Another Bad Argument Against Abortion | Gohan (he/him) - TX | Skeptic Generation E1S16
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2021
- If you’ve followed the hosts for a while, you’ll probably remember Gohan, a frequent Talk Heathen caller back in the day. He’s back, and ready to spar with Vi about the morality of abortion. His weapon of choice: the violinist argument (and Trent Horn’s reverse violinist argument). Too bad for him. Vi is not taking this conversation lightly today.
To hear a brilliant discussion of the violinist argument, check out Abigail Thorn’s video on her channel @PhilosophyTube: • Abortion & Ben Shapiro...
________
Skeptic Generation is LIVE every Sunday at 11:30am-1:00pm CT
Call on your phone: 585-LA-MURPH (585-526-8774)
Call online: tiny.cc/callSG
Love the show?
Become a patron: tiny.cc/donatetoSG
Buy merch: tiny.cc/SGmerch
Help with our studio: tiny.cc/SGwishlist
You can also join our Discord: tiny.cc/SGdiscord
To find out more, visit www.skepticgeneration.com
Copyright © 2021 Skeptic Generation. All rights reserved. - Zábava
"Rapes don't agree to have sex"...
It's not sex, dude, it's RAPE. Rape is the verb, not the noun.
There are different forms of rape, there can be rape without intercourse. Rape where it's like a fingering, or other instances where there was no actual sex taking place like forcing you to watch me jerk off or something. That's why i don't see a problem with saying there is sex within the rape, it's a way of describing that there was vaginal or oral or anal intercourse within the rape scenario.
Be kind he still struggling with women= person....
Well said
For those of us who don't want to play let's pretend, rape is nonconsensual sex and a transwoman is a man pretending to be a woman-see, that wasn't so difficult was it.
Wrong on all points. Sex is sex independent of whether or not it was a choice. It's still sex. Rape is both a verb and a noun. Learn English. Having sex with children is rape. Rape is an action where you have sex without consent. It's a sexual act, ergo a noun.
This should not be a debate at all. Well said Vi. These people are about control, not life.
Right to life is part of the usa.
"Christian Conservatives want *LIVE BABIES* so they can grow up to be *DEAD SOLDIERS"* -- George Carlin *RIP*
theyre pethetic god is for abortion anyways, both in cheaitng wifes in the bibile, and as indirect punishment for a parents crimes... which is revoltingly evil and wrong.
in the case of the violinist argument, if i'm hooked up to ANYONE against my will, and if i decide to disconnect from them, they die--then THEY ARE GOING TO DIE. no other arguments or scenarios, tough stuff for them. i have ZERO obligation to act as a lifeline for anyone against my will.
Yup, there are exceedingly few people on this planet I'd support with my body like that.
"the original violinist argument isn't analogous. So let me give you another reverse argument thats even less analogous by adding stupid conditions that don't happen in the actual subject"
The violinist argument is a bad argument
@Carl Peterson
To whom are you responding? The OP's point flew right over your head evidently. Do better.
Buying dinner for a homeless person today doesn't obligate you to feed them for, oh lets say, the next 18 years.
@Andrew Boettinger Because you decided to keep your child and bring them up.
@Andrew Boettinger I thought that was a pretty funny response haha
“Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.” Vi, this is a perfect retort to the “pregnancy is a risk to having sex and you have to live with your choices” argument. Thank you!!
Really. Then driving a car is consent to an accident and insurance should not cover the costs.
@@jaege are you saying “consent to sex:not consent to pregnancy::consent to drive:consent to accident”??
I would say consenting to drive is NOT consenting to an accident, and that the analogy to sex holds up. And insurance should cover the cost of the accidental damage/pregnancy.
@@spencerelliott2544 No. I am saying that consent to drive is not consent to an accident the same as consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.
@@jaege oh good! Haha I misread you then. Thanks for clarifying!
@@spencerelliott2544 I realize I didnt write it out too well.
You go Vi! I'm old now,but I protested and marched and wrote letters and called congresspersons about Roe back in the day. We worked very hard for our rights to control our lives and our futures and for our daughters and granddaughters to have these rights. I'm so angry about this and tired of these same old arguments. I thought we left the Taliban in Afghanistan, but they came to Texas. It's all about controlling a woman's body. Period.
...and my great granddaughters will have to fight the battle that we had thought we had won. :(
@@annk.8750 Goddess be Wise Goddess be Fierce, Goddess take no shit...Stand with thy Daughters and let this abhorrence pass away into days that are learned from and cautioned against, never to bring harm to any Mother's child. Not EVER again..And may this come to pass before it is even hoped for....my Sisters...your daughters and granddaughters if it be Needful and if one is needed, shall never be without this Mother's son beside them.so long as this Heart beats and this body still lives..
And I am but one of many Men who would swear to you the same. My Brothers stand with you and yours, and this I can say with certainty speaking for them without doubt. Daughters of the Goddess as all Women are, will always have us near... ALWAYS! Blessed Be may the Day come swifter than thought, quicker then my Blood and never be brought down again...LC, SoH🌙⭐🌘
It's a shame that we have to fight again now. Thank you though for showing respect and a good example of leadership/reasonable thinking for future generarions
@@fartface192 the fight is still on. It’s not over until it’s illegal in every state. The end of roe was just the beginning. We aren’t done yet.
