Yeetus the Fetus
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 лип 2024
- Some pro-life activists decided to give a talk at a university, so we're here to make some rebuttals.
Support me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=3308388
Follow me on Twitter: / stickprofessor
Become a Member: / @professorstick
Check out my merch: teespring.com/stores/professo...
Original Video: • YEETUS The Fetus!? | K...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This video may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
I wish people who are not good at live debates would not show up at these events. They let these bad faith actors get away with so much and fumble the debate so badly, the audience sees it as a win for the bad guys.
Yeah it was so cringeworthy to see how bad the pro-choice person's arguments were. It is giving the conservatives a free kick.
This exactly, that pro choice person just did an absolutely awful job and did not help the cause one bit, not just anyone should do these debates. It’s the type of Ben Shapiro owns college leftist trope that gets people thinking conservatives have actual points and logic on their side
I'm convinced she's fake. Non-binary, pansexual, polyamorous, dating 2 transwomen at once and only cares about having consequence-free sex? Yeah, there are people out there like that, but it's far more likely she's a Forced Birther pretending to be what she thinks is a typical Pro Choice person.
Refuting an argument is not a "win". It doesn't prove your position is correct. It proves that the argument you're refuting is invalid. Kinda like how this video doesn't prove abortion is morally permissible or a human right or anything.
So nice of her to explain what "yeet" meant!
7:05 "We're the most charitable country in the world, sending troops..." That's....NOT charity!
Beat me to it. Troops are Sooo helpful (heavy sarcasm)
It is to those poor, poor armaments, weapons companies, who barely scrape by.
Ok sure bud. Tell that to Ukraine. Let's just take back all our stuff we gave to them and see how they fair against Russia.
Clearly, no one in this thread has experience with troops.
@@catholicdad I wouldn't bet on that, you'd be wrong.
When that lady said America is the most generous country in the world because it sends troops.... my god... tell that to Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and literally every other country that has been worse off from American interventionism.
Most American military deployments are supported by the country they're in. Still pretty strange to call that "generosity" though, it's a mutually beneficial arrangement.
@@VitalVampyr I wouldnt say most since USA have a long history in supporting coups, and even invasion. However all first world countries have done that so i dont blame the US
@@gabrielmora5092 That's irrelevant, you don't need to send troops to support a coup. Most US foreign military deployments are to bases in allied countries.
@@VitalVampyr "most". who was asked to find out "the country" supports the troops being there?
@@GenerationWhyMe The country's government, when they and the US negotiated that the US would establish a military base in their territory.
Extremists and propagandists often cherry-pick the most extreme examples to make their point, which is why it's crucial not to defend those outliers, even if they are on our side. This young person likely did more harm than good by trying to turn an online joke into a real-life argument. Thank you, Professor, for setting the record straight.
Yep, it makes it much easier for fundamentalists when they can paint the other side as fundamentalist as well.
Before you make any assumptions about me, I am pro-choice. That said, I thought she was concerned with the trivialization of abortion, which is risky and expensive medical procedure with nasty side-effects. Regardless of what your position is, abortion should not be trivialized and equated with “throwing out garbage.” It is closer to a surgery than removing a mole, let alone throwing out a can. It is not that it should be scary, it is scary. My concern is that it pitches to young people like myself that they should not be careful even though they absolutely should. A meme, an internet joke, it is fundamentally a pitch to young people which coincidentally are also the most likely demographic to undergo abortions. Abortion is not easy, is not trivial, is not always safe. Basically, I think this meme took it too far. Too much stigma is bad, but no stigma at all, is also bad. We have seen this same phenomenon occur with drug use. You should not be removed and isolated from society for using drugs, but drugs could completely destroy your life so you should make an informed decision, it is not trivial.
Some also limit the examples and fail to consider all relevant possibilities.
Amazing how they can just say "just don't have sex", like stopping millions of unmarried couples from having sex is not going to make so many frustrated and unhappy people.
This also assumes that all married couples want children, which is absolutely not true.
Frustrated and unhappy people are easier to distract with outrage hate mongering
@@alliet.7582 together for 17 years and no kids for us. I'm definitely not all married couples want kids
Yes they're absolutely stupid because not all married couples want kids. Not all people in committed relationships want to get married or have kids
They also claim that fertilization resulting from non-consensual intercourse is still an innocent baby and should not be terminated....so the prior argument is just a distraction.
The argument over whether a fetus is a person is a distraction, it's a moot point. Bodily autonomy is all that matters, and that right is afforded to _corpses_ .
I agree. Even if you think a foetus has a right to life, that right doesn't triumph over bodily autonomy. If you think it does, then you should be fighting for mandatory organ donation for people when they die and require regular blood and bone marrow donations, as they also save lives.
@@lisahenry20This brings the principle of “just because you can doesn’t mean you should”. you realise that you could see someone you hate’s death by not giving them an organ. Obviously this is an extreme, but I want you to understand that legality doesn’t always guarantee morality.
It is entirely the issue. You have the freedom to swing your fist *until it hits my nose.*
@@abhiramn474 you can have more reasons to refuse giving an organ or even blood than you hate the recipients. Normally when you donate blood, you don't know the recipient.
In addition, that means that no matter what you think the morality of abortions are, they should be legally permitted, just like refusing to donate.
@@AlexPBenton your nose is your body. No one has the right to use your body without your consent. Bodily autonomy is the entire issue.
The prolifers team up on the pro choice person to purposefully wear down them so as a pair they "win" more often. While one is asking the question the other is looking for flaws in the opposition's arguments and when the pair gets flustered they shoot rapid questions to overwhelm and confuse the topic being discussed
The ol' Gish Gallop.
"Here’s a test:
I’m holding a baby in one hand and a petri dish holding an embryo in the other.
I’m going to drop one. You chose which.
