The Implications of Overturning Roe v. Wade - Between The Scenes | The Daily Show
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июн 2022
- Trevor discusses the implications of overturning Roe v. Wade #BetweenTheScenes #DailyShow #Comedy #TrevorNoah
Subscribe to The Daily Show:
/ @thedailyshow
Follow The Daily Show:
Twitter: / thedailyshow
Facebook: / thedailyshow
Instagram: / thedailyshow
Stream full episodes of The Daily Show on Paramount+: www.paramountplus.com/?ftag=PP...
Follow Comedy Central:
Twitter: / comedycentral
Facebook: / comedycentral
Instagram: / comedycentral
About The Daily Show:
Trevor Noah and The Daily Show correspondents tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and pop culture.
The Daily Show with Trevor Noah airs weeknights at 11/10c on Comedy Central. 
Приколы
As a German this day when Roe v Wade was overturned was some kind of awkward. Because on the very same day voted our "Bundestag" for overturning the paragraph 219a. This was a law which prohibited doctors to do "marketing" for abortions. And "marketing" means in this case write it down on their website or inform your patients in any other way about it. This bill made it in fact for women who needed an abortion impossible to find doctors who could help them.
So this day was very strange on the one side I cheered because our own law made a huge step forward and at the other side I was shocked about what happened to you in the USA.
America is a backward country.
Yep. It was a strange day. Celebrating our pro-choice victory in Germany, mourning our siblings defeat in the US.
Maybe you'll update your refugee laws to take in Americans once things get a little worse? 😮💨 (I'll learn German)
FML, as I wrote this my coworker sent an article about the Supreme(ly Unjust) Court gutting our EPA (environmental protection agency).
This theocracy will end us all 😑
@@TragoudistrosMPH You might not like the weather though. And I think our refugee laws are quite lenient (compared to the US at least). Oh and we have very strict gun laws, but you are still allowed to speed on 50% of the Autobahnen in Germany, as long as you are not stuck in a traffic jam.
I have never seen someone with the ability to get a point across, capturing everyone's attention and hitting the core of the issue time after time like Trevor. Amazing talent and beautiful soul!
"You don't force others to live by your morals and your standards. That's it."
Amen🙏
except when it's for mandatory vaccines. i love how silent Trevor was back then
@@Wickedmen0303 yeah because if aren't vaccinated you will affect those who live near to you or you risk others life in danger
@@Wickedmen0303 because it's not morals, it's science. Let me ask you: did you take the vaccine?
@@aviralgupta393 if it's not morals, then why should conservatives not use the same argument but then it's religion?
At least both sides use there belief to supress one or another.
I want a show solely based on these in-depth analyses. I can listen to him speak logically all day.
same though. I crave more of these monologues and intelligent conversations!
Maybe you should also try some Tucker Carlson to hear the opposition view on political discourse.
@@ardhiconsults3780 how insulting to compare the two.
And if that comment wasn't sarcastic, it's being presumed that opposing views and that man haven't been heard. I personally wouldn't put the two in the same category.
Me too. I prefer it to the comedy writing his team does.
I wish the show was filmed more like this. This feels more intimate and down to earth conversation
Agreed it’s actually quite nice
This is miles better than the scripted content (no offense to the writers). Let's just leave the scripted style for Stephen Colbert in which he excels at, while we let Trevor be himself so he can give his personal point of veiw on every matter that he decides to touch on. I think it would even be beneficial to the ratings. Like extremely beneficial.
Seems biased.
Down to earth? The dude literally just spewed upwards of 10-15 incorrect and incoherent things strung together into a unenjoyable show.
@@n-0-1 Yes, I agree. You do seem biased.
I made that same statement last night when my cousin asked how I felt about the whole situation. I was like do you know how many of them have had mistresses or family members that they made/helped get an abortion. It’s a very scary time where I feel like we’re turning into the handmaids tale or something. I feel like we have made so much progress without fully making it to the end and are being made to turn back around and progress backwards.
are you saying your mom had the right to abort you?
That’s simply what happens when we get complacent and progress stops. When conservatives aren’t getting their dosage of new progress to fight against, they start fighting the old progress. Just the inevitable effect of Democrats doing absolutely nothing despite controlling the House, Senate, and White House.
Regress is the word you were looking for. It's progressives and regressives fighting over the keys of government.
I'm terrified, and more so for our future generations.
You hit it right on the head with the Handmaid reference. I have been saying this
I’m personally anti abortion meaning I myself wouldn’t have an abortion (unless if it was required to preserve my life) but I also acknowledge that those are my beliefs and what is true for me is not necessarily true for another. It is wrong to impose your beliefs onto others. To an extent that in university I supported my friend through an abortion she got because I loved her and acknowledged that it was her life and her choice to make given how the unwanted pregnancy by an abusive loser would have affected the rest of her life.
Fast forward 14 years; we both graduated, are married, have solid careers and have two children each in our marriages to our wonderful spouses. No one is in any position to say how having that unwanted pregnancy before she was ready to become a mother could have affected or derailed both her and that child’s life. Everyone is pro life however everyone should own the choice to be able to have a safe medical abortion if so required and the government should have no say in that.
All the Implications, not just 'They wont STOP; realize that' have been covered by Some More News, Big Joel and
Belief-It-Or-Not.
@@nenmaster5218 um... maybe lighten up on the meds dude.
Why are you "personally against abortion"? Do you think that your would be unborn babies are more valuable than all the others?
@@dyobbo "Maybe lighten up on the meds dude."
That sentene was never used in a non-cringey-way. Makes me wonder: Is it even possible?
Excellent choice of words 👏 !
Well that's the thing: they _specifically_ called their movement "pro-life" for PR reasons because "anti-abortion" wasn't selling the narrative they wanted. People generally don't rally to "anti-" causes the same way they do "pro-" causes. It's been marketing right from the beginning.
Yes! I've mentioned this many times, that the "pro life" people aren't pro-life, they're just anti-abortion. You're right, it's a matter of branding, and they know what they're doing.
I just call them pro-blob
Same way they did with the BLM slogan. Who wouldnt agree with the slogan?
@@kevyriverside8082 Lol, many of these folks didn't. Haven't you heard of the insanity that was All Lives Matter?
@@bmay8818 Like the dude in Ozark said "Fetus loving, women hating maniacs"
i absolutely love trevor for his jokes. but i love him more when he gets serious about serious issues.
If only our leaders were this thoughtful, intelligent, impassioned, and humane.
Gotta vote those red fascists out
Yeah! Trevor for president!
“There’s only one devil in this conversation, and it’s you.” 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
@Gabe Barry takes one to know one?
@Gabe Barry they were merely quoting the video we're commenting on. Who do you think bots would call Satan? And why are you the one to defend them?
@Gabe Barry the funny part is your comment where you said "you cannot force someone to give birth" is one of the most 'attention seeking' comments I've ever seen on RUclips
@Gabe Barry funny how when your comment calling the original poster a bot disappeared, the other comments calling the commenter a bot also disappeared.
Maybe you're doing a little too much projecting.
I love that your complicated brain expresses complicated thoughts in such a fair and uncomplicated manner, bravo, Trevor.
I would take it a step further. If a woman is forced to carry a known terribly deformed fetus, that when born will require constant care causing one partner to be unable to work, thereby being unable to care for their other children, bring the child to an abortion protester from when clinics were open, (start taking names now!), armed with adoption papers as well, and lovingly have them adopt this “life” that they were so willing to force to be born. Put the burden where it belongs when people are forcing their own personal morals on someone else.
Republicans don't believe in caring for any human AFTER they are born. So your suggestion is a non-starter for those bold-faced hypocrites. BTW they are like this because they know there's no accountability. Democratic Party AND our armed forces, are SPINELESS. They'll sit back having endless Committee meetings, while our Freedoms and Rights are *patiently yet firmly stripped away* by the Republicans.
I think they should not care for the life, but pay for it. Because if they get the chance, Republicans will "reproduce" their agenda by teaching it to the innocent kids.
Oh no! What are they gonna do from the 0.001% of times this will happen?
@@Leviathan-mj8gi "just" have it. Because pregnancy does not take a toll on your body at all ...
@@blauespony1013 then why get knocked up ?
Thank you Trevor. You did not let me down. Talking reason and reality again. Your mother would be so proud of you. The abortion debate has been reduced to a slogan on a number plate and we all know how utterly wrong that is. I thought Americans were big on separation of Church and State, was it not in the much Vaunted constitution?
Republicans look at the constitutions like they look at the Bible... as if it's a Chinese menu, where you can just pick and choose what you feel like that day.
That’s the thing: separation of church and state is not explicitly stated in the US Constitution. Notably, there is no religion specified in the document. We can easily tell from the writings of those who contributed to the constitution that they wanted a separation of church and state.
@@MusicfromMarrs The first clause in the Bill of Rights states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Thomas Jefferson in an 1802 letter declared that when America adopted this clause, they built a “wall of separation between the church and state.”
The separation of church and state was elaborated by the Supreme Court in Emerson v Board of Education:
“The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups, and vice versa.”
Which part of these influenced or controlled by church.....
I never paid for an Abortion. And I never will. I will just deal with the consequences.
Thank you Trevor. Your ability to clearly put into words the fine nuance of all sides of a contentious subject never ceases to astound me. You have a way of articulating the truth of an "us versus them" argument that is going on in the world, and then manage to bring the humanity back into it. It is a quality I wish more of our politicians possessed, as maybe then they would stop blaming the other side for all of the problems of the people they are supposed to represent and actually start doing something to resolve them.
There's nothing nuanced about entirely forgetting the side that matters most, cause it's the side with its highest right being put into question. There's nothing in all that Noah says that acknowledges the humanity of the unborn.
To be quite honest, I love these behind the scene clips a bit more than the broadcasted segments. He has the ability to be more vocal and bring up thought provoking ideas. It's like the real Trever Noah without all the visuals and skits. If this man sits down at a public park and just starts talking, i'll pay just to listen. Even if there isn't an admission fee I'll just give money to the nearest child so they can buy a balloon.
LOL about the balloon.
I totally agree. And the fact that Trevor Noah & John Oliver were born & raised in different countries really gives us, Americans, a more unbiased view. They aren't in the thick of things (although Oliver is now a USA citizen). They talk about how certain issues are not even worthy to discuss (you just take care of them) & we make a whole big deal out of them (& usually do nothing about them); meantime, in their countries, women can have abortions because it's a forgone conclusion, period.
Truth. Trevor is at his strongest just like this.
He is just echoing his boss's talking points. Those are not his personal views but of the people who employ him and pay his salary and who are predominantly DEMOCRATS!
Trevor Noah is a people pleaser, a sellout and a puppet to America's corporate media.
@@ardhiconsults3780 Are you high? He's right and you are very, very, very wrong.
@@MrKeychange he is right because he is saying the leftist political points you want to hear. If Fox offered him more money he would jump ship in 10 seconds. Point is he aint going back to the slums back in his homeland South Africa.
When a woman is dying because the doctor doesn’t know how the law will affect if he performs and emergency abortion because a woman’s life is in danger and she dies waiting for medical attention in a hospital you know that pro life is a mistake
are you saying your mom had the right to abort you? and if she was in the same position you be cool?
Very scary, indeed!!!!
How many times a year does that scenario happen in the US?
That's an interesting point. Perhaps in that case a federal law allowing for prosecution of state actors involved with causing said loss of life should be on the table. They can also maybe be charged with double-manslaughter/homicide charges if both mother and fetus die.
Not a fan of the 'in danger' argument - It's an extreme case, and doesn't need to be extreme. Should just be legal if you legit aren't ready to be a mother/father.
We couldn't do an ex-post facto law, but I'd be totally in favor of laws in these abortion ban states that says "men who aren't actively seeking to produce a child must have a vasectomy". If women's body's are getting controlled, only fair men have an equivalent law, and this one would help reduce unwanted pregnancies!
.......What's that? Men feeling it's unfair to make laws controlling a person's body and healthcare choices? Huh....interesting take....
Oh wow you're the first person to say that wow so original
100% agree! Thank you for posting this.
I get it, and was just about to say that any man convicted of r*pe should also have a vasectomy. Then I thought about all of my arguments against the death penalty and my reasoning is often that they keep finding out years, or even decades later that some of them were innocent all along. That made me stop being mad long enough to realize that this is looking at it the wrong way: _Seek equality in freedom, not equality in oppression._
A man can impregnate various women in a short period of time, a woman can only get pregnant once in at least 9 months so we could say that would be more reasonable. Of course we don't want the government telling men OR women what to do with our bodies cause it's not right. But I get what you're saying though.
@@aylbdrmadison1051 oh there are better and more brutal options to deal with that. Would it still go bump if it didn't exist?
Thank you! Not everyone is religious, not everyone uses abortion as a form of birth control. Things happen, just as you said protection doesn’t always protect. Give us our choices back!
You still have a choice
@@fnsentertainment1544 sadly that’s not the case for all of us, I may be privileged enough to be able to travel for now to get an abortion, BUT there are plenty of woman who don’t have that option because of money or lack of vehicle/friends with vehicle, what are they supposed to do? They will be forced to carry a baby they don’t want and that baby will just end up in an already overpopulated foster care system, this is sickening.
@@Holisticbrit those women probably had a choice not to get pregnant so suks for them.
@@fnsentertainment1544 not always the case, I am on birth control, pull out method and condoms and STILL got an unwanted pregnancy! I know plenty of woman who took all the precautions and it still happened. Protection does not always protect as I said.
But that's one of the rare cases where I think abortion is okay but most of the women going in there aren't doing that they're just using abortion as a form of birth control.
When comedians and entertainers are more intelligent than the people running the country🙃
Well I think it is that they are smart enough to not become part of the political game. The one's running the country just couldn't fathom that them going all "I do dis! I gonna make country go vroom vroom" was not the best call.
Because politicians are not educated to be politicians.
love Trevor and his 'calling the GOP lawmaker's bluff' law is both tempting and would show their hypocrisy. however, as most lawyers will agree, this law would be struck down by the courts as unconstitutional. it's apparent in Roman law jurisdictions were the principle of _nulla poena sine lege_ (one cannot be punished for doing something that is not prohibited by law [at the time of committing it]) exists.
Wow trevor is intelligent? 🤯🤯 Never knew that 😏😏
Perhaps not more intelligent. Just less malicious. We don’t live in an unintelligent society. We live in a malicious society.
You don't put religion on someone else. Separation of church and state exists for a reason.
It did exist, not anymore
@@colleenclement474 SCOTUS says it's okie dokie to say prayers in public schools, no problem.
I urge every parent, with a child in public school, to advise that child to respectfully say their prayer after the teacher completes their own. Anyone up for reciting The SHEMA? Anyone up for reciting the Salat/Salah? Every child who does that will most likely be given detention or just suspended. Let's take that to SCOTUS; you said we can pray in public school, didn't ya?
It should be separated by that hasn't been going on for awhile.
Just curious, where did you get this idea of “Separation of church and state” from and do you know what it’s intent meaning was?
That sort of sounds like an absolute doctrinal statement. "Thou shalt not put ones religion on someone else." He says to someone else....
It’s a shame the supreme court Applied their ideals or religious beliefs before the law.
Welcome to the United States of Jesusland. We believe in angels here, not that Satanic Science.
There was no religious argument in that ruling.
@Gabe Barry Actually, science is halal in both Islam and Christianity.
@@777Skeptic That's an idiotic comment considering that most doctors are Christians themselves.
@@rickmorty7284 Only because most people are religious. Less doctors are religious than laymen.
These in between clips are what sets Trevor apart from the others. You can genuinely see his genius and brilliance during these clips where he talks to the audience.
Trevor could bridge the divide between any two parties and make them see the truth in both arguments-on any given topic. Trevor is truly one in a billion
Well it’s great that almost ten million people are following him and are getting the message. So sad it’s nit our political leaders.
"Pro-life" or "Pro-choice" is an accurate example of a 'false binary.' Thanks Trevor, for pointing that out. 👍🧑🎓🇺🇸
Yep, it's a false dichotomy. It's really pro-choice vs anti-choice.
Both of you are not seeing the whole picture. Aaron Geisel above me agreed it's a false dichotomy while giving his own false dichotomy.
The reality is pro abortion Vs Anti abortion. Pro choice is a separate category that either side can fall into.
A lot of pro choice people are pro abortion, but not all of them are. I, for example, am pro choice but very anti abortion.
I think women should be able to choose, but I also think the supreme court needs to follow the constitution.
Whether you agree with the overturning of Roe V Wade or not, it was the right decision. The supreme court followed the constitution. The power is now back to the states as it should be.
I see nothing wrong with pro-choice. It says exactly what is needed. Choice!! The right to choose!!
@@gloriaf6971 Choice was never a right. This may sound counterintuitive but a right is something you have to fight for. Nobody fights for choice.
I'm not talking politics and government, I'm talking on a deeper level. The only rights you as a person, as a equal part of this universe, have are the ones you have to give yourself.
It should be pro life vs pro abortions
I like this analysis of the issue, and I agree that this is the problem, in general, with how almost every issue in the West, especially in the U.S., is dealt with: reducing a very complex, multifaceted issue to only two sides, an either/or matter. Most of the time, the solution is neither of the two sides; it's a little bit of both together, or sometimes neither of them! This is what I noted from just daily analysis of how things turn out in my life. And then when I came to live in Asia, I noted that Asians think more in a circular manner, considering all the different facets of each issue and often seek to find ways to satisfy proponents of both sides. This two-sided view is a product of our two-party political system, as well as the ways in which bills are debated in the Senate and House and cases are debated in courts. Even high school students are trained to think in this manner, when they become involved in activities such as interscholastic debating. But reducing everything to only two sides usually means that the most creative and appropriate solutions to any problem never come up.
An excellent analysis of the US.
Well done.
Yeah, I'm sorry dude, but there's no compromise on basic civil rights. We're not talking about how best to solve income inequality, or how best to address addiction. We're talking about whether or not women will be allowed to make decisions concerning what goes on inside their bodies.
@@heathermarie5139 This. You summed up exactly what I was thinking. I absolutely do not agree with the original commenter.
Trevor just speaks fire sometimes and I feel it in my soul.
He's the child of a single mother and a woman who was abused by his stepdad. He is not fooled by all that pro-life nonsense, he knows what's up.
The Supreme Court also changed the rules to Miranda rights. Noticed how no news station is covering that fact, even Trevor. Big flashy headlines to hide the dangers they do in the dark.
They mentioned it on _The Late Show._ It was just a mention, though.
I mean, we no longer have privacy rights so....
But it wasn't the whole Supreme Court ,its was just the conservative wing.
SCOTUS just removed the Civil remedy for a cop not telling you that you had the right not to speak to them and to get an attorney. You still have the Miranda right just no civil litigation threat to make sure cops tell you your rights.
However, at this point there should just be widely known, a massive TV campaign, and taught in schools what any lawyer will tell you.
Never talk to the cops without a lawyer except to ask for your lawyer. Even if they tell you you aren't a suspect. If they have brought you in keep your mouth shut.
@@LC-sc3en you do realize none of this is taught in school, not even in some colleges. A red light tells you to stop. What if you remove it? Then there’s nothing telling you to stop and you’re just gonna keep going. We have speed limits that tell us the safe speed to travel. No speed no limit to how fast you can go and boom, crash. Same thing with this. Without an officer informing you of your rights, then how does an officer know you have rights? They’re not taught in POST. I get what you’re saying, everyone should know their rights. Not every one is a lawyer. This is just the first layer their peeling off. There’s gonna be more and fact this was done in the dark, should make you realize your rights are being taken away and you don’t realize it.
If they want to hold strict "pro-life" stances they need to also hold men accountable for the pregnancies they cause. Let every father of a miscarriage also be a felon. See how far that flies.
(in reality I do not wish harm on anyone and I do not wish for any pregnancy to put anyone at risk of harm or death)
This is literally it
Welcome to a version of Iran and Saudi Arabia where only one gender is punished for such sins.
It'll fly like a cinder block with feathers taped to it id imagine
No the women decides to open her legs. The women gets pregnant. Men bear no responsibility.
Men are already accountable for pregnancies they were responsible for. Ever hear of joint custody and child support?