@Gohan Pro-life
I'm chuckling as I type this so please forgive any typos. As flawed as the Thomson violinist analogy may be, your monstrosity of a thought experiment is so bizarrely disconnected from the real life difficult choices faced by women who find themselves facing an unplanned pregnancy that I'm left in a state of bemused disbelief.
Continue with your war against women's ability to control their own reproductive freedom. You should be thankful that there is no such place as hell because if there were no one would be more deserving of its fiery depths than you Gohan.
When I was MUCH younger and believed I was a christian, I was at a church camp. One lecture we had featured a person speaking about abortion. Many of us questioned their position, and it became clear to me the life of the fetus was NOT the main concern, and I asked an accusatory question, seeking clarification. We had wandered into an unmarried woman having a child, and the speaker confirmed that a big part of his (her?....it was a long time ago, over 50 years) stance was that the pregnancy and bearing the child was PUNISHMENT for the woman having sex out of wedlock. I wondered what those children's lives would be like, being raised by a parent who viewed them as a punishment.
You bring up a very good point. There are many cultural/religious ideas behind the call for laws banning abortion.
One involves deeply ingrained sexism.
As you state “the life of the fetus was NOT the main concern” of the speaker at your church group. Instead according to this traditionalist, the pregnant woman who had sex out of wedlock needed to be punished by giving birth.
- This fits the stereotype of the “fallen” woman which traditionalists believe should be punished by the government.
What about when men put the lives of children (not fetuses) at risk?
In the US it is legal for parents to smoke tobacco in front of their children. Even if the child has a breathing disorder.
- According to the Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine, secondhand tobacco smoke kills more than one thousand children every year from diseases including respiratory syncytial bronchiolitis, asthmatic attacks, and other respiratory complications.
- The Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine state, that “at least 6,200 children die each year in the United States because of their parents’ smoking . . “ This includes deaths due to lung infections and burns.
Why isn’t tobacco smoking banned in the US or at least banned for parents of young children?
My answer; parent smoking includes the behavior of men. Men say they want their privacy. Men say they should be able to raise their children the way they want to.
- Parent smoking fits the stereotype of the independent man. The man who is “king of his castle”.
The traditionalists think the independence of smoking parents should be supported by the government even if children die as a result.
Don't you know, a baby is a gift from god, unless the woman happens to be unmarried. In that case it's a "consequence". Christian double-speak at its worse.
You asked a question like that and your mum didn't whoop your backside when you got home? My mother would have been really rather cross because I dared to talk about abortion, I mean, that was about "adult" married things. Unmarried woman ""did things"" that were only for married people and they had to go to a special home where they were disgrace to society. And it was all such a shame.
Now if we're talking about someone who plays the accordion, all bets are off.
“Shut that bloody bouzouki off!” -Cheese Shop
😂
Hey now, what about Weird Al?
@@gadfly4190
Haha! A cheese shop without any cheese.
Why do I feel like Gohan would be squealing "my body, my rights" against mask mandates? Freedom for he but not for she? 🤔🤔🤔
Bro I wear masks all the time.
Now what?
@@MrKit9 1) what’s the definition of woman?
2) sorry I went into your echo chamber and have views you don’t like
@@gohanprolife8389 "sorry I went into your echo chamber and have views you don’t like"--
Projection... You are the only one with an echo chamber.
@@fomori2 yes the pro life Catholic is inside an echo chamber when he calls into atheist tv shows.
@@MrKit9 you literally told him to go away because you disagree with him, then accused him of being in an echo chamber, then accused HIM of projecting being in an echo chamber for calling you out for clearly demonstrating you do not want to be near people that disagree with you...that is a crazy neat trick there....like triple layered projection....sheesh man....(edit while also strawmanning your own argument in the name of saying he just doesnt have one...good lord...that is some mental gymnastics...i guess to justify ending a human life at any of its stages for selfish reasons you need to do some loops up there in your brain...but does that logic have to spill out into every way you perceive the world? )
I found this a really interesting call, really bad argument. I guess when Vi pushes her mic forward and leans in……someone’s about to be schooled. Great show!
Every human organism should be equal, except women, who do not have equal rights. We still don’t have the equal rights amendment, and the government gets to decide what we do and don’t do with our own bodies.
But but but men have to pay child support (or some such garbage argument).
We need to pass the ERA and get the government out of abortion (except for safety regulations and financial support for the indigent).
The government does the same with male bodies by drafting them and if i remember correctly the are going to or already have changed that to all people can be drafted so no matter the abortion argument, the government has the right to send you to your death to defend America from, idk, brown people or something.
Vi, perfect response.
Yea man she handled it very professionally. I’d be boiling to that point! My hair was already bristling with rage listening to this lunatic!
People like him are exactly the people who made this world so messed up as it is.
I really feel Vi's frustration. I agree completely with her assertion about bodily autonomy.
The day I see the anti-abortion people work towards having informed sex education in schools and universal access to contraceptives to reduce chances of unwanted pregnancies, when they set up pre-natal and postpartum care systems for the women and their babies without linking it all to religious instruction or evangelizing, then and only then will I believe their argument that it's about saving the babies. Because as it stands right now, it sure looks like it's about controlling women and their bodies.
If they cared about "life" they would be against the death penalty.
If they cared about "life" they would advocate for heath care for everyone.
If they cared about "life" they would be anti-war.
As you pointed out it is 100% about control and only the most ignorant and stupidest among us cannot see that.
As someone reminded me (I made the exact same mistake in my earlier comment) Vi goes by they/them, not she/her. :)
@@themaster408 Thank you. I'll keep that in mind the next time I refer to them.
@@fomori2 and if they cared about prevention of abortions, they'd be out on the street corners on Saturday nights handing out condoms.
I’ll care about bodily autonomy when the same right is extended to men.
"If I became an atheist today, I'd be pro- life tomorrow." Yeah, I said the same thing, but that's not how it happened.
Then that person would be an ignorant atheist instead of an ignorant theist. The Pro-Life position is based on dogma and/or ignorance of biology at best, and a need to control women at worst.
@fomori2 There are plenty of pro life people who just think that a fetus has a right to life and it has nothing to do with dogma or any biological fact. They just see that a fetus will grow into a person and think that fetus should have the right to grow and that in cases outside rape that the fetus was made willingly and shield be allowed to grow. Not what i think btw, but to just stamp only 2 options for a position that tens to hundreds of millions of people hold is ignorant because you are just ignoring other perspectives. They don't think what they think based on any dogma and don't think anything wrong about biology, they know a fetus is not a full human but think it should have the right to grow into one.
@@bpdmf2798 why would anyone grant greater rights to a human who has yet to achieve personhood in favour the bodily autonomy of a woman? Seems equivalent to charging a kid with vandalism for kicking a ball around a park that will one day become a housing development.
@@markharrison6498 Granting a fetus the right to 9 months gestation is no greater right than any human has had. I'm not even arguing for it, just pointing out that most people who are against abortion think that and arguing about a female's bodily autonomy does nothing to change their minds because to them, the fetus too has the right to live and unlike the mother, the fetus had no choice in the pregnancy (barring rape) and should not be murdered for no reason other than immediate physical threat to the mother (which very few pregnancies actually pose). These people see granting the mother the right to murder the fetus as granting the mother extra rights over the life of the fetus who doesn't have the right to end a life for any reason. You have to see it as 2 separate humans, one who is growing inside the other because of knowing decisions made by the mother. Not arguing on that front gets you nowhere and is a waste of air.
@@bpdmf2798 I disagree with pretty much everything you said. Is this the caller?
I love how Eric gave Vi the keys on this one. Smart.
Smart? It was a no brainer....
@@LucianCorrvinuswhy?
@@Thronsohnbecause V has a womb and Eric doesn't?
Vi & Eric... I FOUND YOU! :D
I haven't seen you 2 for ages and I had no idea where you went, so I'm very happy to have found you again and I look forward to watching all the vids ;)
Welcome! We're glad you found us!
Who plans a pregnancy and then has an abortion? If that is the case, that would be really rare, and I bet the reasons would be really strong, like sudden extreme poverty or a pregnancy that threatens the life of the mom. And it would be so heartbreaking to make that decision.
Yeah, if it happens, it likely is due to a big change of situation. But honestly, I don't care why they change their mind, because it is still their choice
Wether it’s heart breaking or not doesn’t matter. Ppl do have abortions after planning it. That should not be allowed, no matter the reason
@@gohanprolife8389 why?
Why does a z/e/f get special rights that nobody else has?
@@shanewilson7994 it gets the same rights you and I have. The right not to be killed
@@gohanprolife8389 do you have the right to use another person's organs against their will?
If you need my kidney, and I say, screw you, do you get to take my kidney?
22:20 “are duties punishments?” Kind of. Duties are considered duties because they carry the threat of punishment if not carried out. Draft dodging is a crime. Not reporting for jury duty is a crime
If not doing A means that B happens...then B is distinct from A. It happens in the absence of A.
None of thesae things make it even resemble A. If you eat my chocolate, I will punch you. The chocolate isn't the punch...though I uised to own both. And now you got them both from me.
@@brucebaker810 yes, but its your choice of whether or not you punch someone; its not a law that you have to perform, and there wont be punishment if you dont punch someone (though there could be consequences if you do punch someone.....much like the consequences of carry a fetus to term (i.e. a lifelong commitment to said child)
A consequence is not necessarily a punishment. Skipping on a banana peel has the consequence of you falling in your butt, it's a consequence, not a punishment, nor do all duties entail punishment if not carried out. Kobe only needs to show a single duty that does not have a punishment if not carried out for your point to be wrong, regardless of jury duty or the draft or any other duty that has a punishment that you can point to. Failing to perform a duty does not 100% = a punishment.
@@bpdmf2798 then name one
@@bpdmf2798 Not a punishment. But a result with negative cnnotation. Posaitive result: prosequence?
I'm 41 years old and I can safely affirm I have never heard an argument for abortion that included the word "violinist". Until now. My brain hurts.
Vi...great job on this! As frustrating as this was, you kept your cool, kept things on point and made great points for all of Gohan's arguments. As someone who's had abortions (many years ago), you hit all the right arguments for keeping it safe and legal.