If you really truly believe an embryo is the same thing as a baby, it should be impossible for you to decide. You should have to flip a coin, that’s how impossible the decision should be.
Shot in the dark, you saved the baby.
Because you’re aware there’s a difference.
Now admit it."
But still the Petri dish has a value. This is called the Doctrine of Double Effect where it is okay to do an action that has a good effect even if there are unintentional bad effects. It is bad that the Petri dish isn’t saved but it is not a quote-on-quote “sin“.
Technically correct, though very low value compared to a born human. IVF uses embryos and ironically anti abortion people are against that because not every embryo is guaranteed to be used, even though it would lead to a pregnancy that they're so interested in.@@abhiramn474
The embryo in that case is already dead. If you’re holding your mothers ashes in one hand and a living turtle in the other, you should guard the turtle more closely than the dust that was once a person.
@@abhiramn474"But still the Petri dish has a value" Irrelevant and completely beside the point.
@@page8301I meant the embryo.
Perhaps they should tell the don‘t have sex part to all that men who are paying for an abortion for their mistresses, girlfriends and wives. So where are the men in this equation of don‘t have sex if you don‘t want to have a baby. Do men conservative men really want to have a baby each time they have sex or are they just living their lives in celibacy?
the thing is, conservatives love big families.
Their "Don't have sex" point is irrelevant anyway. Surely even women as dumb as these two must know that not ALL sex is consensual.
Fetus deletus is a woman's choice. )At least for the first 24 weeks IMHO)
Lmao
The fact that Google offers to translate this to English and it works
@@nooneinparticular3699 lol
@@nooneinparticular3699that is funny.
I have a question, would it also be the woman's or man's choice to quit supporting or feeding a born baby because the parents have a right to their time and resources, much like the pregnant woman? Before the fetus becomes conscious, I have no problem with abortion, but once the individual is a clump of cells + consciousness with desires, I think you should weigh their desires before directly or indirectly killing the human organism.
Nothing they bring up has anything to do with bodily autonomy, and that is all that matters. There is no reasonable stance against safe, legal abortions.
In my experience the "pro life" are neither reasonable in their stance, or serious about supporting life *after* the birth. Many will attack advice clinics, just because a small percentage of the advice _might_ be "in your circumstances, have a termination".
Depends on what "legal" means.
@@Schmidtelpunkt legal means it is not against the law.
@@John.0z they are also not Pro Life.
@@PurpleKnightmare So when a state makes it illegal from day one to abort even just a fertilized egg, there would be a reasonable stance?
I am hesitantly anti-abortion in my personal philosophy...
I am STRONGLY pro choice in my broader societal philosophy.
Ask me if I think you should get an abortion, no, i don't want a world where potential persons are erased...
But... if you ask me if it is my right to dictate the choices another person makes about their body, a strong f no.
I do not dictate my personal beliefs onto others.
I want a stronger safety net for expectant families, better sex education (sex is not only about popping one out), and a better overall system that allows for both choices.
I have my thoughts and beliefs. I do not get to make the choices of others based on my beliefs.
How is a potential person erased? A potential person is not a person. Is failure to fertlise an egg the erasure of a potential person?
So in short you are pro-choice
Tell your friends. Tell ALL of your friends.
This is all i want from people. Especially since pro life often does not take into account the life and healh of the woman. You clearly do, by saying “i would do this, but i cant make your choice!” :)
I'm with @andrewbenbow9257 on this. I am anti-abortion _personally._ I would not get one, if I had a womb. I would not want my womb-having partner to get one. But the final decision is also not up to _me._ And I definitely wouldn't want _the government_ to have the final say on it.
I think the student may have some sort of neurospiciness going on; I’m autistic and I have strong feelings about a lot of topics (using science based reasoning) however I purposely don’t engage in active debate because I rehearse answers that I know I’m going to have already. I have Auditory Processing Disorder with the ASD, therefore forming a coherent answer in that sort of environment would be incredibly hard. I want to be able to engage in debate and that sort of stuff but it’s hard enough explaining my day. I know I am somewhat intelligent due to my exam results and given time I’m not terrible at giving quite technical written answers but speaking is just not a good way to communicate sometimes especially with opinionated far right people who’ve been fed these anti scientific ideas like a goose force fed fat
I'm pro-life. I'll have a nice discussion with you and we can both take the time to formulate our ideas. No pressure about anything. Also, I'm a scientist.
Forget pro-life activists, if you're under 40 and you don't know what "yeet" means you're socially deprived. :')
I'm over 40 and didn't know what yeet meant. Looked it up. What effing cretin made that up? What's the World coming to?
58. No clue. Don't much care.
@@thehellyousayits lame now it was funny years ago now social rejects think its the funniest shit ever
The students for life president was coming to my campus, so I went on a fun walk around the week before and took down as many of their signs as I could find. The audience for the event was embarrassingly low and the protest thrown was just as big!
I salute you for taking down their signs and making their audience so low at your campus. You are a true gigachad!
So tolerant and based. I'm literally shaking with fear of these people exercising freedom of speech. Thank you brave hero
What fun! 😒
Your twisted and endorse censorship.
Disgusting.
And this is the problem with seasoned 'debaters' challenging random people. Those people don't know how the tactics work and can fall prey to their tricks.
I mean, they raise the question of "how do you know the difference between a baby and fetus"
Well response should be more like "If you don't know the difference between a fetus and a baby then I fully understand your position. Us, on the other hand, understand the differences. You not understanding the differences shouldn't allow you to make those decisions for other people and take their rights away."
That's not a refutation.
1. Nobody said they don't know the different between a fetus and a baby. It's a rhetorical question.
2. Even if they didn't know the difference, it's not a rebuttal to refuse to answer their question. You're just jumping the gun on what you think they're going to say to sound rhetorically smart (it has the opposite effect).
3. Your last sentence is a silly strawman. Nobody said "I don't understand what giving birth is, therefore abortion is murder".
@@ruaraidh74 Yes it is an argument. Because if they are going to try to use that bullshit question then they should have it thrown back at their face.
They clearly don't know the difference otherwise they wouldn't hold the position they carry. They constantly try to push that an abortion is killing a baby so that alone just shuts down your entire "rebuttal"
Nice try but you failed miserably. Almost laughable attempt.
Yeah, she wasn't the best person to be up there speaking to them. Anyone who isn't educated enough will think the pro-life people 'sound' like they know what they're talking about. When in fact, it's just word salad and religious dogma.
What religion invented basic biology, philosophy, and morality? I'm confused...
@@ruaraidh74 invented? I'm confused
@@dreadnoughtus2598 You told me the pro-life position is religious dogma. I'm wondering which religion owns / invented basic biological and moral principles:
P1 Human life begins at conception (basic biology)
P2 Human rights are innate to humanity (Declaration of Independence; basic morality)
C Therefore, human rights begin at conception
You're the one attributing this claim to religion. I'm wondering which religion it comes from so I can join it.
@@ruaraidh74 P1 has to be true for your argument to even come close to accurate. The bible disagrees with you to start, (I'm an atheist BTW) then it depends on your definition of "life" and "rights".
And how does the life of the fetus have more rights than the life of the mother? It's seems you are choosing to ignore the rights of the mother.
You also presume elsewhere that pregnancy is voluntary - what about the rights of the rape victim or the pregnant child?
Too many inconsistencies in your position!
@@tonyclif1 "P1 has to be true for your argument to even come close to accurate."
Sure, that's how deductive logic works.
For P1 see:
"Fertilization is the fusion of gametes to give rise to a new individual organism or offspring and initiate its development."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation.
*"The bible disagrees with you to start"*
No it doesn't. That sounds like an appeal to false authority but please cite your sources regardless.
*"it depends on your definition of "life" and "rights"."*
Life is a quality that distinguishes matter that has biological processes, such as signaling and self-sustaining processes, from matter that does not, and is defined by the capacity for growth, reaction to stimuli, metabolism, energy transformation, and reproduction. Various forms of life exist, such as plants, animals, fungi, protists, archaea, and bacteria. Biology is the science that studies life.
Human rights are intrinsic moral restrictions on what can rightfully be taken away from you.
*"And how does the life of the fetus have more rights than the life of the mother?"*
That wasn't one of my premises I have no idea what you're talking about.
*" It's seems you are choosing to ignore the rights of the mother."*
If you have an argument from the rights of the mother then feel free to explain it. But I can't read your mind.
*"You also presume elsewhere that pregnancy is voluntary"*
That's true because this is the case in 99.7% of abortions according to the Guttmacher institute. I could just beg off the 0.3% of abortions and say those are justifiable. You can keep them. What would that prove for your argument?
Congrats on 200k! 🎉
The moment any of these women gets pregnant by accident or by rape, they will rush to the nearest abortion clinic.
really depends on the person still though.... cuz you know God kinda owns the baby too
@@ghostagent3552 Except God kinda DOESN'T EXIST.
@@craigcorson3036 but they will absolutely go against what you say. So yea... no way out of it really
Right wing hypocrisy at its finest...
@craigcorson3036 as an atheist i have to step in here and say prove it.
Do not make positive claims.
"Just don't have sex" only works with the assumption that eventually the person will want children. I feel like if someone were to respond "what if I want to have sex with my husband but don't want to ever be pregnant" they wouldn't know how to respond.
That was the choice my former wife and I made before we got married. For different reasons, neither of us wanted children. She really disliked taking the pill, and was much happier after a tubal ligation.
They would tell the husband and the wife to not have sex they don't want kids because I'm sure they're that stupid
@@John.0z My husband had a vasectomy for similar reasons. However, even surgical birth control can fail. It doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.
I asked the same question to a family member. She told me she would have premarital sex only in a committed relationships but in case pregnancy occurred, she would just take care of the kid regardless of the circumstances. Mind you, this is a very career-oriented woman. Her partner said the same thing. Although it is not something I would advice (I am pro choice), I can respect that.
I mean, they should. People aren't entitled to sex, and a purely recreational act of sex is generally looked down upon in many cultures.
I am not convinced the pro choicer is not a plant. She didn't appear to be taking the conversation seriously and all her questions were poorly presented and delivered in a way that made her look like an idiot.
Her positions and responses were SO bad and lacking in thoughtfulness that I'd have to agree that she was likely a plant.
Got the same feeling
You clearly haven't met a college student if you suspect this lol
@@ruaraidh74 I have been through college. College students don't act like that. I don't recall high school students acting like that. I suspect the "college Students" you are referring to were attendees at Trump University or perhaps, a graduate from Liberty.
@@99xanthan99 Dunno what to tell you man. I've been involved in pro-life activism for nearly a decade. I've helped run almost a hundred tabling events at various universities and community colleges. College students are a special kind of stupid. They will walk up and start acting like apes like this for nothing. I wish I had enough money to hire this many people to embarrass themselves but I don't. I don't know how you expect me to respond to "na college students don't do this. Source: trust me bro"
My sister's sister-in-law just had her fetus die a week before the due date. The removal of the dead fetus qualifies as an abortion in most cases and nearly all anti-abortion laws prohibit the removal of the fetus even in cases like hers. That's why these anti-abortion laws and pro-life propaganda points piss me off so much.
Whether someone should get an abortion or not is a very personal choice. A bundle of cells is not a separate life until it can be a separate life it is not alive.
That fetus has no idea it exists. Would I have cared if I was aborted? No because I wouldn't have even known.
I wonder of some of those deluded pro lifers know they exist. They just seem like those toys you wind up and let make noise, flail about until they need to be wound up again.
8:32
Stick: “You can’t just not have sex.”
