The Redirect: Why facts matter on both sides of abortion debate
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- Abortion is deeply tangled up in politics, personal beliefs, and individual experience. But the key is to have every conversation, no matter how contentious, grounded in facts.
Over the Christian Science Monitor’s 108-year history, we’ve built a legacy of high-quality, distinctive journalism because we recognize that news is more than facts. It’s the story of how we are each trying to make our homes, communities, and nations better. What matters are the values and ideals that drive us, not just the who, what, when, and where of the news. Visit us online at: www.csmonitor.c...
Subscribe to our RUclips channel: / csmonitor100
Follow us on Facebook: / christiansciencemonitor
Follow us on Twitter: / csmonitor
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
While I believe all lives, even unborn ones, are important, making abortion illegal wouldn't decrease the abortion rate. According to the statistic presented in the video, abortion rate rather increases when abortion is illegal. Since we clearly can see making abortion illegal is not helpful, we should rather let abortion to be legal, giving people freedom of choice.
They didn’t say abortion increases when it becomes illegal they said in places where it’s illegal there are higher rates. I don’t think more people get abortions when it becomes illegal, that really doesn’t make sense. I think countries with higher abortion rates just implemented the laws. Idk for sure but those are my thoughts
Also look at the Texas abortion ban that happens recently. Within a month abortions reduced by about 50% that seems effective to me.
@@nickstojic6995 the number of reported cases reduced by 50%. The back alley abortions never stop no matter how strict the ban gets
@@nickstojic6995 decreased by 50% of reported cases
@@HaventSleptIn30Years Can you point me towards that stat that indicates that almost all of the other 50% got a back alley abortion. I seriously can't find any illegal abortions stats for texas
This is one of the most fair and unbiased pieces of media I have literally ever seen related to abortion, and it came from a Christian channel!
You haven’t seen much then
@@AndrewF321 i have actually. Almost all media related to abortion is clearly biased and relies exclusively on strawmen representations of the other side
Pro-life people people claiming that pro-choice people are trying to kill babies, and pro-choice people claiming that pro-life people hate women and are trying to create a punishment for sex.
It's all just ridiculous petty squabbling, all in unbelievably bad faith. This video is a breath of fresh air properly representing both sides of the argument.
@@iSchmidty13 You think saying abortion is the killing of babies is bad faith?
Because NOT ALL Christian are unreasonable
Yesss
I love this video. It’s not on either side. It’s just an informative video where you yourself can make your own idea and opinion out of the information from this video.
YESSS
@@EnderEntertain pack your instruments, head outside, take vests also, it's a bit cold and chilly, we are going to andover today, put everything next to the side window, hopefully we get a good rating this is professional
it is firmly on the pro-choice side
@@AvgustGeorgi Kells and windmills and shay mccay dark wood cabinets while there's oil and grease on the chemistry lab tables while there's lots of complaints about that in the new room you go in one day.
Next Andover trip in 2 days when you're on the bus and when you hear the noise, it reminds you of compounds
"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners, immigrants, the sick, the poor, widows, orphans. All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible, they all get thrown under the bus for the unborn
true
W
Pro-lifers don't "defend" unborns.
They attack them all the time.
What you need to understand about the pro-life ideology is that they don't see women as villains, they see unborns as villains.
Pro-lifers will bark and whine up and down about how "all lives are precious" and "how could you kill such a precious little baby".
But listen to pro-lifers on literally any other topic and they reveal their true face.
Pro-lifers can't go 5 seconds without whining about how "Kids these days" are lazy, disrespectful, entitled, spoiled, bratty, or whatever cliched insult they pull out of their ass.
And they explicitly use their imaginary beliefs to defend real violence and abuse towards kids.
Everything from baptism to circumcizion to spanking to shock torture to molestation to beating a child to death are all atrocities that pro-lifers commit everyday, and they believe they are in the right doing so.
Don't believe me? Listen to PragerU's video "How to get kids to listen", and then remember that EVERYONE who opposes abortion has those exact same attitudes towards unborns.
If you didn't already hate pro-lifers, you have more than enough reason now.
Pro-lifers always come with their massively egos, saying "You're murdering an innocent baby".
But pro-lifers are left speechless when I rub their own words against them.
Pro-lifers say, in clear english, that they believe children are born evil and need to be physically tortured because their religion says so.
"Spare the rod, spoil the child" is every pro-lifer's catchphrase.
I wish I was joking.
All I can say is, pro-lifers can go die in hell.
I don't wanna hear another one of those entitled bastards pretending they have empathy for unborns, when they themselves have a declared hatred for the youth.
Pro-lifers are the same assholes who whine about teenagers being "stupid" or "lazy" or "too sensitive".
Now take pro-lifers insults and apply them to unborns.
Baby killer? Don't you mean brat killer? Or snowflake killer? Or little monster killer?
Pro-lifers seriously believe that children are the villains of the world and that child abusers are "poor souls" suffering at the hands of "those brats"!
That's why they voted for a child molester as their president.
That's why christians and priests molest children.
That's why they beat children to death for "being gay" (which is what people mean when they say they "Defend the family", by the way).
That's why they bully innocent trans people into commiting suicide.
Pro-lifers are to children are to children as Nazis are to jews.
Pro-lifers are OK with a woman murdering her child, as long as she does it in the name of "defending the family".
To say I despise pro-lifers would be putting it lightly.
I want these bastards to be locked up and beaten daily for the rest of their lives. Only then will pro-lifers have a taste of their own medicine.
Yes, let's ignore the thousands of pro-life pregnancy resource centers, of which some care for mothers and their children for years after their child is born, and let's also ignore the fact that the vast majority of adoptions in the US are by Christian couples and Christian adoption agencies.
@@nippymutt9018 Let's ignore the ammount of Christians who are complete assholes towards minors in an infinitude of ways.
No one in this planet has a moral high ground to oppose abortion.
Good to see a video on the subject that isn’t just rhetoric
I agree.
My thing is that, you can't just say "no abortions" and be done with it. You don't think abortions should be legal, fine, but what is your solution then? women that are going to get abortions don't want the child or can't take care of it, so we need to find an alternate solution for abortion if you don't like it.
Adoption. Adoption is so expensive. When anti-abortion people say every life is valuable, they really mean it lmao. Why isn't adoption free? Are you saying that a child needs to be bought in order for it to have parents? That just limits their chances of being adopted and having a family. So then they go into foster care and some foster homes are nice, but the majority aren't. Most kids will just be tossed from home to home to people who only care about a check. Then when they get to a certain age, they'll age out and practically be thrown to the curb. Most in those situations will either become homeless, end up with an addiction, or in a life of crime/prison.
All that could be avoided if someone had an abortion. But you still disagree with abortion? Okay. If you have to come up with alternatives. Whether that be working on child service reform( with lower adoption prices, better social workers, etc.), giving money to women who abort only because of financial issues, etc. You can't just ban abortions and think that the debate will end. That's naïve and not how the world works.
Sex education and contraceptives. We need to have sex education taught in school and not just that awkward moment where you all go to the auditorium and the gym teacher tells you about sex. No we need to have full units in health class about it where you learn about condoms, how to out them on, why we need them, different types of them, risk of having sex, sexual diseases you can catch, pregnancy, birth control, etc. Studies have shown that schools that have proper sex education have less teen pregnancy rates. I mean it's common, the more you educate someone, the less they'll make bad decisions.
We need to put our religions and our morals aside and start talking about practicality. If you ban abortions cold turkey, children will just be thrown into the system or will end up in bad homes.
Incredible explanation, love this man.
So you're saying that the parent that have birth to the child isn't sufficient enough to raise them? So they just give them away to the state? Sounds to me that abortion is just bad parenting.
@@_steamfunk_2271 That isn't what they are saying at all. There are reasons why women get abortions. If we focus on resolving those issues, women would be far less likely to get an abortion and would be far more accepting of an abortion ban.
It has nothing to do with bad parenting.
Even though I don’t support abortions, I agree with the consequences of many adoptions, but it’s all about solving the problem before it happens, we may never get to the point where there are no abortions or everyone can financially sustain the baby, but we can work for that goal, just as we want murder rates to go down or robberies to go down, I believe that the same effort it is put right now to legalizing abortion everywhere, should be redirected into prevention (sex ed, economy) and the after effects (adoption agencies etc) I truly believe that both sides can work together, because even though many people support the right to abortion, I believe or want to believe that they know it’s not a good thing to do, so if we can work towards less abortions instead of more, why not?
I'm sorry. Practicality over Morals? Do you hear yourself? That's basically saying Convenience over Life.
How can you messure how many illegal abortions are being done in a country where it is illegal?
hax
I just want to say this: Your probably right, no matter what side your on. It’s a matter of which life you value more. Which also means the other side is also correct. When it comes to the worst case scenario, it is one life or another. Both choices are equally valid. There is little reason to continue the debate, when the time could be spent finding a compromise. Neither side will like it, but if one isn’t found then the debate will never end and no progress will take place.
I must say, I find America's politics really strange. In my country, this topic isn't even up for discussion, and neither is gay marriage.
It's interesting to watch. But I suppose every country has it's issues.
@@kingmonde I’m curious, what is the law on this in your country?
@@trevordillon1921 abortion is 100% legal, it's actually free if you can't afford it. Actually going to the hospital for anything is free if you can't afford it.
As for gay rights, well in our constitution, it states that nobody can be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. So gay marriage is allowed. No business can reject a person based on their sexuality, you can get fined a lot of money if your business if you claim religious freedom.
@@kingmonde canada?
@@trevordillon1921 Clearly, yes. He said "Constitution" so I tend to think of that one Constitution who is really open on that subject.
Thank you for mentioning that making abortion illegal doesn’t stop it from happening. That is such an important fact that anti-abortionists miss.
It mind boggles me that no can talk about education. Education on how we can take many steps to avoid even getting close to the idea of abortion. Responsibility has never been a top priority in this country, rather compensation. We never can focus on root issues. I definitely dont agree with abortion, and the only time I would agree would be in the case of rape. but that is such a small percent of all abortion cases that it is ruled out. Instead if everyone could focus on being better humans we wouldnt even have to divide ourselves this way and save this practice purely for when it is truly needed. Idk just my thoughts
The world is fundamentally wrong, the fact that rapes even happen is just disgusting. I agree with you, I don’t agree with abortion, but situations of rapes shouldn’t put the victims in jail for killing the baby. They should get a fine, but the rapist should get an even bigger punishment. As for miscarriages and the mother accidentally falling and killing the baby, I’m not sure why people decided woman should go to jail for that. It’s not their fault, they didn’t intentionally kill the baby.
@@ducksama8448 their not even baby’s? A fetus is not a baby?
@@kal-elcastillo8453 it has a heart beat and its living your striping a person from there life just because your to lazy to be pregnant or if your a guy to lazy to put and balloon on
@@justmeandi8256 just because I dont agree with abortion do I believe the woman should be sentenced as a felon, i definitely think that what theyre currently doing is rather harsh and I can understand your emotions towards it. However notice how I said we need to educate each other instead of always compensating for the worst. If a womans life is in jeopardy or she was raped, basically forcibly impregnated by somebody, than I believe they should not be criminalized, but I dont believe it should be an openly available thing to every individual if they don't meet certain requirements. Obviously knowing how congress is those requirements would probably be dumb but thats not what im arguing. My point is that if we educate each other on the reality of the situation all of this can be avoided. Such as responsible sex. You live under a rock if you think sex isnt over glorified to out simply and is way too common than it should be. Mainly amongst young teens. I wont lie i was definitely irresponsible at times but i was more than prepared for what could come had i had a weak pull out game. But people need to wake up to reality and realize that while sex does feel good, that doesn't mean it's something you should abuse or treat irresponsibly. Its literally how we reproduce so youre a fool if you dont expect the POSSIBLE outcomes. People have have such an entitled sense to victimhood its astonishing. Another thing to add is if you do your education or research, youll learn that more than 85-90% (depending on sources) of reasons for women getting abortions is due to self inconvenience, not personal health or rape. The amount of people that try to push abortion as some sort of necessity is astounding actually, they like to make it seem as if every single abortion case is a life crisis. No hate or nothin either I got nothing but love for everybody and i only wish for peoples safety and well being, but we also have to remember that responsibility is a core fundamental aspect to life, without out you will fail.
@@kal-elcastillo8453 ? I said a fetus was a baby when did I say it wasn’t?