For what it is worth, it is good to hear people who have actually experienced having an abortion speak on this. Yours are the voices that a lot of people need to hear. As long as it is not a sensitive subject, please do. When I was anti-abortion, one thing that changed my mind was just hearing ACTUAL women tell their experience, to hear the real reasons they get abortions.
It wasn't the only thing, but it is definitely important. This issue is one in which two sides are completely disconnected and that is one way to make that connection.
@@IllustriousCrocoduck my hat off to you that you changed your mind based not on emotion, but actual facts, and listening to those involved.
what? she clearly lost her cool.
Eric's initial comments were on point.
"should we call in on our neighbors to some secret police?"
Funny how some people in this country like that idea. Or want an almighty overlord of some stripe 🤷
11 minutes almost on the dot, Vi hit the nail on the head (not that they didn't make excellent points earlier, but that was a mic drop moment). As someone who used to be religious and was very pro-life and voted R almost entirely because of it (and now the exact opposite of all of those), I wish someone told me some of these points years ago.
Also something someone told that that's similar to what Vi is saying at 23 mins is "do you think the government should knock on your door to force you to have an abortion cause there's too many people? It's the same argument of them having control over your body.
I never understood why people make these types of arguments. They only get people further away from what you are.
*they :)
@@joshkirby2372 where did anyone misspelled they?
@@ryanmathis8286 it's not because of a misspelling, the original commenter just misgendered Vi. Vi uses they/them, not she/her.
@@joshkirby2372 thank you, I edited my comment. As soon as I read that I remembered and I apologize.
I love Vi😻🖖🏽
Regardless of how each conversation goes, I effing love the fact that you're constantly getting calls from other shows. It speaks to the honest discourse, civility and willingness to have a conversation across the table that you all have. Take that as the compliment it is!
The reverse violinist analogy makes no sense.
What makes a human being "human"? Consciousness makes us, or gives us the quality of being human. Until the brain has developed to the point of being able to function as the conscious organ it kight become, the fetus doesn't have any of the qualities that make one "human".
right. An astounding amount of people have no idea HOW fetuses actually look like in the earliest stages (or how small they actually are). They're putting their baby fantasies on something that is usually the size of a period that has no heart, or brain, and it analogus to a lot of parasites. All to basically punish other humans for having lifestyles they believe are "wrong".
@@Callimo well if ones truly believes there's sucj a thing as a soul, I can understand they'd be worried about it, in their ignorance of what medical science actually is.
Would Gohan be pro forced vasectomies? Think of it like the government kicking out violinists so they can't get hooked up to people
If I refuse to get a vasectomy how many people does that directly kill?
@@gohanprolife8389 Potentially any woman you get pregnant as it might kill her. Pregnancy is a game of Russian Roulette for the woman.
@@gohanprolife8389 The same amount that get killed by abortions.
@@gohanprolife8389 that depends..how annoying are you...cuz if your really REALLY ANNOYING, and would remove the already given rights to a citizen to satisfy personal feelings or SUPPOSED mortality...I can think...at least one...but I'm hot headed and tend to have trouble keeping my hands to myself in response to bullshit..how bout you?
Well...he is a little bit Fascist and they were all about forced sterilization for the "undesirable" back in the day... I'm thinking..yes..right up til he found out he was on the list...then he'd whine and cry and try to get off the list...you know that's what happens when you remove a right completely from one citizen., It just gets easier to do it to another...you think it'll never happen to you, and then.... snip....
Gohan means "Bone Head" in Skeptic language.
I absolutely how fucking done with this Vi is. Their whole demeanor on this call is absolute fire.
I was watching Vi being like "oh man.....it's coming...."
You "absolutely" WHAT?? do elucidate svp
@@manifold1476 Haha! I didn’t realize. “Absolutely love.”
@@praiseboognish1979 I kid you not, my brain filled in the blanks. I didn't notice that you left it out!
Take notes get inspired keep the faith go forth and kick ass in your world...cuz this is going to be messy right up until this stupidity is defeated, and we all are needed ...
THATS the violinist argument?!?! Yeah fuck that I'm walking out. That'd be terrifying to deal with.
Wow the reverse violinist analogy sounds like a episode of general hospital.
"All life deserves equal rights", but in some twisted way he doesn't include the life of a pregnant woman. No matter what he says, that's equating the acorn with the tree.
That is equating the flower to the tree. An acorn is finished, it has all its organs ready, it is a little preemie tree : it needs some time in a delicate environment to ensure it becomes a strong tree. A growing tree embryo/fetus is what you find in a wilting flower.
The actual violinist argument actually IS useful, because the violinist argument is a defense of abortion. In this call, Gohan got the argument totally wrong. In the actual thought experiment, the violinist (fetus) is assumed to have a right to life. However, the kidnapped host can unhook, because they aren’t violating the violinists right to life. They are depriving the violinist of the use of the host’s body, to which the violinist has no right.
I represented the argument as a pro choice argument, not a pro life one.
@@gohanprolife8389 Friend, if you were actually making a pro-choice presentation, that was very unclear. I don’t think you were presenting a pro-life stance, either. It was rather muddled.
