TheRedArchive needs help
With 700,000+ posts and 16,000,000+ comments archived, and new Red Pill content being added every week, keeping TheRedArchive alive and discoverable to everyone is starting to become very costly. As a 20-year-old student who just moved out and is living independently for the first time, keeping TheRedArchive alive is beginning to cost me much more than I thought.

Therefore, if you appreciate the website, have gained a lot of knowledge and insight from it, and want to show your appreciation, you can do so by donating any amount that you want via the options below. The money will be used on the expensive monthly host bill and any future maintenance of the website.
Thank you, and I wish you all a successful 2021 and a good luck with achieving your goals and dreams!

Best, /u/dream-hunter

Whoa there, slow down. Nobody is seriously arguing these. Especially not the first and last one.

Reddit View
December 3, 2019
post image

Post Information
Title Whoa there, slow down. Nobody is seriously arguing these. Especially not the first and last one.
Author username2136
Upvotes 184
Comments 20
Date 03 December 2019 03:13 AM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Original Link
Similar Posts

[–]nbowers57833121 points22 points  (6 children) | Copy

I will argue the first one. On one of the men's subs there was recently a story of a 12yo who was raped but forced to pay child support. I'd say that's pretty close to consensual rape

[–]ulgulanoth34 points35 points  (3 children) | Copy

That's not consensual rape, that's just the government gangbanging the rape victim again with a life sentence of indentured servitude

[–]nbowers5783319 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy

And in doing so saying it was not rape but rather a consensual act

[–]username2136[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

No I am pretty sure a 12 year old did not want to pay at least several hundred dollars a month. I would certainly be fucked if I had to do that when I was 12.

[–]144463682 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

What is legally true and actually true can, in fact, differ.

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy


[–]nbowers5783310 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Only when the court finds it as such

[–]MegaMindxXx10 points11 points  (5 children) | Copy

She isn't a sign of intelligent life either. The heartbeat in a petri dish has more sense.

[–]username2136[S] -3 points-2 points  (4 children) | Copy

What do you mean?

[–]MegaMindxXx4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy

Dr. Kathie Allen I'm talking about

[–]username2136[S] -2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy

Sorry, I mean by “has more sense”.

[–]MegaMindxXx1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

That's not self explanatory? That a petri dish of heart cells like she is talking about has more intelligence than she has? Do you even know what you posted? Do you read your own posts?

[–]username2136[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Oh, duh. I do, your comment sounded weird to me at first. I get it now.

[–]RichardJLyon6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

I genuinely am not certain if heart cells beating in a Petri dish signify life.

I’m pretty certain though that a foetus grasping the abortionist’s instruments moments before being severed in half does, and that the idea that society should be excluded from that decision on its behalf is absurd.

[–]Gretshus4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Is the heart cell beat in petri dish thing supposed to be an allusion to abortion? If so, that's a pretty weak argument against one of the weaker arguments against abortion. But let's think about it. The argument of heart beat in abortion is that the heart beat signifies that the fetus is alive, not that it's intelligent life, but that it's alive in general. That, combined with its natural status as being a human (the only logically consistent definition for human only requires that the DNA be of the human species/genome), it constitutes a human life, which then entails human rights. Human rights specifically prohibit murder against the person who holds said human rights, which would make abortion murder. Bodily autonomy does not allow you to commit crimes with your body or for your body, therefore you cannot use bodily autonomy as justification for abortion, which would fall under murder due to the fetus having human rights.

tl;dr she doesn't understand the argument made and conflated life generally with intelligent life.

[–]username2136[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

That’s a very good point. Thank you!

[–]Undead_Chronic0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

All that education wasted on th9s leftist cur

[–]Faqir_Indahbat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Muslims say the last one. And the first one.

[–]808picklejuice-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

So when people study the human heart in a lab, and pump blood into it then it’s a living being

[–]come_on_anarchy-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

A doctor of victim hood

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter