What Is Pro Life, What Is Pro Choice: A Constructive Conversation PART 1
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лип 2024
- This conversation features 6 everyday people with different opinions on abortion. THIS IS THE DEBATE WE ALL NEED TO WATCH! As the 2024 presidential election gets closer, we'll all be having more conversation about politics. Watch this ready for that discussion.
Subscribe to our channel so you don't miss out on powerful content! More exciting projects coming🔥🔥🔥
This was SO WELL DONE!! Very proud of these pro-life folks for articulating and defending the unborn so well!
I am praying that God will speak to the heart of every mother and father faced with the choice of whether or not to kill a baby. I ask that their eyes will be opened to God’s truth of when life begins and that their hearts will be changed in Jesus name.
Bravo 🙌🏼 these are real adults with different opinions and beliefs but huge respect to one another ❤
So glad to see people with respect talking about this subject. I would like to see this taken further where they would actually commit to viewing a video of 2nd & 3rd trimester abortions and to view what was taken out of the mother. We can watch any medical procedure so this should be no different. Also, look at 3D ultrasounds of early pregnancy and throughout. To be honest and make informed decisions one needs to actually view for themselves what is actually being discussed. Now THAT would be worth doing over and over.
Such a powerful conversation!
No, it's not. It's the same as Ted Bundy's last interview. A reach to justify murder.
Wow!! This was good!!
Fantastic! Well done
Where was the discussion of responsibility of using birth control?? Abortion is not birth control.
Birth control is not 💯effective.
Right it is murder of a life.
I love the first question because you immediately see the dichotomy of the two views. One side believes it is a human from the moment of its conception, which is an objective and scientific position to take. The other has to get into defining humanity on entirely subjective terms. By its nature, pro-abortion is a dehumanization position because it aims to justify humanity by some given standard. It's quite no different than racists arguing over what degree of melanin gives you rights. Whereas they argue over color of skin, pro-abortionists argue over other arbitrary standards: level of dependency, level of development, possession of certain faculties, etc.
Science can hardly tell us what life is and it most definitely cannot tell us what life to value. Also, we already do set arbitrary standards for what rights we afford people. Children have less rights than fully functioning adults, developmentally disabled adults have fewer rights, felons...
We still restrict rights to humans already, just not based on skin color anymore.
There is no such thing as an objective position on when human life begins. Claiming it is doesn't make it so. Even the argument of conception is something that people pose as being objective while it is no more objective than the position that human life begins at the moment of consciousness or the position that sperm/egg cells are human life too (which is an even more simplistic take when using biological definitions). It is simply a more complicated discussion than simply claiming objectivity.
@polyliker8065 careful with this opinion, they're deleting comments like yours
@@Noah-yc3ns I wouldn't be surprised seeing their channel description.
@@polyliker8065 and the inverse works as well, namely that, "Claiming it isn't so doesn't make it not so."
The argument that this "object of discussion" is a) human and b) alive is completely objective.
Conception, as opposed to consciousness, is a much more deductive and objective idea. Conception, the beginning of something (in this case, the egg being fertilized), is the objective beginning of a human life. How is not, might I ask? What's the alternative to this idea? Empirically, the human life begins at conception. Anything before conception is just a sperm and an egg, which is technically still "alive" in a looser sense but not human. A simpler way to state this would be: conception is a necessary act of human being, the very moment of its realization.
Consciousness, on the other hand (or any other arbitrary standard the pro-abort wants to put forth), doesn't work this way. For we know that humans can lack consciousness. And if we take this position, it leaves us in this absurd limbo where the best we can say is, "Well, we don't know what's in that woman's belly, and we won't know until it gains consciousness." That's, well, just stupid. We all know it's human, though some do love to deny their own common sense in exchange for populism.
But moving away from empiricism, we can know philosophically-from deductive reasoning-that the "object of discussion" is a human life. Humans can only produce humans. Life begets life. From this "thing's" beginning, i.e. its conception, it's human. Bar none.
Hope that helps. 👍
Sounds great! However, I don't have TV...only a smartphone...
That will do!!
This is just a curious question if a drunk driver intentionally hits a car and kills a pregnant woman, should he be charged with a double murder?
The brunette woman’s first statement is how the majority of women of privilege believe. How do we change this thinking?