@@gohanprolife8389 it’s a horrible argument that just proves your ignorance on the topic
@@gadfly4190 I stated I wanted to steel man the argument at the beginning. That clearly means it’s an opponent’s argument
@@jewsco the violinist isn’t my argument it’s a feminist pro aborts argument
This was an excellent conversation. Well done. Thanks for posting.
There are two options to show responsibility once a woman is pregnant.
1. You decide to carry the baby to term
2. You decide to abort the fetus before it's too late
Number 2. Is a valid option and within the right of an individual as it pertains to their bodily autonomy.
The entire argument is about punishment. They want to punish women for choosing option #2.
And let's talk about the organism argument. When a person is brain dead, are they not an organism? They can't live without machines doing the work for them. Who decides whether to withdraw life support? The family or the government? Bingo the family.
A fetus is an organism but it needs the mother to grow. The mother is analogous to machines keeping the brain dead person alive. Without the machines the brain dead person cannot continue to exist and function. Without the mother a fetus cannot become a fully grown human.
Gohan, why should the government decide for the mother whether or not she is allowed to withdraw life support? The government is not carrying the risk of the pregnancy and neither are you. So why are you and them so adamant on forcing a woman to remain pregnant against her will?
The entire argument is about punishment. You want to punish women for having sex. A woman has the right to decide whether or not she wants to have a baby and not you or the government. End of fucking story.
My wife and I want a baby but when she's pregnant our finical situation might change due to life and we might decide against it which is a responsible choice. So we'd opt for an abortion. A clump of cells isn't a human being and therefore removing it doesn't qualify as murder.
And for all the anti big government talk that comes from Texas Republicans, you guys sure as well love big government intervention. Morons.
And the viability argument is highly flawed. Even doctors can't draw the line. There's no scientific consensus on when a fetus becomes a person.
"Even doctors can't draw the line. There's no scientific consensus on when a fetus becomes a person."--
The worst part about the morons that are not educated enough and/or not intelligent enough to realize that a mass of cells is not a human is they are interfering with us from having the legitimate discussion of where that line is.
Besides them not knowing science, they dont even know their bible. There is no prohibition against abortion in the bible, and it in fact actually proscribes how and when to do so several times.
God and the bible are pro abortion, but because the easiest people to indoctrinate are your children, organized religion has to lie to their flock that he is against it in order for them to keep bringing new converts into the world.
Not everyone is against abortion because they are using it as a form of punishment. Really limiting a humans amount of reasons to feel a certain way to justify an argument there
@@miyamotoyamazaki1760Perhaps, but by banning abortion and making it a crime, you ARE making it analogous to a punishment, regardless of intent.
Vi you are brilliant!
In your argument you show absolutely the difference between someone who has done the very hard, honest work of examining their moral code and the basis for it. Gohan showed what it is to accept comfortable memes from his chosen social group and NEVER examine the underpinnings of those memes and what logically they lead to.
Well done, Vi and Eric!
From the start he said his reason was “treat every human with equal treatment” it is not equal rights , it is special rights ... a fetus even tho a human fetus, can not use someone’s body without their consent.
If your biological child needed a kidney you are not obligated by law to give up.
This was a let down. . .
8 mins in , hopefully the point is brought up.
Violin , eh analogy...
I would use a child even a teenage or adult any offspring needs a human dialysis machine for 9 months. Can the law make the parents hook up to the human for 9 months , with life changing effects, to the person.
And if the government gets the go ahead on making those decisions.... what happens when the president needs a transplant?
.
.
And if anyone has to think a moment longer on if the teenager should also have rights to the parents kidneys, crazy to grant the fetus that has absolutely no ties to this world gets the special privileges.
So what about the idea that a father would legally have to give up organs to his children if they need them. Would he think that was fair. Especially if the child needs a heart, both lungs, or both kidneys and it would cost the father his life.
Gohan's entire argument is about making a woman completely dependent of a man.
So Gohan wants to grant equal rights? Why then grant special rights to fetuses, that override the rights of the person providing the womb? That's not equal!
Yeah saying you don’t have a right to kill a fetus doesn’t grant it more rights than the mom
@@gohanprolife8389 You don't get it. You are granting special rights to the fetus over the person providing the womb. If the fetus is there without their content, of course they should have the right to remove it.
@@gohanprolife8389 Not only are you arguing for a pregnant woman to have less rights than a fetus, you are saying that a pregnant woman deserves less rights than a corpse. Without prior consent, one may not remove a corpse's organs even if it will save someone's life. You are arguing that a fetus deserves the use of someone else's organs with or without consent.
@@chrisgift are you confusing organ donation with abortion? Do you know the difference between direct killing and indirect death?
Gohan ProLife I'm not confusing anything. The question of abortion is about bodily autonomy. No one gets the right to use another person's body without their permission. The details are unimportant. My answer will always be the same.
Props on the accepting Gohan.... Cause technically he hadn't been banned yet....
Can we trade future Gohan for a DOZEN Victer from nycs? At least vic was super entertaining
I prefer gohan
What about the number of women who will die from back alley abortions if it weren't legal? Moreover, not all fetuses are actually viable. Abortion can be an act of supreme mercy.
Love you guys. As we say here in the river valley, you done good.
There is difference between fetus as organism and human being! Fetus isn't consious self aware being like humans are.
When does a fetus become conscious?
