Debate Teacher Reacts to Abortion Arguments | Feat. Ben Shapiro & Steven Crowder
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 сен 2024
- In this video, I react to some of the most viewed videos that display abortion arguments. They happen to feature both Ben Shapiro and Steven Crowder. So let's jump into the arguments and see what works and what doesn't work! :)
Links to these full videos:
"Ben Shapiro DESTROYS Transgenderism And Pro-Abortion Arguments": • Ben Shapiro DESTROYS T...
"Ben Shapiro SHREDS Pro-Choice Argument | UBCFSC Talk": • Ben Shapiro SHREDS Pro...
"I'm Pro-Life (4th Edition) | Change My Mind": • I'm Pro-Life (4th Edit...
"I'm Pro-Life (3rd Edition) | Change My Mind": • I'm Pro-Life (3rd Edit...
Get your Wise Disciple merch here: bit.ly/wisedis...
Want a BETTER way to communicate your Christian faith? Check out my website: www.wisedisciple.org
OR Book me as a speaker at your next event: wisedisciple.o...
Check out some awesome videos on effective evangelism: ruclips.net/user/pl....
Got a question in the area of theology, apologetics, or engaging the culture for Christ? Send them to me and I will answer on an upcoming podcast: wisedisciple.o...
People always forget that having sex IS a choice, for most people. Everyone wants rights, but nobody wants responsibility.
Thank you. I've been saying this for years. What the pro choice argument really is, is the right not to have to take on the responsibility of the consequence of the choice they made to have sex. It baffles me that it's never brought up in any of these conversations
@@ritchierich6133word.
What also baffles me is the Hollywood stars like Madonna who will fight tooth and nail for you to be able to kill a child, but say absolutely nothing about the moral virtues of abstinence.
Well said, we have the choice to not have sex.
@@tommywilson7192even better, we have the choice to use as much protection as readily available. Yet they don’t even want to do that. So that tells me these people WANT to get pregnant so they CAN murder babies
@tommywilson7192 Fetuses are not people 😂
The woman in Crowder's change my mind video returned to appear on his show later, and she actually DID change her mind after some time spent thinking. It's one of my favorite videos because of this.
She was defensive because she'd had an abortion herself, so the result of their conversation was especially cool.
I was just about to comment the same thing. It's awesome what can happen when someone's eyes are opened to reality.
I'll have to watch this one then.
Where is that video?
@adamhorachek759 Steven Crowder has a whole playlist of "Change my Mind" on his channel. StevenCrowder
I am honestly surprised RUclips hasn’t found a reason to take them down yet :-/. The Change my Mind series are some of the best videos Steven puts out I feel.
"It's not a baby until it crosses that birth canal."
Okay, so C-Section births are not babies, got it.
Guess I’m not a human lol
@@mentalwarfare2038 Yup, neither am I. I guess I can finally identify as an alien
You're twisting what this person said to make it easier to attack. Which is a strawman fallacy. Crossing a birth canal can mean being born. Also claiming c section born babies aren't babies isn't what this person was supporting. which is a masked man fallacy.
@@bystander265
“Your twisting what this person said”
Ho the irony!! Was that a rational claim or was it just determined?
Was that an absolute truth claim or was it just the relativistic delusions of an overgrown amoeba with illusions of grandeur?
Your world view, your absurdity, your existential crisis and your epistemological crisis not the theists!!
A man beat a pregnant woman so savagely that her unborn child was born dead with a fractured skull!! The California legal system quickly and unanimously passed a law no problem signed by the then democratic governor that said that any man who so abuses a pregnant woman that he causes the death of her unborn child shall be charged with murder. Now isn’t it strange that the same women could have chosen to take the life of her unborn child and it’s referred to as “abortion” not (murder)!! If someone else ends the child’s life the term (murder) and end of a child’s life is used and it’s logically considered murder because what else could it possibly be!!
@@georgedoyle2487 That's a false equivalence. Beating someone to death is not the same as an abortion.
