Someone's world does, though.

Neither. At least, we have no way of knowing. In the case of abortion two lives (if we can call an embryo a living human being) are involved. Should we give up the bodily autonomy of one person in favor of the bodily autonomy of another's? What if this was a fight between two identical people, both of which fight for their lives? Who has more right to live?

I totally agree with you. If someone wants an abortion, let them have it. If they don't want an abortion, don't force one upon them.

Let's take your comment down argument by argument. The mother has to go through a traumatic experience to give birth to a child she doesn't want, and she's stuck with the baby she didn't want the next 18 years. Father having to help is a great idea, but that doesn't have anything to do with abortion. People should use protection if they don't want a baby, but did you know that stupid people have sex too, only they don't use protection. Should they give birth to that child? Do we really need another stupid person, raised by stupid people who didn't even want him/her? People have to go through so much just to conceive, but if they didn't use protection and didn't abort the child they wanted it enough to go through all that.

I agree that abortion shouldn't really be used as "prevention" (not really prevention, but you get my point) when we have things like condoms, but giving birth shouldn't be used as a punishment. If you have unsafe sex and get pregnant there shouldn't be anything physically stopping you from aborting the embryo (it's an embryo, not a child, the first eight weeks or so), because how would you investigate that? It's like investigating rape. Most of the time there's literally no evidence. It's just one person's word against another's.
Let's say we follow your rule. A McDonalds employee has unsafe sex and gets pregnant. She's denied an abortion, and has to go through with it. She gives birth to a child she didn't even want, and she's on minimum wage and can't support both the baby and herself. What do you think will happen? How do you think that kid's life will be?

But please, at least try to do something about it if you're fat. Please. It's better in every single aspect of it. There's literally no benefits from being fat, other than not having to work out. Now, this doesn't apply to chubby people. Chubby people are often just cute (Unless they're not, in which case they're not. The point is, your body doesn't have anything to do with it if you're just chubby, and it's a lot easier to be cute if you're a bit chubby (if you're a girl)). No one should starve themselves to be thinner, because that's not healthy at all. Just work out, if you're obviously fat (not saying you are). Go for a jog every now and then, or go hiking. It's better for you. Trust me.

You work hard to get a thigh gap? You work hard to get something that's not just less desirable than something you almost don't need to work for, but less healthy as well? You work hard to become less desirable and less healthy? What kind of logic is that?

Faster than the speed of life. LIFE.

It looks like it says morphshifting but I tried and it's not that.

I know that I was unclear, but I didn't write it to be understood by everyone. I merely wanted to state my opinion to anyone who care enough about this to read my comment thoroughly enough to understand what the hell I say.

Downvote me all you will, people, but I'm providing hard facts.

Jerusalem is smack centre in the cradle of Islam, and was a Muslim city up until the crusades around 1100. Comparing any group of people with their medieval counterparts is wrong, no matter how you look at it. Even if it's positive for that particular group (Take us Norwegians, for instance. Everywhere I go we're compared to our Viking ancestors, when clearly we aren't anywhere near as awesome (sorry, fellow Norwegians, but we aren't)). Yes, Muslims were bad around the time of the crusades, but so were Christians, Jews, Hinduists, Buddhists, Pagans. Literally every single group was bad by modern standards around the time of the crusades. Some Muslims shoot Christians and say it's because they're Christians, and you judge Islam and Muslims in general, but if some Christians shoot Muslims saying it's because they're Muslims and you'll most likely say that "a few bad apples spoil the bunch".

I watched this at 12 pm and it still scared me.

Yiss, I'm not the only Hufflepuff out there!

Hufflepuff. Fucking Hufflepuff. Every single quiz I take. Insigificant fucking Hufflepuff every time.

I'm gay as well, though. Sorry. :/

You didn't describe every single shy person ever (believe me, I know a lot of shy people who are still boring as hell when they get comfortable with you), but you did describe me perfectly (at least from what I've heard from my friends).

Most girls who say they want nice guys usually aren't anywhere near that league, as almost none of the "nice" leagues also contain "undramatic" and "popular" (usually it's the polar opposite), which most girls who say they want nice guys are.

"You're unique" is actually a really bad thing to say. It implies that you're the only one out there who's like this, and that's the last thing you want to say to someone who's going through some difficult times. I for one would much rather know that I'm a part of a community, rather than the one and only.

To take the angle of the last sentence there: Conservatives are pro-army (and thus pro-war) and pro-execution, but against abortion. This joke targets conservative Christians. With that in mind, I have another, similar joke: If the child whose life you (not you, guest, but the target of this joke) fought for is gay, will you still fight for its rights?

"Thou shalt not kill", unless it's in the name of God, in which case it's a Holy War and completely fine.

Every single human being has the right to live, and there is no evidence that execution prevents crime. Rather on the contrary, it makes crimes that lead to execution anyway escalate to a point where someone who murdered one man could easily murder ten more, because no matter what he does he's going to be executed.
About war, I'm against any form of attack, and think that the attacker should always be the "enemy" of the world, no matter who they are or what purpose they have, while rebellions whould be treated the exact opposite way (the rebels should be helped, even though they're the attackers).
Whatever you say, embryos are not human beings. Fetuses are, but abortion is only the removal of embryos, not fetuses. Embryos are just the fusion of egg and sperm, and the embryos of different species are only slightly different.

Is every Christian you know, including yourself, evangelical fundamentalists who refuse to accept the evolution of species? Because although that doesn't directly have anything to do with this particular case, most evangelical fundamentalists who oppose the evolution of species are also anti-abortion but pro-army (and thus pro-war) and pro-execution.