Me: Hold my beer.
(This is a joke by the way.)
Your videos also serve the people who have the same opinion as you do. They are here to find the arguments to talk to people with different opinions.
Although I completely agree with the student, I notice that she lacked the education needed to have this discussion.
She also were not payed to have the discussion....and kristin just repeated crap that were proven false and even lies in the past.
Someone saying 'Don't have sex' or a million years of evolution, which one is going to win?
Its just another way she enjoys controlling people...Kristin is as close to a devil as you come in the real world....women die becouse she encourage people to make abortions illegal.
That student was just insufferable.
I don't think that's a saying I wanted to hear, because now I'm sitting here singing yeetus the fetus to the tune of Viva Las Vegas.
I would ask them,
"Imagine you're outside of a building that is on fire. Inside, at one end of the building, is a baby. It was crying, but now is silent, and the smoke is thick. You have a mask that will save you from the smoke for two minutes, so you have time to save the baby, if it's still alive. At the other end of the building is a small picnic cooler, inside of which are 100 frozen human embryos awaiting implantation in women unable to conceive. You can save either the baby, which is possibly still alive, or the embryos. Which is the correct moral choice for you?"
Trolley problems don’t invalidate basic moral scenarios. At best you’re saying that it’s complicated, but we aren’t talking about this clunky scenario you’ve thought up, we’re talking about a real thing that people claim is not even worth talking about.
@AnonYmous-yj9ibbut...do they? That seems to be the whole issue right? That people do value embryos
@@somnia3423 the purpose of the thought experiment is to reveal what your beliefs are. do you value an alive person or potential life more? there isn't really a "right" answer, but the way you answer will reveal your values. i have asked this of MANY pro-lifers, and only ONE has ever actually answered. every other pro-lifer i asked came up with excuses for not answering.
Alright, alex pee misogynist, how about *this* scenario? There's a couple, happily married, the parents of three adopted refugee children they saved from some hellish war zone like Afghanistan or Syria or Colombia or Missouri, and they want a biological child to make four. They try for a child, and joy of joys, conception occurs. Then, seven months later, they get a scan and oh, no, tragedy, there's no pulse, no movement, no brain signal, no sign of life at all. Now the choice is whether to force that woman to carry a dead foetus around until either her body expels it or it goes septic and kills her or to remove it cleanly and completely so they can try again in a few months. Is it murder to remove the dead tissue and moral to risk her life, or is it murder to force her to die in agony of sepsis, leaving three children without a mother, and moral to do what we can for her health?
There's your sodding trolley problem, alex pee. On one track, a mother of three. On the other, a couple of pounds of dead tissue. You can't choose both and you can't choose neither.
@@sebcw1204 ahh okay, thank you☺️ (im not really pro life)
I love how the pro choice fone is just giving them this 'are you really that dumb' look at the part where they're just like "well then don't have sex" lol. Their face sums it all up.
Except that that's 100% an option.
You can cry about having no self control all you like but that still makes it your problem.
You dont wanna get pregnant? Keep your legs closed.
@ButrzV2 or maybe other people shouldn't be making choices about my Healthcare for me.
@@hannahevertson8306 It aint healthcare, its murder, and no amount of mental gymnastics will change that.
Maybe we wouldnt need more laws to protect the innocent if people like you had any sense of right and wrong.
@@ButrzV2 Or just... Use protection 😅
@@ButrzV2 rape :
Thanks for the video :)
That questioner absolutely screams “plant”, or at very least someone that decided to roleplay a strawman representation of a pro-choice and general liberal individual.
Thanks for making me feel young in my mid 30s. I use yeet daily lol😂
*waves a wand* "feetus deletus"
Why don’t anyone talk about the law, where the rubber meets the road? Pro choice is going to have abortion clinics available for people, Pro life is going to outlaw abortions. How can the government enforce this? It can’t be enforced.
Her entire education up to that point has led to this moment....... The production of a crappy bit of cardboard, hastily taped together and containing a nonsense message, WHICH I might add, she proudly declares, "I made this morning".
Employers beware. You will open yourself up to a whole world of problems if you hire this thing.
2:56
If there's a spider in your ear I think you have the right to get rid of it. If killing it is the best choice then do that.
If a spider is just living it's best life outside I think it's not right to kill it.
I shall try to alter the scenario.
If there's a dog in your house and draining your bank account, I think you have the right to get rid of it. If killing it or allowing it to starve or freeze is the best choice then do that.
If a dog is just living it's best life outside I think it's not right to kill it.
This does not neccesarily represent my views, I only extrapolated your prior argument.
@@josephpostma1787 what is the point of this?
@@Rose_Haw I am trying to see if your logic is valid so that you do not support things with invalid or poor logical reasoning.
@@josephpostma1787 Ok. Then yes I do still agree with the statement.
Freezing and starving are never the right choice.
If it's an old dog and no one wants it the right choice might sadly be to euthanize it.
@@Rose_Haw Don't you suppose that the old dog or the conscious fetus might want itself even if no-one else wants them?
What is instead of the old dog there was a child or some old guy.
what is their concept of first aid?
"have you considered not getting into an accident?"
captain hindsight strikes again!
Jeremy Clarkson 1998 whilst dumping acid on a porche first yeet
Another great video. Enjoy vacation!
My opinion on the subject is simple
You have priority on what happens to your body.
If you want your body to be used as a life support system for another living organism to grow, that's fine
If you do not want that, it's also fine.
You also have the right to change your mind at any point during that process.
Because life is often ugly and things happens, situations can change
Imagine you were to take a loan to buy a house, you sign for 20 years.
Now imagine if something happens that made you unable to pay that loan
Normally you'd either go bankrupt or just sell the home
But for whatever reasons they say no, and you must finish paying it up
you end up as some sort of slave doing various services in exchange because screw you I guess.