I'm an adoptive father and also a foster parent. I am so exhausted by pro-choicers wielding around the foster problem to justify their positions. This lady in the second Crowder segment says, "let's say abortion goes away, what happens to the influx of births that are going to occur?" There is very little evidence that I have seen and researched to suggest that restricting abortion *increases* foster care entry. One particular study has shown that it might happen to single mothers in poor communities, but foster care entry would be a bit later, not at birth. And the chances of this even happening are a guess at best. Then she says "what happens when they do give them up for adoption?" Here's the confusion. She is somehow confusing and associating domestic infant adoption (through an agency or private instances) with a child being removed and put into a foster family because of neglect, abuse, or something else. If a child is PLACED for adoption (not given up) with a family that is chosen, that child never goes through a foster care system. She says this would create a huge influx into the foster care system - it wouldn't. She's confusing the two. They would be adopted by the over 2 million couples waiting to adopt in this country. In foster care, the goal is *reunification* with a family member, never immediately adoption. Once parental rights have been terminated then they look to place a child with a family forever through legal adoption. Another flaw with this thinking is ... look at the numbers currently. We have 400,000+ children in the American foster care system. I heavily doubt that abortion is doing the job she thinks its doing by reducing the number of "unwanted" children that "go into the system." This is just regurgitating talking points from pro-choicers and it's disgusting to use kids in hard places as your pawn to justify killing kids before they're born. Totally sickening. This is ultimately, consequentialism. She is trying to justify the killing of someone NOW by pointing to a FUTURE scenario of burden, unwantedness, hardships, etc. You cannot come to a good conclusion about if something is right or wrong (especially when it's involving intentionally killing someone innocent) by pointing to a future good and avoiding the issue on its own merit, right where it currently is and wrestling with what the choice actually is: the deliberate and intentional killing of an innocent human being.
Well said!!
Yes! I’m glad you made this comment, this argument always bothers me. These people clearly have no idea how adoption and foster care actually work.
When people make these kinds of arguments I can always hear the slavers making the same kinds of arguments in defence of slavery when it was about to be abolished, speaking about all the good it does for society. We know slavery is a great evil, and history does not look back kindly on those who defended it. One day it will be the same with abortion.
@@Chablar89 They get really, really mad when you point out that every single one of their arguments completely falls apart when the logic is applied to literally anything else.
Thank you!
I came to the comments to say the same thing. It drives me nuts how often people conflate the two.
My cousin was considered unadoptable because her father was also her grandfather. My Aunt raised my cousin as her own child. None of us thought about her as that somehow defective because of her origins until the abortion debate. She was/ is beautiful with he big green eyes and jet black hair. I resent the notion that kids born in ways that fall outside the neat package of loving relationships are less than other kids or that they shouldn't be born. That's a horrible argument to make for abortion..
Oh SNAP!! Keep spitting facts!!!
Wish I could like this a million times. ❤
In case Noone has mentioned it, he did convince that girl. She came back on his show talking about it
Yea! It was wild.
Baby in the womb possesses memories. If you talk to them, play music, etc, they remember when they are born. They recognize the noises, and it soothes them.
I think you said it best when you mentioned that there are a lot of ideas that haven’t been really wrestled with or philosophically thought through.
They seem to have just absorbed these ideas from the culture and it’s almost like they are surprised when they are presented with a well thought out counter point.
Exactly! Great point 👊🏼
Thanks very much for watching! I apologize in advance for my mustache ;)
Why would you apologize for something so amazing? Any answer other than "It looks great" is heresy and should be dismissed immediately.
@@Welleher LOLOLOLOL!
Dig
I came here for the moustache. Did you say something about a debate?
LOLOLOL!!
With Crowder he has two kinds of conversations there:
1. To try and convince the person he’s talking to.
Or
2. To try and convince the fence-sitting by-stander.
With this one he was going for number 2 and trying to show the full spectrum of how this dialogue could go. He allows the other person to steer the conversation a great deal just to demonstrate the full range of things you might here.
You may be shocked to find out that the last girl that Crowder was debating with actually did change her mind eventually. Crowder had her on his show to discuss her switch from pro choice to pro life
I've done a lot of pro-life outreach on college campuses, and most of my conversations go just like these do. People have their "pro-choice rolodex" and as soon as you refute one point, they move on to another, and then will come back to a point you've refuted already (usually bodily rights, which serves as a sort of pro-choice safety net). But the last girl, I'd be willing to bet she either had an abortion herself or someone she's close to has had one. She avoids the question because if she accepts that the unborn are human beings, she'll have to accept that she or the person close to her is a murderer (this has also been my experience, unfortunately, too).
@Swann [ intellectual titan has entered the chat ]
There is the pro-life rolodex too. Both rolodexes are quite tiring to hear.
However, one thing I've seen that pro-lifer can't answer is if abortion at any stage is murder, how can they justify abortion in any case? Is it self defense? It's definitely tragic.
I'm not really pro choice but find being an absolutist in each camp grapple with hard questions.
@@ausis6214 I'm one who thinks abortion is just plain wrong. I don't agree with abortion in the cases of rape or incest. That being said, those cases are a bit more difficult to argue, one reason being that there are arguments that don't apply. For example the argument that having the ability to choose to have sex and therefore the ability to choose not to have sex so that pregnancy isn't an issue, that's an argument that doesn't apply in the case of rape as the woman didn't have the choice. However, rape and incest related abortions make up such a small amount of all total abortions, I, and others, choose to focus on the larger issue, which is the overall attitude that our society has regarding sex. Our society doesn't want to have limits placed on sex, it wants for us to be able to engage in whatever sex we want with whoever we want without any consequences. But, sex doesn't work that way, there will always be consequences that have to be dealt with. And, if our society can learn to recognize that, and teach that to our children, then all sorts of problems involving families would start to shrink, including abortion.