Seriously, my _mother_ was pro-life in that, when she was pregnant with me, she did not have an abortion. But she was _also pro-choice_ in that the decision was _hers._ The decision was left up to _her._ The Supreme Court didn't rattle its sabre, say "yoink," and give that decision to her _husband,_ her _father_ or a government _bureaucrat,_ secreted away in an _office_ somewhere, whom she had no prospects of ever actually _meeting._
This is _not_ something simple. Stop pretending that it _is._
This is not a complete ban, where the heck are people getting that from? The SCourt simply said according to the Constitution, especially the 14th Amendment, . 14th Amendment states, the government does not have the right to take a life, abortion is just that. Each state will now decide. That was the premise for the case that came before the
Supreme Court that caused Justice Alito to write the original opinion. Also there are trigger laws for extreme
cases even in states that do not allow it. Chill out America, we are turning into barbarians, hysterics at the drop
of a hat. What is this the decision goes to the husband? 80+ percent of abortions happen each year because the
woman was left alone with a pregnancy or simply an unwanted child. You really need to stop with men have all the control mentality. It is when bail women resort to abortion. Look at the actual stats. On average there are 1 million
abortions a year, that is sickening. If men would step up and take responsibility the majority of abortions would
not happen. Not the other way around.
Let’s be clear the over turning of roe v wade is not a patriarchal (men) thing. It is a religion , conservative thing. Women are also involved on purpose and heavily with supporting pro-life .
@@ycAuntieLala well, most men who are extreme religious conservatives by default are patriarchal. That is how it is structured.
@@donnav7103 Thank goodness I don't live in one of these states but let say I lived in Arkansas which is a trigger law state. Do you realize that every single state bordering Arkansas is also a trigger law state? This means women living in Arkansas won't be able to travel right next to to the next state. They would have to go several states over, and that's if they can afford to take time off work, and if they have the finances.
@@almccue7176 you don’t say, Al. As someone else in the comments said it is also largely about marketing (aka rhetoric). Yammer on about the patriarchy and making it men vs women thing miss a large part of of people the libs are trying to reach. They will tune you out.
Absolutely love Trevor & how his mind works. This was a truly a well thought out speech.
He is a national treasure and must be protected!
@@latishabuckner8231 I totally agree. I was never interested in watching the Daily Show before. Now that Trevor took over, I’m hooked. It’s so much more interesting & funny now.
"There is only one devil in this conversation and it is you!" Thank you for articulating that so perfectly!!!
In Peru where I live (South America), abortion has been illegal since forever and as a doctor you need to call a lawyer to check if it's really necessary to do it as a medical emergency, because if not, you will go to jail o loose your license. Due to that, Peru has one the highest rate of pregnancies. Even if it's an ectopic pregnancy you can't do an abortion, you have to call a lawyer and talk with your hospital, it's a long a process and during that time your patient can die. A lot of women have to go to illegal places so they can have an abortion, and at the end, they sadly die.
Never expected they were going to allow that in the US. It's a shame they have done that. I hope they overturn this decision.
Well we already know that the dUSA is sliding into 3rd World Country status. It is what it is.
@@pietrojenkins6901 It's not easy or cheap to travel to another country, and it also can take time. so this affects poorer women more. Ectopic pregnancies, or other complications, can happen even to women who WANT to keep the child.
@@pietrojenkins6901 For MOST people globally, international travel isn't that easy...
@@pietrojenkins6901 That is factually incorrect. Listen, do you wanna keep spouting nonsense for LOLs and attention... or do you want to have a rational discourse based on easily-verifiable data?
@@pietrojenkins6901 People living paycheck to paycheck in the US don't have the option to travel to other states. Traveling to other countries is obviously more expensive and time-consuming.
I agree with that retroactively write a law if they've been involved with an abortion they also go to prison. Exactly it seems very hypocritical if you ask me of them to say down with abortion but then they use it you know it is ridiculous!
It's a clever thought experiment to expose hypocrisy on the other side, but I hope you intend it just as such.
If you actually started implementing retroactive criminal laws, you would live in literal tyranny. Citizens can only behave according to laws if they were implemented before they acted.
I wonder if it would be possible to sue any State Senators if they have ever secretly forced their mistress or anyone at all for getting an abortion now that Roe has been overturned. I mean theoretically you would not need a retroactive law to do this.
@@andredingstertsao You could now actually. It does come with its benefits
I’m just not understanding how the government telling me my Embryo is a “Person” with a right to life yet the IRS tells me I can’t claim this “bag of cells” until it’s born 🤔. Make up your mind government.
are you saying your mom had the right to abort you?
Think how will they be able to deal with IVF clinics??? It's a hot mess...
@@annethompson4318 What's IVF and what does it stand for?
If they care so much about “life” as they claim.. then why don’t they provide families and women who end up in unplanned pregnancy, free health care, adequate maternity and financial support, free education and help with all the responsibilities that come up with having a child? Why?!
Why didn't they mask or vaccinate? That would have saved actual born people, not a clumps of cells.
Because, I suspect, the powers that be want a large pool of people that are poor and uneducated that they can hire for low wages to maximize their profits. If you think this is crazy. Years ago in Thailand they considered raising the minimum education from grade 9 to grade 12. In the end the wealthy people did not support it, because they were concerned they would have to pay people more.
@Nomad - I am with you on this. If you honestly care and are thorough with that proclamation why is there NO supportive legislation for housing, education and at minimum “Child care.”