When asked, people would just say you were dumb and you didn't have to make the loan so it's your fault.
Would that be fair?
Nobody has a right to use my body to sustain a life and nobody has a right to use yours to sustain a life. Consent. Is. Everything.
The fetus didn't consent to being aborted
Did you consent to the sex, knowing that it would produce a child? If not, that’s horrible, but the child isn’t the problem, the rapist is.
Did you agree to an act that can create a new life? If so you knew the risk and should be responsible for said decision.
Dont want to worry about it? Then don't have sex. This goes for men too.
If you consent to driving you consent to a car accident I guess.
@@AlexPBentonconsenting to sex isn't consenting to pregnancy.
Love watching your channel Stick keep it up
Although Professor Stick's answer is better, the simplest answer to "why is there an arbitrary cutoff" is because we need atbitrary cutoffs for legal and procedural reasons.
There is no difinitive difference from the moment where the second trimester ends and the third trimester begins either. Jusy as there's no reason why the moment you have been on this planet for exactly 16 years (give or take 23 hours) means you are mature enough to drive a vehicle. But we have to put down these lines for our systems to function.
I hate the hyperbolic rhetoric that “abortions are allowed up until 10 minutes before birth”. This is just not a thing that happens.
As a victim of Social Murder myself... When are you going to come help me lady?
If women expect to be treated like adults, they need to learn to vote Blue.
I'm into explaining in detail to the hard right why they are the butt of the joke. Own your WEIRD!
5:35 What kind of a nonesense question is this? One is a cell, the other is two separate cells.
Thanks for the video. Just a thought experiment. If a fetus for whatever unfortunate reason would happen to perish during the process of pregnancy, would these people consider that an act of murder? After all, there is a likely chance that the body of the host was a factor in it and from the moment of conception it is "alive"
As we've seen, not only are there people that believe this they've pushed to legislate it and criminalize miscarriage.
Murder is intentional
I mean if you punch and kick a pregnant woman into the stomach, and the baby dies, is that just assault or murder?
@@AlexPBenton Okay, but can miscarriage still not be compared with some kind of manslaughter, which is commonly also criminal?
I have heard that now several times, not only from Poland, but also starting in the US, that the doctors do not dare doing an abortion anymore for fear of being accused of murder, but say to pregnant women "go outside on the parking lot and wait. When you are about to die, THEN we can do something. Not before".
Babies without a brain - no reason for abortion. Have the kid come to term and then let it die within minutes.
Ectopic pregnancy - cannot work - no reason for abortion. Wait until the embryo dies and decomposes and threatens the life of the mother, and if you save her, question is whether the woman will remain able to get more children.
The problem is that all these movements have simplistic slogans. There are millions of scenarios, and each one has to be evaluated individually.
But as there is just one God, and all its rules are perfect and universal, the world must be simple and apply to EVERYthing.
"You can choose not to engage in heterosexual sex"
They can also choose to punch you're sorry regressive ass in the face. I seriously would have backhanded that woman. Dismissing another person's choices out of hand like that reallyget to me for some reason.
That's assault and shows your side is violent af. But good on you
@@thefrontier2288 No not "my side", just me. Please note that while I'm threatening to slap someone in the face not SHOOT someone in the face with a GUN. That behavior is solely owned by the anti-choice Jeebus worshiping American Reich.
@@thefrontier2288”your side” just because one person thinks violence is the answer doesn’t mean everyone else does.
@@thefrontier2288 but treating women like incubators and slaves is perfectly fine right???
@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite no just punching bags apparently
Yeah i am 44
I know what yeet is
"What's the difference between 10 minutes before and 10 minutes after being born?"
Being born.
But what does abortion have to do with 10 minutes before birth, since that would only ever be aborted if both would likely die.
My response to the "just don't have sex" argument would be, "Are you saying that I do not have the right to engage in sex with my heterosexual, legally married partner? Because we are not prepared to have a child at this time. Are you saying that we are not allowed to have sex?"
If they point out that we can use contraception, put them on record as saying that contraception is allowed, even forms of contraception that medically prevent conception. Because these people are liars. There are attacking contraception, even as they try to use it as an argument against abortion. And they intentionally conflate abortion and contraception even though they are medically different.
5:55 "Once you know evil is happening..."
Yeah, THEY defined it as evil.. not society, not even their holy book, THEY themselves.
If I declare: "Any woman speaking in public is EVIL!", it doesn't make it so, and any action I would take would still be judged by others from their own viewpoint.
There is way more biblical president for women being evil than abortion being evil.
To generally assert that it's not immoral to take the life of a fetus inherently disregards our obliviousness regarding the definition of concious life. It is for this reason that I sympathize more with the conservative approach because in my opinion, if we do not yet know when concious life begins then we should not risk destroying it (unless not doing so would risk the definite life of the mother). However, because this matter is so nuanced, the government ought not to intervene.
If you can understand the difference between not allowing someone who's drowning to use you as a flotation device when you're afraid you might also drown and drowning a person who is not having any sort of situation and is not attempting to use you as a flotation device, then you can understand the difference between aborting an unborn baby and killing a born baby.
Well thats a title 😅 feel that would get me thrown out of a restaurant though.
Psalms 137:9 - Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
1 Samuel 15:3 - Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Exodus 12:29 - And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.
Isaiah 13:16 - Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
Hosea 13:16 - Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.
2 Kings 15:16 - Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.
Numbers 31:17 - Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
Psalms 135:8 - Who smote the firstborn of Egypt, both of man and beast.
Acts 7:19 - The same dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live.
Psalms 136:10 - To him that smote Egypt in their firstborn: for his mercy endureth for ever:
Exodus 1:16 - And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.
Matthew 2:16-18 - Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. (Read More...)
