Abortion: The Argument No One Is Having
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- Alabama has passed a bill banning abortion. This has spurred a lot of back and forth online and off. Unfortunately, people aren't really arguing about abortion. They're fighting, calling each other names (we'll see some of that in the comment section below, no doubt), getting upset, but not arguing-which is something altogether different. In this video I wanted to offer a clear argument for why abortion is always wrong and can never be justified.
For a great follow up, read Refuting a ‘Heartless’ Pro-Choice Argument, by Trent Horn: www.catholic.c...
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!
📌 To support me on Patreon (Thank you! 😭): / mattfradd
👆Subscribe to my channel here: www.youtube.co....
(make sure to hit the BELL icon to be notified of new videos!)
🎧Listen to The Matt Fradd Show podcast here:
podcasts.apple....
📖Get my book "Does God Exist?" here: www.amazon.com....
🍺Support me on Patreon (Thank you!): / mattfradd
Facebook: / mattfradd
Twitter: / mattfradd
Instagram: / mattfradd
Big, strong people shouldn’t kill little, weak, innocent people. Simple and undeniable. Thanks Matt!
I remember being at Mass going back to my seat from Communion, I was carrying a toddler while also being pregnant walking behind an old lady pushing a walker and we both passed a mom in the pew with a lovely Down's child. At that very moment I thought that we as a group are the most hated people according to the world.
Honored that you're watching, Fr. Mark. Thank you for being a good priest!
@@mickieknows7712 virture signaling! Hypocrite!!!
@@PintsWithAquinas Will you be doing one on men, sex and abortion? No one, especially men ever want to discuss male prowess, their claims to the right to have sex because they are men and the consequences. Women don't go to sperm banks just to have abortions.
I don't like that argument. I call it the 'no kill animal shelter' or 'pet rescue' argument and it's based on sheer emotionalism and special pleading. That makes it weak, unconvincing to those we want to dissuade from this evil, (both women and men, to make this a woman only issue is a grave error) and somewhat degrading......
A better argument goes like a commandment: We don't dispose of people because they are inconvenient or stand in the way of what we want. This reveals the case of treating a potential human as a person and not as a commodity or mere thing. This also covers not only pregnancy issues, but the failure of modern marriages, collapse of families and dissolution of community, and you can reference it in many places to scripture. The cardinal sin behind killing an unborn child goes all the way to the top and to the bottom. Just as it did in the fall of Rome.....
I am a recent Catholic convert and I was pro life LONG before I was even considering religion. Pro life is pro science.
Same here. Pro Life is the default position, anything else is indoctrination
100 % same here. let the anti-truth of our age not poison our minds and morality!
Completely agree with your comment. It's odd how the majority of people uphold science but then many prochoice say something anti-science like: "it's just a clump of cells"
Matt, I agree with you 100%. If something is alive, distinct and human it has dignity and must be protected. However, even with all of the evidence in the world, the majority of the Abortion Activists have flat-out rejected any and all logic thought process in order to protect their agenda. I have tried to have rational discussion with people on this subject and no matter how many sources or truth bombs that I can pull out of my hat, they never admit that what is inside the womb IS a human child. At best I can get them to admit that they really and truly don't know what it is to which my reply is simply "If you don't know what something is, how is it that you (and our government for that matter) think you can advocate for or have the right to kill it?"
That’s unfortunate. Thankfully the biological sciences have developed a centuries-old classification system that places different organisms into different species. A DNA sample of an unborn child is unambiguously Homo sapien, and Homo sapiens are human beings. No medical professional or modern scientist denies this. Their best argument is to argue that there is a distinction between a human being and a human person (a premise that we necessarily reject). It is a difficult position to defend however, because the burden of proof would be on them. In other words, they would have to prove that such a distinction exists. Until they sufficiently prove that a human being is not necessarily a human person, logical integrity demands that we accept the default position that human beings are human persons.