@@miltonwetherbee5489 I understand all that, but the government has no business in how sexual someone is. I'm sure you see a person who has casual sex as irresponsible. So why would you want them to become a parent? There's some horrible parents out there so I think it's cruel on the kid think of them as a consequence of their parent's actions.
Until we have a system that better supports foster kids, low income families, etc. We shouldn't be forcing people to become parents just because they couldn't keep their clothes on.
@@ausis6214I'm not talking about the government, I said society. It's true that society shapes our government, but it's more basic, more fundamental than any government. Governments exist because societies create them to provide protection for the society in a variety of ways, and to enforce rules of morality that it deems appropriate for the proper continuation of the society. It's entirely possible for a government to stop acting in the interest of the society and instead act in its own interest or the interest of a select few, which leads to revolutions, rebellions, etc.
Now that I've hopefully straightened that out, let me ask you some questions.
Do you think we should have laws regarding rape, incest, and pedophilia?
“He shuffles his deck of claim cards and pulls another one out.” 😆😆 that’s awesome!
I agree that it takes a lot of courage to get up in public and debate your position when you are not a professional debater. This courage is tripled when you know that no matter how the debate goes, you are going to be on youtube somewhere getting "DESTROYED" and "SHREDDED".
Maybe if you aren't super sure of your position you should ask questions genuinely and not attempt an entrenched position against the host of the event.
I get so much out of these vids, I hope this channel blows up soon, the content, the quality, the character, it’s all here. God bless!
Yeah a very underrated channel to be honest. Don’t give it up! I listen to Whaddo meme, red pen logic, inspiring philosophy, winger etc who have tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of subscribers and the quality and clarity on this channel is equal to these apologists if not better. Nevertheless, despite this being such an emotive and controversial issue I never was impressed or convinced by the inconsistency of the arguments for termination of a child inside the womb. I think that it’s inevitable that as science progresses and the final nail is put in the coffin for materialistic ideologies we will look back in unbelievable horror. Equally, labelling this as a fundamental religious issue versus secularism is just a rhetorical device and a straw man argument as I have friends who are secular who believe that a child should be able to preemptively have the “choice” to decide on not being terminated in the womb. As do a lot of survivors of failed abortions some of which were rescued from hospital buckets in the clinical waste cupboard. Even prominent Directors of secular organisations have admitted that there are also people from a secular back ground who are repulsed by the weak arguments for this form of utilitarianism. It won’t be long before break away groups are campaigning for terminations of babies and adults after birth. And if you think this is just pseudo speculation and pseudo philosophy read up on the utilitarian and prominent atheist philosopher Peter Singer who’s already advocating for infanticide after birth. Equally, Peter Singer claims that if you had to choose between the life of a human infant outside the womb and a full grown adult ape it is “moral” to let the child die.
This was great! Do you have any videos of you doing debates? It would be really fun to see Debate Teacher Reacts to Debate Teacher!
There are no videos ☹️ I kinda wish, now, I had preserved a lot more stuff I used to do with my students!
@@WiseDisciple Bummer! Think you'll ever get in the ring with someone in the future?
i learned from michael knowles, followed by a google search, that the word "fetus" is latin for "offspring". a fetus is a baby. the more scientific definition is "an unborn young with the basic developmental features of its kind." this is around the 8 week mark. at this point, the fetus is not only genetically identifiable as a human but also visibly identifiable. the heart begins beating approximately 2 weeks after gestation. the brain begins development shortly after. the "clump of cells" is literally a living human organism.
22:13 Crowder should have _immediately_ pushed him to finish his sentence. The guy said that the pro-life stance uses force. "What about pro-life laws allows women the choice--" The choice to do what? Forcibly kill their children? His view is the one of force, not Crowders.
Yep. It's pretty ironic how the pro-abortion side always projects their owm tendencies onto pro-lifers. They say pro-lifers are the ones forcing and controlling women's bodies when they're perfectly fine doing that to the prenatal human being. They think pro-lifers are the ones who put the lives of prenatal human beings above that of women when they're the ones who put the lives of women above the lives of the preborn. They say pro-lifers ignore women when they're the ones who completely exclude the prenatal from their ethical considerations. So much self-awareness.
You really have to do this format with Trent Horns "Why are you pro Choice?"- radio show! I absolutely love this format!
COOL, I'll check it out! Thanks for the suggestion! 😊
The foster care argument always makes me angry because of the year I was in foster care. I got to meet many kids who had been in for years and they deserve to be alive just as much as these college students. I cant stand that argument and babies if they get put in there are really what people are hoping for and if the mom doesnt get it together then they do get adopted.Its true nobody wants to adopt older kids but that doesn't mean they should be murdered. Also the whole point of foster care is to take care of your children while you get your crap together. Hence why I was only in there a year. It really breaks my heart having been poor my whole life these people look at the poor children who dont have anybody and instead of compassion they say kill the baby and then have the audacity to say its compassion because they care about the mom. That isnt compassion its classism.