Amos 1:13 - Thus saith the LORD; For three transgressions of the children of Ammon, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they have ripped up the women with child of Gilead, that they might enlarge their border:
Hosea 9:11-16 - As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception
When does an animal change into food? I want to ask them
I'm sure that person supports gay marriage and protections under the law, right? I mean they say you shouldn't have heterosexual sex for fear of conception so of course the reasonable answer is no hetero sex, right?
If a woman wants to be a slave to her womb that’s fine but no one else can or should be make that choice for them it should be between a woman and her doctor no one can take a hostage I care if it’s nine months adult or foetus it doesn’t matter
Stick some people can't help not having sex 😢
yeah incels deserve as much respect as the rest of us
/j
@@joshuanorman2 🤣
I have to admit, I have issues when, at what moment a baby/fetus is viable even with todays medical advances? And I stress at what moment to the second does it break down to the moment when a fetus is no longer a chunk of cells to a viable human being? This issue and some others, I look at it down to seconds or split seconds. Almost like at what split second does god zap a soul or spirit into a growing embryo. Or does the magic man make that decision after a head pops out and starts to breathe?
We are all missing an extremely important point of the legislation. No doctor will perform an abortion on a viable healthy fetus. If the fetus is viable, but the mother cannot carry to term, it turns into a delivery.
The purpose of the legislation is to address the very rare cases of late term abortions.
What is "hard core" Pro-life? Is there a state between life & death?
If a fetus can not survive outside of the womb even with medical interventions, its fair game. Usually before the 20th week. Even after that, between 20th and 30th week requires heavy medical intervention and survivability is extremely low, but theres an actual increase in chance each week after the 20th week. After the 20th week, only if its absolutely medically necessary. For instance if the mothers life is in danger or the fetus is dying, dead or has significantly low chances of survivability due to defect, abortion should be an immediate medical intervention.
People don't go for months forgetting to schedule their abortion. Someone won't go through pregnancy for 8 month, remember their delivery date is soon and suddenly change their mind.
Abortions that are after 20 weeks are because of lack of accessibility (aka restrictive laws, money, etc) or because of medical reasons.
My aunt got a late term abortion because my cousin grew to big for her body to handle (he is nearly 2m tall now that he has stopped growing). They would have both died if she didn't get the abortion.
My friend had the room prepared, clothes bought, and a list of names when her kidneys failed. She had the choice to die with her fetus or survive for her kid. She chose life.
The people who go through months of pregnancy to get an abortion the day before their due date don't exist.
Religious fundamentalism and pro-life are cringe, but my goodness, that student was a showcase of some high grade, terminally online Gen Z cringe. Can't know if they were a plant, but other than clowning around, they had nothing to contribute. They sounded straight out of some low brow Babylon Bee sketch. Really poor showing.
The issue with pro-lifers is that they consider 2 weeks into pregnancy as relavant and equal to a baby as 10 minutes before and after birth.
Yes, 10 minutes before birth it already is a baby.
I'd even argue in favor that 3-4 months into pregnancy we could possibly consider the embrio developed to the point of a baby.
But earlier than that? Maybe some gray-lines, but definetly not a developed baby.
If the fetus or born baby never had any consciousness I should care not about it. If the fetus or baby is conscious or was conscious and should be so again, then I care about them. What about you?
Tbh I'm a man I'll never NEVER ever have to be pregnant and deal with choice of my life or babies life etc so I have no right to have an opinion
To answer the question of "what is the fundamental difference between ten minutes before birth and ten after birth"
Legally life begins at birth
You receive your birth certificate and social security number and all forms of legalization at birth!
The difference is that ten minutes BEFORE you are born you are not legally recognized as a person or alive...
And ten minutes after you are!
Legally speaking.... Life... Begins AT BIRTH!
And we see no reason to reform the entire census taking process of one of the largest countries in the word because a minority of united states citizens, almost all of which have religious agendas rather than legitimate concerns about the sanctity of life, want to convince themselves and others that life starts before the start... Of one's life...
Also how much ya wanna bet that literally every pro-lifer there is also totally OK with the death penalty?
Just sayin.... >>
Legally killing a pregnant woman is a double homicide. Get your facts straight
@@AnonYmous-yj9ib Yep. Both lives. That means there is a life involved aside from the mother.
That has to be a fake pro choice person. She's a pansexual, non-binary person with multi-colored hair who's in a polyamorous relationship with 2 transwomen, carries a crude "Yeetus the Fetus" sign, can't string 2 coherent sentences together and whose argument is: sex is awesome and I don't want any consequences for having all the sex. When she can't make her argument against the obviously superior Forced Birther, she storms off like a 5 year old, making rude gestures as she stomps away. Sorry, but she's a winning Stereotype Bingo Card. I don't know if the Forced Birthers planned this ahead of time or if Ms. Yeetus decided on her own to show up to help discredit Pro Choice people, but it's stupid either way.
Offspring are not parasites smh
If she gets exhausted so easily, can intercourse for her really be that "exciting?"
Exhausted by having to explain simple things to people that change around definitions and make up shit .......Kristin get payed for this shit, the exhausted one dont....if they got payed to disprove kristin as well we would have more effort put into it.
@@skagenpige88 What can be disproven?
@@catholicdad ...that pro life is a positive thing and not a demonic, hate filled, facist controlling of women and their bodies killing everyone that die at childbirth and permanently damaging the others during the forced pregnancy? Not to mention trauma and consequenses for the unwanted child. Also her idea of ppl not having sex is criminally stupid and we can show why.
0:20 you're fine I don't mind.
Although I don't know how much of that is because I agree with your position and how much of it is the "underhanded dangerous stuff" some anti-abortion advocates are pulling.
1:06 love the idea. Too long for a sign, but would make a fantastic meme.
9:40 agreed. Now it's a subjective statement so it can't technically be wrong.
But it's a bit like saying "the crown Victoria is a better muscle car than a hellcat challenger" yes that statement technically can't be wrong, but the objective data doesn't support it.
