Destiny BREAKS, Laughs As Abortion Debate Gets HEATED
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 окт 2024
- Destiny breaks character as moderator, laughs in abortion debate between Zen Shapiro and TheAlexKirschProject...
Date: 13 May, 2022
Follow Destiny
►STREAM - www.destiny.gg/...
►DISCORD - discordapp.com...
►REDDIT - / destiny
►INSTAGRAM - / destiny
►MERCH - shop.destiny.gg/
Check Out My Amazon: www.amazon.com...
Buy My Merch: shop.destiny.gg/
#Destiny
Skip to 1:27:10 for Destiny's thoughts on this difficult debate from the pro-choice POV
Timestamps and chapters fix soon
@Russian Waifu I agree, but are you a Russian bot?
HOW TO U GET ON TO DEBATE THIS SHIT?
@@bennywolfe4357 Are you implying that Russian women are mindless automatons? Just when I thought the toxic masculinity couldn't get any worse smh 😢
This debate pulled me into a dark slimy canal
Pro life ppl pretending women are not people but babies are entitled to the ride
Man what a conundrum. On the one hand, this guy argued so badly it almost converts me to be pro life. On the other hand, if I had been aborted, I wouldn't have had to hear this debate. That's tough
Mood
😂
This shit was so frustrating. He clearly was incapable of engaging with the important questions.
That's tough
Reading this comment restored all the brain cells I lost watching this debate
I don't see how this guy can call himself pro-life after absolutely murdering such a helpless man
Best comment, ever!!
Did you see Zen Shapiro’s debate with Richard Spencer? It’s not very long, it’s hilarious.
Bravo
Lol😂
@@ThinWhiteLukeRichard was an idiot
100% clear example of "well this is just the popular narrative/opinion and that's why I support it" argument.
“My friends wouldn’t like me if I didn’t display the same labels they do so I blindly say I support their positions.”
Lol exactly. I thought I was the only one wanting punch my own face listening to super highlight face guy until I started reading the comments. My opinion is shares immensely.
@@DustbinFunkbndr lol 100%
Wait, why is that bad? I mean if that's what he thinks, then that's what he thinks. It just happens to be the popular narrative.
@@User71956 they’re joking that he supports it BECAUSE it’s the safe/popular narrative and that it’s not coincidence, this is due to him not arguing the points particularly well, or having any depth to it.
This guy arguing for the pro-choice side needs to censor himself and never speak in public again on this topic. The fact that he could be so stunned by the generic pro-life arguments, as though he didn't see them coming and didn't prepare for them, is really embarrassing. What makes this guy think he ought to speak publicly on this topic?
Ego is blinding
Or at least do a cursory web search before enthusiastically hopping on stream to offer the conclusion of his argument countless times
What's more insane to me than the lack of preparedness is the complete confidence in his piss-poor debate skills.
This was a lesson on hubris.
It's almost like the pro choice side has some problems with its arguments. Almost as if both sides have valid, strong points, as if virtually no issue is completely black and white. What a novel concept
@@EGstill85 I said this elsewhere and I'm gonna say it again. The bane of this guy's performance wasn't even his lack of preparedness. It's his lack of the most basic understanding of logical argumentation and debate. Imagine using "if a woman got an abortion, how does that affect you?" without being able to pause for a split second and anticipate your opponent's very easy rebuttal to this sad excuse for an argument.
How the pro-choice guy can be comfortable enough to argue infront of so many people while also knowing so little is beyond me.
Are you pro life
and people say autism isn't a super power
@@sigmundsigma6888 this guys looking to go off on someone
“Now now now I don’t want to argue about necrophilia” who the h e double hockey sticks brought that up ever???
@@sigmundsigma6888 he’s just saying the guy was a bad debater, not that the position was bad.
Idk if I’ve ever seen someone speedrun a debate loss so fast…
@Sleeve T Rocks there is a way to defend that with the bodily autonomy argument but this guy was to stupid to even understand why he wasn't making any sense.
Even though it's ridiculous the defense argument for pro choice given those 2 premises is that you shouldn't have to sacrifice your body for the life of another. Mothers go through alot of terribly shit from extreme hormonal changes to skeletal changes from the shift in center of mass to their skin becoming deformed to morning sickness to the extreme limitations being pregnant puts on your work and social life. So the argument would be that a person should not have to be forced to sacrifice their entire life for nearly a year and near permanent changes to their body for the life of another.
@Sleeve T Rocks then I would challenge how much the prolifer actually believes that you should sacrifice yourself at least to some extent for the life of another. I would ask if they are pro vaccine mandate, as covid vaccines are so incredibly safe and side effects last maybe 2 days instead of 9 months so if they think a mother should sacrifice her entire life for nearly a year for the life of another you virtually have no argument against vaccine mandates.
Then I would ask if forced organ transplants should be carried out by the government as well, not organs that can't grow back and cause permanent side effects but organs like the liver which can entirely grow back. Should a person be forced by the government to donate a part of their liver (which grows back) for the life of another.
Then you have things like inaction. If you see a person drowning should you be forced to try and save that person with a good chance of suffering some amount of damage and even possibly dying.