That’s a very bizarre statistic but at the same time I believe that abortion rates are caused by the culture of a society. I say the statistic is bizarre due to the rise in the number of abortions per person, a further promotion of promiscuity/hook up culture in America, lack of accountability for people who have abortions and most importantly a rise in viewing life as disposable
Most people I know who support abortion view it as a last resort. Even women who have abortions in tough situations can feel extreme guilt after- further guilted by protests outside abortion clinics.
I do agree with you about safe sex and sexual education for Americans. We have a high percentage of teen pregnancy compared to other developed countries and that’s definitely worrying.
However, I don’t agree with blaming everything on the women “viewing life as disposable.”
Pregnancy is actually really dangerous for the mother! Especially because the USA has high maternal death rates (in comparison to other developed nations) due to extremely expensive healthcare in the US.
In addition, the adoption system in the USA is a total- complete mess. There’s cases of foster families stealing from their children, abusing them, or selling them.
I hope this sways your views on the women who choose abortion. Of course, there are always people who misuse and abuse abortion, but I’d argue abortion is extremely necessary until the USA gets its shit together.
If you want links for further reading, I can totally supply that :)
@@sticksandabush7491 wait do you have statistics on the cause of pregnancy for those having abortions or is that information not asked? A lot of the stats are usually really vague
thank you! and I agree. I knew a girl who basically used abortion like birth control and honestly didn't seem to give a f, even when the dude who got her pregnant wanted her to NOT get one.
@@-obamium5320 This part of the article is probably what you’re looking for, though.
“In the 2004 US data, 89% of women reported more than one reason for having an abortion; slightly more than half reported at least four reasons. The most frequently cited reasons were lack of financial preparedness (56%), partner-related (55%), and interference with future opportunities (54%). These results were comparable with the findings on women’s main reason for having an abortion using data in the same survey (Table 2), in that lack of financial preparedness was also frequently cited as a main reason. While partner-related concerns and interference with future opportunities were frequently reported when multiple reasons were allowed, they were less likely to be cited as the primary reason. The recent US data from 2008-2010, presented in Table 3, show that the top three motivations for seeking an abortion were not being financially prepared (40%), not the right time for a baby (36%), and partner-related concerns (31%).” Cited from the Multiple reasons for abortion section.
Well, my previous comment with the link keeps getting deleted. I apologize. The source is from Reasons why women have induced abortions: a synthesis of findings from 14 countries from the NCBI.
Additionally, women are generally not forced to explain their reasons for abortion but there are surveys.
You can't choose for other people.
I guess we should get rid of all murder laws then. After all, it's there choice to get rid of someone that's a nuisance to them. It's not my business
True but you can definitely choose God who is the absolute truth.
@@christiansnaturestudio6599 but you also cant choose God for other people 😂
@@shivamsrivastava6312 but we can have some Christian values as the law of the land like “do not murder” for example
@@jannettowers6731 Im pro-life
I do have genuine questions on abortion, not to judge nor attack anyone, but as an attempt to educate myself. I'm aware that to have an abortion must be a very difficult decision and that the decision maker, might unintentionally not be viewing abortion, from all angles (with all its implications). These questions are the result of me discerning on the topic and having these data gaps as a result.
I am solely attempting to educate myself, understand better all perspectives and reach a common ground-one.
1) In order to reach a truly objective point of view (on any topic), isn't it not only valid, but necessary, to analyze such in terms of all the parties involved? In the case of abortion, is it valid to ask not only questions on how the parents are affected by it, but also how the conceived being is affected as well?
2) Religion aside, is there any SCIENTIFIC evidence, that human life does NOT begin at conception?
Is there any other phenomena during pregnancy, that is MORE prominent than conception (to the point in which such event could be considered the actual beginning of human life, instead of conception)?
3) If anticipating a challenging life for the child justifies the abortion, does that mean that poverty and adverse life conditions, are reasons for people's lives to be ended? If I assume that your life will be difficult, does that give me the right to decide whether you get to live or not? Does that give me the right to decide over your life? Is ending your life because I am assuming that it will be difficult, fair to you? Wouldn't I be eliminating all possibility for you to build YOUR life and overcome adversity, by cutting it and taking it away from you right from the beginning? Isn't that a much bigger abuse over another human being (ending its life), than any other type of abuse he/she could go through in life?
4) Why should standing up against an alleged abuse towards someone (i.e. the human being whose life is being ended through an abortion), mean that those standing up are obliged to financially support the alleged victim of abuse? If my neighbor abuses his child and I report such abuse to authorities (as an attempt to stop it), does that mean that I am obliged to adopt my neighbor's child and financially take care of him? How is opposing abortion linked, to having to become financially responsible for those whose lives are ended through abortion? Does that mean that, if I witness someone being abused in anyway, my moral responsibility does not end at denouncing the abuse to authorities, but I am also morally obliged to embrace full financial responsibility, for that abused someone?
5) If I claim that those against abortion are wanting to decide over my body, isn't exactly that what I'm doing, if I get an abortion? By ending the human life growing inside of me, ain't I deciding over another human body as well (the one growing in my womb)? Am I not doing the same thing, that I claim those against abortion are doing to me (choosing over someone else's body)? Am I not doing an actual worse thing than "choosing over someone else's body" by getting an abortion, since through the abortion I'm actually choosing over someone else's LIFE? If so, isn't a double standard to claim that others want to decide over my body (by not supporting abortion), when that's exactly what I'm doing to the human being growing inside of me (deciding over another human life)?
Complementing above, many pro-abortion people have used the "right to bodily autonomy", as their main argument. My logic makes me ask: Is "bodily autonomy" a more important right, than the right to life itself? Whichever damage or inconvenience your body suffers due to pregnancy, will last 9 months (or a little longer with post-labor recovery), but you will most likely recover most of that bodily autonomy, after giving birth. On the other hand, ending your life (which is what's done to the baby), is irreversible, there is no going back and the damage to the human killed, is perpetual. Also, isn't LIFE indispensably needed in the very first place, before any other type of right? If you have a combo of "life with rights"...and you take the "rights" element, life itself can still exist. This does not happen the other way around. If you take the "life" element out of the "life with rights" combo, rights can not continue existing without a life. Therefore, life on its own, DOES come above any other right. This is why, the violation made to the newly alive being, is more aggravating (ending its LIFE) than the violation of "bodily autonomy" made to the mother, by the NATURAL phenomena of pregnancy. Whichever inconvenience suffered by the mother due to pregnancy ("bodily autonomy"), does not reach the same level of aggravation, as that of the violation committed against the newly alive being (ending its LIFE), in order to justify such life being exterminated. Or does it? How?
Again, I am verbalizing my discerning process and resulting doubts on abortion, solely to try to educate myself, understand better all perspectives and reach a common ground-one.
In my opinion - in short - fetal dehumanization is bad for living people.
Whether an act is bad or good is based on the influence on the outside world and the influence on the ACTOR. Therefore, it can be argued that the fetus (until its brain and nervous system is not developing) is not important in itself - because it is not aware - but still be against abortion.
I - I can understand some of the pro-choice arguments, but I don't accept the rhetoric that abortion is fun, neutral.
Someone who is pro choice, not by unpleasant necessity, but by some kind of war, pride, immaturity is deleted for me.
I believe that supporting abortion is due to the moral weakening of people (as well as men and women). The right to abortion is just comfortable and unresponsive. To justify this, there are terms for a fetus like "clump of cells" and are cloaked in intellectual slogans.
These are all valid points in the sense that they make sense as critical arguments given a viewpoint you already hold. And that viewpoint is the following: abortion (termination of a fetus) is equivalent to murder (termination of a human outside of the womb). All of these arguments / equivalencies stem from that, and my understanding is that the pro choice side does not believe abortion is equivalent to murder, it’s more equivalent to putting down a pet. Thus you can have an opposing and logical argument against all of these points if you have this viewpoint (yes I’m ending a life / potential life, but it matters less than the impact it has on me).
I'll add my own response for whatever it's worth. (hoping i dont get attacked) I WAS pro life at one time, thinking nothing could justify me, a female person, to have an abortion if i ever got pregnant.... but... then i started experiencing chronic pain that requires alot of pain medication to get through the day at times. if i were pregnant i would be VERY limited on what i could do for my pain because pain medication poses a risk to the pregnancy. I started thinking about what if i got pregnant even when trying not too (contraceptives dont always work) and now im suddenly faced with the dilemma of sparing the child but suffering in pain for nine months resulting in my mental health declining even more than it already has due to the pain or end the pregnancy so i can continue to limit harm to myself.
i realized with this constant nagging fear that pro lifers would/were basically telling me that my life, my mental and physical health and comfort didnt matter in comparison to even a zygote. i would basically be told to suffer for nine months because the zygote/fetus ALWAYS matters more than the one carrying it. the fetus isnt conscious of its pain and suffering to point of longterm effects. the one carrying it is. but according to pro lifers the longterm effects of suffering (not just the pain i mentioned i fear but also sensory issues, issues caused by financial instability, some have actual self harm levels of negative reactions to feeling of something growing inside them) on the conscious individual isnt if any consequence in comparison to preserving life of unborn. nevermind tgat some can be traumatized by pregnancy. it doesnt matter to pro lifer because the trauma/harm the pregnant person experiences is so much less important compared to the unborn that the unborn is chosen every time. screw how the one carrying it is being affected both in the moment and longterm. (btw if i did get pregnant like this and went through with carrying it, true i would love the child but id also hate and likely be traumatized from the pregnancy. but it should be my decision on whether or not im willing to put myself through all that and whether i think i can handle it. pro-lifers want to take tgat decision away and say they kniw whats best for me when really they show they only care about the unborn. not me and not any other female dealing with these complex issues)
2) it's not about when does life start, it's about when does life become a right to them.
But what defines a right in the first place is a will, if u have a will to live then you have the right to live, u must want to live first (and not affected by your mental health, indoctrination or temporary state)
And pretty much fetuses don't have that, since everything in them is controlled by the mother through the umbilical cord
Now once that cord is cut/they are born, they start crying, crying for food, sleep, feeling pain... All are indirect indicators of a will to live, becuz when they want to eat, they also want to live...etc
Basically it's just about wether they have that right to life or not
@@ziad4826. The baby cries for food outside of the womb because the cord gives it all the necessary nutrients, it’s always alive, it will become a human being and every human being has a right to live.
If abortions are illegal (denied) every child conceived has a right to an appropriate environment, including nutrition, and medical care. We must do a better job of protecting them, the maximum sentence for abusing an infant or child is life in prison or death.
@Ace Spades women and men alike should take every step to ensure unwanted pregnancy doesn't occur. Doesn't mean people can't have safe sex. If a girl or woman does become pregnant, instead of shaming them like I assume your the type to do, assure the mother and child have the resources to be healthy and safe. Then maybe they won't feel the need to try and seek out an abortion.
Or just be a weirdo
@Ace Spades That is just incredibly backwards and you are actually shaming people for not being as brainwashed as yourself and believing every single thing religion says. It seems you aren't aware that such a thing as condom and birth control exists. Be honest and admit you're being influenced by outdated ideas of sexuality that come from religion.
@Ace Spades
Good parents keep their legs closed until marriage?
So that means you’re having sex in your marriage right? Or are you just having sex when you want to procreate. A woman can do everything she is supposed to and still wind up pregnant. But apparently you’re only allowed to have sex, only when you want to procreate.
Just because you want to push your religious views on us and act better than us doesn’t mean we will just shut up and listen.
Some people don’t have a choice of whether or not they want to have sex or if they want to get pregnant. Some Children do not get the choice. I’m not going to assume but some people blame women and sometimes children for being raped.
Catholicism has a Virgin woman who gets pregnant, so either you believe a women can get pregnant without having sex or you don’t.
I can go on and on how stupid your comment is because you obviously have one train of thought and you want to stay that way.
@Ace Spades let’s say you do wait until you get married, what happens if you get pregnant and your husband decides to leave you and the child?
The husband has a right to leave if he doesn’t want to but the wife is forced to do it on her own now?
A woman and her husband can plan a pregnancy and there’s a chance the father will still leave.
What then?
@Ace Spades that is already a developed child, that child can breathe, feel pain etc. stop comparing a fetus to child who was born. It’s not the same.
appreciated this video. Found it though provoking to consider some of the information presented. Thank you. Please keep making videos and having them available for viewing
Abortion per 1000 women is a useless statistic when you consider that pregnancy per 1000 women varies considerably. In many countries the fertility rate is four or five times greater than in the USA, so having 37 abortions per 1000 women vs 31 abortions per 1000 women is in fact misleading. A far more useful statistic would be abortions per 1000 live births.
