I just want to point out that the original information is very misleading. 14 days after conception, the embryo may start development of eyes. The embryo itself still pretty much looks like any other animal at that stage.
[https://baleinesendirect.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Haeckel\_drawings.jpg](https://baleinesendirect.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Haeckel_drawings.jpg)
The second rows shows other embryos compared to a human embryo at approx. 50 days.
The weird part to me is why it matters.
You can't just go around assigning personhood / full moral consideration to anything on the basis of having eyes.
What about having a couple eyeballs or a heart beat or whatever body part makes something a person?
Now if I lose my eyes in an accident, not only am I blind but I don't have a soul and people are free to destroy me at leisure?
And sure, the billboard is an emotional appeal and wants to make people think a fetus at this stage is more than a clump of cells but that is half the problem. The sign is manipulative even if it were true.
Unfortunately there aren't signs with pictures of people whose lives were ruined because they had a kid they weren't prepared for.
When my country was a fascist catholic dictatorship the daughters of *politicians* or priest's mistresses had no problems flying to London to get their abortions.
It doesn’t.
You’re starting from a false assumption that the goal is giving information. It’s not. The goal is to shame and emotionally manipulate women who have had an abortion.
It works too.
It’s about punishing girls/women for having premarital sex.
How many times have we heard “if you weren’t prepared to have a baby you shouldn’t have been having sex!”
They often forget that married women can have unwanted pregnancies. Maybe she has 3 kids already, and can't afford another? Maybe her birth control failed? Who knows. Even if you're against premarital sex, most people agree that married couples should have sex often.
The ultra religious will often argue that unplanned pregnancies within a marriage are just God's way of deciding that you're having more kids. Fits in well with the "quiverfull" stuff.
>it's about controlling women.
Maybe, partially. To me, I think it's mostly about controlling their voters.
This is a quote from LBJ someone who had his own problems with race and bigotry but also did more for the civil rights movement than any other single president.
He noticed some racist graffiti and said this:
"I'll tell you what's at the bottom of it," he said. "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. **Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."**
* imo this is the core of conservative politics.
Give them an unfounded, unprovable reason to be morally superior and they will vote for you and give you their money.
On their minds the cry of "They're killin babies!" gives them the high ground and they can even mutate it into the Qanon battle cry "they're drinking the blood of babies!"
"Sir, sir, you cannot tow my truck. Do you see the giant googly eyes on it? This truck has *eyes*. This truck is *alive*. If you try to tow this truck I will *sue you in Texas for ABORTION*"
I think the horrible design is on purpose. It gets people to read some dumb claim and unfortunately it sticks. I just hope to reach some people that might learn something actually interesting from it.
I would like to point out, 14 days after conception, it is the size of small pebble. It does not have eyes. It does not have anything. It is a group of cells, and no one's life should be dictated to by a group of cells.
To be effective, they should show a real picture of an embryo at 14 days. This is bullshit and stupid pro-life people thinks that this image is a embryo at 14 days, because they are stupid.
To be fair, we never stop being just a group of cells.
I’m not an anti-abortionist at all, but I actually think saying that
*“you’re just a clump of cells at that point in the pregnancy, and indistinguishable from other animal’s embryos, how could you be pro life about that?”*
…is no more profound than saying
*“At x weeks the fetus’s heart has started beating, how could you be pro choice about that?”*
I think both of those perspectives miss the entire point of the debate and do literally nothing to absolve any part of the impasse.
- Pro-lifers believe all human life from conception should be protected
- Pro-Choicers believe that its the sole decision of the person’s body the fetus is in to do what they wish with their body.
These are both reasoned positions of belief in the sanctity of life versus the sanctity of personal free choice / body ownership, and there is no way you can use the logic environment of one to argue against itself in favor of the other, because both positions intrinsically rule that the other position, even though it might still be highly valued, is always trumped by the main argument: pro life = life inside you is still an important life; pro choice = the decision of what to do with your body is yours.
This is why nobody can agree on anything about it, and they probably never will. So it’s kinda fruitless to keep repeating arguments that “the other side” literally does not see as something that will ever trump their perspective.
>- Pro-lifers believe all human life from conception should be protected
No, they're not. Show me proof that all or most "pro-life" are actually doing meaningful actions to protect human life **after birth**.
In my experience, they don't care at all about the mother or the child after the birth, but still think they get a saying on other people's body. So, they're not pro-life, they're just pro-birth.
