@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
And ideally we wouldn't have to throw anyone away, but sometimes you must make a choice in limited time with limited information and limited resources and that choice will affect you and others, possibly drastically so.

And you might refuse to acknowledge that there is an ordering of your potential choices but the ordering will still be there and others might acknowledge it.

Ideally, people wouldn't have to think of this stuff, but the world can be ugly.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
-not having the right to safe abortions just increases the number of unsafe and illegal abortions
-women are shamed for even considering an abortion and are told that "god will help" them. and guess what, they often die.
-rape victims should not be forced to carry a child they did not want

also, it is usually better to prioritize the mother's safety because they can, to put it bluntly, always have more kids

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
So until this magical promised land of yours comes true, what do you suggest those considering abortions do?

@grainloom @Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle prior to widespread access to abortions and other forms of birth control, the acceptable approach was infanticide.

Abortions are much cheaper and less messy. Let's stick with them.

Meat can have a human genome without being a person. It can even have the potential to become a person without being a person. Consider the root of every hair on your head, for instance.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
Have you seen what poor families with lots of kids go through?
And you haven't really answered my question.
Until all those conditions you've listed are met, what are women to do?

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
Adoption only works if people can adopt and even that is not properly implemented everywhere.
Anyways, let me recap, correct me if I misunderstood:
what you suggest is that women who are in bad socioeconomic situations and are expecting a child that they (by their own admission) could not care for properly give birth regardless and either send the child off for adoption or raise them AND they should also fight to change society.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
I think you are asking a bit too much.

Also, the case where the fetus is known to have serious genetic defects is imho not properly addressed. And Down is one of the better cases within that, at least the child doesn't die within hours after birth.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

> having the right to safe income and sustain for the kids, having welcoming communities that actively help ...

World ain't like that. People ain't like that. Not everybody wants to be a parent, y'know. Especially by accident, tragic or otherwise. It doesn't make them bad, it just means they have different needs and priorities.

> God cannot help anyone

Because there is none. Fictional characters don't help people. People help people. And people ain't all goody two shoes, most of us humans are pretty toxic bastards, get over it.

> do yoy prefer the cheaper alternative: let them abort and forget them?

Yes, let them abort if they want to. Nobody said anything about "forgetting them": there's a lot of shit associated with rape that needs helping with. It's a sensible alternative.

If the woman decides to an abortion, let her have it. It is not your place to tell anyone what to do with their bodies and parts of it.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle Also, mind you, abortion is not a fucking sport, it's an emergency measure, ALWAYS, no exception.
It's a traumatic and painful procedure, not even taking the social stigma that exists because of you and people like you.
Women turn to abortion only when all other options have been exhausted already.
When's the last time have you seen a woman getting pregnant and undergoing an abortion every goddamn Saturday just for the hell of it? I thought so.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle A woman also has a right to NOT reproduce. Capisce? And sometimes there is just no option to fully express the right to not reproduce other than abortion.

Now, what you're saying just makes no sense whatsoever. When and how access and right to abortion infringes on a woman's right to reproduce? Do you see anyone vouching for mandatory abortion? Strawman much?

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle I believe this views are based on the fact that humans are very expensive to produce. It takes ~20 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to grow a self-sustaining and contributing individual in western countries. I suppose this could change some day, if we could create or copy human beings at will. This would also make murder less of a crime and more like a minor inconvenience.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle honestly, you're talking about capitalism propaganda if it was even a thing. Or if there was anything else beyond various forms of capitalism.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle does it scale to 7 billion people? I doubt that.

As for your other reply, I consider myself a philosophical zombie. If I suddenly cease to exist and a perfect copy of me is placed instead, would anyone know a difference? Nope!

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle but if another person looks like me, acts like me, feels like me, aren't they as much me as I am?

@newt
No, they aren't: you can't make an exact copy of a quantum system without destroying (altering) the original. Approximate copy — yes.
@Shamar

@amiloradovsky @Shamar is there a proof that consciousness is necessarily a quantum system?

@newt
No. Proofs may only be performed with a precisely defined notions, but consciousness isn't one of those now.
On the other hand, there is so-called Integrated Information Theory (#IIT), which aims to define it more or less rigorously.
@Shamar

@amiloradovsky @Shamar that's basically what I meant. Even if consciousness is quantum based, there's no way to inspect the quantum state, and I suppose there's no need because consciousness constantly changes. Myself today is different from yesterday. So it doesn't really matter.

@newt
My point was about copying: the only way to make an exact copy of something is to take the original…
And those minor differences matter: the evolution of such an unstable system must be very sensitive to the initial conditions (see the chaos/ergodic theory).
The change in time is not really a change of state (in a mechanical sense): e.g. pendulum is moving in time (swinging), although it's "state" stays the same, as long as nobody touches it.
@Shamar

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle you're boring

@Shamar @newt @Wolf480pl @noelle
> just like you accept
within some extreme cases
no one is saying abortion shouldn't be controlled or there shouldn't be a cap for how old the embryo can be
or that it's good when someone has to choose it
but yeah, you wouldn't sacrifice someone to save someone else, i would. it would have to be a pretty dire situation but i would.
i have nothing else to add

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle this is a nonsense. Abortion and other forms of birth control are a technical progression, not capitalist per se. They simply replace the previously-widespread (and pre-capitalist) practice of infanticide with something tidier.

As for the rest, you're imposing a duty to reproduce, not protecting a right to. Reproductive choice is enhanced by technology, but more so by the end of notions like you or I deciding whether someone must bear a child

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle and none of them are 100% effective, even when used 100% properly (which is generally difficult). Even abstinence.

By denying abortion, you are imposing a duty to reproduce in the cases where earlier interventions fail.

Human meat with the potential to become a person has no right to life, and reproductive control is not capitalist oppression.

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle fortunately, the idea that a fetus has moral equivalence is losing favour everywhere. This makes your nightmare scenarios less likely, as we can focus on the real distinctions between aggregates of human meat with moral standing, and those without.

Although we shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that bigotry needs an internally-consistent worldview to thrive. It does perfectly fine without one.

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle sexual control is distinct from reproductive control, and many people do not have it. So yes, abstinence is not 100% effective. But it's by the by, since "oops" abortions have moral equivalence. There's no reason to avoid abortions in general.

I am definitely human meat, just like an embryo. Being human meat does not generate moral standing - that way lies absurdity, and as noted at the very start of this thread, is a modern invention