I'm not a huge fan of abortion but I have these issues with the prolife crowd. 1) these people are often against thorough sex education for kids to prevent abortion 2) they underplay the fact that birth can kill a woman, and can maim her for life in various ways 3) they don't seem to care about victims of rape, incest, domestic violence for whom pregnancy has been imposed on them and 4) they don't seem to care about the impact on families, societies and the children themselves of having large numbers of unwanted and neglected or abused kids in society, where are the prolife people lining up to adopt these unwanted babies? I personally think those who are militantly prolife are just authoritarian and I don't believe they care about babies at all.
I'm pro life, and I understand where you're coming from. To me these seem like diversions that are thrown in order to get people to turn away from the bigger issue of baby genocide thats happening in America. I'll just go through each point to explain why none of these things persuade me on my opinion:
1) rather than being against sex education, I personally see more pro lifers saying that they want sex education to be between parent and the child. After sex education was introduced in schools, there was an uptick in terms of sexual promiscuity withing the education system. It has more to do with the type or connotation of the sexual education that is currently provided in schools. I'm currently in highschool, and we were told about different sexual positions, gay and lesbian sex, masturbation, etc. All of which I view to be unecessary in a school environment. Sex education should only really involve the biological aspects of sex; cause and effect type of stuff concerning pregnancy and stds. I personally don't see the need to bring in sexual preferences to the subject, as that is for the individual to figure out without being coaxed.
2)it depends if we're talking about a national or global scale. If we're talking about America purely, less than 1% of women die in child birth (I've cranked the numbers for a school report sophomore year, take how many babies are born in a year then take how many women die from labor complications in a year and you get the number) and it is tragic, I'm not denying that. But to use that as a reason for abortion, I see unfit. A) because abortions are dissportionatly not for the purpose of saving the mothers life, this is the more pragmatic reasoning. B) do you blame the mother if the baby is miscarried? The proper answer would be no. I don't blame the baby for what happens to the mother. Neither party should be blamed for an accidental death, and I stick by that opinion. This is the one that has more ideological reasoning. Both contribute to my opinion on that issue.
3) you're right they don't really seem to care about that issue in comparison to their fervent opinion on abortion. Again, it has to do with the overall numbers of how many women get abortions are rape and incest related as well as the whole blaming an innocent byproduct of an ugly reality. Rapists and horrible criminals should get the death sentence, innocent babies should not. (Foot note: a lot of people call pro lifers hypocrites for supporting the death sentence, which I truly find moronic. You truly have to commit acts of pure evil in order get the death sentence. And I personally believe that it should be a selective punishment for those who have done horrific crimes. An innocent baby is not comparable to a homicidal maniac)
4) actually, historically, being pro abortion was a republican opinion to have because of the effects financially and the burden it creates within the home. The whole stereotype of Republicans only caring about money kinda divulges from that, and btw a lot of republican congressmen and governors still only care about the financial aspect. Which is why I'm not a republican, I'm an independent. Just because someone is a burden does not mean that they are any less human or have any less rights than you. The constitution clearly states that every American person has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The key word is pursuit. It's not the guarantee of happiness, it's the pursuit. Just because the baby is going to be raised in financial hardship does not mean that their personal pursuit of happiness is obstructed. However, aborting them completely obstructs their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
All people are equal under the eyes of the law, and by extension God. It's not authoritarian to draw a clear line in what a person has the right to do and what they don't.
I hope this explains why a lot of stereotypical pro lifers give no leeway when it comes to abortion. ---a stereotypical pro lifer :)
(Edit: you may not be American based off your username so that's a big oof, sorry if my arguement doesn't really culturally translate well)
@@dingdring6317
1) Right, conservatives are against sex education in school and prefer to talk to their children at home. The problem is that they either don't or give substantially and noticeably worse sex education.
Your personal experience with sex education may mean that your sex education system needs to be adjusted or maybe that the parts you didn't find helpful or interesting were helpful and interesting to others.
2) I think he meant that they underplay the risk when compared to abortion and that there can be lifelong effects of childbirth for the mother. I agree these are very rare but both sides should be as truthful about the possibilities and their chances of occurring, right?
A) I am not sure if he is using it as a reason to get an abortion but rather that the option of abortion should be allowed. This is a health issue for the mother and the mother should be allowed to make her decision with the best information.
B) I don't understand why you are talking about miscarriages or blame.
3) Being raped and it resulting in a pregnancy is rare, true. However, the idea that you must not abort the unborn child just because it didn't commit a crime is crazy. This is trying to treat the unborn as equal to born humans. We don't do that almost anywhere else currently.
4) The point is that we need to make sure children are doing better in this country now. Republicans don't seem to want to do that.
The Constitution doesn't say we have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit to happiness. You are thinking of the Declaration of Independence, which is not the same.
Their beliefs are influenced heavily by religion and nothing else. In the comments here you can see them trying to pretend like Science is on their side by arguing the fetus is 'life' or 'alive' at conception. Shows how little they actually know about the Science. Embarrassing how arrogantly certain they are of themselves too when they know nothing.
@@polarbear1713 The Ninth amendment states that listing specific rights in the Constitution does not mean that people do not have other rights that have not been spelled out.
@@cliffisaac6158 Right.
This was an incredibly prudent and helpful video for anyone who considers the issue. Thank you 🙏
Pro abortion is kind of wrong because the baby is stay alive even if the is no heart beat because if the baby was dead it would have smelled and the body would have been as a rotten corpse. But a baby in the womb do not smell or look like a corpse. So they are alive.
@@salometipsandtricks2786 that's not how it works. There's alive, dead, then there's neither. Dead is non life after life. Neither is non life before life.
@Ace Spades, murdering babies is always wrong. Abortion, even though I would argue is morally wrong, is not morally wrong because it is murder. If by abortion you mean "the termination of a pregnancy through medical means", then it is not "murdering babies". The fetus is not a baby. This is a crucial difference. Lest a debate ensure, you could argue that a newborn baby, fetus, and embryo all occupy similar ethical categories, but that is a real argument, unlike saying a medical procedure is simply murder.
@Ace Spades, fetus is Latin for baby, but this etymological fact has nothing to do with the ethical implications and differences between a fetus and a baby.
A baby and a fetus are not the exact same thing, as you have insinuated. I will illustrate why it is important to distinguish the ethical categories here. If there is no difference between a fetus and a baby, ethically speaking, then what is the difference between a fetus and an early stage embryo? If there is again no difference, then what is the difference between an unfused sperm or egg cell and an embryo? The only difference is that a new genetic predetermined cell hasn't been created yet, so if in a lab the genetic information of two individuals is combined via AI, then this is of the same ethical value as a living breathing human baby, according to this line of reasoning.
"Terminating" a pregnancy doe not mean carrying to term. Medically speaking, terminating a pregnancy means the opposite of carrying to term.
Again, I will point out that I hold the position that abortion is morally wrong. But we need to be clear with our understanding of the complexity of the issue and our terminology if we ever hope to have a holistic perspective.
@Ace Spades, Like I mentioned:
"...I will point out that I hold the position that abortion is morally wrong. But we need to be clear with our understanding of the complexity of the issue and our terminology if we ever hope to have a holistic perspective."
Even though I am fairly familiar with embryology and medicine, could you please explain to me how to 'terminate a pregnancy' without killing the fetus at 14 weeks?
As you mentioned: "...for a child created by AI in a lab being equivalent morally to a born child. Yes."
In my example there is NO actual child created by AI, just the genetic information (ie the genetic information of the father and mother). Not a biochemical copy, simply the information drafted on a computer program. Are you actually arguing that a computer document is morally equivalent to a living breathing recently-born human baby?
"Murdering the Unborn is morally abhorrent."
You may have some good points, but you need to define what you mean by "murder" and specifically lay out the categories of moral significance when it comes to baby, fetus, or embryo in order to have a "pro-life" position and not simply a "pro-birth" one.
One tip I will offer. It is not enough in the academic realm of ethics to simply state something normative with only descriptive claims. In saying:
"...it's wrong to murder an unborn child for the convenience of it's mother"
you made a normative claim. You need to explain why though, and with normative claims.
Take care. I do hope this helps.
Are there any people out there who are prepared to look at this subject carefully, critically and without just emotionally defending 'their side". All I see are bad arguments from both sides.
If you are pro-life, that’s great. Don’t have an abortion. But that doesn’t mean you get to force other people to follow YOUR personal beliefs.
If you are pro life that’s great. Don’t murder a newborn. But that doesn’t mean you get to force other people to follow YOUR personal beliefs on infanticide
@@gopher7691 Not infanticide at all. It’s called murdering someone out of self-defense, or more specifically murdering someone for the preservation of one’s own body/bodily autonomy. For example, if *YOU* tried to use my body against my will, I could kill you out of self defense and the courts would rule in my favor every time. So why should a fetus get more rights than you? Why should fetuses get special rights to use other people’s bodies against their will? You people say “right to life” but really what you mean is “the right to forcibly use someone else’s bodily organs against their will” because that’s exactly what it is. That’s not “the right to life”. That’s the right to use someone else’s body against their will, which isn’t a “right”, no person has that “right”. For some reason, you think fetuses should.
Also, for you people who love to say that abortion is genocide, there are four key differences between abortion and genocide. 1) Abortion can be considered self-defense since the fetus is living inside of and using the mother’s body against her will. Genocide cannot be considered self-defense because the victims are not violating the bodies of the perpetrators at all. 2) Genocide is systematic, whereas abortion is completely personal to that one woman, meaning abortions happen randomly and not systematically. 3) Genocide is coordinated. Abortions are not coordinated. There isn’t some Women’s Conference every year where a bunch of women get together and scream “YEAH! LET’S GO KILL THESE BABIES! YEAAAAHHH!!!!” And 4) Genocide is hateful. Abortion is not hateful. The woman doesn’t want her body being violated, so she ejects the human that is living inside of her without her permission. That’s not hateful. Also, most of these women don’t even want to have the abortion, they just feel trapped and they’re desperate; they feel that they *have to* have the abortion because they have no other choice. How do you stop that? By showing them their alternatives to abortion and providing them with the resources necessary for them to choose life instead. The woman has to tell you she’s pregnant and ask for these resources and support though. And why would a woman tell you she’s pregnant when abortion is banned? You’ll just report her to the police. So, counter-intuitively, abortion bans actually have been shown to INCREASE abortions.
If you are against murder, great. Don’t force other people not to commit murder. See the logic there? The only time abortion is “self defense” is when the mother’s life or health is in danger.
@@NinjaDog9123 The mother’s life/health are *always* threatened by pregnancy and childbirth. Why else would we need an entire armada of medical personnel devoted solely to pregnancy and childbirth? Because it’s so safe and dandy? No. And it’s wrong to force someone to endure threats to their health/life just because *YOU* want them to give birth against their will.
Also, let’s say pregnancy was perfectly safe and no one ever died or was injured from it. Even so, no one has the right to use my bodily organs against my will. Not even a baby. That’s infringing on someone’s bodily autonomy, so protecting one’s bodily autonomy is also self-defense.
We don’t even force criminals who stab people to give up their blood to save the stab victim. And yet here you are, telling women that they need to be forced to do a lot more than just donate some blood. She didn’t even commit any crime, either. All she did was have sex. And now you want her to “take responsibility” but what you really mean is “you need to be forced to give up your entire body and organs to someone else”. In what other situation are you okay with forcing someone to do that? Do you also think the father should “take responsibility” and be forced to give up his organs for the pregnancy as well? Or does this only apply to the woman for you people? For example, if the woman gets gestational diabetes and her kidneys start failing, that means both she and the baby will die because of the pregnancy, which was caused by the father. He CHOSE to have sex, he CHOSE to impregnate her, which is why she’s in this predicament now. So by your logic, the government should be able to force the father to donate his kidney to the mother, even if he says no because it’s a dangerous procedure that threatens his health/life.
@@azayzelderegis1655 their is risk in everything we do. Driving to work is risky. That is why there is an army of medical professionals at emergency rooms.
All laws banning abortion make exception for mortal danger to mom. The fact is almost all abortions are done for convenience. That is what pro lifers want to stop because killing an unborn human being for convenience is murder.
So I’ll make a deal with you. I will allow abortion in the case of mortal danger to mom, very serious health risk to mom, rape, and incest if you let me ban abortion for convenience. Deal?