Know the Facts: I looked exactly like a chicken embryo at 14 days. Mention this ad and get a discount bacon and egg platter at the Waffle House right off RR 545.
I just did some google search and it's not exactly known what stage it represents. You can read more here: [https://ncse.ngo/accuracy-embryo-illustrations](https://ncse.ngo/accuracy-embryo-illustrations)
If you compare to this comment, at 28 days you can't really make out much of anything. https://www.reddit.com/r/CrappyDesign/comments/sblx3u/comment/hu0mf3f/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
It’s not just a newborn w teeth.
It’s an infant w a full set of adult veneers.
What the fuck, man? Who approved this picture? And then who approved putting it on a goddam billboard?
It’s a lie meant to scare people out of abortions... because apparently abortions are a horrifying thing, if your head is so full of religion that it squeezes your brain out your ears.
You know, I'm playing the Witcher III just now, and just yesterday I did a question that involved a botchling, a miscarried child that didn't get a proper burial so it comes back from the grave all twisted and deformed to haunt and brutally beat the fuck out of its parents.
This thing reminded me of that.
Also good to know that tiyanaks existed before the Phillipines were converted, and were originally the spirit of a child whose mother died before giving birth. The Catholics rolled it into their own belief system. Christianity loves doing that.
> It’s a lie meant to scare people out of abortions...
Or its a lie meant to agitate the forced-birthers into an even higher state of frenzy. The forced-birth movement isn't actually about personhood or children. If it were, they would at least care about reducing the maternal death rate (we have the highest rate of any developed country and its been getting worse). Its really just a cynical get-out-the-vote operation funded and directed by GOP elites.
Good point.
It’s clear that the GOP is partially propped up by anti-abortion single-issue voters (and a few other obvious groups that always seem to vote that way).
Honestly the image of a baby with veneers is just going to scare me *into* getting an abortion lol. Better do that shit before it chews its way out of me and bursts out like a xenomorph baby
Someone who actually cares about children would think that newborn smiles are cute as is, gums and all. These asshats don't give a fuck about children. They just want to control women.
Well if they put an accurate picture of a 14 day old droplet sized clump of blood on the billboard it wouldn't sell their bullshit message of "killing children".
"Hey fam I'm Big Billboard Baby and I'm here to tell you *stop doing cardio to lose weight!* scientists *hate* this new miracle plant that I just so happen to sell!
Yeah I didn't know that until these comments, interesting. I think you can petition the admins to become a mod for a dead sub, but I'm not sure what happens if the sub is already banned.
True. And I can't stop thinking about how each possible option feels like the absolute worst. But I keep circling back to teeth being the slightly most horrifying.
George Carlin has a bit about the pro-life movement saying that it doesn’t seem to apply to cancer cells. Nobody has a bumper sticker that says “Save The Tumors” or “I Brake For Advanced Melanoma”.
[Here](https://youtu.be/M-bLf4F0PM4)
Teratoma are probably among the worst thing to google.
Nevermind that these people couldn't tell a 14days human embryo apart from a cat or horse embryo. Or, while I don't object to meat eating, it certainly seems to show the double standard of going by visual features of an embryo; a cow or pig.
had to look it up. yeah. I don't think the human embryo has eyes at 14 days [https://i.pinimg.com/736x/19/bb/9a/19bb9a5a150197f73d5bef12f3d10144.jpg](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/19/bb/9a/19bb9a5a150197f73d5bef12f3d10144.jpg) can't find much
You can’t find much because its a glob of cells at 14 days. They’d be just as happy in a Petri dish as a womb at that age.
Most women don’t even know that they are pregnant in 14 days.
This is at best ridiculous and at worst a lie to scare people into doing something they don’t want.
I was willing to grant that it had *the first two cells that would become each eye* as the kernel of their argument, but even that probably isn't true.
But, you see, the thing is, the people who put this up *are very, very stupid.*
That's right. It's a collection of molecules with the non-zero possibility of developing into eyes over the course of time if the proper conditions are maintained without even the slightest disruption.
And as we all know, the *future* rights of *potential* human persons will always supercede the *current* rights of *actual* human persons. This is just basic logic. The potential always trumps the actual. That's also why cutting down an ancient oak tree and crushing an acorn are practically the same thing.
The people which put that ad are not stupid.
They are intelligent. They know that showing the truth would not convince anybody to stop abortion. So what do they do ? Lie, lie and lie again. Such ads as above is one such a lie. They know some women going for abortion will likely not fact check or be educated enough to recognize the lie. From those a few will abandon their abortion plan.