Another one would be Jeff Durbin debating women outside an abortion clinic.
Thanks, I'll check that one out! That's the title? Or it's just a series of videos?
@@WiseDisciple there isn't necessarily a set series, but apologia does a lot of ministry at abortion clinics and uploads some of the footage. There's a recent one they did that's about 30 minutes long on their channel
@@WiseDisciple There is one called Salt Lake show down with a Karen, but it didn't seem to be productive. He does others where he talks to two or three at once and actually he's able to get some proper dialogue going.
The "they can't survive on their own" argument really bothers me.
My 6 year old can't survive on his own.
Jeff durbin from apologia Church has some really interesting street conversations that maybe you could look at. Conversations range from cult members to atheist to pro-choicers. Although idk if street convos would apply
Yeah I agree. His apologetic methods is so so simple and yet effective.
Caleb Gomez Are they effective though? I haven't listen to him in a bit, but he doesn't seem particularly persuasive to the other side. He seems to have a million prepared answers to whatever someone says vs having a dialogue that could get someone thinking. I think he's someone more that "own" the other side than would change minds.
For the girl (in the Steven Crowder clip) who spoke about the kids who never get adopted in the foster care system, I was one of those kids but that is no reason for my life to have been destroyed. My childhood was crappy for much of it. Shoot, I’ve had a rough adulthood for much of it. However, my life has, also, been very fulfilling in spite of that. As one of those people she is using to justify her abortion advocacy, a tough life, a lack of family support, financial hardship, etc. are not an excuse for abortion. By that logic, anytime anyone hits a prolonged period of hardship, I guess they should be offed. 🙄🤦♀️
Just a quick point on the video titles. Ben himself said he hates the titles and wished they would stop. He has said this multiple times in a lot of his really really REALLY long shows and videos
That kid with Crowder says “fetus” with such venom. There is serious contempt for babies with that dude.
Women have choice… to engage in procreative intimacy or NOT. We know what creates a person.
Man, so many of the arguments from the pro-choice side are genuinely hard to stomach.
Pro-life arguments are easily the better arguments. Arguments for abortion - personhood and bodily rights arguments - have both been refutted innumerable times and it's already getting too old. The pro-abortion side only has bias at this point.
Really? If “life” is truly more important than bodily autonomy, then the Government should force people to gift fellow citizens with every organ/fluid they can spare. After all, the only difference between a leukemia stricken child in need of your bone marrow, and a fetus in need of your womb/bodily resources, is the amount of suffering had by the dependent. A child can suffer immensely, while a fetus can be aborted before it can even detect pain.
@@anolisa1939 yes really. organ donation is not analogous to pregnancy or abortion at all. You don't have the right to deliberately kill an innocent human being in addition to refusing him the use of your organs. That's more analogous to what happens in abortion - killing vs letting die. And bodily rights aren't absolute. Your bodily rights end when they can have negative consequences for other human beings. The right to life also takes precedence over bodily rights. Bodily rights wouldn't even make sense without the right to life. If you value bodily rights so highly, then you ought to value the right to life even more highly. The amount of suffering you can experience also doesn't determine your human value. If Hitler drugged his victims and made them unconscious before killing them, the holocaust would still be wrong even if the victims never experienced suffering. All of this is just common sense.
@@IWasOnceAFetus
So the legal issue is in the abortion process? A less direct means of termination (say, tying off the umbilical cord) would be fine, because you are then “letting it die” rather than killing it directly? It would be similar to unplugging a brain dead patient from life support.
@@IWasOnceAFetus
Another question? Why should a fetus have a right to life? It is of our species, sure, but cognitively, it has more in common with a root vegetable. I see no rationale in granting it protections/rights in the present for attributes it may hold sometime in the future.
Yeah the second guy hasn’t thought through the implications of his ad hoc worldview.
Very helpful. I've seen several of these videos, but it's very practical to also get a breakdown from you of the tactics and flow of the conversation.
Great vid! Thanks for this!
I've had a precious conversation with someone who was willing to listen and be persuaded: I used Live Action's method of simple questions about their thoughts on abortion and restrictions, then (basing the my response on their responses), I watched a video with them of Dr. Levatino describing an abortion during a trimester that the person I'm speaking to said would be okay to have an abortion at.
In most cases, however, the folks I speak to have already made up their minds that I'm a horrible person who 'just wants to control women's bodies', and that it's better to kill people rather than have the possibility that they be brought up poor or in foster care.
Another, when I was speaking to their friend on a different issue, simply asked "pro-life or pro choice?", and when I said pro-life, they called me scum.
I followed up with them after I finished speaking to their friend:
"You're a horrible person and I hope you one day realize that."