True. I feel like people in the future will look back at abortion the same way we look back at slavery. Black people were not considered “human people enough”, so they were tortured, killed, abused and traded like an object. Unfortunately, people apparently don’t learn from their mistakes and now we don’t even consider a little baby inside the womb as human enough to live and we kill them like they are nothing.
Sarah Santos i couldn’t have said it better myself 👏
I think this argument is SOLID. Thank you for outlining it in such a clear and concise way.
I'd like to know just what exactly the unborn are supposed to be if they're not human
They say it is a "clump of cells"
@@rody3199 Yes, kind of like humans
Good question - And one disturbing answer is that the unborn child is a parasite, equivalent to a cancer cell, and the mother is a host! www.campusreform.org/?ID=12165 - I realise I don't have the full context of this story. Nonetheless, it is clear that this person believes a fetus is a 'legitimate parasite..', which goes against what I believe in!
@@MissNatali3 and my response to that is how can an unborn baby be a parasite if it resides in an organ (the uterus) that was specifically made to provide for it? Parasites and pathogens are intruders that are not meant to be in the body and if the uterus' purpose is to contain the life of the fetus inside of it, a fetus cannot be considered a parasite
Megan Hanson That makes no sense, humans are designed in a way that parasites can exploit humans as well
I’m 39, and my generation was fed a lie. We were told “it’s no big deal”. So many women in my life can not let go of that lie. I was coerced into having 2 abortions by the age of 18. I really felt I had no other choice. I was crushed emotionally for years and not one family member or friend cared that I regretted my abortions. They thought I should move on and be grateful that I was able to go to college. But some friends of mine do not regret their decisions. They are glad they have “good” lives now and they want women in our country to continue to have that choice. One day it will hit them. I pray for them everyday.
I believe it is a matter of person's sensitivity. I saw some women who were as sensitive as a hammer - for them abortion was like clipping their nails - they never had a second thought about it.
the problem is people have no idea they could put themselves in living hell situation - I cannot even imagine what sensitive, intelligent person may feel knowing she aborted her own children.
Best regards
Be blessed, Gabriela !!
The logic is strong. There is only very weak arguments for abortion, and they are selfish, materialistic, and based in emotion.
There was a time in my life when I was ambivalent, because it was popular and I am in a blue state and it was a fight I was not ready to have. After having my own child and reengaging with Christ, I am a vigorous supporter of innocent human life.
Thanks for all you do Matt. I have been clean from porn for over two months, and I will never turn back. God Bless.
Logic was my favorite course in college. We learned, like you said, if the premise is true the conclusion must be true. Your point is 100% true!
Any so called 'human right' that requires you to violate another's human rights cannot be a human right, by definition.
I think that one portion of your argument is weaker than the rest: You mention the question, "Is it growing?" The answer is indeed yes, but from this alone, it does not follow that it is therefore alive.
How can we make this portion of your argument stronger? Because there are many things that grow that we wouldn't consider alive: Gas prices, temperature, pride, crystals, mountains, etc. I think that if we show that the unborn exhibit many other commonalities of beings we consider to be alive, that would strengthen this argument. Things like movement, responding to stimuli, or metabolism. I believe that these are all backed by science as well, but I think it's necessary to include them.
Interested to hear your take. Thank you Matt for all you do!
Correct, but growth is still one of the indicators of life, especially when coupled with other criteria. There are widely agreed upon lists of criteria for life, and growth is included in them as an indicator even though (like you said) it is not an exhaustive indicator by itself. NASA’s website as well as many other scientific sources have lists that can be referenced.
Oh, so maybe I wasn't pregnant with a human child...it was just inflated gas prices.
If you could, please ask Stephanie Grey how she would address instances of rape. The case most frequently brought up to me is that of the 11-year old, God be with her. As another commenter noted, some of the women/girls seeking abortions are weak and little themselves.
Abortion is reactive, which doesn’t solve any underlying societal issues. What are the underlying issues here, and what are Catholic ways to proactively support non-Catholic women, before there is “need” for an abortion?
As the only Catholic in my Protestant and agnostic friend group, and the only one who is pro-life, I see a lack of regard for family or life, and an overarching desire for independence and self-autonomy. I don’t see myself changing any minds here. How do I talk with my liberal friends and family, many of whom don’t want to have a conversation if it’s “confrontational.” Even if I speak quietly and peacefully, they are not willing to listen and I don’t know the best way to broach the topic with them. What do you suggest?
A person is a person, no matter how small. -Dr. Suess.
We have this poster in the L&D of Catholic Hospital. This so well fits for a pro-life argument. I agree with the premise but I also believe it is always wrong to maim or kill a weak, defenseless human being by a big or small human being. It is more so when they are a child.
I love this! I've been doing some prolife canvassing, though, and a lot of people are stuck on the issue of pregnancy complications. I'm not sure how this would work in that case.
Perhaps we need to define the Big Strong Person. My first assumption was that the big, strong person was the mother, but I think the abortionist needs to be defined as the big, strong person. The mother herself isn't always big and strong for medical or emotional reasons.
Update: I just saw that there's another video for pregnancy complications, so I'll watch that, too.
thank you for showing us how to make logical argument than just names calling
If you would, can you ask Stephanie if she knows of any actual medical instance where a fetus can endanger the life of it's mother?
Heroica Knight ectopic pregnancy
Great point about if parents are human then child is human. Thanks Matt for defending the defenseless.
Hi! I absolutely love your videos! Recently I've been speaking out more about my pro life views to pro choice people. Although, I keep getting stuck with people who say they believe abortion is wrong but they feel that they can't take that right away from other women because they don't want to put their views on her. What is a good argument for this? I always just say the whole murder is illegal so why wouldn't abortion be illegal if you truly believe that it is a human from the moment of conception. Thanks so much! Keep making these great videos!!!
Alexis Petrosino There’s this great video by Lila Rose. Hope it helps.
czcams.com/video/7YzY5kuOhxE/video.html
Ella Wood oh wow great! Thank you I’ll watch it!!
@@alexispetrosino1068 Yes, the Lila Rose video is fantastic! So very simply, it's the same as saying, "I'm not okay with my husband hitting me, but what my friend's husbands do to them is none of my business - I can't impose my views on them." Of course that's craziness because of COURSE I think it's wrong in all circumstances for a man to hit a woman, just as it is wrong in all cases to end a human life.
Emily Wilson oh wow hi!! Love your videos Emily!!! That’s a really good explanation thank you!!! I’ll be bringing that up 🙏🏻
Nobody has the right to choose death for another human person. If they want to take their own life that is called suicide, if they take somebody else's life that called muder. That is the pro choice position. Murder is only justified in self defence. Is that logical enough?
Another great video, thank you 😊
We are given a gift to have this miracle of baring children. As adults and parents, our duty for these babies is to; protect, provide, support, educate and love them throughout their life. We as adults need to be responsible in these duties to celebrate, conserve appreciate the gift of life that God has graced us with. Sadly, people are not responsible being's and fail in this order of affairs. Abuse and disregard of the unborn and the mother is unnaceptable.
Matt, great video. I am the VP of my college’s students for life organization and have had dozens of conversations with pro choice people specifically about abortion, and a majority of the time this video would refute their arguments. However, there are stronger, less common forms of the pro choice argument that you did not address here. For example, I find that pro choice people, ones who are educated at least, will rarely deny that the unborn is biologically alive, but rather disagree that it possesses “personhood,” whatever that quality is that makes us different from animals. Also, an even stronger form is when pro choice people grant you that the unborn is a “person,” but the mother still has a right to kill it due to the unique relation between them. Good answers to these claims are provided by the Equal Rights Institute, who I find to be the best pro life resource out there.
The argument I am hearing more from pro choice people is that “women should not be forced to go through pregnancy and give birth against their will.” I think they know they are loosing the “it’s not a human being” argument and this is taking its place. I’d like to hear an argument defeating that thinking from a non religious perspective. They won’t listen to religious arguments and tune out.
You understand the issue properly and the argument goes as follows - You have the power to do good or wrong and you should do good. That is the basis of all morality whether religious or not. The unborn child has no power in this situation and is not an agent, but you are and can be held accountable as well..........
Our secular society may minimise the killing of the unborn to a non crime someday, but there are many ways this evil will came back to you. Ways you can't imagine. The flood story of Noah explains this very well.........
Most of them believe the fetus or embryo is not a person so none of this matters
So the question follows - what is a person? The definition I would use and that I think is implicit in Matt Fradd’s expansion of the argument is ”a living human being” or ”a living member of the human species”.
A human foetus or embryo definitely falls under that definition, meaning that it matters a lot.
Roe decided that unborn babies were not "persons." Person hood is a legal designation. That is all Roe did and yet look how many babies have died because they have been denied "personhood." Since unborn babies are not "persons," then they have no legal claim to life. That is really bad law.
Thats not true, most of then know the truth but ignore it anyway.
The 1972 decision on the road was later proven that it had nothing to do with the 14th Amendment. Of course it is religious issue, but the Supreme Court found that it wasn't in the Constitution and thus it is the new law of the land. And the justices that decided that in majority were right. We as Catholics are already right but just thank God that the Supreme Court Justices took the Mississippi case and fix something that was wrong in 1973. I'm very proud to be in Mississippi lady and a Roman Catholic lady and it's just a wonderful time to be in Mississippi right now because we were part of changing the evil of Roe versus Wade. I'm so proud of the state that I married into. Praise Lord Jesus Christ and God bless our Supreme Court Justices decided on the right side of the Constitution and took care of judicial activism
If it's growing, it's alive. If it has human parents, it's human. - I don't think I've ever heard it put across just as effectively. It is psychopathy and deeply unnatural to kill a life you created out of convenience. You don't get to decide for that person whether it'll live a live worth living or not. I am so grateful and relieved that the matter is being reviewed.
Mother Teresa at a prayer breakfast in DC said: “From here, a sign of care for the weakest of the weak - the unborn child - must go out to the world … then really you will be true to what the founders of this country stood for.” ~ St. Teresa of Calcutta
Wrong quote! M. Theresa is not a saint because she she is a syncretist and the world loves her for that more than her Master.
@@gloriam9941 That is a special kind of stupid.
@@mickieknows7712 Prove me wrong with facts not insults.
@@gloriam9941 - The Church canonized her. Fact. She's a Saint.
@@kimfleury firstly she is not cannonised for the universal church. M Theresa never believed that hindus and muslims must convert before dying to be saved. Read her books - its formal HERESY not just material. She was not a sign of contridiction since all indians love and adore her.
So I’ve seen a couple videos, this one and Brian Holdsworth’s video, regarding this subject. I think that your arguments about being alive and being human could be strengthened a little, but are still alright. Both arguments include words like “wrong” and I’m not inclined to speak that way in a legal sphere. Arguing with morality is ok, but is a longer route to reach the same conclusion. So let’s step up this argument a little, I use the following syllogism and then fill in the definitions later:
Abortion is Murder
Murder is illegal
Therefore Abortion is illegal.
Abortion is the premature termination of a pregnancy by the direct and intentional killing of an innocent human fetus. (Blastocyst, zygote, or embryo)
Illegal is punishable by law.
Murder is the direct and intentional killing of an innocent human life.
“Murder” is a legal term that carries a specific meaning. “Wrong” isn’t.
Arguing that abortion is something that is already considered illegal is a much more relevant argument (although it’s similar to yours). Whereas the morality of people can be interpreted in multiple ways, the law is absolute. Someone could easily say, “you might think it’s wrong, but I don’t.” In which case you’d have to argue against relativism before even beginning the abortion argument. Overall I agree with your argument tho, and perhaps my critique is insignificant. Thanks for the video!
That's a great point for arguing against the legality of abortion. I think this video does a good job of exposing the immorality of abortion, but as you say, it's hard to argue in this way in our day and age when moral relativism is so prevalent. Thank you very much for your comment.