Your straw man health argument is phony. No one wants pregnant women to die so all laws banning abortion make exception for that risk. What pro choicers want is for it to be legal for a pregnant woman to kill the unborn human being in her womb for convenience. Own it
This video needs to be watched by a lot of people
An embryo is or isn't not a "person". If it is, then abortion is murder because the right to life trumps a woman's bodily autonomy right due to the "duty to rescue" being greater as the woman's decisions led to that circumstance of potential death of an embryo.
If it is not a person, then the woman's bodily autonomy right trumps.
All of this boils down to this, when does an embryo go from being human life, to a person. The burden of proof rests on the pro lifers here. They have not defined this point yet in a defensible and logically consistent argument which is why they have lost the debate in court each time thus far.
Sorry but I think you need to take more time and think about your arguments. At a quick glance I can see two hole. There may be more.
1) murder is the illegal killing of a person so if abortion is legal then by definition it can't be murder 😂
2) the body attorney argument starts with the claim that we have this as a right. This is not an axiom, only a claim and therefore needs to be shown to be true. Until such time, the argument fails.
@@bjhcvuaerpigfy incorrect on both accounts, so your quick glance must have been a bit too quick.
First, I did not claim abortion was murder, and my comment was establishing how the courts came to the ruling that abortion was not the taking of a person's life, and thus not murder by legal definition.
Second about body AUTONOMY (not attorney) here is the definition of an axiom: a statement or proposition which is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true.
The right to body autonomy is legally derived from the fundamental rights laid out in the constitution declaration of Independence/Charter depending on your country. I'll use the US as an example though:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
14th amendment to the constitution
What this effectively translates to is that the ability for one to get an abortion is necessarily defaulted as legally entitled until a law is justified and passed saying otherwise. Ie no support is needed to "justify" body autonomy as it is an axiomatic right. It is an implied and de facto extension of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
@@InAVanByTheRivr my apologies for mis reading the first bit. It seems we both agree that abortion cannot be murder while it is legal.
On the second bit, on body autonomy ( not attorney: bloody auto correct 😂) l understand where you are coming from legally but I would still like you to give me a good justification morally (if you can please)
@@InAVanByTheRivr PS I think we are both on the same side: pro-choice.
I'm just looking for the best arguement and I don't believe the body atonomy arguement is the best. In a philosophical arguement an axiom has value because of its utility. If I'm having a conversation with a normal person I could use "the earth is a sphere" as an axiom to start an argument.
Because the earth is a sphere and a single light source will only light half of a sphere at any point in time, we can say it will always be night on Earth for half of the earth.
But I can't use "earth is a sphere" when talking with a flat earther. They are just going to say "no it's not" and the arguement is over.
When you say we have body autonomy to a pro lifer they just say "no we don't".
The body autonomy arguement will never win until we can get it back to something that they agree upon: an axiom.
I think there is potential in "liberty" and "burden of proof"
@@bjhcvuaerpigfy "we have body autonomy because we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by default unless a court can legally an thoroughly define grounds to infringe on those rights"
"no we don't"
"OK.... See you in court then, where you will love again like you have for the last 70 odd years :P"
That's how that debate goes.
Countries that prohibit abortion probably don't do much about sex ed and contraceptives, which would explain why they actually have higher abortion rates. If people really wanted to save lives they should invest more in sex ed and contraceptives, but being religious seems to be more important.
Well contraceptives dont always work, so its giving condoms to horny teenagers is like giving candy to sugar addicts. Its like saying “go have sex! Even though these condoms fail 15% of the time!” Seems like that would increase unwanted pregnancies right?
As I see it and have observed, abortion centers around the question of when does life begin-- at conception, somewhere during pregnancy, or at birth? Isn't this a theological question? If so, what ever happened to the separation of church and state? Why do the women and their doctors get almost all of the blame? Where are the men responsible? Something to ponder.
Stop pondering and stop abortion.
No, it's not a theological question it's science. A fertilized egg initiates life, scientists and biologists all agree. You don't need to be religious to think that ending a human life is immoral/should be illegal. Ultimately it's just been politicized so, in reality, the question of when does life begin is irrelevant.
@@Thelearner08365Scientists and biologists do not agree that life begins at conception.
The sperm and the egg cell do not initiate life because they are both already alive.
That’s part of why it is hard to determine when those cells become a person.
@@synchronizedchaos6099, made a nice argument. I would also point out that if conception is when a new life/person begins, then are true twins one life in two separate bodies? Note that if the answer is yes, then the actions one does should doom (legally and theologically) the other. If the answer is no, why not? They have the same DNA and the same conception event.
I think it's easier to argue that a person is a brain. So:
-two twins = two people;
-one body, one brain, two DNAs = one person (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_%28genetics%29#Humans);
-one body, two brains = two persons (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycephaly#Occurrence_in_humans).
Synchronized Chaos cells equal life. If scientists were to find cells on Planet Mars, then that would be called life.
It’s the woman’s choice period. And no one has the right to interfere with anyone’s life. Period.. not the government not the state.. the woman’s.
You’re right. No one has the right to interfere with anyone’s life, and that includes the baby’s life in the womb. The most basic human right is the right to life. It’s not a woman’s choice, because it’s not her body, it’s a baby’s body with separate DNA.
@@jessicazumbach1943 while I agree with your statement and stance on the issue.. fact is the mother is the one in the drivers seat..so she should have the say. It’s not up too you or me or anyone else to decide what’s best, your not the one in the situation nor am I..sounds cruel I know but nature can be cruel you and I are old enough to understand that. It is the woman’s choice.. she is the vessel to carry this life..and her life will be directly affected by this birth. Despite how you and I feel on the subject or anyone else feels..again it’s not our lives it’s hers.
@@travisdozier1357 no it’s not her life, it’s the child’s. The child didn’t choose death, as such the termination of said child is murder. The mother made her choice from the moment she spread her legs and let someone finish in her. Not to mention the plan b option. She made her choices, once that child is conceived it is no longer her choice to make as it is not her life most significantly affected by it.
@@kingorange7739 so if your wife was going to die because of the birth of a child or your daughter, or perhaps they were rapped.. you would not be for aborting the child?
@@travisdozier1357 firstly I love how you people keep trying to use statistical anomalies as excuses to justify the overwhelming amount of cases not done for that reason. It’s honestly baffling. To answer both your questions though because unlike you, I am not intellectually dishonest.
1. Nowhere did I say someone’s right to life had to end for the sake of the child. If there is a situation where the pregnancy is actively putting a high medical risk to the mother’s life, then her life would be prioritized. Obviously, especially given that the child would be likely to die along side her anyways. Almost no pro lifer would disagree with this. However a pregnancy that is actively endangering their life or health is not the same as one that is an inconvenience to said mother.
As for rape, once again statistical anomaly so it’s not even intellectually honest, but let’s play with it. Do i believe rape is bad? Yes. Do i believe the rapist should be castrated? Assuming it can be reasonably proven without a shadow of doubt, yes. Do i believe a child should receive the death sentence for the crime of his or her father? No. So no I would be against abortion even in rape cases, as it’s not the fault of the child. Also let’s just say rape was made an exception, how would that even be deducted and confirmed? Would we just take her at her word, or would there have to be some kind of investigation? So even taking away the practical issues and intellectually dishonest semantics, no. A child being killed to pay for the crime of his or her father is not morally right either. You punish the perpetrator, not a victim. And a child is victim of that like a mother is
I am neither pro life nor pro choice I think what everyone should be aiming is to teach sex education to children and to stop treating sex as a casual thing it is not!usage of contraceptions etc should be taught to teenagers as well so that we don't alwysz reach the abortion area. But things doesn't always happens the way we plan so abortion is necessary sometimes (r*** cases etc) the only morally right way for abortion is to abort the child before it can feel any physical pain.
@Anon Ymous Yeah kind of but I hate the way most pro choice dudes in social media sees abortion
I only consider abortion murder if it is done in an evil intention to wanted inflect harm and pain onto the fetus, I believe that women should have the right to choose what to do with their bodies, pro-lifers moan about it being murder but most them have never experienced childbirth nor pregnancy, not only that but banning abortion is just purely cruel, because that way you are forcing women into pregnancy and childbirth against their will, pro-lifers never think about the affects pregnancy has on a women, "the fetus feels pain when it's being aborted" and so does the mother during the entire 9 months pregnancy and childbirth, "if ki**ing a newborn is murder than why is abortion not murder" the newborn can breathe on its own and survive without being attachment to the mother and can at least eat and drink without the help of a placenta & the umbilical cord the newborn can survive without the mother attached to him/her whereas the embryo can't, it can't brethe on its own, it can't eat or drink on its own, it is surviving on because it attached to the mother, it is absolutely ridiculous the fact that people have the audacity to call abortion murder, the embryo is just a lump of cell growing nothing more.
Search for "dating single mother" and scroll down to the comment section. You'll see why you ought to have a choice and not be toyed with your emotions by other people's philosophical views on the issue. It's ultimately your decision to do one or the other. Do some introspection. Find out where you stand philosophically. You have the right to arrive at your own conclusions without feeling guilty about it.
The basic argument that you are making is not a very good one. Say you are a single mom and impoverished, living on food stamps below the poverty line. Let's imagine not that you're pregnant with a child but that you had the kid, and he is around half a year old. You are in the same position as the pregnant woman, except now the kid has been born. Why shouldn't you be able to kill the kid? The argument is that you're not going to be able to raise the kid in the circumstances proper to the child, guaranteeing them the best possible opportunity, so why is the child's right to life different now that the kid is born than before the kid was born? Because the argument being made is not about the stage of development or bodily autonomy, the argument is about the circumstances of the child. So if the argument is that living circumstances or future living circumstances of the child are insufficient to the needs of the child, you can kill the child; that argument applies equally to kids born and unborn. This leads to the green lighting of infanticide based on circumstance. Again the key issue with abortion is not the circumstances in which kids grow up because there are literally billions of kids who are growing up around the planet right now in rather unenviable circumstances, and killing them would be pure murder. The real "question" about abortion is whether this is a kid or is not a kid, and unless you are willing to at least acknowledge that is the question, then you are making a secondary question. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do everything we can to improve those living conditions. It doesn't mean that if you have a kid, you can't take care of, you shouldn't give up the child for adoption. There's a good argument you should, but the tying of social conditions to abortion is a particularly egregious moral error.
@Ace Spades Yeah, I was half asleep when I wrote that 😅. TLDR; You are making the case that suffering post-birth is justificatory of death before birth which is a rather egregious moral error. Poor or insufficient living circumstances to the needs of the child do not undervalue to child's right to life. That logic applies equally to kids born and unborn.
Philosophically I oppose killing human beings for convenience.
Very well balanced and helpful video. Thanks for making it.👍
Shouldn't be a debate. Women need to learn to be accountable... be more responsible... not sleep around and use birth control before an abortion needs to even be cosidered.
I don't think this is fair tbh cause men can do the same thing and not get preggers. I think it's fine for anyone to sleep around as long their of age and are doing it safely. If there are ways to prevent getting pregnant I think women are entitled to them all because it really is a life changing process
@@bananajoe4940 and tht seems to be the problem
just bcoz a man can't get pregnant and will not be held accountable in any regards doen't mean that women shuld be allowed to do it
@@AhmadAneeq huh why shouldn't they be able to then? That seems like a double standard
@@AnonYmous-yj9ibSure. But bodily autonomy ends there, where hurting of other people starts. There's no such thing as absolute bodily autonomy. Fists are my body, right?
So can I violently throw my fists around on people's faces? It's my body, my choice?
@@AnonYmous-yj9ibFetus is not part of mother's body, it's invidual being, no matter if it's not fully autonomous yet. Organ donor argument fails at that refusing to donor organs to sick people is not murder. Person with sickness will die natural death. While abortion is not natural death of fetus, it's purposeful ending of life, known as murder. With sick patient, the man that refused donor did not cause the illness of patient, thus letting patient die is not murder. With woman, she did sexual act, that caused the existence of fetus. There's no such thing as absolute body autonomy. It's not the highest right above others. There are limits. You must wear seatbelt, even if you don't want to. You can't use drugs.
If fetus is another human being, then there's no right to choose murder it. Doing so is grave injustice.
It's shame people are selfish nowadays, all caring about themselves, and their feelings, not the other persons right to life, especially those who don't have a voice. Society has always abused the defenseless, innocent and weak.