I tried to kindly ask "Would you be up for discussing this?"
"No, I don't ever want to talk to you. Don't speak to me ever again."
----
Matthew 7:6 comes to mind: just keep on trucking if someone's heart has shut their mind, and always seek to be kinder than they make you out to be.
One more note: another person I had spoken to said this to me near the end of the conversation: "I wish my mother aborted me."
Never forget you're talking to people, many of whom are in serious pain - not only dealing with trouble, but also - having been deceived - they are afraid to dig in case they find yet more pain in discovering the things they've condoned are wicked.
The only hope I know for freedom in such darkness is Christ, who died even for me.
I am perpetually amazed at the mental gymnastics to which people will resort to dehumanize an unborn child, so as to justify abortion universally.
Have to have an abortion??? Do people have to have sex and become pregnant? So, the "have to have an abortion" bit would only make sense in talking about rape. I mean, we don't need to have sex, it's not like lack of sex will kill us. So, if we know that getting pregnant and carrying a baby to term would be monumental bad for us, then we should make the choice not to have sex until that's no longer the case.
Ben should have pointed out that babies in vitro also recognizes their parents. I have had three children and every single one of them would scoot towards their father when they heard him walking or when he would sit next to me!
Unborn babies recognize their mothers. The first sound they come to know is her heart beat. It is what soothes them after their birth! 🥰
Hi love your review! Just wanted to mention that the all caps SHREDS or DESTROYS in the title is done as a joke. It’s kinda like a meme now
Ohhhhhhhh, I see. 👊🏼
I think the guy arguing against Crowder was confused about the 8 month fetus vs 8 month infant example. It sounds like he was comparing an infant that is 8 months old (i.e. was born 8 months ago) to a fetus that has been gestating for 8 months.
That dude arguing with Crowder is painfully ignorant 😮💨
Dude says you can kill people with AMNESIA 😂😂😂
Too bad Crowder didn’t mention possible medical problems for the mother when that kid asked, because he seemed genuinely curious and there are some.
There are a lot and potentially linked to black women dying more in child birth...according to the experts
What they don’t show with the Ben Shapiro clips is that he has already established his definition before the people ever go up there for 90% of the questions. However, he will occasionally get someone up there who randomly throw a question that has nothing to do with the speech he just gave, but most of the people do ask questions about what they heard and what he has already clearly defined.
Don't know how I ever found this channel, glad I did though.
Glad you did TOO! Let me know if you have any suggestions for future videos 😊
Lady, these laws also affect the men who have zero say in whether their child lives or dies. So women need to stop thinking they're the only ones involved in this choice. There is also a man and an unborn child who deserve the right to choice!!!
The biggest scar on my heart was a decade ago when I never got to meet my first child because the lady I slept with chose to end it's life!
I have yet to hear the trauma women are causing men to be brought up in any of these discussions, but why????
My choice, my trauma doesn't matter???
Here's a list of formal debates on abortion you can review when you have time:
(1) Scott Klusendorf vs. Nadine Strossen (at Wayne State University)
(2) Stephanie Gray Connors vs. Dr. Malcolm Potts
(3) Trent Horn vs. David Boonin
(4) Christopher Kaczor vs. Benjamin Watkins
I think the last two are very interesting.
What is a good book that is easy to read when it comes to the abortion issue?
@@soulgalacticlover7281 I think Scott Klusendorf's "The Case for Life" is a pretty easy-to-read book on abortion. But it's always good to read more on the subject so after reading Klusendorf, you can try reading Trent Horn's "Persuasive Pro-life", Peter Kreeft's "The unaborted Socrates", and Hendrik Van der Breggen's "Untangling popular pro-choice arguments." Breggen's book is pretty basic and easy. If you want to read a little more sophisticated book on abortion, I'd recommend "The ethics of abortion" (the newest edition) by Christopher Kaczor.
@@IWasOnceAFetus thanks. One question I like to ask. Is the example in the Violinist Argument closer to someone who has been raped?
@@soulgalacticlover7281 yep it's more analogous to rape 'cus the violinist is _forced_ into his state of dependency.
@@soulgalacticlover7281 by the way, I have some good pro-life resources and links in the description box of videos I've uploaded. In addition to the books I mentioned, those links and resources are pretty helpful. Just letting you know if you're interested...
I'm a survivor of a traumatic brain injury. I have lost much of my memory. I had to learn who my wife was again, talk again, walk again, feed myself again, etc.... Even thought I survived after they told my wife I had a 4% chance of survival, this guy thinks I should have been killed. This guy is the symbol for what is wrong with humanity and why we ALL need Jesus.
It seems to me that girl was speaking from personal experience; she doesn't want to address the core issue because it hits too close to home.
I am to the point where i wont even have the argument with them anymore unless they can first concede that the father does in fact deserve a say in whether or not a woman kills his baby in her womb. I think its ridiculous that the women gets all the say so in that even though a woman can not make a baby without a man.