The problem is that abortion isn't defined as murder in law. If you want to be perfectly precise, abortion is simply premature termination of a pregnancy by any means, so a miscarriage, too, is medically defined as an abortion. When we say "abortion," though, we're most commonly talking about intentionally terminating the pregnancy. Intentionally terminating the pregnancy requires direct and intentional killing of the human in the womb, at whatever stage of development. We don't need to call it "murder" for intentional killing to be morally wrong, or illegal. But it *is* legal to intentionally kill some people, while murder is always illegal. People who are aware of that distinction will correctly reject your first premise as false. If you're unwilling to discuss right and wrong actions, it puts you in a more difficult position. Of course, all law is based on the premise that there is right and wrong, good and bad, so laws themselves are moral.
What about the people who say that being biologically "human" doesn't mean you are a human being. They say the standard for humanity should be being able to think or having consciousness
Will abortion ever be banned / illegal again? Please God it will be.
You made a mistake, Matt. Validity of the argument is unrelated to the truth of the premises. A valid argument is one in which the conclusion necessarily follows the premises. A valid argument with true premises is a sound argument.
Correct.
Got a feeling some of you will try and argue that a fetus is a human but not a person. Here's why that's wrong: www.catholic.com/video/when-does-a-fetus-become-a-person & www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/refuting-a-heartless-pro-choice-argument
If your terms are defined as:
"Big strong" = having the power the kill or abuse others
"Little, weak, innocent" = those who have committed no crimes warranting death, and who have no power to kill or abuse others
"People" = human beings, meaning an entity which is human
In that case, I would say the premises are all true, and thus the conclusion is true.
Tristan V I would add ”living” to the definition of people being human beings, so as to avoid any confusion.
@@steele8280 but you can't kill what isn't alive. So you would be dealing with the Department of Redundancy Department.
Questions for Stephanie Gray:
1. How do you respond to someone who justifies abortion for case of terminally ill preborn child/ anencephalic.
2. Any Practical tips/advice to give elderly person who is suffering and is considering Physian assisted suicide?
3. Maybe Gently ask her If she can share her joy/testimony that she experienced after her broken engagement as noted in her bio on her website.
Thank you Matt
The thing I've run into the most has been involving the second premise in which the unborn are considered people. I've had many claim that the unborn are alive in the same way a hamster may be but that does not make the unborn a person.
This usually leads to something like the baby is not a person because they are not conscious or they are not independent, so on and so forth.
I think this position is completely illogical and as such I think getting someone to acknowledge the "personhood" of the unborn has become on of the key arguments these days. At least that has been my experience from the little bit of debating I've done on the subject.
Yeah. My reply to this is usually to claim two things: First, any definition of "personhood" that is not "living human being" is going to exclude some class of born people along with unborn people. You can go through a few case studies such as consciousness to show this. As a corollary, such a definition of personhood will not exclude some unborn children, as anyone with half a brain knows that there is no major cognitive difference between a 38 week fetus and the same child who is born a few hours later.
The second is that even if we grant that "personhood" is what gives us value (and I think you can kind-of agree with this even as a Catholic, as our likeness to God is chiefly in our rationality), all human beings at all stages have "personhood" in potentiality (under the A-T definition), and it is only through circumstance (for someone with a disease like Down Syndrom) or development stage (like for the fetus) that a person has not actualized this potential, but they still possess this in potential just by being a member of the human species.
@@Catholicdragonslayer I agree, especially with how our personhood and value is intrinsic to being a part of the human race. If it were not the case one could argue that a baby with the rare abnormality of its brain not developing ultimately is not human because there is no possibility of consciousness and/or rationality. Of course such arguments also depend on medical conclusions to be 100% correct 100% of the time.
As for those case studies, if you happen to have links to them on hand I would very much like to read them.
Unfortunately, I don't have any official case studies. I usually take more of an ad-hoc approach when it comes to that, since I'm usually responding to someone else's claim of what constitutes personhood as opposed to making my own claim that any definition not congruent with "living human" is going to exclude certain classes of people. When you are responding to an existing claim of what defines personhood, it's far easier to come up with excluded classes to show the limitations of the definition. @@@Vintacith
"Alive in the same way a hamster might be" -- I'd ask if they're arguing in support of the dismemberment of hamsters.