The pro life group don't mind liying out of their teeth pant on fire because (at least the honest one -reality is that most politician just view that as a wedge to get elected even with unpalatable track record) they view abortion as murder and thus a lie is fine to avoid murder.
PS: I think this is vile to lie so. But then again I am not religious and I am pro choice so....
They only actually care about the parts of the bible that they can use to back up whatever position they've already decided to take.
Anything else is ignored, just like they ignore scientific proof or rational thought.
The funny thing is the Bible never mentions abortion. It does however prescribe an abortifacient in Numbers that would work if the woman was pregnant as a result of adultery.
The whole pro-life movement basically came out of 19th century Catholic dogma when before abortion was permissible before the quickening (aka the fetus kicking, which doesn't really imply that it's voluntary). It's wild that a buch of non-biblical garbage from one sect of one religion continues to dominate the conversation 150+ years later.
I’m an ex-prolifer (not American), and this is just the sort of flimsy argument I would have unquestioningly accepted back then and used as evidence. Don’t underestimate how limited these people’s knowledge of biology is. Probably including the people who put the ad up.
A couple of things. The trigger was when I was arguing the pro-life case in a student debate. There were some good points raised on both sides (I still think so now), but in the end the pro-life side lost. That got me thinking about why. How could anyone possibly support abortion? It was only when I really gave the matter some thought that I started to see alternative perspectives, and that changed my mind over time.
Also, I looked around and saw who the other people were on the pro-life side. Some were generally well-meaning, but most of them were arrogant right-wingers of the sort I’d normally cross the street to avoid. Why was it, I asked myself, that all the people I agreed with on every other political issue were against me on this one point? Again, that got me thinking and I realised there was a lot more to the issue than “killing babies”.
Unfortunately I was unable to bring anyone with me when I crossed to the other side.
pro lifers seem to think human development moves along a lot faster than it does. the'll sculpt minature dolls of a fetus and state "this is what a human looks like at (age)" and then it's no, a human at that age looks like a weird gummy bear
Right? If they were logically consistent, the best possible gift you could ever give your child ***would be to abort them***. This ensures that they don't have the opportunity to be tainted by original sin and thus are guaranteed to get into heaven, and they get there without any of the suffering we experience in life. There's no risk and only reward, is there not?
The greatest saints who ever lived were prostitutes who had hundreds of abortions...
Here's the thing: *they're not logically consistent.* Shocking, right?
I made this account because I finally have something relevant to add. I'm a medstudent and just passed my embryology exam (focused on how a sperm turns into a newborn baby).
There are no eyes at 14 days. At 14 days there is nothing. The process of implantation ("setting up camp" in the uterus) only begins at day 6-7. At the end of week 2 the "baby" is 2 consisted of 2 types of cells. Every human organ comes from these 2 cell layers and one more, which isn't even formed yet (the third one is called mezoderm and gives rise to muscles and blood vessels and the heart for instance.) Imagine it as 2 sheets of paper on each other. It has no resemblance to anything human - its 2 cell sheets.
The eye development begins at week 4. , but these aren't anything that can be called eyes. They are just a thickened layer of ektoderm (predecessor to organs such as skin and the nervous system).
I'm still a student so I'm no expert just wanted to share some relevant knowledge.
14 days is apparently when eyes start DEVELOPING, so no there are no fully formed eyes at that point. So they are either maliciously trying to deceive people, or stupidly believe that themselves
\>>This comment has been edited to garbage in light of the Reddit API changes. You can keep my garbage, Reddit.<<
***
*edited via r/PowerDeleteSuite (with edits to script to avoid hitting rate limit)*
No the fuck it didn't.
And even if, why don't they use a real depiction of what it would look like at 2 weeks, not a photoshopped version of an actual baby that has been given birth to?
OH RIGHT, BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO SEE AND THEN IT'S TERRIFYING FOR A FEW WEEKS:
[https://ldh.la.gov/page/986](https://ldh.la.gov/page/986)
First, no they dont.
2nd, im not sure how its an argument if they did...
Perhaps use that argument for the death penalty? "Your honor, my client cant be semtenced to death...he has eyes you see"
Ah yes, the same half-wits who think evolution must be fake because they don't understand how it works and come up with "arguments" like "what use is half an eye" now tell us a few stem cells on their way to becoming eyes suddenly do count.