I can see Crowder doing it to persuade the outsiders if not the person who's not receiving the conversation.
I think the point that Ben was making with the left side of the aisle comment is this: My position and political party is the one for severe punishments for rapists, your party/political views are the ones that are in support of the rapists getting a light sentence. At least that is how I took it.
The woman actually had an abortion that's why she was so emotional about the issue, and in that emotional state kept making "I" statements.
Funny story, the person you said wouldn't change her mind ended up changing her mind. It's on Crowders channel if you're interested.
I'd love to see a review of Christopher Hitchens vs Dinesh D'Souza, specifically the one at Notre Dame
I was born preemie. I wasn't viable outside the womb. Since I wasn't viable on my own and required a ventilator, does that mean someone could have killed me?
Yeah, I used to fall for that “SHREDS” thing and other variations in the titles of videos like that. Along with clickbait, people arguing generally without solutions helped stray me away from politics a bit.
Thank you for chiming in on sp many relevant topics! Subbed. 👏
I'm tired of hearing about foster care as their excuse to have an abortion instead of taking responsibility and trying to help fix foster care.
I think one reason that pro choice advocates bring up cases such as rape and life of the mother is because in those cases there has been a violation of the women's volition in a sense. I think at their core they realize something we rarely touch on in these conversations and that is in most cases a choice has been made. The man and woman have both chosen to partake in sexual intercourse without contraception and the result is a pregnancy. At that point the life that is now without choice is the unborn baby. Most medical definitions define life at stage one the fertilization.
These rare cases of rape and life of the mother or other health issues raise a moral dilemma in that it is possible there is no moral outcome and even if an abortion is performed to save the woman's life the unborn baby still suffers an injustice because they did nothing to deserve having their life terminated.
I think it's important to always remember that the two individuals who who conceived a child made choices already and the unborn child is the one having their volition infringed upon.
Is it brave if they truly want attention? I mean it's brave if I do it because my stage fright is real, but for someone who thinks they are entitled to have their misguided opinions heard, is it truly brave to hop on a mic?
The easiest, best, and cheapest form of contraception is abstinence.
I think in the Crowder bit he was trying to convey the idea that two babies of identical age. Instead what it sounds like is a pregnancy that’s eight months along vs an eight month old child.
Myself, my siblings, our children, and their children walk this earth because the heinous crime of rape was perpetrated on our birth grandmother. Our mother was born from an act of violence, she lived in an orphanage for a certain period of time. Eventually she as adopted by my grandparents, who could not conceive. My grandparents adored their adopted child, and their grandchildren. My mother was a happy person. All this to say a tragic conception does not mean a tragic life.
I would have asked, "if a consequence from an act could impact your life and you could prevent that consequence from happening by not participating in that act, would you?" I would imagine she would say yes. Then I would ask, "why not refrain from sex." If it's got such a consequence that would ruin your life, why engage in it?"
It's like drinking and driving. Most don't do it, because we know we can kill or injury ourselves and/or someone else. We take responsibility ahead of time. Why can't people do that with sex?
The Lady thay Crowder spoke with did change her mind. She returned to his show and told them that he had changed her mind. Because discomfort usually is a part of the process of changing your mind. That's why it's so hard.
A pregnancy not just proves that life is intrinsic, that it’s a human, but that life is not spontaneous. A pregnancy proves that it takes two lives to create a life
There are actually two questions to be answered at the start for this debate to really be useful:
1) What is the unborn? Is it human, or is it something else? This question is answered by science, as we are able to look at the unborn from a biological perspective and see that they are, in fact, human. Also, people keep calling it a "fetus," which is simply a Latin word meaning "offspring". The "offspring" of a human is another human, and the term we use for them depends on the stage of their development (e.g. baby, infant, toddler, etc.). Some people use the term "fetus" to refer to a stage of development (e.g. zygote, embryo, fetus, etc.), so you should always clarify which way the person is using the term. One is a common use, but the other is the actual definition of the word. If they're using "fetus" to say that it's something other than human, they have no idea what the word means.
2) What value, if any, does the unborn have? This question CANNOT be answered by science. This is a moral question that depends on your worldview (i.e. religion). This is why it is impossible to have (and why it's so frustrating sometimes to watch people try to have) this discussion without acknowledging their religion and presuppositions. Christians believe that human life has intrinsic value (meaning that it has value simply because of what it is) because we are made in God's image. If you take away us being made in God's image, then you would have to come up with some other justification for why human life has intrinsic value. On the flip side, if you believe that human life has extrinsic value (meaning that it is only valuable insofar as it has certain functionality or certain characteristics), then you also have to justify that side. People skip over this part of the debate completely. But as Nate was saying, this is the key area.