Say hypothetically there is an activity you can do, which is loads of fun, but you know each time you engage in that activity, there is a chance that you will bring a being, which will be physically dependant on you body into existence. The question now is, should you have the right to unplug that being?
Without taking anything away from Vi's frustration regarding this argument, I heard a variation of it that I think focuses on the bodily autonomy angle without introducing things like kidnapping:
Suppose there is a child who needs a bone marrow donation. Severe aplastic anemia and the child is going to die without a donation. You're the only one who matches.
Does the government have the right to force you to donate?
Of course not. Even if you had signed up for a tissue-matching program so that you could be called in to do a donation should there be a match, you're still able to refuse and nobody can force you to donate. For crying out loud, even if you died, nobody can harvest your organs without your consent. Why is a uterus special? Why is that the one organ that people are allowed to use without the consent of the person whose uterus it is?
Say hypothetically there is an activity you can do, which is loads of fun, but you know each time you engage in that activity, there is a chance that you will bring a being, which will be physically dependant on you body into existence. The question now is, should you have the right to unplug that being because it's inconvenient for you?
@@rider24ZA Suppose someone started using your body without your consent. Suppose that you’re dead. The question now is, should they be allowed to use your body without your consent, even though you’re not even alive to make an objection?
Because that’s how things currently are. If you die, your body is not allowed to be harvested for organs to keep other people alive. You don’t even exist to be able to make an objection but so long as we do not have your active, declarative consent to use your body without your consent, we cannot do so, even in the interest of saving someone else’s life.
OK, but maybe that shouldn’t be the case. Maybe universal organ donation should be the standard where you have to actively opt out. So then we’re back to the previous situation: There is someone who is dying and needs a bone marrow transplant. You’re the only match. Can you be forced to donate in order to save their life? No. You cannot be forced to have your bodily tissues used without your consent. You cannot be made to give blood, donate marrow, donate organs, or even your hair that you are voluntarily cutting where someone might be able to use that hair to make a wig for someone who is undergoing chemotherapy. Your body is yours to use and other people are not allowed to use it without your consent.
Except for a uterus, it would seem.
Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.
Why is a uterus the only organ that can be used by someone else without the consent of the person whose uterus it is?
@@rider24ZA Yes, absolutely! Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. A fetus should not have more rights than you or I.
If you guys can turn up the volume just a tad, that would be great. Mostly for your older listeners like me. Thx.
Wow so good! I love you two!
I totally feel Vi here and I relate! She has to deal with so many stupid people on this planet. It is so frustrating because if one is able to see the stupidity of people, you’re left thinking - how can you not see the obviousness of this very easy dilemma. Are you like 7 years old ??!
Vi, I get you. Hang in there…..😅
Nope I’m 28.
What’s the stupidity of the dilemma?
@@gohanprolife8389 ; you obviously are an intelligent person.
From my POV, the violinist arguments are not productive. My view is that there is a division between personal morality and what the government should be involved with.
- In terms of all human organisms (those which have unique DNA) as you put it, in terms of government intervention, there is going to be a difference in the treatment between the unborn & the born in a non totalitarian democracy.
This is especially true the closer the human organism is to fertilization.
Why? Because to treat a human fetus the same as a born baby in terms of government surveillance requires a totalitarian state.
Pretty bold of you to call someone else stupid when your writing is trash.
@@bb1111116 don’t give me too much credit I wouldn’t say I’m intelligent haha
If you think there should be a division between personal morality and what the government should be involved with, why would you be against murder? Or slavery?
@@gohanprolife8389 ; Please, you are intelligent.
I approve of the government enforcing laws against murder and slavery (involving those who are born) because it does not require a totalitarian government to do so.
For instance, the law against drinking alcohol, (Prohibition) could not be sustained because it made criminals of the huge number of people in the US requiring police state tactics to enforce it. Studies about Prohibition show that it actually saved lives overall from alcohol related deaths. If saving lives was the only criteria for any law in the US, then Prohibition would still be in effect.
Second example; if reducing premature deaths was the only criteria for a law, then cigarette smoking would also be illegal. As with alcohol, to enforce a complete elimination of cigarette smoking in the US would require a police state.
this guy's examples are so bad.
If a hand is not an organism then neither is a clump of cells.
The person is forced against their will, has less rights than every or else. Back to Gohan initial statement, equal.rights for all.
I think if/when Gohan calls back in he needs to explain why he believes it's a person's duty, their obligation to carry out a pregnancy once the egg is fertilized.
He would say that you are responsible to provide life support to a being that you helped to create. That applies whether you were irresponsible or unlucky.
He also would say you have that responsibility if raped, but I have no clue why. That's so despicable I can't even wrap my head around it.
(If not obvious, I think Gohan is completely wrong in everything he says.)
@@idahogie to be fair, i give respect to pro-lifers who dont have those caveats, rather than the pro-lifers who are against abortion....unless its rape or incest. you cant call one murder, and the other not murder; they both have the same action, the same outcome. the reasons why dont matter.
just to clarify, i am not only pro-choice, i think abortion should be the very first thing on the table for a pregnancy that isnt wanted.
@@1369Stiles I agree. The ones who allow exceptions are irrational. The ones who don't are despicable, but consistent.