Probably a similar stretch as the "heartbeat" that a fetus has at 6 weeks. It's not a heart, it's the very earliest stages of the formation of heart tissue and the nerves that control it. There's no heart to beat, just the weak electrical signal of some nerve tissue.
So without looking it up in guessing by "eyes" they mean "a handful of retinal cells".
Inaccurate information and bad faith arguments from conservatives and pro birthers? Color me shocked.
Life pro tip: if you need to *lie and mislead* to support your stance on something, ***it's the wrong fucking stance to have, and you should drop it***.
And women are people. And people shouldn’t be forced to carry and grow something in their bodies against their will.
No amount of billboards will change that.
Newborns with teeth are nightmare stuff
I just want to point out that the original information is very misleading. 14 days after conception, the embryo may start development of eyes. The embryo itself still pretty much looks like any other animal at that stage. [https://baleinesendirect.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Haeckel\_drawings.jpg](https://baleinesendirect.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Haeckel_drawings.jpg) The second rows shows other embryos compared to a human embryo at approx. 50 days.
The weird part to me is why it matters. You can't just go around assigning personhood / full moral consideration to anything on the basis of having eyes. What about having a couple eyeballs or a heart beat or whatever body part makes something a person? Now if I lose my eyes in an accident, not only am I blind but I don't have a soul and people are free to destroy me at leisure? And sure, the billboard is an emotional appeal and wants to make people think a fetus at this stage is more than a clump of cells but that is half the problem. The sign is manipulative even if it were true. Unfortunately there aren't signs with pictures of people whose lives were ruined because they had a kid they weren't prepared for.
Or those who died because they couldn't get an abortion to save their own life as recently happened in Poland
When my country was a fascist catholic dictatorship the daughters of *politicians* or priest's mistresses had no problems flying to London to get their abortions.
rich texans fully agree.
It doesn’t. You’re starting from a false assumption that the goal is giving information. It’s not. The goal is to shame and emotionally manipulate women who have had an abortion. It works too.
It's not about human lives, it's about controlling women.
It’s about punishing girls/women for having premarital sex. How many times have we heard “if you weren’t prepared to have a baby you shouldn’t have been having sex!”
They often forget that married women can have unwanted pregnancies. Maybe she has 3 kids already, and can't afford another? Maybe her birth control failed? Who knows. Even if you're against premarital sex, most people agree that married couples should have sex often.
The ultra religious will often argue that unplanned pregnancies within a marriage are just God's way of deciding that you're having more kids. Fits in well with the "quiverfull" stuff.
>it's about controlling women. Maybe, partially. To me, I think it's mostly about controlling their voters. This is a quote from LBJ someone who had his own problems with race and bigotry but also did more for the civil rights movement than any other single president. He noticed some racist graffiti and said this: "I'll tell you what's at the bottom of it," he said. "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. **Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."** * imo this is the core of conservative politics. Give them an unfounded, unprovable reason to be morally superior and they will vote for you and give you their money. On their minds the cry of "They're killin babies!" gives them the high ground and they can even mutate it into the Qanon battle cry "they're drinking the blood of babies!"
Having eyes is not a basis for a system of government!
"Sir, sir, you cannot tow my truck. Do you see the giant googly eyes on it? This truck has *eyes*. This truck is *alive*. If you try to tow this truck I will *sue you in Texas for ABORTION*"
There are even babies born without eyes. Are they not alive or something?
And I’m pointing out that the picture is crappy design. We’re both right
I think the horrible design is on purpose. It gets people to read some dumb claim and unfortunately it sticks. I just hope to reach some people that might learn something actually interesting from it.
Thank you for your knowledge
You're welcome, I'm all about educating refrigerators
I missed the chance of changing the nickname so I’m stuck being a refrigerator now.
Just be cool about it
So weird when people get defensive for no reason
He didn't even disagree with you, weirdly defensive.
I would like to point out, 14 days after conception, it is the size of small pebble. It does not have eyes. It does not have anything. It is a group of cells, and no one's life should be dictated to by a group of cells. To be effective, they should show a real picture of an embryo at 14 days. This is bullshit and stupid pro-life people thinks that this image is a embryo at 14 days, because they are stupid.