Shame on all who defend abortion.
So what if it changes body?
Is having sexy scar free body more important than another person? My goodness people are vain and narsistic these days.
people who talk about abortion are polarized but most people are in the middle??? Most people are in the middle because they have not thought hard about the issue or because they are actively willing to arrive at a compromise. I too am willing to arrive at a compromise and therefore am in favor of legal abortion up to 10 weeks. But there is no middle position on abortion, as there is no middle position on slavery.
This is the only reasonable video I’ve found.
I dont think its reasonable to overcomplicate an issue when the issue is “Is murder wrong?”
I remember hearing that the majority of abortions are done on women who’s pregnancies were mistakes done through irresponsible consensual sex, does anybody know if that’s actually true or not?
Abortions aren't easy I don't think somebody would do it unless they have to.
@@warm_lettuce473 Having to do it does not preclude that the pregnancy was attained through unsafe casual sex
@@theyautjawarrior6652 True, but you did ask about stats so I just provided the most logical answer I could think of based on what I've observed.
@@theyautjawarrior6652 Doesn't change the fact that restrictions increase it, not the other way around.
Keep the law out of women's bodies.
And stop pretending you care about unborns when it's blatantly obvious that you don't.
@@eymed2023 i do care about unborns, unlike you, who would advocate for women fucking all they want and killing unborn babies all they want
”Abortion is safe”
The baby chilling in heaven: WHAT U MEAN?!
that's literally the purpose of an abortion: to end a potential life. a safe abortion is one that does not harm the mother.
@@dbuc4671 does harm the baby tho
@@scarecrow8201 Pretty sure it's supposed to
@@Kralkuscov didn't say it wasn't supposed to
@@justmeandi8256 Person B did not choose to be inside Person A or choose to use their parts, they were put in there by Person A's actions and have no choice but to use their Person A's parts as they can't do anything about it. This is more accurate.
In 1915, my grandmother was having trouble with her pregnancy, the local doctors encouraged her to abort the baby, for her own survival, but she refused to kill her soon to be born child. She was in an area where illegal, but "safe" abortions were performed. She told the doctors that "God could not forgive her for killing her baby, and she could not forgive herself." She felt the love she had for her child in her womb. She went on to give birth her third child in January of 1916. The baby was premature, but survived. My grandmother sadly died one month after giving birth. That child grew up to marry and had two children of which I am the oldest. I am married and my wife and I have two sons. Both are married and one has a son. So, three generations later, my family is thriving thanks to the courage and strong faith that my grandmother had.
My grandmother made a decision based on her bonding with her child, faith and the risks at the time, to keep her baby to term and risk her life in the process. My family is forever grateful to her for that.
Now, if a woman chooses to terminate her pregnancy, and kill her baby, that's her option, but my faith tells me to thank God every day that I can live this life thanks to the faith and love of my grandmother.
If a woman decides to terminate their pregnancy for no good reason, she will have to answer to God for eternity.
To anyone that believes abortion should be banned, just think. We would never let a kid adopt a kid, so why would we support forcing a kid to have a kid?
You could just as well ask certain parents why they support letting their kids have sex with other kids. You're not legally an adult until 18 in this country, and not fully grown arguably until 21-25 years old. Yet at 14, 15, 16, and 17 parents are buying condoms for their kids and/or facilitating an opportunity to engage in sex acts with other kids their age. This is a COMMON reason teenagers keep ending up pregnant and their parents convincing them to go through with an abortion. We need to start talking about the root causes of the problem first.
Lack of responsibility to justify their promiscuity, clearly shows how bad our society has turned from their own morality.
And male promiscuity, tony Lopez? That's always been fine, right? Since men don't get pregnant.
@@gamkal7231 bro male promiscuity adds to this problem. Nowhere did he mention in his comment that male promiscuity is fine. You're just making up things.
@@INCAnitysy True he didn't specify. But you know as well as everyone else that the word "promiscuity" is aimed at women 99% of the time. And that's not making anything up, dude. Sorry.
Lack of morality is thinking you have the right to control someone else's body.
Pro-lifers don't give jack shit about unborns.
@@gamkal7231 Maybe it is because females control access to sex more than males does? the only "easy" way for an average guy to sleep with a women is via prostitution
there is a reason female prostitutes and hookers are more in demand than their male counterparts.
people need to understand some choices are not ours. choosing our gender, race, nationality is not our choice so is deciding someone's fate. if you somehow get pregnant the baby is automatically your responsibility until it's born.no matter how you got pregnant.
Here are some dead baby jokes: @1 - What's the difference between a dead baby and a banana? ANS: It's easier to peel a banana! #2 - What's the difference between a dead baby and a football? ANS: When you kick them both down the field, the football goes further. And it stays in one piece! #3 - What's the difference between a dead baby and a tray of "Fast Food." ANS: The tray! #4 - How do you make a dead baby float? ANS: A glass of root beer soda, with two scoops of dead baby! #5 - How do you make a dead baby sink? ANS: A dead baby basin, with hot and cold water dead baby faucets!
If you can think of others, please list them below. Thanks for playing...
I don't hate women who have the full control over thier bodies and have the guts to say NO TO SEX.
So does that mean you hate women who say yes to sex after binge drinking and get pregnant, then take the morning after pill?
@@gerrydonohoe2765 yes, because they have Zero self accountability and responsibility. They don't want to own their actions and want to run away from responsibilities.
@@neostoic19 And with this hatred in your heart, you think you're taking a moral position? Moral outrage is not moral behavior. Let's test your definition of "accountability and responsibility": What are you willing to do to stop a woman having an abortion? Pretend it's your sister.
Women who have abortions have to deal with the mental health effects for the rest of their lives. In case you forgot, the religious right are all over this, pointing out the negative effects of abortion on mental health. You can't have it both ways.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 let's pretend it's my sister. First of all, If she's a Minor, Sex shouldn't be even be promoted to her. She shouldn't be encouraged for sex. In case she got pregnant as a Minor or an Adult due to consensual sex and wanted to abort I would be totally against that. Unless of course her life was on the line or that the baby would be born with deformities. And if that's not the case I wouldn't subscribe to an abortion
Abortion may also cause mental trauma to my sister while at the same time killing HER child.
@@neostoic19 Re: "I would be totally against that." This is what I'm getting at: What does that mean, "totally against" - Again my question: What are you willing to do? There's no trick here; I'm pointing out that you are accountable and responsible for whatever you choose to do to prevent an abortion. Some will blow up abortion clinics. In Texas, people are encouraged to sue people despite having no skin in the game.
Re: Mental trauma, yes, this is a feature, and so is the mental trauma of raising a child that is not wanted. Neither is your responsibility, neither is a moral dilemma.
Since you are not a radical, and allow for deformities (perhaps rape too?) and you avoided the question, I'm going to assume you won't do anythig forceful, and would advise your sister to adopt or whatever. That's your right, and her right to choose to follow your advice.
The words "christian" and "science" in the same sentence is laughable
Well God created the universe, so…
Unless you think the universe came from nothing, because THAT is definitely not scientific
@@jannettowers6731 The big bang theory.
@@shoimi the big bang theory was thought of by a Catholic priest and is not incompatible with the Catholic faith. Whats your point?
@@jannettowers6731 Well there's no proof that God created the universe, and neither does if God exists or not.
@@jannettowers6731 So you can't just bring religion into this topic.
0:23 sorry. I am not any of these clown. I am muslim men.
There was a card, you could open the low security door, but there is also the small space that is locked, a corridor to get there, one card, two keys, which one opens if you come from point b to a, if you used the card only once for both?
Maybe you could explain what you are on about? I'm sorry but I don't get your point.
Remember this: "You still have the SAME heart that began beating in your mother's womb" ~Houston Kat
Reagan is not one to talk.
And pro-lifers don't care about unborns. It's a fact.
Reagan certainly never "saved" any unborns.
The only way to make abortion dissappear as a common option is to ensure an adequate environment where irresponsable sexuality doesn't go rampant and, when it does, have a backup humanly assistance. If you can provide help and wellbeing, half the arguments mean nothing. It would just depend on whether the people are selfish or not or just unwilling to go through the process.
Pregnancy and birth are body changing and life changing events for women and we should not be forced to go through this. If you are not a woman you will never understand.
@@billmartins5545 I know women who would never understand either. It doesn't matter whether you can do it or not, it's an opinion on reproduction of new life. You shouldn't be forced to get pregnant but once it's done you can't just get rid of the little one as if it was not your child (or as if it wasn't a human).
This video is a great representation of how we can take a step back and be logical in the abortion debate, however I feel that they have downplayed the consequences of letting states make their own abortion laws. Physicians take an oath to “do no harm” to their patients, this is called non-maleficence. In states were state legislators have outlawed abortion, they have basically taken away a physician’s ability to follow this tenet. In many instances, abortion is life-saving healthcare. The red tape of these new laws has further complicated an already complex situation that many people find themselves in. Confusion surrounding these new laws is having numerous unfortunate downstream effects. Firstly, care is being delayed. In cases where a patient’s situation falls into the criteria that abortion is still allowed, physicians may feel the need to consult legal professionals before performing the procedure. This delay in care often places the patient at risk of life-threatening complications. Hemorrhage is often an imminent threat in pts who require a medically necessary abortion; this bleeding can be rapidly fatal. In patients that do not fit the criteria for legal abortion, they may travel to have the procedure done or not have decide to proceed with the unwanted pregnancy. Traveling to have an abortion performed carries an immense financial burden. Pregnancy and delivery pose substantial health risks that no person should be forced to undergo. The rates of complication are much higher for delivery than they are for abortion. In terms of the physicians that are now having to navigate this complicated legal landscape, there are increased levels of stress and burnout. The states that are passing these abortion restricting laws also have the fewest OBGYN providers per the NE Journal of Medicine. And these providers are leading in swaths. So these state laws that are so seemingly innocent are putting millions of people at risk for life threatening complications while simultaneously reducing the number of skilled professionals available to provide adequate care.
BEEN teaching GOD & His Word over 40 years I think each side needs to understand better WHAT GOD THINK ON ABORTION? For Know GOD & most all does not like or want of Abortion to happen to babies. For GOD created us Mankind with Freewill for when comes to abortion GOD is always going to give a Woman Her Freewill Power & Authority over HERSELF & over that baby inside to HER NOT to Men trying make Laws to make have baby thinking they doing GOD some Favor to Look of GOD to gets votes & power in Governments. We need to let GOD deal with that woman on abortion NOT Men doing of sin & evil in churches & government. GOD BLESS
That’s already miss information, it’s nonsensical to say something is done more when it’s illegal than legal. Crime is rampant now in all the places where crime is now overlooked and let go more people will do drugs if it’s legal, then if it’s on legal and more babies won’t die if it’s illegal for abortion.
I'm sorry but you didn't think this one through. We have other ways to discourage apart from just making something illegal. We have reduced tabaco by adding a very heavy tax. we can't add tax to something that is illegal. if a high tax works better at getting people to give up smoking than making it illegal then we wiould have more smoking when it is illegal.
I mean it’s a little funny you said that complications are 1 percent but the death rate of the fetus is 100 percent
If abortions bother you, then keep the law of it. Legal = reduction. Restriction = increasing.
All that matters is what happens in practice.
Don't tell me you care about unborns if you support restrictions.
@@eymed2023 this is legit so fucking dumb. That’s like saying legalize meth to stop people from doing meth
@@Attain556 No, it's not. It's facts. It's how reality works, weather you like it or not.
Either way, no one has the right to tell someone what to do with their own body. It's not "legalizing abortion". It's the other way around. The government has no right to invade someone's uterus, or any other body part for that matter.
And don't you DARE use unborns as an argument. I know better than anyone how pro-lifers treat minors. The entire pro-life discourse is a blantant and disrespectful lie.
@@eymed2023 Wow so your calling me a child abuser to support your argument. How about you actually find how the procedure is done before glorifying it.
@@Attain556 I'm not glorifying anything. I don't need to.
There is no way abortion could possibly come even close to the barbaric things that pro-lifers do to children.
Those same assholes who believe abortion is murder are the same assholes who want kids to be paddled, belted and the like.
Compare how children are treated in pro-choice countries VS pro-life countries. Children are treated like shit in pro-life countries.
PragerU proves my point. This is a fact, weather you like it or not.
It doesn't matter. Banning abortion does nothing to stop it. It's not a discussion.
On the other hand, protecting a child's rights by the law DOES work.
