Stance on Abortion
The Birthday Party · 2026-11-05
Source: /about/political-parties/the-birthday-party/documents/3

The Birthday Party
Stance on Abortion

Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1
Selfish.................................................................................................................................................1
Unborn Human...................................................................................................................................1
Murder and Killing............................................................................................................................. 1
Stance.................................................................................................................................................2

Introduction
Written by Central Committee Member Nuxart on November 4th, 2026, this short
document is to make the stance of Nuxart’s position on abortion clear.

Selfish
If one were to search up the definition of selfish they might find this definition
“someone who cares only about themselves, their own advantage, pleasure, or
well-being without thinking about or caring for the needs and feelings of others.”
​
I found this definition, and for that reason I have decided to apply this to those who
attempt to give birth or those who want an abortion. This is not intended to put down
the person, but rather to accept that these decisions are selfish. Now, we are, of course,
talking about the situation that one of our time would expect, of course, a person giving
birth because they consented to having sex with another human.
​
Why would this be selfish? Well we all know that unborn humans cannot in any concrete
manner consent to being birthed nor to being aborted. So, because of this, it is selfish
as we have known that historically that for the humans who wish to finish the birth they
might do it for some general purposes like creating a family of their own or passing off
their genes and how they have historically treated their children as that of personal
property rather than their own agents which eventually age to gain full independence.

Unborn Human
For this document and possibly future documents, an unborn human is a human who
hasn’t exited the body of the pregnant human. If one wants to argue about whether it is
murder, then I would say that they can make that argument, but I do not care about this
argument; I am indifferent to it. I also do not care about the other classifications made
to try to avoid the fact that this is an unborn human. It was on their way of becoming
human, since I do not know of any humans who can birth nonhuman creatures. The
destruction of an unborn human is not wrong in my eyes mostly because this unborn
human is usually brought here under circumstances of selfishness this same selfishness
allows them to also order the destruction of the unborn human especially if we consider
that the usual circumstances requires the occupation of the selfish human and if they so
please to carry on or order the destruction of this unborn human that is their decision to
make because of their selfishness.

Murder and Killing
Murder or Killings however you want to see it as there are legally distinct forms of it but
for this document or future ones murder to me would mean just killing someone. I
searched up the definition of murder, and I got this: “the unlawful and unjustifiable
killing of a human being by another person, usually committed with malice aforethought
or extreme indifference to human life.” I then searched up the definition of unlawful and
got “means an action, behavior, or condition that is not authorized, allowed, or justified
1

by law.” I also looked up the definition of unjustifiable and found, “something unable to
be defended, excused, or explained by a good, fair, or acceptable reason.” Clearly, killing
or destroying of an unborn person is also not unjustifiable
Now with these things added together there can be an argument that murder occurred
depending on the legal statues of where one resides at least on the legal side of things,
but if we are focusing on purely killing then the destruction of unborn humans is always
a form of killing as you are destroying them. Killing is clearly not always wrong,
especially if you ask others about situations of self-defense or when you enter things
such as Natural law or Moral justice rather than statutory justice; then suddenly, if killing
is bad or not changes. Under my current framework at the time of seeing this the
destruction of unborn humans is a form of killing that would not unjustifiable first of all
in the most normal of normal circumstances this unborn human was about in a selfish
and because at this stage there is no way of consent it is ultimately up to the pregnant
human if they wish to pursue the birthing of this unborn human. They are justified in the
destruction of the unborn human because it occupies their human body, and because of
this same selfishness, allows them to destroy them, as they have no autonomy of their
own. Once they are a born human, they will develop into their own autonomous agents
based on normal circumstances.

Stance
In case it is not entirely clear because of my bad writing and laziness in rewriting things,
I am in full support of abortion, but I do hope that people who raise these born humans
accept that they are their own autonomous agents and receive more listening than is
currently provided to them in a reasonable way, since, as a human develops, there are
different tiers of autonomy one can reach, and we know not everyone can reach these
due to disabilities that might come before or after their birth. The only reason
selfishness even provides this consent is because the unborn human cannot also
consent to their birth or their abortion; we don’t know entirely if they would’ve wanted to
be born or not, so it is left as a personal decision, and because the unborn human also
occupies the body of the pregnant human, they have a right to override the unborn
human and their occupation of the pregnant human. I have heard arguments about how
one may incur legal penalties for beating up a pregnant human, but this makes sense
because it isn’t known if the pregnant human will continue with their birth or not, and
because, at the time the unborn human hasn’t been aborted, it makes sense to add
protections because, if this unborn human is to be born, then it is in their best interests
that they develop with the least negative actions inflicted on them, and because of the
selfishness of the pregnant person, this is needed to protect their right to continue with
their selfishness and provide birth.

2