I would reword "people" in the syllogism as "humans"
They’re synonymous aren’t they?
Len k agreed. The idea of personhood has somehow become vague, and less definitive in the abortion argument. Today someone can deny that a fetus is a person, but we are talking about human beings. Individuals human beings no less. We used to refer to this with the word person or people, but not anymore. Good suggestion.
joey puvel yes they are, but it’s to combat the modern vagueness of the word people or person. To be a person is to be an individual human. People deny the personhood hood of the fetus, but they cannot deny that it’s human. Nor can they deny that it’s an individual. You see this in the language of pro choice folks; “It’s not a person.”
I think that was spot on! It was concise, precise, and logical. But some people do not listen to reason and would flat out deny everything you said.
The problem is that those of us who are pro-life make no distinction between personhood and humanity.
Those who make any excuse for violence against "others" have a pretty fluid concept of what constitutes "personhood," and so they can justify abortion.
The solution? Understand that "personhood" is an unnecessary, and now detrimental, legal fiction, and do away with it. Replace any notion of "person" with biological human, and proceed to make laws based on reality.
I'm just wondering whether they can say that it's ok to kill a small, innocent human being provided they're not a human person.
Thanks Matt! Great lesson in structuring a logical argument!
Can you make a video on what would happen if abortions were illegal? I genuinely would love to know what you think would happen to society if women were no longer able to have abortions.
I'm pretty in the middle between the two sides. But I think considering that ending the life of someone who is braindead is considered ok and moral for the most part even when there a chance of them reacheiving congitivity. A much better argument would be talking about how it is wrong to end cognitive life and arguing that some point in the fetus's journey it becomes cognitive life.
What should we answer to people who think abortion is by all means wrong except in the case of rape? And when they make it personal and use their personal suffering and their arguments are "unless you have lived through that you have no idea how much she suffered because of that trauma" and how from it she is perfectly capable of affirming that she wouldn't have had the strength to come trough without an abortion. Like if without abortion their painful process would have been worsened or that the idea of a "rape product kid" would have destroyed them.
You're right; you're exactly right, you evaluate anybody's ability to speak on anything by race or sex and you turn yourself into a racist or a sexist; good observation, Matthew. Very good quality observation on the leftists' tactics.
The problem is that a whole lot of the pro-abortion people will not listen to reason. They only care for their feelings.
Thank you, Matt, for making this video. I've been trying to say the exact same thing to my fellow pro-lifers who unfortunately think that there are exceptions to being against abortion. I am honestly very frustrated to see how many people embrace the pro-life premises that you outlined and then draw the most logically inconsistent conclusions such as, "abortion is wrong, except in cases of rape, incest, disability, mother's health, etc." I am getting tired of having the same argument over and over again, and so it is quite refreshing to see that you're being logical with your conclusions. Anyways, sorry for the rant. I thank you very much for everything you're doing for the Church and for God's Kingdom. Hopefully, your apostolate continues to grow and to bring many more people to the Way, the Truth, and the Light. God bless!
thats how you cook a frog - you put it into a pot a heat up slowly. if you put it into boiling water, it will jump out.
so lets take small steps.
Funny how the Gosnell trail (and movie) received almost no attention, but now this story is on high rotation
The story is on high rotation because -- I think -- the Gosnell movie woke the right people.
The Catholic belief would also be that human life is sacred.....
Stephanie and Matt, how can we have these conversations and shed light on the issue of abortion without causing significant distress to both women who have had abortions and men who have been directly affected by them? It is easy to make a list of sound philosophical arguments which we hope will bring truth and change hearts, but the reality is so grim that I find myself being hesitant to bring the issue up in fear of causing great pain to those around me. This is especially relevant when wanting to share things on social media as the lack of human contact means there is no space to show that my views don't come from a place of judgment or condemnation.