Yet pro-lifers are against child's rights because they see kids as property.
If you actually cared about children, you'd be supporting the criminaliation of corporal punishment and circumcizion.
The fact that pro-lifers defend these barbaric practices, which I HAVE seen, is more than enough to prove that you're a liar.
*- A letter from the voiceless-*
Dear Mom,
I want to start by saying I love you, you were my first connection with another person. And I hoped I would get to see you face to face, hear your sweet voice sing to me sleep, But that never happened. Whatever I did I'm sorry, I didn't mean to hurt you or cause you any trouble, I just wanted you to be my mommy. What I went through physically hurt me, and I hope no one ever has to go through that again. But what hurt me even worst was the fact that my mommy that I love so much hated me. So much that you wouldn't even acknowledge that I was alive(lacking the ability to breathe unaided), you called me it(a clump of cells). And after all that you threw me away(like garbage), you wouldn't even do that to a pair of old shoes. Now it's to late for me, but on my behalf can you try to stop this from happening to any other babies. PLEASE!
Love
The Unwanted
P.S. I forgive you.
Dear Mom,
I'm only a zygote but already I can type a well-written email to you. I have all the feelings, thoughts, imaginations, desires, everything that makes us human, not animal. Please forward this to Science so they can rewrite the biology books.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 Jeremiah 1 1 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." "Ah, Sovereign LORD," I said, "I do not know how to speak; I am only a child."
@@villain5873 You're quoting the bible now? Sorry, that's a bronze age myth, not an argument. And while it's not relevant, that quote is for Jeremiah, not children in general.
Evangelical Christians who believe the bible is the literal word of God are a danger to society. We've already seen abortion clinics blown up by terrorists, let's not start quoting the bible to justify imprisoning women, ok?
@@gerrydonohoe2765 pregnancy is imprisonment?
@@villain5873 Yes, that what it means to make abortion illegal: You imprison women. Pregnant women. The pro-lifers will not be held accountable for suffering imposed, their scapegoat is the state.
For a video that begins saying that both sides have extreme view points, it sure does seem to be only countering the pro-birth side.
That's because reality skews in that direction
@@elbownio5820 How so?
@@justme-kr7lx most conservative or reactionary viewpoints aren't based in science and research.
Pro abortion is kind of wrong because the baby is stay alive even if the is no heart beat because if the baby was dead it would have smelled and the body would have been as a rotten corpse. But a baby in the womb do not smell or look like a corpse. So they are alive.
@@elbownio5820 Which ones?
This video was 2 years ago….yet timeless after the decision was already made. Abortion is not banned in all states
Using your logic, if Abortion is Murder, then so is Stillbirths. So until someone starts prosecuting women for having Stillbirths, then Abortion should be legal.
My lungs are connected to my body, the government is not allowed to say how long I can or cannot hold my breath. A baby is connected to a woman's body via the umbilical cord. The government can't tell the mother to Stop Breathing.
I'm sorry but these are terrible arguments. Please try harder
@@bjhcvuaerpigfy Terrible Arguments? Is the Baby not connected to the body via the Umbilical cord? Is anything the mother consumes (i.e. Drugs, Alcohol, Food) not also transferred to the fetus because it's connected to the body? If children cannot smoke, then certainly it should be against the law for Pregnant People to not Smoke. Same goes for Underage Drinking. I will never force you to donate an Organ so that someone else can live. You will never control my body so that a Unborn Baby can live.
It would have to be proven that 1. The woman knew she was pregnant, and 2. The woman did something irresponsible to cause the baby’s death.
You can’t distinguish between accidents and intentional acts. It’s the difference between accidentally falling off a cliff and being pushed off. The former is an accident, the latter is murder. Stillbirth is an accident, abortion is murder
Is anyone willing to have a abortion dissuasion? I am pro life and want to understand the other side.
Sure, what right do I have to use your body against your will, causing discomfort, pain, and stress, to sustain my life?
@@polarbear1713 first I would like to thank you for responding to me. I want to understand the other side better. The problem I have is that yes there could be stress in a pregnancy however it doesn’t warrant the right to kill the baby. It’s tuff and I couldn’t imagine the stress however it shouldn’t give anyone the right to end a life.
@@abelasteway5726 I didn't think you were going to respond considering the age of the comments. So thanks for replying.
I would like to say you misunderstood my question. I was asking if you or I had a right to another person's body to sustain our lives. I wasn't speaking about pregnancy.
Oh I see. Forgive me for misunderstanding. I believe that we should have that right to live. The right for others to live should be first then the right to ones body.
@@abelasteway5726 So, I may as well just lay out my whole argument?
1) Let's start at the beginning. I do not believe that a woman should be forced to carry a baby just because she is part of the cause for the baby's existence. If you get an STD, I do not believe that we have to accept it. Instead, we can be given options for the situation. In the future, perhaps these options could include gene editing at this point. This is about options at this point, not what those options are.
2) Now the woman has chosen to have an abortion. We assume she has a right to bodily autonomy. We also assume the child has a right to life (I actually don't think the preborn do but let's act as if they do because you believe they do).
3) The question then is, does her bodily autonomy infringe upon the child's right to life? Seriously think about this. My view is that the removal of an intact foreign entity from one's own body is never infringing on their right to life.
4) If we believe that, the question remains, how can you justify the killing of the preborn while in the womb? Before viability the preborn child would perish outside of the womb, right? We already do procedures that kill a preborn child if they attach in the fallopian tube. The only difference is that it would eventually die and it would possibly kill the mother too.
5) So if we kill the preborn in that situation, a situation where it would eventually die, why can't we kill it earlier than it would if we required a c-section extraction?
6) Don't forget that at this point, the woman has already made up her mind, and I believe that her bodily autonomy is not infringing on the right to life for the preborn. It is not the mother's fault that the preborn is just not viable or able to use its right to life without infringing upon the rights of the mother.
7) I asked if we had a right to cause discomfort, pain, and stress against your will while I use your body to demonstrate that we don't have a right to a separate entity's body. We must have their consent.
"...it might be informed by your brand of theology, but what matters most is that your opinion isn't informed by misinformation." 🧐🧐🧐
Saint Joseph, protector of the Holy Infant Jesus and terror of demons
Pray for us. . . . ..
Just saw you sourced Planned Parenthood 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Did they help pay for this?
where else are they supposed to get the data from? they're the ones carrying out the abortions. I mean she could get it from Europe, but the numbers are the same anyway.
@@Google_Censored_Commenter data is fine…
If a women can choose to not be a mother and abort the child. Then a man who doesn’t want a baby can leave when the child is born.
He should be. In fact, if the state wants to save any baby, it should pay for it.
Exactly. Here's that argument in syllogistic form:
P1: If a woman has the right to kill her unborn child, then a man has the right to abandon his unborn child.
P2: A man does not have the right to abandon his unborn child.
Conclusion: A woman doesn't have the right to kill her unborn child.
Defense of P1: if "my body my choice," then "my money my choice" also.
Pro-aborts already accept P2.
So the conclusion logically follows.
@@IWasOnceAFetus Wrong. I am pro abortion and I don't think either parent should be held legally responsible for any birth. If the state wants a child to be cared for, then it is up to the state or the person(s) who chooses to. .
I also think assisted suicide should not only be legal, but highly encouraged. Soylent Green fertilizer!
@@LogicAndReason2025 you "think"? That's not how you refute deductive arguments. What you think is irrelevant.
@@IWasOnceAFetus You argued "Pro-aborts already accept P1" That is not true for everyone. Therefore the conclusion does not "logically follow." It is merely an opinion.
Also; rights are decided by vote, so what YOU think is irrelevant.
Guess what? The conversation is not complicated because slaughtering the most innocent among us is about the most evil thing you can do. Abortion doctors should be punished and women should be given actual help
“Most innocent among us”
You are talking about a group of cells
@@vitanera4032 i am a group of cells. You a group of cells. If you found a person who was smaller than you, and therefore had fewer cells than you, would you then declare you are more valuable than that person?
Number of cells does not determine number of value points in a human
@@jannettowers6731 I am a group of cells with a brain activity,
I did not said more cells= more valuable,
Since giving birth can cause death and there could be complications (ex. Errors)
The being with a brain activity that is pregnant IS THE ONLY to decide if choosing to take the risk or do not continue the pregnancy (she has time until she can’t postpone for medical reason)
No one else, because she risk her life.
Actual life>potential life
@@vitanera4032 Oh so now it doesn't have to do with "being a clump of cells"? It has to do with brain activity? so now, if a person has more brain activity than someone, that person is now more valuable than that other person? So teenagers are more valuable than infants? Be careful what you say.
Driving could cause death. Drinking could cause death. Heck, even WALKING could cause death. But we shouldn't ban those things or allow people to ban those things, right? If something causes death less than 1% of the time, that's not an excuse to murder a child is it?
Also, the mother chose the risk when she had sex. Unless she was raped, which is less than 1% of abortions.
@@jannettowers6731 “oh so now it doesn’t have to do with ‘being a clump of cells’v it has do to with brain activity, if a person has more brain activity than someone, the person is now more valuable than the other person? So teenagers are more than infants? Be careful what you say”
I find it funny that every time you are trying to put words in my mouth, tell where is said more brain activity=more valuable, you can’t because that not what I said, what I said was that if a group of cells have brain activity it is a living being, nothing about casts or gerarchy,
“DrIvInG CoULd CaSuE DeAtH, DrInKiNg CoULd CaUsE DeAtH, EvEn WaLkInG CoULd CaUSe DeATh,
But we shouldn’t ban those things or allow people to ban those things, right? If something cause death less than 1% of the time, that not an excuse to murder a child”
At this point I don’t know wtf are you talking about, those things when happen it’s a ACCIDENT, because even breathing can kill you, for ban those things you to consider pro and con, if the con>pro ban it, if pro>con let it stay,
Post a link where it say less than 1% of the time
“Also, the mother chose the risk when she had sex. Unless raped, which is less than 1% of abortions”
Source? Because I have one here that prove you wrong
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/
And even if she choose the risk, it’s her choice to abort, because it’s her body and her decision, no else
That group of cells is not a living being.
If you consider it a living being then a body of a person that died it’s a living being.
I'm not firmly pro abortion but what the hell does the graph mean. It clearly shows the rate of complications is higher around 1973. When abortion became legal
Why facts matter in the slavery debate
Explain your analogy.
There is a right and a wrong position on slavery. Just as there is on slaughtering unborn human beings in the womb.
This video is the equivalent of saying cotton production was more efficient when slavery was legal. Who cares?
To say that legal abortion is “statistically safe” ignores the fact that 100 percent of fetuses are killed in an abortion. If facts matter then shouldn’t that fact be mentioned? It’s like saying owners of slaves are statistically wealthier than non slave owners without mentioning that the slaves are held in bondage
Fetuses aren't conciouss
@@john-us4zwso what?
I have the answer for abortion ...
It depends on the context
Murder depends on the context?
Mother who’s life is in danger: these are not abortions, theyre c sections and the baby is not directly killed, but sometimes the baby dies by itself because of a complication
Cases of rape: Punish the rapist. Not the baby
Cases of consensual sex: A woman accepted the risk of bringing a child into this world. The least she can do is not have it killed
No ir doesn't. Killing babies is wrong no matter what
lol Centris be “ like this is fine”
the video is misinformation... like trying to be the middle ground but with a lot of lies in it.
Could you point out one of the lies?
@@gerrydonohoe2765 It says that abortion is safe when it involve taking the life of a human being
@@samnewton3358 Yes, safe for women, compared to 50 years ago, whether they are legal or not. By definition, obviously abortion is not "safe" for the life inside. Whether that life is a human being or not depends on the stage of gestation. It is most certainly not a human being to begin with.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 totally wrong. The human being is human being, no matter of how old it is - days, weeks, years...
@@Sma-v4y Re: "Human being" A single cell is not a human being. Two cells are not a human being. So it very much matters how old the "life" is.
Im PRO being responsible, lots of contraceptives in the market.
yeah, rapists should use contraceptives, and women should stop having medical complications, it's so irresponsible! Just like the pro-lifers who refuse to be responsible for imprisoning a pregnant woman, turning all accountability over to the state.
@This commie is coming for your toothbrush I think you're reading more into his statement than I did; in fairness, the post is too vague to interpret. My answer was to point out the obvious information he's leaving out. The "responsibility" argument is not an argument against abortion; it's at best an argument against on-demand, next-day cheap safe abortions with no restrictions, which almost nobody wants.