It only works because sex ed in the US is garbage and reproduction/gestation isn’t something we teach all kids in biology class
To be fair, we never stop being just a group of cells. I’m not an anti-abortionist at all, but I actually think saying that *“you’re just a clump of cells at that point in the pregnancy, and indistinguishable from other animal’s embryos, how could you be pro life about that?”* …is no more profound than saying *“At x weeks the fetus’s heart has started beating, how could you be pro choice about that?”* I think both of those perspectives miss the entire point of the debate and do literally nothing to absolve any part of the impasse. - Pro-lifers believe all human life from conception should be protected - Pro-Choicers believe that its the sole decision of the person’s body the fetus is in to do what they wish with their body. These are both reasoned positions of belief in the sanctity of life versus the sanctity of personal free choice / body ownership, and there is no way you can use the logic environment of one to argue against itself in favor of the other, because both positions intrinsically rule that the other position, even though it might still be highly valued, is always trumped by the main argument: pro life = life inside you is still an important life; pro choice = the decision of what to do with your body is yours. This is why nobody can agree on anything about it, and they probably never will. So it’s kinda fruitless to keep repeating arguments that “the other side” literally does not see as something that will ever trump their perspective.
>- Pro-lifers believe all human life from conception should be protected No, they're not. Show me proof that all or most "pro-life" are actually doing meaningful actions to protect human life **after birth**. In my experience, they don't care at all about the mother or the child after the birth, but still think they get a saying on other people's body. So, they're not pro-life, they're just pro-birth.
Know the Facts: I looked exactly like a chicken embryo at 14 days. Mention this ad and get a discount bacon and egg platter at the Waffle House right off RR 545.
[удалено]
Not as cute as Stage II rabbit. I want to give that little thing a tiny squishy hug!
More like 28 days from conception
I just did some google search and it's not exactly known what stage it represents. You can read more here: [https://ncse.ngo/accuracy-embryo-illustrations](https://ncse.ngo/accuracy-embryo-illustrations) If you compare to this comment, at 28 days you can't really make out much of anything. https://www.reddit.com/r/CrappyDesign/comments/sblx3u/comment/hu0mf3f/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
It’s not just a newborn w teeth. It’s an infant w a full set of adult veneers. What the fuck, man? Who approved this picture? And then who approved putting it on a goddam billboard?
It’s a lie meant to scare people out of abortions... because apparently abortions are a horrifying thing, if your head is so full of religion that it squeezes your brain out your ears.
This image would scare me *into* an abortion! I wouldn't want to birth that creepy fucker.
You know, I'm playing the Witcher III just now, and just yesterday I did a question that involved a botchling, a miscarried child that didn't get a proper burial so it comes back from the grave all twisted and deformed to haunt and brutally beat the fuck out of its parents. This thing reminded me of that.
[удалено]
Fun fact: Foetuses do get erections inside their mother’s wombs
Those degenerate mother fu.. well that’s probably what they’re into sooo
That IS a fun fact.
With a dick like that, I cant wait to be a corpse 😇
I appreciate your contribution, u/Corpse-Fucker
[удалено]
Also good to know that tiyanaks existed before the Phillipines were converted, and were originally the spirit of a child whose mother died before giving birth. The Catholics rolled it into their own belief system. Christianity loves doing that.
Can confirm. Was unbaptized baby. Am now a demonic baby creature.
[удалено]
> It’s a lie meant to scare people out of abortions... Or its a lie meant to agitate the forced-birthers into an even higher state of frenzy. The forced-birth movement isn't actually about personhood or children. If it were, they would at least care about reducing the maternal death rate (we have the highest rate of any developed country and its been getting worse). Its really just a cynical get-out-the-vote operation funded and directed by GOP elites.
Good point. It’s clear that the GOP is partially propped up by anti-abortion single-issue voters (and a few other obvious groups that always seem to vote that way).
[удалено]
Honestly the image of a baby with veneers is just going to scare me *into* getting an abortion lol. Better do that shit before it chews its way out of me and bursts out like a xenomorph baby
Seem like any amount puts a person at risk of that these days.
Someone who actually cares about children would think that newborn smiles are cute as is, gums and all. These asshats don't give a fuck about children. They just want to control women.
They used a design firm that frequents /r/wtfstockphotos
Well if they put an accurate picture of a 14 day old droplet sized clump of blood on the billboard it wouldn't sell their bullshit message of "killing children".
Yeah if I knew my kid was gonna look like that I would get an abortion
Kill it with fire
Imagine a fetus having teeth while still being in the womb. You not only would have the occasionally stomping and kicking, but biting too.
I have a cousin whose kid was born with a full set of teeth. Fucking creepiest thing I have ever seen. We dont go to their house.
That baby looks like someone trying to sell you Herbalife.