@@idahogie for me, I would rather the service of getting an abortion be regulated by hospitals and the government.
Because if not we would experience the same problem that happened in the 1920s during the prohibition of alcohol, people were desperate and in their desperation did dangerous things that caused harm to almost everyone involved
@@FoxInnaHat The problems of prohibition were *caused* by regulation by the government. Specifically, over-regulation by the government, on a theistic basis rather than a basis of societal good.
I agree that we need abortion services to have the same regulation that all other health care services receive from both industry and government.
It's a woman's body, it's a woman's choice. We wouldn't be having this conversation if men had the babies.
they do have babies...they take ownership of them the moment their unfortunate victim receives their sperm. And what's this shit about a woman's body, a woman's choice? What the fuck do I pay for a engagement and wedding rings for, if not to establish and communicate my ownership of her? Did I miss a meeting, or something?
Have you noticed that at some points Eric Is enjoying VI’s answers so much he actual giggles.
More engagement. Great work really slick without the bad connotations of slick. You're gonna be fun to watch.
aww shit here we go...
So, Gohan is not in favor of exceptions for rape and incest. Which one of those turns him on the most: forcing an assault victim to carry a rapist's fetus to term, or forcing a victim of incst to carry a fetus to term?
Who says it turns me on?
And why does a kid deserve to die because of what their mother or father did
@@gohanprolife8389 why are you willing to punish the person who is pregnant for being raped?
@@shanewilson7994 who’s punishing her?
Is not letting her kill her kid really a punishment?
@@MrKit9 sure bro.
Also, what’s the definition of woman
That is extreme. I can understand why a Christian is against abortion in most circumstances. However, to coerce a female to carry pregnancy when she experiences sexual trauma against her will is something only a sadist is capable of doing.
Oops, he is a Christian. Never mind. That explains a lot.
Violinist argument fails because the person has been forced to do something against their will.
The best argument I've heard is... Say there is a 3 year old who needs a kidney transplant, should either of the parents be mandated by law to give up parts of their body to save this child's life? The bottom line is that once born, no parent is required/mandated to give up bodily autonomy to save their own child. So why should the woman have to do it through pregnancy? It should be a choice in both circumstances.
Eric tot nailed it at (22:13) ! That’s how you get fucked up people dude!
❤️
Every time I ask a forced birther if the fetus should have the same rights as a born child. They always say yes, and I laugh.
We should treat human beings equally. Agreed. I don't have a right to another person's body neither does a fetus. Next.
i love that his analogy is saying: forcing people to have a child they didn't want is the same as kidnapping, and I'm like.... what's your point, dude?
Gohan is bad at analogies.
Say hypothetically there is an activity you can do, which is loads of fun, but you know each time you engage in that activity, there is a chance that you will bring a being, which will be physically dependant on your body into existence. The question now is, should you have the right to unplug that being?
VI is awesome 👏
Scientifically, a human organism is defined as a complex set of cells consisting of specific organs.
The difference between the violinist example and the pregnant woman is that the woman engaged in an act knowing that pregnancy was an outcome, in the violinist instance. Did the person and the kidnapper who attached them engage in an act where the person knew that being attached to a violinist was an outcome that was possible (if not likely)?
Anyone else horrified that Gohan has children? I can only imagine how much it would suck to be raised by someone like him.
The Soviet Union was the FIRST nation to legalize all abortions, Eric.
Sad
@Bluthund; playing the communist card. I can do that too.
- Gohan praises Hitchens. Hitchens was a communist when he was younger, spending time in Cuba in the 60s & spouting Marxist ideas when he was younger.
- Communist North Korea outlaws some abortions w/ a 3 year prison sentence as a penalty.
@@MrKit9 ; Hitchens was never a great leader for me.
He also became a foreign policy neo con in his later years supporting the war in Iraq and the forever war in Afghanistan. He never backed away from that.
In later years Hitchens became a strong pro lifer advocating for government control & prosecution of any pregnant woman in the US.
He had other right wing views about women.
@@bb1111116 when did I praise hitchens? All I stated was he was pro life
@@gohanprolife8389 ; playing the semantics game now. Fine.
One definition of praise; “Expression of approval”.
Gohan brings up one person in a video who takes a pro life position, Hitchens.
Gohan approves of Hitchens’ pro life position.
An expression of approval, by definition praise.
I will never ever ever understand the concept of a 12 year old girl getting raped by her own father, getting pregnant...and pro-life advocates demanding that little girl raise her own sibling, as a mother.
All part of god's plan
@@whispersmith Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight
The sheer absurdity of this reverse violinist argument kinda says a lot about what they are trying to say. Why do we have to make up a preposterous impossible scenario for a common, real situation?
Because the easiest way for arguments like this to be made is via achieving gold medal status in the mental gymnastics division
The way to frame the question is, Do you want the government to force all pregnant women to give birth, and how does that benefit society?
Hahaha - oh my fucking gods….
Vi’s expression at (21:52)…
She’s like - ohhhhh my god…..(siiiigghhhhh)…..how are you not getting this by now!
Lol Vi is so over this pro fetus BS, and Eric is literally cringing when Gohan starts😂
If you suppose bodily autonomy, do you support assisted-suicide?