"Responsibility" as a general argument immediately fails on two primary reasons for seeking an abortion: rape and medical complications.
@This commie is coming for your toothbrush Yeah I made a second reply that wasn't intended for you, thanks for letting me know, it's deleted.
1:58 everything was good before you tried to slip this little part in
Compromise: women can opt to give birth at viability
Good video, but didn't explain the stance of conservatives on Anti-abortion.
What percentage of women vote for Anti-abortion.
Or is it just an issue of social perception?
Still why have many big American shots have refrained from granting this right??
I wish if this video had answered that
Believe me, abortion isn't even a plan B for pregnancies. It's like a a Plan Y.
For sure, I stand somewhere in the middle. I believe that abortion should be fully legal ONLY in cases where the mothers health is at risk, or the baby will be born with a medical condition that will give them a bad quality of life. I also agree that an early term abortion (as in, before the first trimester ends) should be allowed ONLY in cases where the mother was sexually assaulted. But I do believe abortion is wrong in cases where the mother just got pregnant accidentally because she wasnt careful and wanted to have sex, at that point, you just need to take accountability and prepare for the byproducts of your actions, or give the child up for adoption, because there are thousands of familys with women who cant conceive, same-sex marriages, people who just want to adopt, etc. Sex is for having children, and if you are going to have sex for a purpose that isnt that, you are taking that risk and have to deal with it like a adult. The bottom line is, if you REALLY dont want to have a baby, dont have sex, there are ways to connect with a partner and feel pleasure that isnt penetration. Of course, there are outstanding circumstances like I mentioned before (medical emergency, rape) , but in most cases, its just people being impulsive and not thinking about the consequences of their actions.
I don’t agree that the quality of life is a good reason. That is a slippery slope. By that logic you could justify killing homeless people.
Predicted for today's new law. Wow. Was already the plan to change the law.
I honestly think abortion should be legal only if you can't get a child yet or that you are not financially stable but if you get an abortion frequently you should be banned
SAME, like if its rape, a minor, or medical reason, sure! if you didnt feel like wearing a condom, too bad thats called being irresponsible
@xanderbraxton949 This makes no sense to me, if you think someone is irresponsible, why would you ever want them to be responsible for a child? Those people seem like they most need abortions.
This argument also seems like you're trying to punish people for irresponsibility with a child. A child should never be a punishment.
@@maddystruthers5860 so you want the girl who is too irresponsible to wear a condom to kill a fetus cause she don't wanna wear one?
Isn't that just murder?
I was pro choice than I was pro life idek anymore
@spacingsparkle i was pro choice first because i thought a women should choose what she does with her body but I'm in a really religious family and my sister gave me a big speech on how abortion is murder and stuff like that so I became pro life but then I thought about what I'd do if I were raped and got pregnant so I really don't know anymore
@@aixenaixen8106 if you would like I may be able to help you clarify your position. All that I would do is ask you questions, but question that, while thinking about them, may help you decide one way or the other. 🙂
@bob Oh, I'd really love that! I have really mixed feelings on abortion so I'm sure that'd help.
@@aixenaixen8106 Some of these questions may seem a little weird and they don't all necessary have a right or wrong answer, but hopefully by thinking about them they will in the long run help you to decide one way or the other. Abortion is after all an important issue that does need to be thought about with care.
The year is 1350 and you live in England. You have just been accused of being a witch. The punishment for being a witch is to be tied to a stake and burnt alive. Which of the following do you think should happen.
a) You should have to prove that you are not a witch. If you are unable to prove that you are not a witch then you should be burned.
b) the people who have accused you of being a witch should have to prove that you are in fact a witch and if they can't do this, then they should have to set you free.
@@bjhcvuaerpigfyb
All I want to know is what percentage of total abortions is because of risk to the mother's health!
some around 12%
2 per cent of all pregnancies pose a threat to mom’s life. About one per cent of pregnancies are from rape or incest. Here is an interesting fact. The pro abortion Gutmacher institute says 75 per cent of abortions are done for socioeconomic reasons. Most unborn human beings are slaughtered in the womb for convenience
@AnonYmous-yj9ib not sure what your point is. Sometimes children are a great inconvenience. No doubt about. But that doesn’t give anyone a right to kill him or her. Otherwise fathers would kill their children if they couldn’t afford child care
@AnonYmous-yj9ib I may be wild but at least I don’t kill people for convenience. That is being done by abortionists
@AnonYmous-yj9ib they are both human human beings according to the sciences of genetics and embryology. It is wrong to kill either for convenience and both should be illegal
I don’t hate women or babys just don’t do abortion if someone’s thinking of it they could save your life or be more famous then Elon musk and they will allways love you
what if a teenager gets sa’d should keeping it for the possibility of their child’s fame still be a good reason
“ABORTION SHOULDN’T BE ILLEGAL” “ABORTION IS BAD” Me: What in the world 👀
it is bad.
@@MistaaPep yea, I don’t care about anybody’s opinion on that 😂 I just don’t care is my opinion
@@EnderEntertain you should probably care a little about babies being murdered, even if you cant see it happening and it doesnt affect your life, it is evil
@@jannettowers6731 okay, I get that.
@@jannettowers6731 they are not babys? Before 20 weeks the fetus chares NO human characteristics it can not even feel pain. Also it is not evil
Genesis 2-7 and god breathed life into him and he was a human being. Even hod says not a person till 1st breath
Which is contradicted by biology. Also to note that the Bible was written by men at a time abortion wasn’t even a true concept.
The Genesis is special case where the first man made of dust was not living until God breathed life onto him does not apply to the rest of us. We are living after the conception.
@@KingPingviini mentioned 15 other times also the priests give an abortion recipe
@@KingPingviini why the f+++ all the self righteous shit , let him decide. Ruin your life in false belief. Get the F+++ away from me.
@@kellyjones4942 And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people.
I think you referenced this?
Except it's not abortion recipe.
Dusty water is not going to kill the baby.
If miscarriage happens, it's because God saw woman guilty of adultery, but if woman is not guilty then nothing happens. And God is the only one who have authority to take life, because He is the giver of it.
The blame for the death of the baby is on the woman, who cheated.
Just like arthur movie on PBS kids movies
yes to abortion !
Yay! Murder!
@@jannettowers6731 Yay! women will die because giving birth can cause death in some cases! Yay womens will have to go in secret abortion potentially risking their lives because someone think a group of cell= full grown body!
Yay that the most ‘pro-life’ are with death penality!
@@jannettowers6731 Why can't you respect their opinions?
@@shoimi do you respect the opinions of serial killers and rapists who think killing and raping is ok?
@@jannettowers6731 Okay, what if you don't have enough money for pregnancy? I think pregnancy costs around $10,000-30,000. And abortion is literally $500-1000+ (according to google.)
Even if you did have money for pregnancy, what about the child's needs? What if you don't have enough money for food or their basic needs cause you spent it all on pregnancy? So basically it could sometimes lead to POVERTY.
There are also cases of r@pe. (even minors are involved). If the woman is not ready to give birth, then let them do an abortion.
So basically, there are a lot of reasons why it should be legalized.
That’s Gun the person rates are declining how expensive are they
Pro abortion is kind of wrong because the baby is stay alive even if the is no heart beat because if the baby was dead it would have smelled and the body would have been as a rotten corpse. But a baby in the womb do not smell or look like a corpse. So they are alive.
@@salometipsandtricks2786 i’d say that hunting it’s closer to murdering someone then abortion is because you can actually empathize with other animals and feel what they’re feeling and that’s how you make friends by empathizing with other people I really don’t care that I was kept alive after my parents found out I would have brain damage because the The right to live is incredibly big and doesn’t say anything about the quality of work you’re going to have even in murder cases I don’t think the fact that the family misses them is that important because it doesn’t say anything about where the victim went in the afterlife And having no afterlife just means that you don’t care about anything
THESE videos we need more of. Sure, I don’t like it. But I don’t get how people on the extremes of each side are so feral with this. Dude just focus on being a good person, bunch of losers getting sucked up in politics
- If they legalize abortion, would there be a fetus' week age to consider? Example, abortion is only legal if the fetus is only 8 weeks old? Something like that?
- Also, as what I'm seeing now, it can be prone to abuse like those couples or individuals who don't practice safe sex. Are they allowed to get abortion anytime they want?
As a non-American, these are the questions in my head right now about this matter. Hopefully someone can answer or clarify things to me so I can understand the topic further. Thank you.
This is determined state by state. Also, it depends on the mother and her health. Most of the time, after 24 weeks you won’t be able to get one. The only time after 24 weeks is if it is medically necessary (The mother, baby, or both will die if carried to full term)
im trying to figure out why you felt like you need to specify that your not american 💀
hate is a strong word
Honestly, I don't give a single crap about the woman's feelings when a human life is at stake. If a serial killer feels like killing someone, I'm not just gonna say go ahead and do it. Once again, I don't give a crap about their feelings.
yeah because men like you don't have to go through the same predicament hence why you couldn't give a single shit about someone who actually lived through the world and you'd rather have an unconscious clump of cells live instead right?
@@mamamia8733 What makes you say a baby is an unconscious clump of cells? At what point do you think it becomes conscious?
Except that is not a valid argument, because restrictions INCREASE the number of abortions.
@@eymed2023 better education will reduce it
@@cesruhf2605 That too.
Abortion is definitely the most controversial topic in the world.
I just can't bring myself to approve of it but then I am deeply sympathetic to women who were unfortunate victims of disgusting crimes, I am very close to my aunts and my mother moreso then any of the lads in my family so I can see why this is a rational scenario even without any bias but a women could still raise a child in spite of such a horrid act happening and they could grow to have a very close relationship even with the knowledge of the crime obviously by revealing the information later on but of course that would take a lot of strength, its an excusable reason for it to be legal however of course and I can't argue against that and I have all the understanding in the world for women that do it in this situation.
It's also understandable when the female is too young and in jeapordy also and there's multiple other reasons
God bless you all just my opinions
Many of the woman who are pro abortion don't have children so it's biased on both sides
What people don't talk about is that 2% of abortions happening after 21 weeks is still an alarming number of children considering how many abortions happen per year it waters down the raw numbers.
(CDC) reveals that in 2018, an estimated 50,000 abortions were committed at 14 weeks or later, with nearly 6,200 of those committed at or over 21 weeks
Keep in mind these babies have a very developed brain, limbs, head, eyes.. and 100% of Democrats in office voted that abortion should be legal until BIRTH.
Re: "100% of Democrats in office voted that abortion should be legal until BIRTH."
Can you give a source for this or did someone share a tweet?
@@gerrydonohoe2765 Every Democrat voted for the women's health protection act in the house. Look up the bill and it allows abortions up until pregnancy and prohibits states from setting restrictions that gets in the way of that. The Senate has not voted on it.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 If you also listen to what they say on the campaign trails, no democrat is talking about restricting abortions after 15 weeks. They consistently push the most extreme agenda.
@@Kyle-pj2vc I'm not here to support the Democrats' bill, but I do know it's politically motivated, since they knew it would fail, being too far left. The idea is to prod the Republicans to make their stand on abortion. It's a wedge issue for the upcoming elections.
I think it's ironic that it's the Democrats arguing for deregulation i.e. keep Government out of your business. It shows how the ends meet. "Small Government" far right conservatives have no problem creating crime that requires more regulation, especially when it gives local citizens power to arrest. Fascists love that kind of thing.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 I don't see outlawing abortions as a "regulation, big government" type of thing. The government makes laws telling you what's right and wrong, what you can and cannot do. Legislating morals is something we do for basic crimes Dems and Republicans can agree on. This is no different at all, if Republicans think life begins at conception, babies in the womb as individuals deserving sovereignty.
Conservatives are social collectivists and tend to legislate morality more, correct. Democrats regulate your wallet more, how much taxes you pay, hiring more IRS agents, creating larger bureaucratic institutions.
I'm curious when does motherhood begin? ..or here's one, "abortions are safe" for who exactly ¿¿ Is it really just an "unwanted pregnancy" ¿¿ ..wouldn't the individual human Life in the womb be a part of the conversation ¿¿ I'm so confused how can one claim to care about misinformation yet be so deceptive ¿¿
Hundreds of thousands of Lives are being snuffed out every year via "safe abortion care" right ¿¿
No, they're not.
There are MUCH fewer abortions in countries abortion is fully unrestricted.