That would be communism \s
@@beckymcdonald9529 I hope you mean that one small group dictating what the whole can/should do with their body is an example of the tenets of Communism 😕
At this point i come here to hear about news than the actual news stations themselves
That's honestly not a bad thing, most modern news stations are so sensationalized and lack any kind of depth or complexity in the viewpoints they present. Trevor's the GOAT rn
Haha! I understand. This was my life, back when Jon Stewart was at the helm. 😉
Same.
This, for me, is what makes Trevor a fantastic and worthy successor to the burdensome mantle Jon Stewart set aside.
I guess Trevor Noah is the equivalent of your pastor and tells you how to live your life.
Bravo Mr. Noah!!!!!! I applaud your morals and your beliefs. I wish we had more people like you.❤️
Thank you Trevor. We need more men who love us to step up... However much we fight to have rights over our own bodies we have no seat at the table where decisions are made but they do.
So many extremes you could go to. If they say life begins at fertilization. Any person creating embryos they haven’t used can have child protective services called on them. Other people can adopt them. Foster them. Maybe wealthier people who can afford these services will stand up and realize it’s a problem for everyone.
They plan to ban IVF too, and contraceptives. It won't be long before they ban s€× outside of heterosexual marriage and force r@&e victims to marry their abusers. Welcome to the Talibangelist States of America.
Well said Trevor. My challenge with the anti-abortion group is that they are so narrow minded on this issue, as you highlighted by saying there is nuance. They do not see and fully appreciate the context in which people get abortions. They treat it as one dimensional, and therefore miss the point of the many very legitimate reasons for having an abortion in the first place. I hope that one day we can find a way to bring more empathy into our law and policy making… unfortunately the media prefers conflict I think… :/
He tries to be nuanced while entirely missing the elephant in the room: what about the right to live of the unborn? Not a peep.
Fertilized eggs do not have rights. The right to life is not absolute, as it does not include the right to someone else’s body or organs. The constitution states that rights are granted at birth. :)
Having an abortion is taking a human life. What legitimate reasons can there be to justify killing somebody?
Exactly!!! Also, the wording is everything!
You are so in tune with everything, Trevor! Bravo!! 👏👏
I like how real and serious Trevor got in this video. The camera went up close and personal too.
It's nice to see your passionate and convicting "real talks", again.
“You don’t force others to live by your morals” hmm 🤔 that’s it !
And now the people of their respective states can decide for themselves instead of an all power unelected court.
Party of family values has a lot of pedophiles and womanizers in office too.
This is not about morals. Justice Alito wrote the original paper based on a case brought before the court which
stated, 14th Amendment of the Constitution, The Government does not have the right to take a life. That also meant
no more Death Penalty. Well government sanctioned abortion is taking a life. So remove the government portion and
return the decision of each state to decide if abortion will continue. This was never about Republicans, morals or
religion. Read the Constitution and you will understand abortion to be illegal according to Constitutional Law.
Besides if a state decides not to continue there are already Trigger Laws in place for unusual cases. These people in the media are willfully ignorant or misleading the public to foment rage. America treats every problem with rage
and violence, we look to the rest of the world like barbarians.
@@jacobortega2786 Those same states still want slavery, so the people in their states don't have the slightest clue what it means to be a "free" American.
So why force the unborn children to live by your morals? Why shouldn't they have a choice on living on like you have?
If they can argue that outlawing guns only makes guns illegal rather than stopping the sales of guns to people who shouldn't be able get them, surely they know that outlawing abortion doesn't make abortion go away, it just makes it illegal.
Republicans don't trust Democrats. The South has never trusted the North because Abe Lincoln woke up one day and waged a brutal war against the South. Hence the guns.
The North is protected by their army. Looking at January 6 now why would a Southerner give up their gun? Clearly the FBI belongs to the North.
But less people will get it
I love Trevor ❤️ great video
And Trevor thank you. the women in your family are fierce. It takes courage to go against whispers as you well know and not everyone has that kind of uprightness. It is very hard stuff
Trevor you gave me the words to fight those people in my life who think they know best.
I consider myself pro life. What’s your best argument for abortion. Let’s keep the conversation civil.
They ain't that smart. You're using facts, they're using feelings.
It's not a hard question at all.
The world population was 3.5 billion in the 1960s.
The world population is now 7.9 billion
3.1 million children die a year because of hunger
If we keep doubling the population at least triple that number will children die each year. We will have food wars, actual food wars. More people will die. The earth will heat up faster and the earth will die.
It's just simple math.
Eventually abortion will be the norm. We've too. One child per family is gonna be the norm too.
Thank you Trevor. I am both speechless and heartened by your insight and I can't appreciate this more.
He's the one who wrongly crammed those partisan fascists into the court. Even though he didn't win the popular vote. And he knew what they were gonna do on this. He is responsible.
I guess he is smart. 🙂
I appreciate these behide the scenes gets really deep into the convo
My body my choice. Personal sovereignty is not up for debate
And the courts didnt dis agree. They said it was up to the states.
@@therebellion6911 new century, same lie.
Perfect voice of feelings of how many of us feel, thank you sir.
My sentiments exactly but I could never articulate it like you do and add a bit of levity.
Other implications are removing the parents choice of morality and mercy when dealing with a severely compromised fetus... The loss of women who do not seek medical help or are not mentally strong enough to carry. And straining the already underfunded foster system, resulting in more hurt children. US doesn't even make the top 30 around the world.