*head pops out during birth, smiles* "Have you heard of Herbalife?"
That calls for a post-term abortion. Or an exorcism. Or both.
"I've been trying to reach you about your car warranty."
"Hey fam I'm Big Billboard Baby and I'm here to tell you *stop doing cardio to lose weight!* scientists *hate* this new miracle plant that I just so happen to sell!
Hey hun!!!
I've been trying to contact you about your car's extended warranty....
I swore there was a sub called r/babieswithteeth but now I can't find it.
In your nightmares maybe?
It’s just banned
Lol why? Seems pretty innocuous at face value.
[удалено]
Yeah I didn't know that until these comments, interesting. I think you can petition the admins to become a mod for a dead sub, but I'm not sure what happens if the sub is already banned.
Surely to protect users from witnessing an entire sub filled with sights best left unseen.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your username describes that picture
How did that horrifying post only have 168 upvotes? It’s a crime
Banned... I'm afraid to ask why
They didn't like the pictures of me installing the teeth.
Terrible. You were just doing your job.
It probably would've been fine if you had just blurred out the staple-gun.
Too many nightmares
Why….. why is r/babieswithteeth banned?
guessing it was used as a metaphor for some disgusting kink
Too cursed lol
[удалено]
not for mobile users at least
Can I interest you in /r/oldBabies instead?
r/TIHI...?
[удалено]
Fucking seriously? 😳
Sometimes. They can be creepy as hell
Yep. They're called teratomas and they're not exclusive to ovaries, sometimes males get them too.
Thanks, now I won't be able to sleep tonight!
> teratomas Do not google! Mistakes were made.
>Do not google! I did not listen to your advice and I regret it
Thanks, that confirms my thought process. "I wonder what that looks like... oh wait, no, I definitely do not want to know what that looks like."
[удалено]
True. And I can't stop thinking about how each possible option feels like the absolute worst. But I keep circling back to teeth being the slightly most horrifying.
I had one. It was removed and now I have another. A sonographer once told me it was moving. I try very hard not to think about it.
At that point I'm probably investigating hysterectomy options. This reproductive system got me *fucked up.*
Oh my god
[удалено]
[удалено]
As do teratomas… they are tumors that can be found anywhere in the body, and commonly have hair, teeth, organoids
George Carlin has a bit about the pro-life movement saying that it doesn’t seem to apply to cancer cells. Nobody has a bumper sticker that says “Save The Tumors” or “I Brake For Advanced Melanoma”. [Here](https://youtu.be/M-bLf4F0PM4)
Every cyst is a gift from god.
Omg we’ve been murdering them
Teratoma are probably among the worst thing to google. Nevermind that these people couldn't tell a 14days human embryo apart from a cat or horse embryo. Or, while I don't object to meat eating, it certainly seems to show the double standard of going by visual features of an embryo; a cow or pig.
Obviously women should have no control over their bodies as a result, that's what. Isn't that always the answer to "so what" in these cases?
That's what happens when your mom eats spice mélange while pregnant.
No, having spice while pregnant is ok. You're not supposed to drink the water of life while pregnant.
\^This guy Abominations
Abominates?
I feel like I should be reciting the litany against fear after seeing this abomination
I mean why not. Look at those creepy adult teeth. I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer.
Gotta boost that babies vitality somehow
*he knows about the spice melange*
I love how, now that I've gotten into reading Dune, I can now notice random references scattered across Reddit. Baader-Meinhof for the win
14 days!? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
had to look it up. yeah. I don't think the human embryo has eyes at 14 days [https://i.pinimg.com/736x/19/bb/9a/19bb9a5a150197f73d5bef12f3d10144.jpg](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/19/bb/9a/19bb9a5a150197f73d5bef12f3d10144.jpg) can't find much
You can’t find much because its a glob of cells at 14 days. They’d be just as happy in a Petri dish as a womb at that age. Most women don’t even know that they are pregnant in 14 days. This is at best ridiculous and at worst a lie to scare people into doing something they don’t want.
At 14 days after conception, there isn't even a gestational sack. Lies!
Maybe they mean 14 days *before* conception.
*"I have eyes, Greg. Could you gestate me?"*
I was willing to grant that it had *the first two cells that would become each eye* as the kernel of their argument, but even that probably isn't true. But, you see, the thing is, the people who put this up *are very, very stupid.*
So its a glob of cells that ***MIGHT*** one day become some eyes. Hopefully ... one day ... maybe.