I’m just look for equal treatment under the law. If we as a society decide that it is acceptable to kill a genetically distinct human being due to their inconvenience. I would also like to be able to kill human beings due to their inconvenience. There are an awful lot of inconvenient people on this planet.
While I agree with this person"s stance, she is the worst at defending it. I think she did more harm than good with her one liners and glib responses.
I don't think she's a pro-life plant designed to give them a strawman, but I do think that's exactly how one would act.
It really annoys me how these people post videos of unprepared colleges students and make put like this is a huge W for their side. If they tried to debate actual experts that'd be destroyed.
That "just don't have sex" argument is so dumb.
Say someone takes part in an extreme sport or an activity knowing full well it could cause injury. Should they have to live with a broken? Should we not provide them with health care?
People will seek thrills all the time, be it extreme sports or sex, you can't tell people to just not do these things, people are gonna do them. I think it's best we make these things safer with safter equipment / contraceptives and health care to treat people if they do get injured / pregnant.
what is the opinion of pro-choicers with regards to forceful monetary child support?
You can't really compare these. One is basic human rights (bodily autonomy) the other is the right of a child to be supported.
A better comparison would be 'if the pregnant person can decide whether or not to attempt to carry to term, the other person shouldn't be forced to give blood or an organ to the child'.
If a child exists, the legal parents have responsibilities. Both of them. However, I am firmly on the side of being able to or sign away parental rights easily (as well as a child being able to have more than 2 parents, but that's another discussion). You gave birth or were otherwise involved and don't want to parent? It should be easy and cheap to sign away your rights to that child. Even 6 months or 6 years later. I'd rather have a child willingly surrendered than abused or killed.
The child support would the simply be paid by the government, as the child still has a right to it. Since most child support isn't paid anyway it'd be better for everyone involved.
Strange, not having sex always came quite easy to me. Without even being asexual. I gues nobody wanting to have sex with me was the trick there.
And you still don't get to tell other people how to live their lives. My husband and I enjoy having sex but we don't want to have kids. Why are you acting as if no one else is allowed to have sex just because you're not interested in doing it?
To sum up, if you don't want to have a baby, don't get raped or engage in any other type of non-consensual sex. Also, we already had a precedent in Roe where abortions were legal up to a certain term, but late term abortions are illegal except in certain cases, like where it would threaten the life of the mother or the fetus. That said, I agree. You aren't going to change the minds of the 2 clowns up at the podiums. Change the minds of the people in the audience.
Fetus deletus
I'm pro live thats why im pro choice.
Lol
I love the name of the video
oh - that was a bad performance from that student. They did not do the pro choice argument any favours.
Its not about the performance but the message....also she were not payed? And the speakers here are dumb or acting dumb...asking questions they have gotten answered in other debates already? They dont even bother to improve their arguments while being payed for it.
@@skagenpige88
she came across as very callous. If you're on the 'pro life' side, hearing her describe things in the way she did is not going to convince you you're wrong. You can be pro choice and still respect the fact that we are talking about a potential life.
I am pro choice and I don't regard undeveloped fetuses as 'babies' - but the way she acted and her lack of real argument was counterproductive. You don't defeat a bad argument with an even worse one - and like it or not, the performance is important when you want to win people to your side.
@@bengreen171 It is quite impossible to convince anyone on the pro life side in such a setting anyway....since Kristin keep replacing and misusing words to convince them in the first place. You would need to present a dictionary and agree on words before even starting to discuss things.
@@bengreen171 I think one of her most commonly used ones is used here. Replacing fetus with baby. Also she pretended not to know the diffrence between a born and unborn baby etc.....And all that need to be fixed before talking with them.
@@skagenpige88
yes, they appeal to emotions in order to get the audience to think of fetuses as babies - people like you and me. So how is being callously insensitive to that idea going to help the pro choice side? It juts makes us look heartless and uncaring. You realise that most people who have terminations do so because they have no other reasonable choice - not because they don't regard what's inside them as human life, right?
We need to confront the pro lifers with facts, like you say - but the student in this clip didn't do that, she just 'sloganised' the whole issue with a cringe rhyme that no-one but her thought was cool. We need to 'win' the public space by pointing out the other side's hypocrisy (ie noting how most of them support the death penalty, so they don't mind ending human life) and, as you say, correcting their bad definitions and equivocations.
If I'm being real given the chance I'd ask the pro lifer 2 questions and base my rudeness off the answers 1 would be do you support the government funding SNAP, WIC, SSD, Medicaid, section 8 being fully funded so that the people who need it have access? And the follow up would be how much of life do you actually pro on what is your cut off age for the life you support if life is at conception where does your support stop?
not only that, i would ask WHO'S life they support. are they pro life for immigrants? are they pro life for trans people? are they pro life for victims of gun violence? are they pro life on the issue of capital punishment? are they pro life for the generations that come after us with regard to climate change?
@@sebcw1204 that second question opens the door for a lot interesting follow ups
There heads would crash and revert to DOS mode
You can ask me those 2 questions
1: Yes
2: (sorry for the indirect answer I am still unsure on a direct answer) If the human organism has never became conscious, I have no rational non-emotional care for for that being no matter the age or stage of development.
@@sebcw1204 I also answer Yes, although our following actions may be different.
At 5:42. Ugh. A fetus 10 min before birth and a baby 10 min after birth assuming both are healthy are both viable to live independently of the mother. Considering that viability is generally 20-25 weeks. The difference between a sperm cell and an egg cell vs a zygote is that the zygote will eventually become a sentient life form assuming it’s a healthy human zygote. The sperm and the egg never will on their own until they meet.
Talking about blurring lines much. If removing the fetus that has reached the point of viability, again 20-25 weeks, is just left on a table with out a caretaker is just as likely to die as a baby 10 min after birth is to die without a care taker and left on the same table.