The fact that the Abortion topic is even something people feel has substance enough for debate is truly a testament to how little people understand the world, including Mr Shapiro. Is Abortion bad? Yes, is Life valuable? Yes? BUT a parent has the legal right to make life AND death decisions ICO (In Care Of) their child. Similar to how when a human being OF ANY AGE is in a Comatose state the medical facility will reach out to whoever is the closest to the law pertaining ones rights and responsibilities to make decisions on behalf of that person. Does that make it any less sad? No. But we aren’t going to remove a person’s right to make decisions on behalf of their children, parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters etc just because we don’t like the ugly reality of Abortion or death. It’s simply not a topic that has enough substance for debate.
The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance.
Please review Stephanie Connors!! She has some of the best Pro-Life exchanges from a philosophical perspective
Awesome, I'll definitely check that out! Thanks for the suggestion 😊
Ok that made me feel totally out of the loop. I did not know she got married and had a baby. Formerly Stephanie Gray, I agree, in my opinion she is the #1 pro-life speaker/apologist.
Trent Horn and ERI and Frank Beckwith would be next. Also someone that doesn't appear probably on a lot of lists would be Kerry Baldwin (another female).
I gave Stephanie some extra points because she's a woman. I think when communicating to feminists, men are already at a disadvantage because all of the built up hostility. For practical
reasons, I think women need to
be at the helm of the PLM. (Although having men is vitally important,
particularly to positively influence other males into doing right by their unborn children and supporting mothers)
As to her claim about viability, (the baby being dependent on an umbilcal cord to sustain the child), then does breast feeding mean that the child feeding off thier mother nullifies the fact that the baby is still needing the mother to nourish it "using her body" ? It's faulty logic because if the mother is unable breast feed due to a physiological problem, then it's like saying that an umbilical cord would then be non existent in the context of her claim. The viability argument in its entirety is absurd.
Crowder makes it clear that those videos aren't a debate. It's too force people to try to rationalize their beliefs. He believes that people don't have to actually think about or rationalize what they spout. They are really good.
Who knew Jonnah Hill was Pro-Choice??? 😂😂😂
Sorry but he sounds 100% like Jonnah right???
I've always liked Crowder's "pro choice" viewpoint. That he is pro-choice. So long as the choices are abstinence, contraception, adoption, and parenthood. Just not murder.
As someone who is a foster parent I can't speak for everywhere but in my state babies go fast in my time of almost 3 years of being a foster parent I've only gotten one call for a baby and it was right before I got my license so my licensing worker wouldn't allow me to take her and I have not gotten a call since for a baby.
The question of why we think the baby is more important than the woman is so uninformed, the entire belief of pro life is that they are equally valuable, they are both life and we want to protect both the of them and we do that significantly more effectively than pro choice, the sheer amount of support groups for women who wanted an abortion but chose life is staggering
A newborn can always find adoptive parents. Many times, older children are not adopted due to the damage birth parents caused by choosing NOT to place the newborn up for adoption and instead, selfishly choosing to try to raise a child they don’t want. Had people chosen adoption at birth, or shortly after, we wouldn’t see an overburdened foster system or rampant child neglect.
I hate the prochoice adoption response. Anyone who’s tried can tell you that the list for a newborn is a trillion miles long, nearly all those kids in the system were put in as a toddler or later.
I don't think it really matters whether he convinced that young lady of anything. The thousands of people that are watching that may be on the fence are the ones that he is most concerned with. So he has to keep in mind that his goal is not to placate her but to show the faulty reasoning of her position, so that the listener will give thought toward the pro life worldview
What people need to understand is that kids in foster care are not unwanted kids necessary,but all the time kids that have been removed from their parents! Adoption and foster care are totally 2 different things!
My wife has opposite opposing views, and we can't find a middle ground on this topic.
I think the biggest reason for the Satire in these videos that were made is to reach the middle. Because they know that at anybody on one side of the argument has made their minds up. Which is why these situations are well documented. To be viewed by that person who's on the middle ground thinking then. Okay, well, What's the right answer? And they call these folks out with common sense.
And the pro choice group has a really issue when they say a baby isn’t “human” or doesn’t have “personhood” because they don’t have relationships, memories or any of the things he mentioned because you’re right, there’s always an example of an adult who doesn’t possess all these things yet they’d argue ALL adults DO have autonomy and the right to life and any version of life they see fit. They’re the “accepting” “inclusive”“etc etc Very difficult if not impossible to merge those two ways of thinking.
IM EXCITEDDDD!!!
Most of the time the "Ben Shapiro DESTROYS" or "Ben Shapiro SHREDS" videos aren't posted by The Daily Wire or Ben himself. Usually it's fans or Clip based RUclips Channels. I've heard Ben say he doesn't like those titles because he wants to have civil debate.
I really enjoy your videos bro!
