophic life events, disability or unending suffering, and they thank the Lord for sending them a just test of their faith.
Well, I have a disability, and if there's a magical sky fairy out there responsible for it, you can go fuck yourself, you mean piece of shit.
But there isn't so I'm not bitter 🙂
(obama_notbad.face) That sums it up quite nicely.
Do you know what community you’re in?
Do you know how high I am, occifer?
Do you know what a shitpost is?
An organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host. The ends to the mean is worth the sacrifice to most mothers and often intentionally planned for or accepted, but yes, a fetus qualifies.
As far as using it as an argument, no, it won't work for various reasons. But as presented as a question of definition...
A fetus is a parasite...
And more importantly, who fucking cares?
I get where you're coming from. It's kind of annoying when other pro-choice people smugly treat pregnancy and sometimes even children as inherently undesirable all the time. But like other people have already pointed out, the purpose of the post was never to convince anyone, it's just being funny.