What will happen next is shaming the women who give up their child, because there is no interest in improving welfare programs, in those areas, by raising taxes. Then there's already the shame dished out for women who keep multiple children. All 3 options are a loss because it all boils down to "don't have s3x heathen!" Which is an impossibility, it's the reality of the situation, and the world is not this fairy tale of "YAY! we saved baby's!"
Trevor. You took my breath away with this discussion.
Trevor, thank you ❤️ keep using your platform!
Brilliant. Thank you, Trevor
Trevor once again showing that he is one of the most well-informed people in entertainment.
Thank you for this. I can only hope that we start fixing the crisis soon.
Well said Trevor!
Well put!!!loved it.
I love even more Trevor. He is able to Show always both side of the medal and explains so perfectly what is actually right, facts with logic. U are amazing Grazie Danke schön 🥰
I really loved hearing Trevor speak on this. I can tell how genuinely upset he is over this and he just makes sense. I am so very worried for the women , especially preteen, teen girls who will get pregnant and not have the resources to go to another state for an abortion. This is horrible and will be devastating for those who are already living in poverty because that’s who it will impact the most.
Beautifully worded. The catch-phrase “pro-life”/“pro-choice” makes it so flippant, who is not pro-life?
I suppose the pro abortionists.
I know a girl who only wanted a daughter so she got two abortions when the ultrasound showed the fetus was male. I think it's pretty clear this person was anti-life. If that's not anti-life from a pregnancy standpoint, I don't know what is.
Conservatives, with their death penalty, no universal healthcare, constantly cutting funding to social programs. None of that is pro life its pro needless suffering.
Trevor always with the best takes!
Trevor, Between the Scenes is always some of your best work. Keep it up!
I agree with Trevor💯
are you saying your mom had the right to abort you?
So eloquently well said.
Thank you!!
Well said as always
Life is Life! Thank you Supreme Court.
Let's get ready for a world of even more unwanted babies.
…and clothes hanger abortions.
How did abortion stop any of that? Have you seen the homeless population in blue states where they abort the most?
The problem isn't children,but poor leadership and policies.
👏👏👏 couldn't have said it more succinctly! Bravo!
Luv this Trevor… you always on point
It took a long time for me to get where Trevor is. Most things are way more complicated than I ever thought.
I applaud your efforts to understand. We all need to continually follow your example. 🍻
I'm gonna shatter the whole question by simple math.
It's not a hard question at all.
The world population was 3.5 billion in the 1960s.
The world population is now 7.9 billion.
It doubled in 60 years. Keep counting forwards at a faster rate.
3.1 million children die a year because of hunger .
There's 50 million abortions a year. This actually needs to go way up.
If we keep doubling the population at least triple that number will children die each year. We will have food wars, actual food wars. More people will die. The earth will heat up faster and the earth will die.
It's just simple math.
Eventually abortion will be the norm. One child per family is gonna be the norm too. It's inevitable!
We need to stop calling then “pro-life”. They aren’t “pro-life”. They’re just pro- pregnancy!
You are pro genocide
They're pro-birth or pro-struggle at all cost. 🙄😒🤦🏽♀️
And you are pro death.
Samething
Everytime Trevor makes this kind of observations it goes viral. He has an ability to use the correct word to make issues that seem complex, suddenly very simple ♥️
thank you Mr. Trevor noah. it is such a frustratingly hopeless time
I can't stand the right-wing..It seriously boggles my mind on a daily basis how people like that exist. Thanks for your work Trevor!
It's been legal for over 50 years. That's a LOT of Republican mistresses to look up. 😉
And you don't think rich hot-shots paid for illegal abortions?
My Great Aunt, who died at age 98, told me she had an abortion after having 3 sons. My mouth dropped open because by that time her husband had been dead for 15 yrs. Her abortion must have been somewhere in the 1940s-1950s. And, she actually went to a licensed doctor to have her abortion; it wasn't a back-alley abortion.
You are a national treasure. Thank you ❤️❤️❤️❤️
Thank you Trevor 🙏🏽
said so many things I've also been thinking: nuanced issue, tough choices involved, not the false dichotomy some pretend, issues with trying to actually prosecute as a crime.
i want this to end with someone saying that not being able to perform an abortion is against their religion so that we can see how the evangelicals squirm around when an actual infringement of religious freedoms occurs
YESSSSS IVE BEEN THINKING THIS SINCE THAT FOOTBALL 50 YARD LINE PRAYING RULING ON MONDAY!!
But the court is corrupted so idk how that will pan out
sorry for the all caps but I was excited to see someone else had that idea!
I think Judaism is the religion with the biggest case to make here, but with the Supreme Court stacked against reason, I'm not sure that this would help at this moment. Sadly, I think the path has to go through legislature.
@@tiga2001 thanks for the comment.. not super well versed in religion but with a reasonable Supreme Court this could be a thing
Brilliant take on the issue Sir.
👏👏👏 Thank you! That was brilliant!
I had hoped Trevor would break this down to the core issue. At what stage of a child's development, are they considered "alive" or when are they considered "their own entity" and not simply "part of the mother"?
In general, these deep conversations are too hard for people to delve into. It's unfortunate that these issues are spun so much that it becomes about the wrong thing.