How long are pro-lifers gonna keep ignoring that fact?
@@eymed2023 U can't claim to be pro-choice when u choose to sustain life 24/7 simply because it's your own.
@@John-tu2wo May I ask how the hell does a country where corporal punishment and circumcizion are considered "parental freedoms" think it has a moral high ground to oppose abortion?
May I assume that pro-lifers have a desire to see kids being mutilated and tortured?
@@eymed2023 abortion is legalized discrimination / more leftist hypocrisy which exposes the mass brainwashing / selective caring.
@@eymed2023..and as I said U ARE PRO-LIFE. Life is only disposable when it isn't yours. So please continue to choose Life 24/7 while claiming to be "pro-choice" ¿¿
In the beginning you talk about how people that are comfortable talking about abortion are extreme and they are extreme because this matter is extreme killing innocent children is extreme
It isn't. Abortion has nothing to do with murdering children. That is sensationalistic policitians trying to distract you.
Either way, the entire debate is irrelevant because restrictions INCREASE the number of abortions. Restrictions do exact opposite of what they're claimed to do.
Does it even make sense? 3:22 You make up a number of illegal abortion rates that can only be a guess, and then say that there are more abortions under more restrictive laws.
Men can get pregnant too
No they can't- 😭😭😭
Search it up
@@idk-ow9iu ok I searched for pregnant man and I found lots of stuff. There’s even a new emoji
@@Random51960 do a direct search "can men get pregnant" they can't it's just logic or maybe ask your parents
@@idk-ow9iu men with uteruses (uteri?) can get pregnant
@@Random51960 oh you mean transgender woman?
It is interasting that animals have more rights than baby, and peoples more cares abot animals than about baby. I do not understand how somebody (who is helty and have enough mony) can kill her baby, her chield!!
Pro-lifers can. They murder their own children by beating them to death.
@@eymed2023 Uhm... pro choice are the ones who mass murder and kill 50+million kids a year. And show proof or statistics that show this?
@@risevision1080 No, they don't. Pro-choicers are not the ones responsible for any of this. Pro-lifers are.
Abortion bans do absolutely nothing to reduce abortions. They increase the ammount of abortions.
All those abortions are your fault. If you had kept your hands out of where they don't belong this entire situation would be avoided.
The pro-life movement in the 60s didn't stop abortions. It lead to abortions skyrocketing.
Pro-choice governments in develop countries are the ones that actually reduced abortions.
But of course, you pro-lifers are too arrogant to acknowledge the inconvenient fact that abortion rates are lower in countries where it is unrestricted.
And then there's all the deaths from spanking, circumcizion, bullying, emotional abuse, honor killings, rape, all things that pro-liferd defend as "harmless" or "necessary".
Then there's school shootings, there's the deaths from starvation and diseases, there the deaths from crime...
All of which is "justified" because pro-life scums have this demented ideology where they constantly try to make children look like the "villains" in an attempt to justify violence and atrocities commited against them.
If I hear another pro-lifer going on another "Kids these days are " I do not respond for what I do afterward.
If you actually respect children, you be fighting against the likes of corporal punishment and circumcizion. Both of which are infinitely more barbaric than what people accuse abortion of being.
Tell me, why should I listen to you when pro-lifers speak in clear english that they think children are "evil monsters" and should be physically harmed?
Everyone is assured a right to autonomy by our constitution. In the case of pregnancy, what decisions are made over a woman’s body are to be entirely left to her, as that fetus occupies her body, and is under her jurisdiction. By limiting a woman’s right to chose you are infringing on her right to bodily autonomy, not only is it immoral but it is literally unconstitutional. The life of a woman need always be considered over the existence of any potential life, even if they are equal that body is still her own regardless of what is living inside her and she should have the same right as everyone else to make decisions over herself. To allow others to make decisions for a person in place of that individual does not align with our constitution’s assurance of every individual’s right to bodily autonomy. Laws prohibiting, and or limiting abortion are sexist and do not consider the cost women are made to pay as a consequence of the existence of such legislation; as well, they put the mental and physical health of women in jeopardy by stripping women of their god given right to freedom over their own body.
Also the video was wrong when they said that thousands of people hadn’t died of unsafe abortions before roe vs wade. Today, over 68,000 women annually are left dead as a result of unsafe abortions. A number which increases when access to safe and affordable abortions are challenged. No roe vs wade didn’t eradicate death by unsafe abortions, nothing likely ever will until safe abortions are made accessible to all, but that is irrelevant. What roe vs wade did was not only open up a discussion about abortion, but also gave women a safe and legal option with which to chose. It was monumental that abortion was legalized, as such a decision was another step towards establishing that a woman’s right to autonomy has a place in our laws. Though, we have a long way to go.
There's no such right
Funny you mentioned "God given rights".
Newsflash for you, God has not given us right to murder.
Where is this autonomy clause located in the constitution? And where does it specify bodily autonomy gives you the right to kill someone for convenience? There are a lot of fathers out there who use their bodies to support their children. Does this bodily autonomy clause give fathers a right to kill their children? Why should pregnant women have all the fun?
I always thought abortion was a necessary thing, not a want but a need. As in having an abortion to save the child from suffering if there was something seriously wrong with the child, or having an abortion because something’s wrong with the mother. Turns out, it’s just a want and not a need, a lot of people seem to encourage abortion because they want it, not because they need it.
The problem with your argument is that it's not up to us to decide if a disabled person should live or not. By allowing abortion we are saying that disabled people have no value or should not be allowed to live. In my opinion all human life has the same value and if a couple had consensual sex then they should not be able to end the life of the baby that they created...
@@thomasin1519 what problem is there with my argument if I just disagreed with abortion if it’s a want and not a need. People want an abortion nowadays whether that child is either perfectly suitable to live a decent life or disabled, it doesn’t matter. Nowadays people just want abortion no matter what because their excuse is the world is too populated or that child is going to live under an abusive household. It doesn’t matter, what? There’s a problem with abortion to you IF it’s necessary to have one? The problem with your statement is you want to bring a child into the world if he or she is severely physically and mentally ill, I understand abortion not just if that child is disabled, not that part, I meant was if that child has sever health problems and would suffer his or her entire life, not being disabled.
@@thomasin1519 I even disagreed with abortion all together until people made some points to save that child from suffering, now I understand if it’s to save the child to suffer, value has nothing to do with it, it’s the suffering part, you get those 2 mixed up apparently. I disagree with a abortion if it’s a lazy WANT. I understand if it’s NECESSARY and a NEED. If you are to put the child out of his or her misery. I also would love a child to live to his or her full potential in life and be happy, but you know what I mean, abortion should be something that NEEDS to be done, not a WANT, and you look at me like I’m someone who wants to decide the fate of others, I wouldn’t want someone to suffer IF that child WOULD suffer. You would want that child to suffer if there is something seriously wrong with him or her, you don’t care.
@@Lauriestrode1978but most disabled people who are aborted have down syndrome, missing limbs etc...disabilities that wouldn't cause suffering to that person....i have not heard of any disabilities that causes the child chronic pain as soon as it is born.... I think that abortion based on disability should only be allowed in cases where the child is so disabled that it won't be able to survive outside the womb. But I do agree with you on the point you made!!! In certain cases abortion is a "need" in my country it is allowed and free if: 1)the woman was raped 2) the woman would risk her life if she gave birth 3) the fetus does not have a brain (anencephaly). I think this is a perfect abortion law as it gives the right to life to the unborn whilst at the same time protecting women :)
@@thomasin1519 that’s exactly the bad disabled I was talking about.
Great video. Great conclusion
So... If my opinion is informed by science? Which represent the objective truth...? A scientific fact is...life begins at conception.
Now, I consider the right to live paramount. A fundamental human right that any civilization should aim at. Above anything else.
If my opinion is considered imoral... then I can't believe that morality exists at all.
No, you don't. You don't care about unborns if you support abortion bans or restrictions.
@@eymed2023 make that comment of yours make more sense... cuz right now it sounds like abortions means caring about the unborn... which makes 0 sense...
@@iordaigheilie-alin1626 Because it's been proven time and time again that restrictions lead to MORE abortions, not less.
Having 100% unrestricted abortions doesn't mean people will have more abortions. It is the other way around.
Less restrictions leads to less abortions.
For two main reasons:
1. Legal abortion doctors can offer alternatives like paid child care and adoption, whereas illegal abortion doctors will simply abort and that it's it. A woman seeking an abortion is MUCH more likely to pick the alternatives when the abortions are legal for this reason.
2. With legal abortions, the government can interview women and figure out the causes that lead people to seeking abortions. Those causes can often be unexpected and strange reasons. One common reason for abortions is that some parents or partners straight up force their daughters or girlfriends to get an abortion, sometimes under the threat of killing them. If that woman seeks a legal abortion, she can ask for help rescuing her from those people and is thus more likely to end up not aborting, whereas if she seeked an ilegal abortion she would just abortion.
Also, illegal abortions are much more likely to leave a woman dead.
@@eymed2023 It kinda makes sense. IDK if the stats represent what you say... but I know it would be impossible to convinve the vast majority that abortion should be illegal.
So, I would propose, at least, a education program using TVs, Internet, Schools, and all other methods to showcase the sience behind the human life, from the starting point to adulthood.
Make people understand that the first developmental stages are still part of our human life journeys, thus the unborns are still humans like us, and any intentional ending of such life should be strongly thought about, especially when other methods to avoid responsability exists.
With the hopes that there will be a future were the procedure of aborting itself will become obsolette.
@@eymed2023 there were far fewer abortions before roe v wade. Do you honestly believe closing the planned parenthood charnel houses would increase the number of abortions?
Do you think infanticide would happen less often if we made infanticide legal? Would fewer banks be robbed if we made bank robbing legal?
Having an abortion can go two ways, if you are an only born child, you will be held responsible for cutting off and possibly ending the family bloodline (if you don't adopt). Now, its a different story if you have sibilings, its a 50/50 chance of them getting an abortion.
You do realize that getting an abortion doesn't mean you can't ever get pregnant again... It's not a permanent thing.
@@adventurika1903 a LOT of women have been unable to get pregnant again after abortions, or even after just using birth control
I believe that abortion isn’t murder, but if America is gonna do that, at least make so it’s 7/8 months instead of 2
So...states should have the right to vote on an individuals medical choices?. And that...just democratic republic so its fine? REALLY CSM???
I see You're taking the libertarian pro choice stance. There's laws against regular 1st degree murder, is that the state infringing on the murderers rights? These laws are made in order to protect another person from being harmed by another person, and punishing those who do harm other people. It's very simple. The constitution clearly states that we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Your pursuit of happiness should not interfere with my life, liberty, or my own pursuit of happiness. You don't have the right to take others rights away, everyone is equal under the law and by extension God. Just like how the baby is equal to the mother in terms of intrinsic moral value.
@@dingdring6317 Abortion restrictions lead to more abortions, not less.
The law should stay out of it.
@@dingdring6317 You're a hypocrite. Pro-lifers always whine about "MY child, I do to them whatever I want! Keep the government out of it!".
Pro-lifers don't respect a child's rights.
Abortion for convenience isn’t a medical procedure. A medical procedure is one that cures a disease or heals an injury. Abortion for convenience does neither. It is no more medical than a doctor smothering an infant with a pillow
Abortions is racist, most abortions are babies of color! Now that's health care the DEM'S way!
What the fuck is your point
@@shoimi apparently your a racist!
@@darylyost7273 So apparently, if the rapist is a man of color. And then you abort the baby cause you're not ready to have it, It means you're racist?
@@shoimi most pregnancies are not from being raped,you got pregnant because your a Ho!
@@darylyost7273 Even if most pregnancies are not from being raped, still doesn't mean it doesn't happen. 😐
How many genius, doctors singers, great WONDERFUL brilliant characters people have been killed by there mammy, s 😣😥😣😥 help me mammy don't kill me😥😣😣😣
Lmao wtf
Also wouldn’t that also apply to sperm that never got fertilized
Re: "Help me mammy don't kill me" - Who is saying that? A fetus? Are you delusional? Sentimental arguments are the last resort for religious radicals who can't argue logic.
There is no debate. It's either you are for sin or you are for Christ. You can not be in the middle.
Or you can not be Christian.
@@ILovePink-x1v Pov: no morality
@@MANTH1NG_JESUS_IS_KING :POV ruclips.net/video/6swmTBVI83k/видео.html
God is for sin.
@@tomward2688 how so? How can the man who defines morality go against it?