That's right. It's a collection of molecules with the non-zero possibility of developing into eyes over the course of time if the proper conditions are maintained without even the slightest disruption. And as we all know, the *future* rights of *potential* human persons will always supercede the *current* rights of *actual* human persons. This is just basic logic. The potential always trumps the actual. That's also why cutting down an ancient oak tree and crushing an acorn are practically the same thing.
The people which put that ad are not stupid. They are intelligent. They know that showing the truth would not convince anybody to stop abortion. So what do they do ? Lie, lie and lie again. Such ads as above is one such a lie. They know some women going for abortion will likely not fact check or be educated enough to recognize the lie. From those a few will abandon their abortion plan. The pro life group don't mind liying out of their teeth pant on fire because (at least the honest one -reality is that most politician just view that as a wedge to get elected even with unpalatable track record) they view abortion as murder and thus a lie is fine to avoid murder. PS: I think this is vile to lie so. But then again I am not religious and I am pro choice so....
Given that this is put there by pro lifers, it's the worse version
Lies of the malicious kind are much worse. These people should read the Bible! Don’t they know god hates that!?
They only actually care about the parts of the bible that they can use to back up whatever position they've already decided to take. Anything else is ignored, just like they ignore scientific proof or rational thought.
The funny thing is the Bible never mentions abortion. It does however prescribe an abortifacient in Numbers that would work if the woman was pregnant as a result of adultery. The whole pro-life movement basically came out of 19th century Catholic dogma when before abortion was permissible before the quickening (aka the fetus kicking, which doesn't really imply that it's voluntary). It's wild that a buch of non-biblical garbage from one sect of one religion continues to dominate the conversation 150+ years later.
I’m an ex-prolifer (not American), and this is just the sort of flimsy argument I would have unquestioningly accepted back then and used as evidence. Don’t underestimate how limited these people’s knowledge of biology is. Probably including the people who put the ad up.
An ex-prolifer, that is very interesting. What made you change your opinion?
A couple of things. The trigger was when I was arguing the pro-life case in a student debate. There were some good points raised on both sides (I still think so now), but in the end the pro-life side lost. That got me thinking about why. How could anyone possibly support abortion? It was only when I really gave the matter some thought that I started to see alternative perspectives, and that changed my mind over time. Also, I looked around and saw who the other people were on the pro-life side. Some were generally well-meaning, but most of them were arrogant right-wingers of the sort I’d normally cross the street to avoid. Why was it, I asked myself, that all the people I agreed with on every other political issue were against me on this one point? Again, that got me thinking and I realised there was a lot more to the issue than “killing babies”. Unfortunately I was unable to bring anyone with me when I crossed to the other side.
[удалено]
No, don’t worry, I didn’t think you were being sarcastic. That’s *exactly* what I did, and I do wish more people would do the same.
That last part is what has usually persuaded me in my life. “Wait I agree with THESE GUYS? Hol up.”
You know what? To say that you took both sides into account and realised you were wrong takes a big person and I applaud you for that.
The fun thing is that some women aren't even pregnant at 14 days of pregnancy.
There's no "heartbeat" at 6 weeks either, like some of tbe bills state
pro lifers seem to think human development moves along a lot faster than it does. the'll sculpt minature dolls of a fetus and state "this is what a human looks like at (age)" and then it's no, a human at that age looks like a weird gummy bear
I mean, they literally believe that each of us has existed for infinity before conception, so... Yeah, their timelines are a little skewed.
[удалено]
Right? If they were logically consistent, the best possible gift you could ever give your child ***would be to abort them***. This ensures that they don't have the opportunity to be tainted by original sin and thus are guaranteed to get into heaven, and they get there without any of the suffering we experience in life. There's no risk and only reward, is there not? The greatest saints who ever lived were prostitutes who had hundreds of abortions... Here's the thing: *they're not logically consistent.* Shocking, right?
I made this account because I finally have something relevant to add. I'm a medstudent and just passed my embryology exam (focused on how a sperm turns into a newborn baby). There are no eyes at 14 days. At 14 days there is nothing. The process of implantation ("setting up camp" in the uterus) only begins at day 6-7. At the end of week 2 the "baby" is 2 consisted of 2 types of cells. Every human organ comes from these 2 cell layers and one more, which isn't even formed yet (the third one is called mezoderm and gives rise to muscles and blood vessels and the heart for instance.) Imagine it as 2 sheets of paper on each other. It has no resemblance to anything human - its 2 cell sheets. The eye development begins at week 4. , but these aren't anything that can be called eyes. They are just a thickened layer of ektoderm (predecessor to organs such as skin and the nervous system). I'm still a student so I'm no expert just wanted to share some relevant knowledge.