Question 1: When does a baby become human? It's human from conception. If not human, what species is it? It's not dog or cat or platypus. Even pre-conception, the sperm and egg are human, in that they're of human species, they just aren't a human being until it begins the growth process, which begins at conception. It ought to receive human rights at the moment the growth process begins, but civil rights feel like a citizenship question, which opens up the question of which rights children have and whether that's ethical.
If you use the argument that a fetus should be killed because it's a burden to the state, you would have to then be willing to accept that same argument to anyone who is a burden to the state.
Question 2: Is an abortion ever justified? I struggle a great deal with this question, because I wish I could justify abortion in rape cases. Rape should be immediately reported, a rape kit performed, and a Plan B should be provided to prevent implantation. I see why this is wrong based on my own beliefs, but we have a responsibility to minimize damage to a victim and I would argue both mother and child are victims to this.
Question 3: How does the unborn differ from us and which attributes justify abortion? Human beings evolved uniquely. Our pregnancies used to be longer, and we now give birth once the fetus can breathe because our stature as bipedal beings make birth at full gestation impossible. This is why humans have the most dependent newborns of any species. That means that the delineation between unborn and born is partially arbitrary, and one cannot use "full gestation" as a marker for justifying abortion. The only difference would be seeing the child's face and having emotion about it- that is callous and narcissistic. The difference between the unborn and the born is that the unborn are significantly more affected by the mother's lifestyle. It's a personal freedoms debate, now- should a woman feel compelled not to smoke or drink alcohol in excess for 9 months when she didn't plan to get pregnant and doesn't want to be pregnant? If she didn't want the restrictions, she probably should have prevented pregnancy. This literally applies to any behavior. If you don't want your license suspended, you have to do things to prevent it, like pay traffic citations or avoid them altogether. Be responsible and you won't have consequences.
Question 4: Is it okay to abort a child with a disability? No. You don't mercy kill adults who have been in a terrible accident and have lasting disabilities. You don't mercy kill someone who learns they will die in X amount of time due to disease. You don't mercy kill someone with an objectively poor quality of life. It's not okay to learn at birth that the child has a disability and then kill it. If you'd kill your child because of disease of defect, you're a weak person and would be a terrible parent because of that.
Question 5: Who gets to decide and how? I don't have a very good answer for this, but I'd like to respond to those in the video. When the woman says 'who are you to tell me I can't kill my baby, you don't know me'. We agree as a society that it is unacceptable to kill a born person (assisted suicide aside). It is really unusual that we have to have a conversation about whether unborn persons are protected from being killed, that we can't agree on that. It is shameful that our society leans towards value of a woman's sexual expression over that of the consequence, which is human life. Whether you believe that the being can experience the pain of being murdered, or how functional the being's brain is, is really not the issue. Except in the instance of rape, which I mentioned above, no one caused a woman to be pregnant but herself. No one put the human being in her body, she made it herself. There shouldn't be an option to just casually wave away the consequences of that. I phrase it this way because anyone considering abortion seems to treat becoming a parent like a burden, which is so sad, but if you're going to participate in the activity that makes babies, you ought not to be surprised when you make babies.
Answer 1: It's a human species at conception
Answer 2: Abortion is justified and morally neutral before 24 weeks
Answer 3: Fetuses are not capable of deploying consciousness. The lack of a conscious experience justifies abortion.
Answer 4: No, it is not ok to kill people with disabilities because they are able to deploy consciousness
Answer 5: The person carrying the child
@@Noah-yc3nsYes, 💯! I guess the person you’re responding to believes every ejaculation is killing a human life. This is right out of medieval beliefs. America joins three other third world countries in going backwards on abortion- reproductive healthcare. So pathetic
amberkumar4514, religious extremist.
More of this. ”for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ,“
2 Corinthians 10:4-5
Also, why do young women deny scientific reality? If they are to lead the moral fabric of our country, they have to be grounded in science and not in magical thinking
Creepy these people are talking Eugenics
Worst than racism
Why is that creepy? Both are bad, but eugenics is rooted in racism and always ends in death…racism always results in discrimination, but only sometimes results in death
receive...not recieve
Thankfully science has proved LIFE begins at conception. It's always a image bearer of God that has greater value than any animal. #AbortionIsMurder #AdoptionIsAChoice #LifeIsAGift #SaveTheBabies
Nope. My companion animals have more value than any human being.
Where did science prove this?
Sincerely, a neuroscientist