A pro lifer that believes that a mother should sacrifice herself entire for her unborn fetus would also need to answer alot of questions about how much sacrifice should a person be expect and even forced to do for another.
When this guy started the debate by listing all the ways he doesnt want to argue, hes basically listing all the ways he’ll lose the argument 😂
Lmao so glad I didn't have to scroll very long to find this comment.
The pro-choice stance is always that of floundering around at points in order to hopefully mentally drain their opponent and force them to give up out of sheer exhaustion.
@@noblepursuit591 that's every debate if you don't know how to debate.
He just came up with the best reply to “what if she is raped”.
You ask “does the rapists deserve the death sentence”.
Then you ask “does the baby deserve the death sentence”..
Case closed. Argument won.
I'm pro-choice, and this pro-choice guy is HORRIBLE at arguing in favor of it and takes the most extreme stances on it that it just makes it look even worse lmao.
so then from you, is the choice of a mother more important than a human life and why?
@@nouda6567 Absolutely, life is worth nothing without bodily autonomy and what's developing inside the woman has no sense of self nor does it value life in any way or form.
@@nouda6567 I'm not him but the answer would probably be because at certain points in pregnancy we would not assign personhood to the fetus. If you're pro choice after that well then thats harder to justify. Bodily autonomy can and should be infringed upon given certain circumstances. Mandating vaccines for example.
@@brad5696 I agree
I am reminded of times that I have seen Fox news bring on a "liberal" to argue a position, and it feels like they are just there to make the argument as poorly as possible.
I think Alex's strategy was to make the pro life portion of the audience wish he had been aborted to justify his stance. In which case, he probably won the debate
I'm Pro-smile towards this comment.
This comment deserves WAY more likes lmfao
Debate begins
Zen: "I've outpaced him intellectually"
I've always felt I'm decent at reading people. Do you think vooosh believed what he said? I'd almost always go no they don't but with him im not sure? His arogence and love for self might win out?
This should be called 'Zen Shapiro helps novice pro-choicer to formulate their stance".
It's a fucking workshop, not a debate.
honestly one of the saddest debates i have ever seen. I think we are all stupider for this conversation being had
The pro life guy was coherent and reasonable even though I disagree with him. The pro choice guy was a bumbling idiot.
I award the pro choice guy no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.
@@Delta169 10/10 meme.
@@Arimil1234512345 I figured it was well suited for this.
@@Delta169 you figured right 💯
"So assuming we both agree that medically necessary abortions are okay, what about in the cases where it isn't medically necessary?"
This guy: "But, what if its medically necessary though?"
Oh lawd
I think people refusing to engage with hypotheticals might actually be the most frustrating thing in any debate, honestly.
"BuT tHaT iS nOt ReALiStIc"
I just learned not that long ago that its actually a logical fallacy but I forget what its called
This frustrates me in real life too. I've attempted to have several good faith debates with friends on several topics and it's almost like they can't wrap their minds around the use of hypotheticals lol. It's baffling.
@@erich.3247 I think a lot of people hate the idea of being wrong way more then they hate the idea of being dishonest in the debate. Or maybe they don't want to feel like they're being tricked out of their decision. Not saying that's what a hypothetical is but it's probably what a lot of people feel like is happening when hypotheticals get introduced.
@@Classikh I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s just a fact of life, and with stuff like this, you need to be kind and patient. Otherwise, you can just be a blackpilled misanthrope, but that’s a cringe way to live life.
So, I’m not exactly a debate lord but even I could argue pro choice 300% better than this guy. You have to air a better advocate than this… he makes the position seem completely indefensible
Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Normally I get absolutely trounced In debates, but this one should have been easy. He kept jumping to different arguments. I don't think he even understood his own position.
The second you grant bodily autonomy to the unborn child you lost the debate 🤣
That's why you don't drink before and during a debate the dude ended up looking like a straight clown against a softball pro-lifer
Makes me question Destiny's motives here. If you're going to have a debate, at least make sure each side is competently represented.
@@gabemord5088 especially if you distort the definition of bodily autonomy beyond all recognition.
I'm just 12 mins in and I've successfully been convinced to abort this viewing experience. Good job top-right-guy!
"Let's agree to permit abortions due to rape, incest, or medical necessity and only discuss abortions of convenience."
"We DOnT kNoW thEIr SiTUAtiOn"
He has a dialogue tree with one branch
Accepting abortions for rape and incest is the biggest contradiction for someone that is pro-life. If the argument is that abortions are bad because you're killing an innocent life. Then you cant say that its ok to get an abortion if the kid came from rape or incest. The kid has done nothing, they are still "innocent" in those cases, so it shifts the argument from "protecting innocent life" to "I want to punish some people that had sex and didnt want a kid but not others".
Because they are clearly ok with abortions when the life of the mother is not in danger, they just want to punish some people for making a mistake.
Yes we do.
Yeah, coz' there's still the situation that the women may be abused, or a housewife that is being neglected by the husband, or a wife, where the husband cheated on her making her sick of the thought of bearing his child... he is not wrong there actually.
A person who starts out the debate claiming he isn’t interested in definitions or exploring hypotheticals isn’t capable of having a good faith debate.