Sure you didn’t directly kill the fetus by removing it from the mothers womb because, insert medical procedure here, just like depriving a person of food and water isn’t directly killing them because someone else needs it more in your opinion.
The thing that happens at conception is that the sperm and egg meet and create a zygote and assuming that it is healthy will grow into a embryo then a fetus then a baby. Determining where life begins is more of a moral argument than a scientific one. After all single cell organisms that reproduce via mitosis are considered alive.
PoliticsImma1st
Lol, a fetus is a mother dependent , and baby? is a baby independent , can he survive alone, nice logic Stick the diference is one is feed by the placenta other by milk
I'm pretty sure the "Pro Choice" "opponent" was just a plant by the group.
I think I have a unique perspective when I come to these sorts of discussions. I view abortions as more of a necessary evil. Bodily autonomy for who? The unborn human? The mother who didn’t do anything to stop from getting pregnant? That argument sounds dumb to me. I look at it from a quality of life perspective for the mother, father, unborn child and all of the children already born. Using abortions as birth control is incredibly irresponsible BUT there are enough good reasons (bodily autonomy not one of them) to have an abortion. The people who actually need them are hurt by trying to limit the ability for any of them to get an abortion. In practice making it the mother’s choice is the best way because, as I see it, women who don’t want children use birth control. Women who have abortions anyway have better excuses than “whoops I was irresponsible.” Maybe they were raped, maybe the unborn child has a debilitating genetic disorder, maybe they aren’t financially stable, maybe they’ll seek out illegal abortions if abortions are no longer legal, maybe they’ll leave the baby in the bathroom stall, maybe they’ll die if they try to carry the baby to full term. Make it easy for those who NEED abortions to have them. Assume they’ll be responsible. Don’t tell them what to do with their own bodies.
At the same time, don’t treat abortions as birth control. If you don’t want a baby use actual birth control instead.
Birth control can fail. People can get pressured into sex. People can get drunk and not take precautions. Do you really want someone who's too irresponsible to use birth control - or is in a situation where they're forced to not use birth control - to give birth and raise a kid? Adoption isn't always an option. Many are shamed for thinking about "giving up their baby" and are pressured into keeping it. Some have the baby used against them. "Baby as punishment for being irresponsible" is a really bad reason to force someone to be a parent.
@@SomeUniqueHandle I’m aware of these other scenarios so I am pro-choice but I’m not a person who is going to rejoice over a woman being proud of getting an abortion. I think that an abortion is more of a necessary evil. She used birth control because she was being responsible, she can’t afford the child, she terminates her pregnancy as soon as she finds out because being pregnant is something she was trying to avoid. I was mostly writing in response to the idea that she is granted the right to kill her unborn child because it’s a parasite so she can go be a prostitute without any long term side effects and it doesn’t matter if she gets pregnant every time she has sex because she can just get that “tumor” removed from her body. If that’s how she wishes to live her life there are more permanent treatments to stop her from getting pregnant in the first place. Then she can have sex all she wants and she won’t even have to wonder if she’s going to keep it or yeet it from her body.
And, of course, there are circumstances where a woman is raped or where keeping the child she wanted and really tried to have is going to be a serious financial or emotional burden on her and the rest of her family. Should we force a child to be born with severe muscular dystrophy and a poorly developed brain? Should we force a pregnant mother do die on the operating table? Of course not.
For the people who NEED an abortion it should be available to ALL women. If they aren’t psychopaths they’ll know what’s right. And if that leads them to getting an abortion it can be seen as having their dog put down at the vet or something along those lines. Sometimes that is a necessary evil that is more beneficial than alternative.
And for the women who do treat abortions like birth control, they’ll just have them done illegally anyway or they’ll throw the baby in the garbage can. May as well make it less traumatic for the unborn child. We can’t (or shouldn’t) stop the mother until the baby has developed to the point that it knows that it’s life is being threatened - at which point it’s already pretty much seen as an act of premeditated murder anyway.
If you’re going to have an abortion do it right away if possible. And you can’t do that if the “pro-life” are making it difficult for everyone to get an abortion whether they need it or not. And those people aren’t pro-life anyway. They are pro-birth and they could care less if the mother and child both died on the operating table.
Consider me pro-quality-of-life and against abortions as the first choice they chose and I’m more against people interfering with a woman’s right to choose. Not because it’s her body, but because she should be mature enough to know what’s best. If she isn’t a monster she won’t seek joy in killing her unborn children. And if she does have those sorts of fantasies we could stop them with a hysterectomy. Just remove the uterus and problem solved.
4:05 The baby is dependent though, we're not deer to be able to walk and feed ourselves in minutes and hours after birth.
It is only punctually and generally dependent, it can be left alone for some time without problem and be taken care of by anyone. A fetus is constantly and specifically dependent, it's going to start dying as soon as it is cut off from the mother, and nobody can replace the mother.
A baby can breath on it's own, digest on it's own, maintain homeostasis on it's own.
@@Zift_Ylrhavic_Resfear the fact that the fetus is specifically dependant makes betraying one worse not better.
Plus we aren't even talking about murdering the baby or the mother, what this "nobody can replace the mother"?
@@VitalVampyr that just makes you in favour of killing someone more vulnerable than a baby.
eff them
“No your honor I didn’t kill my toddler I just didn’t feed it. See? it’s not independently viable. I did not consent for this parasite to take my money and food, I’m just cutting off the leeching”
Frustrating to see how bad the the pro-choice person's arguments are. It makes it so easy for anti-abortion to win.
2:26 Infantis, NOT Foetus, means baby in Latin fyi.. so...foetus mean fetus. There is that argument gone.(if nuance worked on them)
The difference between fetus and baby? Fetus is Latin for "offspring." How is replacing fetus with baby intellectually dishonest Professor?