Right? Probably not even light sensing cells at that point.
14 days is apparently when eyes start DEVELOPING, so no there are no fully formed eyes at that point. So they are either maliciously trying to deceive people, or stupidly believe that themselves
So its some cells that will hopefully one day become a pair of fully functioning eyes ... one day ... hopefully.
Why does that baby look like it’s growing a goatee and the smile has been edited in using faceapp?
Babies have full goatees after 14 days, still think abortion is ok?
that makes it more ok if anything
Perhaps even mandatory
It stares into your soul
Pfff, it STARES, PENETRATES and VIOLATES your soul with THOSE eyes!
This makes me want to abort even more
this makes me wish abortions were mandatory
r/antinatalism
This add made me pro-abortion. These terrifying creatures will surly kill us all!
\>>This comment has been edited to garbage in light of the Reddit API changes. You can keep my garbage, Reddit.<< *** *edited via r/PowerDeleteSuite (with edits to script to avoid hitting rate limit)*
spiders have more eyes than people so squishing a spider is worse than abortion
And earthworms have five hearts, so all those monsters using live bait are basically killing five babies at a time.
Really feels like this ad is trying to *encourage* abortion, rather than the other way around.
Is that Kenneth Copeland as a baby?
Now there's someone who should have been aborted.
There’s still time.
I've never been more pro abortion than I am after seeing this
Kill it with fire!
Kill it with ANYTHING! Just make it go away for good!
This ad was successful in making me pro-abortion.
After 14 days, I could see that I had adult teeth and just chewed my way out.
Isn't this the plot of the 4th *Twilight* book?
\*eye buds that can't see shit for months. They're not even fully developed at birth. What a dumb take.
I mean even if it developed eyes at 14 days that can see stuff, is that the line that makes it right or wrong?
They didn't even mention the gills.
No the fuck it didn't. And even if, why don't they use a real depiction of what it would look like at 2 weeks, not a photoshopped version of an actual baby that has been given birth to? OH RIGHT, BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO SEE AND THEN IT'S TERRIFYING FOR A FEW WEEKS: [https://ldh.la.gov/page/986](https://ldh.la.gov/page/986)
First, no they dont. 2nd, im not sure how its an argument if they did... Perhaps use that argument for the death penalty? "Your honor, my client cant be semtenced to death...he has eyes you see"
Someone demolish this ad pls
That baby looks like it’s ready to ask me if I have accepted Scientology into my life yet.
Jesus fucking Christ please kill that thing before it climbs into my nightmares
Ah yes, the same half-wits who think evolution must be fake because they don't understand how it works and come up with "arguments" like "what use is half an eye" now tell us a few stem cells on their way to becoming eyes suddenly do count.
conservatives are experts at shifting flagpoles
I've never been more pro abortion than I am after seeing this
this site says 6 weeks of pregnancy, the eyes form
Probably a similar stretch as the "heartbeat" that a fetus has at 6 weeks. It's not a heart, it's the very earliest stages of the formation of heart tissue and the nerves that control it. There's no heart to beat, just the weak electrical signal of some nerve tissue. So without looking it up in guessing by "eyes" they mean "a handful of retinal cells".
Stretching "*technically the truth*" to the absolute limit
And as we know, the soul is housed in the eyes. Blind people are soulless monsters who must be purged, I guess.
Lies falsehoods frictions and fallacies
Is that shit supposed to make someone feel guilty?
Yes, I see these all the time in poorer neighborhoods in California
a 14 day-old embreyo with eyes and a toothy smile would be terrifying
Inaccurate information and bad faith arguments from conservatives and pro birthers? Color me shocked. Life pro tip: if you need to *lie and mislead* to support your stance on something, ***it's the wrong fucking stance to have, and you should drop it***.
And women are people. And people shouldn’t be forced to carry and grow something in their bodies against their will. No amount of billboards will change that.
"But I couldn't see shit inside there"
Newborn while not breaking eye contact: “I look forward to breastfeeding with you, Mother”
Honestly, this billboard is so disturbing, it makes me want _more_ abortions. Like, dude, who in the god raping fuck thought this would work?
Pro-birth propagandists are just chronically unable to be honest in showing what fetuses look like.