MAybe but I’ve seen too many debates get sidetracked with semantic bullshit, so I can’t blame someone who wants to avoid that to stay on topic.
@@nsaylor9 probably because the people arguing didn't agree on definitions.
You have to hash out semantic definitions before two parties can discuss anything. If they can't agree on a definition, it's the end of the conversation.
Saying you don't want to talk about definitions just implies you anticipate consensus or you think that you are irrevocably correct.
Right away the pro abortion guy was trying to discount any possible paths of discussion so no surprise he couldn't defend his position.
He deadass went "no debates about hypotheticals, no arguments over definitions", as if that's not one of the main catalysts for disagreements.
The way this Pro-Choicer sat there feeling himself a smart dude casually sipping on his bottle like "look how easily i win this" whil completely getting railed by a mediocre Pro-Lifer is hillarious
The smugness is wild lmao. Dude's straight up intellectually handicapped and simultaneously such an arrogant prick. Mindblowing. I was pro-life before this debate but now I want to abort myself.
If he was winning it might have actually looked cool. But it was downright embarrassing.
Zen is not mediocre, he rekts everyone in this subject.
@@emptyblank099a i was trying to take a moderate position. He did really good. I share many of his points anyways. Its just that he puts it in very easy words which on many people nowadays doesnt work that well, even though its still true.
It's fucking wild that anyone supports abortion all the way up until birth. I've never heard anyone say until the last few months nor was I aware that it's legal in some states. Surely viability has to be a limit even if one supports the right to abortion in every other way.
He supports it because he doesn't think it will happen. I'm not sure he knows what principles are
@@wiredvibe1678 Yeah, there absolutely are people who would be interested in legal infanticide for let's say entertainment purposes. What if the kid comes out inexplicably a different skin color than was expected (wink wink) and the mom or "dad" freaks out. Who has the right to kill the baby then btw? A parent, both parents, anyone in the mood? It goes into crazy land straight away.
If we grant legal rights and protections only when sentience/consciousness/awareness is attained, then abortion could be justified up to several weeks, even months AFTER birth. Morally I think this is permissible but as a legal and practical matter I would draw the line at birth.
The Constitutional argument for abortion is that a person has rights once they are BORN, not conceived.
If a pregnant woman gets shot and she lives but and loses the fetus, I wouldn’t consider that murder.
@@JesusChristsDick When viability is often achieved long before birth I don't see how that's anything but crazy. If we compare mental capacities then a smart dog is of more value than a 1 year old, but that makes no sense. Mentally challenged people and low IQ people are no more killable for that.
Yes, clearly and especially older law doesn't consider unborn children due to the sheer impracticality.
I also don't think it's murder, but if one tries to murder the pregnant mother it could something like fetucide with the intent to murder. If someone punches a pregnant woman in the stomach then that should earn them a few years in prison for sure. The loss of an expected child doesn't differ much from losing a birthed child so the damage done is very similar.
People don't want to make arguments around viability as that essential ties what they call women's reproductive rights to the technology of the time. Viability increases earlier on the better our medics tech gets.
I thought it was impossible to make Zen Shapiro sound reasonable, but this dude somehow managed to do it a couple times.
That's a lazy sloppy attack on someone because you don't like his views which is pretty typical for the left today. Instead of a cheap shot, attack his argument and provide your own thats better but you won't.
I think it’s pretty reasonable to not kill the innocent.
Does he sound crazy in other debates? He displays an impressive amount of patience and restraint here, given how obnoxious the pro choice guy is.
@@joeypinion4660 A fetus is innocent in the same way a tree is. We don't automatically grant it moral consideration just because it's "innocent".
@@hummerlimoVODS Spoken like a true nazi
Tbh, this kid is a good representation of most pro-choice kids online. He was like the embodiment of them 😂
No real idea of the ends of which his ideas can stretch to and simultaneously be pro-life in some scenarios. Ridiculous.
A lot of pro-choice folk are like this.
@@markantony12 I don't spend too much time on Twitter, just places like RUclips, Quora, and sometimes Reddit if I'm feeling masochistic. The amount of pro-choice folk completely misunderstanding the pro-life viewpoint there is incredible. It's just one strawman after another.
This "debate" is a clear example of "just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you should voice it."
Wasn’t sure if the pro choice guy was a troll for the first 25 minutes.
"You just want to talk about principles and hypotheticals." Wow, it's like you're having a debate or something.
I love that Zen, upon picking up his opponent's lack of debate tact, essentially just started walking him through pro-choice arguments which he already had rebuttals to. It stopped being a debate and quickly became a lesson on how not to debate.
When zen says 800 deaths and 800,000 abortions so 99.9% of abortions are for other reasons, that is bad data. What if the number is only 800 bc thousands of mother protecting abortions are preformed. As I’m typing this I’m absolutely baffled at how this guy thought 800 moms dying a year=99.9% of abortions are for other reasons
Yeah it's a bit stupid, but the other guy was way more stupid so it slipped right through.
@34smlS If you are replying to 47 I apologise, but if you think that being in a debate is an excuse for not having thought your statistic through before hand, that's worrying.
@34smlS shut up
@34smlS I agree haha
I'm confused by this comment, would someone mind explaining it to me?
After watching the last Zen Shapiro debate on your channel, I never thought an opponent would make him look not only coherent, but intelligent. Can you get someone who is actually pro abortion to debate him cause I don't think any pro lifer got any insight to help them understand the other side. In fact I am pro life and can make more coherent arguments for abortion.
This is why it's vastly important to criticize the hell out of people "on your side" (in terms of a topic) and not just your "enemy". I'm for the most part pro-choice and I can say that dude on the pro-choice side in this one was an absolute donut and makes the position look bad.
Really wish people (left or right) would realize that just because you've memorized talking points, basic arguments, or whatever for your particular issue does not necessarily mean you can debate it.
This guy failed at a very, very basic level that doesn't even pertain to the abortion debate per se.
The pro-abortion guy sounds like he’s never been challenged on anything in his entire life
This is 95% of humans on ANY political belief, which is annoying, but a sad truth.
I would recommend that you go outside and touch grass
@@MrMctastics I recommend you to go get some maidens
@@mello4399 Ranni
QUEEN
Wow, the pro-choice guy didn't make any sound arguments, and was unbelievably bad-faith on top of that. He got destroyed. Worst representation ever.
I agree on the arguments, but bad faith? I don’t think so, just defense mechanisms to protect his ego. Once nailed down he conceded and stuck to the fact he was contradictory on his principle. Felt like it was good faith that he stood up and said no i wouldn’t support a baby being aborted before umbilical cord cut, knowing it destroyed his argument. Or am i giving too much credit in thinking he knew it destroyed his principle lol
Guess my point is i don’t think he was deliberately doing anything dishonest or misleading to try to win, know what i mean?
The pro-choice guy’s responses are unbelievable. Yet he keeps affirming that his arguments make sense 😆
The pro-choice/body autonomy guy contradicted himself so many times, going from "6 months, guaranteed healthy baby, I'm not okay with abortion" to "5 min before birth, can a woman decide to abort? no", to "8 1/2 month pregnancy and there is a disagreement between husband and wife where husband wants the baby, they can talk about it. I don't agree that its the woman't decision". None of those vibe with body autonomy and the pro-life guy failed to drill this home in a meaningful way. Overall, pro-life won this debate based on the grounds set at the start of the debate.
There are 25 other letters in the English alphabet to choose from but Alex only takes the L's.
1:13:32 "Now you're basically justifying that she has to carry that to term, because of some, you know, righteous bit about 'oh well, it's a baby'"
Pro-life: Yes.
Howe can you be so ill prepared to have the debate that you think just restating your opponents most basic position is ... some kind of 'own'? Merely sarcastically stating that your opponent thinks they have the moral position is not an argument.
He took notes from theSerfsTV
@@Stax_ he does have some big theSerfs energy
And he kind of tries to claim a won point on this lol
This Zen Shapiro guy sounds like he has had this same argument/debate hundreds of times with multiple different people, while with the other dude it feels like he came to that position the same day. It would be like trying to debate vegan gains after watching a few pro meat eating clips from Joe Rogans podcast, dude did not stand a chance lmao.
carnist copium, no amount of prep can be enough against a vegan argument
Oh, he has
@@mariomorales9984 And yet Vegan Gains can't make those arguments sound good.
@@mariomorales9984 based
@@mariomorales9984 I don't agree with you but I like your comment
I can't watch debates where the person with my position is basically crashing and burning through the worst forms of argumentation.
I don't mind watching someone who holds a different opinion / position argues well because I'm fine with having my ideas challenged, but this is essentially like watching a boxing match where the guy I'm rooting for trips on their own shoes, hits the turnbuckle, and knocks themself out.
This Pro Choice dude got wrecked, and that's coming from someone pro choice.
The thing i hate about the abortion debate is that we need more categories for the positions.
Im both pro choice and pro life. The switch happenes after a certain age of the fetus.
I would never be seen on the same side like this muderus loon that thinks killing a 9month old is ok. Fuck this guy
Hypotheticals are a good way to gauge how strong/weak your stance is on a certain issue by applying it to different potential situations.
People who just flat out refuse to entertain hypotheticals are so aggravating and not even worth debating. You admit you haven't fully thought your arguments through by refusing to discuss a hypothetical.
"Medical necessity"
"we already agree on medical necessity"
"medical necessity"
"We still don't disagree."
"did I mention medical necessity?"
The pro-choice side of this debate is an actual living, breathing strawman. This is literally the stupidest pro-choicer on earth vs the smartest pro-lifer on earth.
Where was the straw man? You sure you know what that term means?
@@Tavat A strawman is "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument." The pro-choice guy presented such terrible arguments, he was far easier to defeat than any competent debater arguing in favor of the pro-choice position. Hence, he was a living, breathing strawman. No one had to strawman him, because he was actually made of straw.
@@ManShapedReplicator Ah I gotcha. Clever. I thought you meant he strawmanned so hard he became a caricature of that. But you’re right-he IS literally a straw-man with these positions. 😂
I agree this pro choice guy isn't the brightest but in no way is the pro life guy the smartest pro lifer. His arguments can be destroyed by anybody with at least half a brain, which is more than this pro lifer has.
its almost hard to watch LMAO
As soon as the pro-choice debater began with “Here is a list of things I don’t want mentioned” and one of them included sentience, I knew he was going to suck.