Those issues are not that hard to delve into. The hard part is getting past the inflammatory rhetoric. As soon as you fall for "when is the embryo/fetus considered alive", the word "life" enters the picture, and stopping "life" invites in the word "killing", and "killing" has a bad reputation. But "life" does not have a particular starting point, not even at conception. After all, are sperms and eggs considered "dead"? Of course not. So are we to also find it criminal to allow sperms and eggs to die, or actively block their opportunity to develop? Presumably that's silly.
The point is, we would indeed like to establish some agreed-upon juncture in development where we cement our moral and legal prohibition on killing fellow human beings. There is probably close to 100% agreement that the juncture should be at the latest, the birth of a baby (though that has not been true throughout cultures and history.)
Those who want to establish that dividing line earlier than birth can be invited to give a rationale. Some will be persuaded that "viability" (or a date roughly corresponding to it) makes some sense -- the fetus is advanced enough that it _could_ become a baby without further biological support of the mother, and thus qualify for the considerations afforded a full-term baby.
Others may assert that the borderline is earlier, and that usually relies on support of a religious or sentimental belief. Spelling out those beliefs explicitly would allow debate as to whether it's legitimate to impost those beliefs on others.
@@Graham_Wideman Yes. There are things that I think should be part of this conversation but are overlooked by most covering this.
I don't know what the answer is to these questions which is why I'd like to see these conversations take place (preferably between people much smarter than the average).
But I do know that scientifically, conception is when a new human being is created. So I would say at any point from then onward would be a starting point for contention.
Ppl aren’t seeing the big picture here. Judicial review (deciding whether a law is constitutional or not) doesn’t stop unconstitutional laws from being passed, nor does it prevent the government from gathering evidence to bring charges against you. It buys you a dismissal of a the Supreme Court has ruled that the law is constitutional. But this is based on the status quo of the court.
As an example, MI has a pre roe abortion law on the books. It was enacted in 1931. What the Supreme Court has just done is remove any grounds for dismissal of the state of MI tries to prosecute you. You no longer have that right. They can arrest anyone in the past 50 yrs who have had an abortion and try them for manslaughter.
What the Supreme Court has done doesn’t remove your constitutional protection going forward, it’s as if it never existed at all
So: if you live in NY, that gun law is still on the books. You had better abide by it. The cops can simply take your drivers license and wait until they get a reversal in some future ruling, round you up and prosecute you under that law.
The authority of judicial review is solely based on an iron clad adherence to precedent. This court has just destroyed that illusion. In that way they have essentially ceded their right to judicial review because the electorate can’t take a chance of defying nominally constitutional laws
I’m not sure that’s true. The Constitution prohibits _ex post facto_ laws, so people cannot be prosecuted for actions that were not illegal at the time they were committed. Of course, some overzealous prosecutor might still try it. As you pointed out, the law was “on the books” at the time, just unenforceable.
@@LoganRexus it’s not ex post facto (it was passed in 1931. Ex post facto says you can’t apply the law prior to when it’s enacted, and it was never removed). The courts have no constitutional authority to invalidate laws. Judicial review is simply a blanket statement that if a law is found to be unconstitutional, charges may be summarily dismissed. But you would have to cite, roe v wade (say) to get the dismissal. The da would respond with the Jackson ruling that invalidates your grounds for dismissal. So, you depend on building a case to support an acquittal in a trial. And yes, I fully expect some crazy DA to try this in some red state somewhere
Impressive Tervor. Thankyou
Thank you Trevor💕
"pro lifers" should be required to adopt a child from a orphanage. Watch how quickly their stance changes.
That’s a real bad argument. I would assume you’re against homelessness? If so, why don’t you take in all the homeless people?See how your argument falls apart?
@@davidjoswick1610 Lol. 🤣 No, if anything, a pro-birth person should be the one to take in not just orphan children, but also the homeless. It makes much more logical sense for the person who "cares about life" to be the one to take everyone into their home.
@@davidjoswick1610 against homelessness in what way? I'm not trying to prevent them from being homeless if they so choose to be, however I would like to see help for those who want it.
Big difference in situations
No. Why can't you just take care of your own kid that you chose to conceive.
Any “pro choicer” with a child should be required to send them to a concentration camp. Watch how quickly their stance changes.
If getting an abortion is killing a baby they should allow pregnant women to claim child support from pregnancy, and they should also allow a woman to include "the baby" in life insurance policies so that if she miscarries she can claim money. Maybe if it affects the men more in some kind of way, they'll reconsider😒😒😒
If Republicans don't keep their word on supporting pregnant women then you have every right to protest. I don't believe that in today's world there is anyone in their right mind who should oppose supporting pregnant mothers best way they can and your proposals are valid.
LOVE LOVE BETWEEN THE SCENES WITH TREVOR!
Thank you, Trevor, my thoughts exactly 💯 🙏
Yes it's not a binary choice! You're always on point, Trevor!
How is it not a binary choice? Either the unborn have a right to live or they don't.
it would help a lot if the media would stop uncritically adopting misleading catch phrases like _pro life_ . mention them only once and explain how misleading there are and after that give them a more truthful label
They should instead be called pro-birth, or better yet... pro-struggle. 🙄😒🤦🏽♀️
Great point!
i really resonated with what was said. thank you.