Vi sounded and looked so done with this call right from the onset lol
A man trying to justify a woman not having a choice tends to do that
people need to turn this around and make themselves the object being discussed. the question would be would YOU want to force another person to take care of YOU against their will? what if it was you that was the violinist and it was your life this was being save by forcing someone else to be there against their will.
Even if I voluntarily hooked myself up to the violinist to sustain his life, I have the right to unhook myself at any point, for any reason.
Okay, here's my take on this "reverse violinist" argument: It's exceedingly mixed up!!!!
First of all, it puts "you" in the position of a woman (against her will, but we'll leave that aside for now) that is needed to give up freedoms to keep another person (supposedly like a fetus) alive for 9 months. The "you" initially had a chance to uncouple despite knowing that neither of you can survive now but since you did your choice has been taken away by now keeping you unconscious for 9 months. This is not even close to synonymous with pregnancies. Mother's aren't dependent on fetuses for survival. At any rate, it is immoral to use another in such fashion without express consent.
Second, when reversed I'm sure Gohan meant to say that the violinist, after 9 months, is now free to survive without being connected or the situation hasn't changed any. So now, is it immoral for the violinist to separate from you although you can not survive but it can? This is like asking if a baby, once born, is obligated to keep the mother alive. I think most people would likely agree that a baby, or child (even as an adult) is under no obligation to keep their parents alive by giving up their bodily autonomy.
So Horn's argument misses the point. It would work better as an argument for whether one should be obligated to reciprocate favor.
You nailed it Vi
My Wife ...... We were Sexually a couple 20 yrs ago.she was on Long Term contraceptive....
Somehow it got messed up, and after we broke up, she was pregnant.
With a Girl....
20yrs later... We are married with 2 great Kids.... And we BOTH AHAVE tattoos regarding that first child....
I wouldn't have my marriage or kids without that abortion.
My ONLY regret ... Cause I had known my wife for 10yrs before she earhooked me to her home.... My only regret is that I wasn't there today hold her hand
I've noticed over a lot of these videos that the male host has a stutter that I don't know if it's just a verbal tic or a real stutter, but it kind of bothers my misophonia that when he's trying to respond and instead of saying "or" he says "o-o-o-o-or or or". I hope he's trying to control this if it's just an impulse. It's literally the only thing that makes these videos hard to watch.
Bad joke: Vi ate gohan for breakfast.
No one can be made to keep anyone alive. Period.
Vi, you go girl! Love it when you get so forceful. So, cute. Of course, I agree with all your arguments in this clip. Keep up the good work.
"You said duty" I really think we don't need to be minimizing these issues with jokes.
I feel like hosts dropped the ball in the beginning by talking about what is a human. They should have just stuck to bodily autonomy rights.
Question: I used to grow up in a very oppressed country where women had no rights. As a child, I came to believe that America was the most progressive country in the whole world. 50 years later... I am starting to believe that America is the least progressive country in the world. Have I lost the plot? Rape victims, insest victims unplanned/accidental pregnancy, mother's not going to survive the pregnancy due to medical conditions etc. What went wrong? Why? And what happened America. I live in Africa just so you know, a 3rd world country and woman do have more rights here. Why America?
I like this kind of Vi...I would love to see some of that fire when conversing with Theists.
You swapped the tables on him a bit by making the violinist dependent on him being there to live, but you could try another way as well to remove the human element.
Gohan wakes up to find that he is hooked up to an incubation chamber. The chamber contains a 2 week old fertilized egg. The machine causes him to vomit occasionally, and hurts his back. If he removes himself from the machine, the egg dies. If not, he has to wait 9 months for the egg to become a baby. Will he carry that machine around for the nine months?
Y'all are awesome :O I've never understood pro-life arguments, and as I am a cis man, the idea of anyone having any say in the matter other than those who are in the position to bear the consequences of carrying a pregnancy is beyond insane. Bodily autonomy is paramount. Period.
If men were the ones becoming pregnant, I wonder if abortion would be such a problem.
...they're not and we'll never know...let's try to focus on real problems as they present themselves...
I love Vi's passion!
A foetus is able to live outside the uterus at 23 to 24 weeks gestation. Before that it ia just a bunch of cells like a malignant cancer.
Get a partner who looks at you like Eric looks as Vi when Vi is going full guns blazing.
Also, cesarean births are the most common type of late term abortions..
The WOMAN says it’s a punishment if she doesn’t want to be denied an abortion.
You often have LOW VOLUME ON CALLERS
Please fix this please!!!
I personally have never known any woman who uses abortion as birth control. It's traumatic, it's costly, it's painful.
The woman is known. She has a name, a history, an age, a Social Security number. She has friends who care. She has emotions, feelings, good times, hard times. She has experienced childhood, school, seen beauty, seen wickedness. She has enjoyed meals, had illnesses, learned a language or two, made mistakes, been admired, been disliked. She has thoughts, interests, joy, sorrow.
A zygote/fetus "knows" nothing, feels nothing, wants nothing. At all. Period.
It's not even useful, like an organ.
Humans love, breathe, eat. A fetus doesn't.
Humans laugh, cry, feel. A fetus doesn't.
It isn't a baby, it isn't a child.
Yeah, the whole woman using it as birth control, if it happens at all, would be exceedingly rare