I'm just listening to the opening statement of the pro-choice truck driver guy, and can sense it's going to be a disaster. He basically said "You can't challenge my positions with hypotheticals" and "I will not let you pin me down on a specific definition of a term I use". It's so obvious where this is going, and checking in the comments just confirms my suspicions to me.
Yeah his whole rambling opening statement just boiled down to "women have the right to choose" and didn't defend it whatsoever. What a waste of time 🤦
Nothing against truck drivers, but anytime I hear someone identify themselves as a "truck driver" in a debate I instantly think of Joshua for Congress. And this person... they did not help remove that association.
This abortion stuff right now reminds me of the anti-sjw era: low level of skill in the discourse means the people with the more "fringe" argument (people who are on the defensive more) are much better at arguing their points because, especially in the online space, they usually aren't agreed with anywhere they go and are forced to argue their position. People like this guy arguing pro choice are full of delusion about the soundness of their arguments because they don't get challenged very much, if ever.
Bingo
The prochoicer just wanted to white knight into some minge. He didnt know he would be forced to think this hard.
This pro choice guy has no place debating, maybe even speaking
Wow. I am actually friggin baffled. This is probably the worst god damn debate performance I’ve ever seen. Incoherent, inconsistent and unprincipled. This actually made me wayyyy more confident in my pro choice stance and simultaneously, my ability to argue my core values.
Dude needs to take a step back and rethink how he got to these conclusions and the mental gymnastics he had to lean on to end up at the positions that he did. Embarrassing.
If I actively watch the worse possible pro choice arguments should I become "wayyyy more confident" in my position... Everyone agrees this guy couldnt argue for his position.
@@octavioussage7284 Missing the point. It's like being in class and watching other students fail to answer a question you didn't find difficult at all.
46:30 he just justified slaves and things of that nature without even knowing it.
The patience of the pro lifer LOL I could never I’d snap
He's truly Zen
Destiny allowing this poor Alex fellow flail for 90 minutes is proof that destiny is ontologically evil.
when you start a debate by saying your opponent should not try to point out moral inconsistencies with your argument, you might want to rethink your position.
Destiny understanding both sides of the argument and being a neutral arbiter who only pressures you on the grounds of logical consistency is why he is one of the best moderators.
He seems fair, but he was biased towards the pro lifers arguments, usually arguing for the pro-life side.
The only reason he seemed bias towards the prolife guy is because the prochoice guy was being logically inconsistent and doesn't really understand his own argument.
@@shubashuba9209 this!
The pro-choicer responds to hypotheticals like the guy in the opening of Blade Runner.
We don't get to see it often enough but destiny is a god-tier moderator, not because of his debating skills, but because he is such an impatient asshole. Love you Destiny
Playing the piano was hilarious lmao 🤣🤣🤣
Pro choice guy is a classic example of someone who has taken a position without ever actually thinking about why he holds it
Aka just an average brainwashed normie
Pro choice guy is one of those "I can't imagine an apple wtf are you talking about?"
All this could have been avoided if TheAlexKirschProject's Mother opted for an abortion
I’m sure he’s still dependent on her to survive so she probably still could 🤷🏼♂️
Jesus Christ. This pro choice guy needs to take a class in epistemology. And logic. I’m pro choice in the first trimester but this guy argues for the position terribly. He doesn’t know how to justify his principles at all. I don’t even think he has principles.
43:32
And it was at this moment that Destiny had to remind himself he was the moderator, and that he couldn't tell pro-choice guy how dumb he is.
Its never good when the moderator, who agrees with your position, is laughing at your arguments..
56:41 I am offended as a person who defends abortion rights in debate using the bodily autonomy argument.
Extending the bodily autonomy argument past the point of delivery is stupid because at that point the baby can be put up for adoption, so no the autonomy of the mother is not violated.
No one has a right to your blood supply.
Its a nonsense argument not because of what Destiny said but because 0.0 people have abortions because they don't want the baby consuming their nutrients. People are having abortions because they don't wanna deal with the financial consequences of having a child or simply weren't planning on having a child despite often having unprotected sex and would rather get rid of it than carry it to term.
It's a stupid argument because you're making an argument nobody genuinely cares about or believes in and its often just a desperate attempt to try to pretend most people getting abortions aren't irresponsible drains on society who just wanna have raw sex and vacuum up a baby when it rears its unfortunate head.
This is when ideologies smash into reality. Cellular reproduction has been the primary, driving force of evolution for two billion years. And now we have people literally resisting evolution and reproduction. Evolution doesn’t care about what rights you refuse to grant.
Exactly. I can't believe the pro choice guy never even came close to saying that. This debate would have been over in seconds if he did.
@@happyhappy85 that part of the debate wouldn't have been over at all since all someone would have to do is give the hypothetical of "If adoption didn't exist, what then?" or just counter by pointing out that it still does not have bodily autonomy due to relying on other humans
@@tb8654 So anyone who lacks bodily autonomy loses the intrinsic right to life?
this wasn't a debate, this was a pro choice socdem and a paleoconservative teaching a pro choicer how to actually make an argument
15 minutes in and if I was the pro life guy I would’ve left.