Thank you! Heyyyy, now THATS a mustache 😎
@@WiseDisciple haha to be honest, it was a snapchat filter. I tried growing it on my own, but my mustache wouldn't cooperate. Haha
It is astounding that the whole of America is actually just ignoring the crux of the opposite sides argument and fixates on the technicality of said arguments. People don't want to acknowledge that they understand what the other person is trying to say and are willing to deliberately fault the other person for not presenting an impeccable argument.
The all caps are a Ben Shapiro meme. I'm surprised they didn't include "WITH FACTS AND LOGIC".
The last girl, personally I’m almost certain that she has had an abortion or is currently debating having one. She personalizes this so well because this is personal to her. She is desperately trying to justify what she has done or what she is about to do. I feel a lot of sympathy for her but she is wrong and he is trying to explain why that is a baby and she must acknowledge abortion is murdering another human.
Pro choice is so difficult to defend. Most of it is just logical fallacy and emotion. And screaming. Althoug the last thing is shared with lots of pro lifers.
There are some more sophisticated pro-choice people out there but I don’t find their arguments compelling.
@Please enter a name they have arguments, but those have to be based on the devaluation of life that is in women during pregnancy. They have to decide when that life becomes a human being. The extreme position is that it has value as a human being when it is born. They have to explain why. And that is very, very difficult.
The best they can do is to stick to women's right to abort at very early stage because they made the decision that it is not human but a lump of cells that are yet to be developed into thinking feeling beings. In that case, in her eyes, women are getting rid of a parasite form, not a baby. The future development of fetus is not considered here nor it intrinsic value. Of course, in a materialistic view, a soul is not even in equation. All of these arguments can be debated and are not invalid once God is taken out of the equation.
33:33 There it is! In what she just said, (The Real Problem is), "you are by changing the legalities of, "the laws that I live by".. so for just as many people probably who are arguing either side of the discussion, it's not about right or wrong, or about God's law or man's written law, it's about the individual person's law's that they personally live by, that is what defines their moral standards & stance on the subject.. or any other particular subjects we debate about. & that's why we need God's law as an objective truth. Because it's right for everybody regardless of whether or not they agree with it, because the laws of men are subjective in nature whereas God's law's are not.
30:04 she is deflecting
31:44 she is deflecting
32:12 she is deflecting
You see it a bit in the end clip. I do wonder if this wasn't wrapped into a whole load of other issues in relation to things like socialised health care if you would get a different result in the outlook on this subject.
Yeah, that's an interesting point! I'm sure for a lot of people it is all wrapped up together
Kudos to the second guy for consistency at least
I always have a tough time with the terms used. Fetus is Latin for “baby” or “small child” so they are saying it’s not a baby it’s a baby.
I know this isn't the topic of this, my wife and I had kids out of the foster system with the opportunity to adopt, once we reached that point the system took the kids away, the system has really big faults, and secondly to every baby put up for adoption there's 5+ couples applying
I’ve adopted three children from foster care. I find the argument that those children would be better aborted to be especially vile. I have so much trouble respecting a person that makes such a statement and sadly I have a family member that thinks that way.
Not all children in the foster system are eligible for adoption, many in the system have a court goal for returning home. A 2019 study by the Annie c Courtney foundation shows at the time, out of 400,000 children in foster care, 25% were waiting for adoption and 20,000 would age out. Not a great argument either
That kid at 17:00 talking to Crowder was great in Super Bad. :)
Would you be willing to review the debate with Antony Flew, and Theist, Gary Habermas on Jesus resurrection? I have been really enjoying your content!
You ever wonder how much more effective Ben Shapiro would be if he didn’t lace so much satire in the way he says things…
It took awhile for Sala to admit these aren’t serious debates. They’re informative entertainment. You should put Shapiro or whomever up against an intellectual equal.
Just an FYI: Viability outside the womb means that it is possible for the baby, through normal development or medical intervention to be able to continue living. There is a portion of the period of time of a pregnancy in which if the baby were removed from the womb, there is no way it could continue to live, even with medical intervention, and that would be termed unviable.
A problem with viability being a standard of when abortions can be done is that varies based on available technology as well as technological advancement. Viability has increased since that standard was put in place as far as what is possible with technology. And, considering differing levels of access to technology, even within the US, two babies could be delivered prematurely by the same amount of time, but at two different hospitals. One hospital posses the necessary equipment and personnel with training and the other does not so that the one baby survives and the other does not due to differences in the level of technology available at the two hospitals. This becomes more pronounced when talking about different countries.
So, it would be ok to kill one baby in one hospital or a different country because there's a lack of technology to be able to deliver it at a particular stage but not ok in another hospital or country where a baby at that same stage could be delivered and live??? This is a dubious way of determining when it's ok to have abortions.
Note: the use of the word baby here does meet with common definitions of the word baby. I could use the term fetus, which is a term used by the medical profession to indicate a specific period of development. I have chosen to use the word baby, which encompasses such things as newborns and fetuses.