I'm pro choice and I agree lmao
Pro life guy should’ve left to save time. Pro choice guy should’ve left to save face.
The pro choice guys was really trying to load the cart in the opening. How does he think debates work? He pretty much said that he wont define anything to defend his point. He's just saying pro choice because I say so. Way bother debating then?
That's every redditor's stance on pro choice ever. Screeching that it's her choice because reasons. I'm all for it being her choice, but there need to be exceptions so it's not taken advantage of or left for granted.
if he doesn't hold a concrete stance he can never be wrong.
Under his world view what would stop rich people from pressuring poor people into never having kids? Or a women from extorting the father because she'll abort the child if he doesn't do as she says. Or what if a man punches a pregnant woman and the baby dies why is it murder? Or what if science can prove that life starts at X weeks?
reminds me of an abortion debate i saw between Matt Dillahunty and some prolife person. First time i remember him dissapointing me. He started by listing all the perspectives by which he would not argue or hear arguments on the topic concluding "i will only argue on the basis of the womans bodily autonomy" and any time his opponent tried to talk about the fetuses autonomy or anything else he did this whole "um excuse me? what did i say at the start??" it was bad mang
@@bleedinggreen2518 Ironically, the "progressive" side of the abortion debate is likely to move in this direction since improvements in technology will likely push viability closer and lose to conception. Renewed debate on this issue is revealing that a lot of these people really haven't thought through their positions.
“Well, again, as I’ve explained, I will not engage with your hypothetical because I do not understand hypotheticals”
Sorry, but I don't get the religious person saying "is the innocent baby better off dead?"
If you believe in heaven for the innocent, how is the answer not yes?
Facts 😹😹😹
And you wonder why pro lifers are gaining ground.
It’s not because of the strength of their arguments or the weakness of the other side. It’s because the court is intentionally packed with ideologues.
@@Tavat You make it sound like an overwhelming majority of the country is pro abortion and an extreme minority of the country are anti abortion and they just happen to control the courts lol.
This country is split on the topic.
@Henzo8i8 From a utilitarian consequentialist position, the obviously correct conclusion is to allow abortion in all instances up to a certain point, and then in some instances after that. We could draw the line somewhere it’s been drawn for quite some time. But the point is to create the most good, and it’s been proven that having access to safe and legal abortion does the most good for every single party involved-except for the clump of cells that wasn’t even born.
People making a huge issue out of the existence of abortions are brainbroken.
@@Tavat that’s the point we literally have hearings to make sure folks on the court hold up to certain ideals. You might not like it but that’s literally the point of the Supreme Court
jesus that was brutal. thank you august for the timestamp lol
So detailed...
Do you mind defending your opinion?
That’s a ridiculous hypothetical.
Sometimes you see people debating without really knowing the opposite argument. This is a rare case of someone debating without knowing their own argument. Quite fascinating. How did this happen?
God that pro-choice guy had the worst opening statement
Yeah, he tried to Eminem the other guy,.
Homie lost in his first statement. Brutal.
it's ironic that the pro choice guy's intro was about how the pro life guy would attack and not engage with the topic, but the pro choice guy's whole intro was an attack on the pro life guy and then he struggled to engage...lol
Destiny continues to be one of the best moderators. Unfortunately this pro-choice guy is one of the worst debaters I've ever seen. I've got brain cancer now. Thanks.
You knew he was going to be shit when he started laughing as soon as the other dude just tried to define bodily autonomy.
I'm very pro choice but this guy made me want to Roblox myself
Destiny is so good at moderating, I hope he does more.
@@thenonartist4366 are you interested in doing panel debates?
Pro choicers need to concede the morale high ground to the pro lifers just like meat eaters do to vegans
No, not necessarily. All morality is a matter of perspective. The idea of forcing someone to carry something in their body that causes them immense pain and distress, when they have the physical option to do away with that as soon as possible, can be seen as a very immoral thing. Granting a fetus special rights over someone's body can, as well, be seen as a very immoral thing.
This Pro-Lifer is smokin hot. He wins.
This reminds me of those scenes in movies where a guy plays chess alone. Destiny jumps into the discussion as says 'well he would say this' and before the other guy can respond says 'well he would say that in response'. We need a super cut with just Destiny going back and forth with Destiny!
Im 12 minutes into this debate and holy shit, this pro-choice dude is providing the worst pushback I've ever seen from this otherwise really strong position. All of his arguments are like level 0, boneheaded takes. I wish they had somebody more competent on to talk to zen.
@34smlS Ya even I, a complete moron, would do a lot better than this guy.
Holy shit, I'm not even 5 mins in and this pro choice guy has already ceded so much ground and basically says "yes, it's a life no it's not innocent, idk what sentience is and I will refuse to debate any of these; now let's debate Roe v Wade." If the pro life is moderately competent this is going to be a bloodbath
Spoiler alert: He is moderately competent.
@@Lewa500 18 mins in (listening 1.5 speed) this is going very, very badly for that guy haha
15:40 this guy is the worst debater. Everyone want to talk about the 99% of cases and this guy can't get past the 1%.
True. Then again, the anti-choice guy was pretty obsessed with the less-than-1% of cases where a baby would be aborted “at the last minute.” Why even bring that up if you think there’s a difference between 1 week and 28 weeks? Debating only philosophically on this issue is, to borrow a Destiny expression, “literally fucking braindead.” It’s almost as if consequences don’t matter to anti-choicers. (I mean actual consequences beyond a smushed fetus who literally no-one beyond the mother had a goddamn right to care about directly.)
@@Tavat the reason why the point was talked about so much is because the woman's right guy was being unprincipled. The pro life guy was trying to find where his principles ended. The woman's right guy would not bite the bullet and stand for his principles. He wanted the cake and to eat it too.
@@Tavat as to why you debate philosophy, it is the only grounds to debate on. There is no scientific grounds to stand on. There is only morality.
@@Tavat I don't thimk its really about the amount of cases where babies get aborted last minute. It mainly just serves as a hypothetical intended to expose inconsistencies in the pro choice argument. Any sane person wouldn't want to kill the fetus 10 minutes before its born, but that poses a really difficult question for pro choicers about where and why that line should be drawn. Destiny has a pretty good argument for drawing that line, but this dude had no clue.
@@jordanhanley7585 it's not really a difficult question though. The majority of people seem to fall somewhere around "When the fetus would be viable as a premature birth". Obviously this varies a lot case-by-case, which is why after the first trimester it becomes more difficult and requires more justification, and is pretty much 100% medical necessity in the third trimester
Damn that little bit of piano during the end of the debate got artistic asf. This was indeed a tragedy that we should all reflect on
"abortion is legal, but rape is not. correct?"
I have a strong feeling that he wouldn't say this about slavery.
Lol saying that something is right because it's law is such a moronic take.
@@randybobandy9828 This is kindergarten level of law understanding. The next mature step is realizing that some laws are both legal and morally right.
On the one hand, irresponsible platforming. On the other, Destiny just hosted a master class on how NOT to argue in favor of abortion. I hope the latter has a bigger impact than the former.
@Sam Farza Especially since those kinds of conversations end up going underground and become even more fringe. Best to expose in the public and have those who are knowledgeable break it down.
"Irresponsible platforming" I have no argument
@Sam Farza Honest question, would you also be ok with Destiny hosting a debate that ends up this one sided, if the topic was “are (racial minority) people inherently inferior?”
Just bc the term “irresponsible platforming” gets overused, doesn’t mean it doesn’t legitimately happen sometimes. I imagine all of you shared in dog piling the Serfs when he and the Tail of Two Rabbits guy face planted a debate with Lauren Southern and Counter Points. Feel free to engage, I’m genuinely curious.
this isnt necessarily irresponsible platforming no misinformation was spread here it and it was just an ethics discussion where im assuming the person whos view you disagree with won. its only irresponsible if someone thinks this debate is enough to entirely shape their view on what policies should be enacted which never came into discussion in the first place
Im pro-choice and I wouldnt consider myself very knowledgable in every aspect of the subject or even a good debater, but I could argue for pro-life against that pro-choice guy and he would STILL lose cause he has NO idea what he is doing.
that pro choice opening was the most corporate speech shit ever
The pro choice guy unironically pushed me more towards pro life
Bro I've never heard a worse pro choice argument.
Zen won in the opening. Other guy's opening was practiced sophistry. Zen plain stated, I believe this is a human life, your bar to convince me and people like me is to either justify murder or convince us it isn't a human life. Neither standard has come close to being met.
The pro-choice lobby has a huge handicap here. The right are firmly convinced they are opposing murder. From the pro life side an abortion is trading 80+ years of a human life for 9 months of inconvenience for a woman. Since she can put the kid up for adoption. Inconvenience that I note is a known consequence of an action she is choose to undertake with several methods of preventing. This is a very easy moral choice from the right wing perspective.
isn’t a sperm cell human life?
@@Celestina0 sperm cells do not self replicate, it is a gamete, not a zygote, it is not human life, neither is an unfertilized ovum. and suggesting it is just makes you look ignorant.
@@Celestina0 no. If you leave sperm in a woman, it will just be absorbed. You need to mix it with an egg and they have to implant into the uterine wall.
He should've just bit the bullet on justifying murder. That's what I would've done. It IS a life, and it IS murder, but it's a life that hasn't yet lived and has no sentience or sense of self. It can't miss or desire what it hasn't experienced yet, thus it's impossible to do it harm by "murdering" it. Meanwhile the mother already exists, already has a firmly rooted sense of self and wants and desires and a particular lot in life and an unwanted child can be a huge burden that makes her miserable, makes it impossible for her to attend college or focus on a career, etc.
There's nothing inherently good about living a life. We only value ours because we're already on the ride. But the ride involves a lot of suffering and we die in the end anyway. Ending the ride before it starts harms nobody. There's no logical way you can argue that it does (well perhaps if there were so many abortions that our population plummeted and the economy collapsed or something, but that's not the argument pro life people are using). Right wingers tend to be religious and believe in a soul and an afterlife outside of this mortal coil. In their mind they're imagining a tiny fetus up in heaven that's eternally stuck in a state of arrested development.
@@Celestina0 life starts at conception or fertilization, this is basic shit celestina
Anybody that was "pro-choice" before watching this and has at least half brain has now walked away "pro-life". 😂
No the pro-choice'er here just made dumb arguments
@@error_3498 still havnt heard a good arguement for elective abortions. I'm pretty much convinced there isn't one at this point.
@@powbong7735 just go watch destiny debate the topic
@@error_3498 He’s making the same arguments that I’ve seen the vast majority of pro-choice people make though.
@@caesarplaysgames who ?
If you can't engage with hypotheticals literally just drag your knuckles away from any social or political conversation just talk about Fortnite or paw patrol instead jfc
"I don't want to define terms." 😒
“Ridiculous hypothetical” months after a headline of a young woman giving birth, stuffing her newborn baby in a garbage bag and throwing it in a dumpster alive. If that woman had the chance to use the umbilical cord/bodily autonomy justification I’m pretty sure she would have. We give humanity far too much credit.
I've never pondered about the intricacies of current day Bangladeshi taxation policy, but I'm incredibly eager to jump on stream in front of thousands of people to explain the plethora of reasons why taxation within Bangladesh is unjust!
This debate is already lost when the pro-choice guy says a fetus is a life. Dumbest going to concede.
Not sure how. It is 'a life' by all definitions, but that doesn't change anything. So are ants and the bacteria in your gut.
right? "i agree life begins at conception, thats a science!"
cool where is your towel and where are you throwing it in?
@@TheMarkSasuke64 Firstly, I'm pro life.
Second, I would never use a dumb argument like yours as my argument why a fetus is alive.
@@TheMarkSasuke64 the ants and bacteria in your gut won't develop to be a fully independant human being, show me an example of gut bacteria evolving and then leaving your gut to grow up and go to college
@@Kev7035 Doesn't matter, 'a life' isn't enough to protect anything unless you're willing to concede the bacteria. You'd have to narrow it down to 'human life' in which case we can talk about the quality of the life, and that's when the entire argument would develop into potentiality--which isn't enough to override the agency (or bodily autonomy) of the woman. No consciousness ever, no awareness ever, no victim.
Destiny moderating is the best content and I'm so glad we are getting so much of it.
He’s a terrible moderator and I think he knows it, but he’s always up for creating more content.
You could say that the baby’s bodily autonomy depends on the mothers bodily autonomy and the value of hers is only dependent on her so in a direct way the baby only lives due to the mom’s bodily autonomy which is in her control and therefore in control of the baby’s necessarily.
bingo
Boom. I dont know why Destiny think this is a bad argument.
I don't think I agree with that argument. Can you not justify abortions throughout the entire pregnancy using that logic (unless ofcourse that is something you support)? Also even born babies, and even young toddlers to a huge extent do not have any bodily autonomy and mostly depend on the parent. For example, as a baby, you can't exactly move freely yet. If you are in your crib and your parents are sleeping, there is no way you'll be going outside or moving around the house doing your own thing. If your parents don't prepare food for you, you can't simply go to your local shop and buy something. For several years, you are completely dependent on the people around you and your mother also has complete control over you and your bodily autonomy. Can you therefore just throw your baby in the garbage bin so to speak? Just some thoughts I have about that. I might be missing something ofcourse.
@@johrnarlor So in the first trimester the fetus is entirely dependent on the pregnant person and can't survive outside the womb. In this case the adult's bodily autonomy is paramount as no-one has the right to another's blood, adult or baby.
Further in the pregnancy it is possible for the fetus to survive a premature birth and so the issue becomes more complex, however I would also argue that the trauma and risks of birth must also factor. Reasonable people can debate when the viability of the fetus means that a healthy pregnancy should be carried to term, I won't pretend I know where that line should be.
After birth we are no longer talking about direct dependence, we are talking about care. Humans aren't entitled to another's blood, however humans can have a duty of care to each other. An analogy could be that a doctor cannot be punished for refusing to give her own kidney to a patient, however she can be punished for allowing that same patient to die from not refilling his IV.
6:20 he already is confused. A fetus that was just conceived has no bodily autonomy. It cannot currently exist outside of the womb. It has the POTENTIAL bodily autonomy, but that's not the same as the woman's CURRENT bodily autonomy.
"Is it your position that someone is counted as a life only if someone else wants them to be a life?"
"...sure we can go with that..."
**Destiny stunned and bewildered, yet, lets it stand on its own stupidity**
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
He could've at least asked destiny to reword more concise to the topic instead of biting a bullet that fat.
People really need to stop the "women's right to choose" point. There are a lot of things that aren't left to choice. Taxes. Circumcision. Registering for the draft. Seatbelts.
For real, you nailed. What do you think the government would say if a dude started spouting the "my body my choice" in the face of a military draft.
@@mrjtfang2 Absolutely correct, which begs the question as to why this particular issue is given special consideration above others.
@@LuridContent Because seat belts are for safety reasons. Not for a religious purpose.
@@godzilla9268 Taxes and the draft aren't for religious purpose.
@@godzilla9268 In fact, one can be against abortion and religion not be a factor at all. wtf.