Main disagreement for me is that it's not obvious to me that a fetus in the womb should be granted similar moral consideration as any birthed human. Sure the potential is there, but if we use conception as the start of a human life, far more humans never make it out of the womb than are alive. Far more eggs get fertilized and rejected by the moms body than make it out alive. In IVF it takes 10+ fertilizations for one egg to be viable. All of these count as conception; a unique DNA sequence is formed. Yet I don't see this as a death similar to the death of a birthed person. Similar, I don't see abortion as analogues to murder. A fetus in a womb and a birthed human are different entities with different moral worth.
I totally agree with you. God bless you!
I would even go so far to say every healthy human aware of what abortion means knows that it is wrong, but many are afraid because the truth is trampeled upon by millions and millions of modern folks who shape our culture and discourse. Most pro-life folks have lost "liberal" friends because of that very subject, so have I.
the thing is, I don't really care, you do you. if you're for abortion, aight. if you're against abortion, aight.
Solid argumentation.
If they’re alive, aren’t they growing?
If they have human parents, aren’t they human?
And living humans have a right to life, don’t we?
Hopefully we will always hold that all people of the world are worthy of love, and have a right to their life’s. Please pray that we may love like Jesus loves us ✌🏾
Thank you Matt ☺️
have a question " Abortion is legal murder is it about a woman right to chose or is it that anyone who does not that killing a baby is wrong should not be a mother raising the next generation ?
I was pro life even when I was an atheist but idk I guess I was always drawn to the truth and I was a teenager so it's not like I had to undo decades of brainwashing or to have to look myself in the mirror and admit what I had done/been supporting
What about if it’s a 12 year or even 9yr old carrying the baby? They’re not strong ppl (especially in an occurrence like incest/rape)
Unfortunately the solidity of the argument makes no difference. People continue to sin even if they know what they are doing is wrong/sinful. That is the human condition since the Fall. People will use fallacious arguments when confronted on their evil and when that fails they will throw a temper tantrum; then they will just ignore you and do what they want anyway. It's never been about right or wrong; but what is most convenient and feels good at the time. Maybe not abortion but that is how most of my sins come about.
As I watched this video I was thinking "a conversation between Matt and Stephanie would be great" so kudos to you Matt
I don’t want to fudge what I believe. I am Pro life always. I do struggle with the issue of rape and incest. I realize that it is still a human life innocently being killed. How do we emphasize with that topic. Again I’m avidly Pro life I just struggle with this part. Thanks Matt and God Bless.
I understand your concern. I have dealt with that situation myself and chose life. Also by listening to other people who have first hand experience with being in those situations, I have realized how to conclude. More violence and hurt does not bring healing or happiness from a bad situation. Thus, life is always the best option.
Perhaps researching this area would help you to discern as well.
Tina Xinastle thanks
The arguments that I hear the most are that even if abortion is wrong it should be allowed in cases of rape/incest. I don't believe that. So many women have suffered through that. Someone very close to me was raped and I and she both know beyond any doubt that she would carry the baby to term if she had conceived. Then she could decide whether to choose adoption or not. I also knew someone who did have a child from rape. She kept the baby and raised her with love and said, "it's not the child's fault. Still that's expecting a lot from someone who has been brutalized. I believe it's right but I don't know what to do about it.
The other thing is when people say no one can tell me what to do with "my body. How could anyone not realize that the baby is a different body and they are just housing it while it grows? I really can't wrap my head around the blindness of it.
A huge oxymoron is "abortion doctor"
Abortion is the procedure where someone terminates a fetus a fetus is genetically different from his mother and has independent developing human systems
Doctors jobs are to always protect life and to improve the comfort of life
"Abortion doctors" are not doctors call them abortionist or more acurately executioners
Abortion is not a black and white issue at all. It's a highly grey area. There are so many diverse situations to account for. Rape of a teenager, fetal deformity, medical emergency etc. To say that something as morally grey as abortion can follow from two simplistic premises is, no offense, plain stupid and dishonest.
Hey Matt,
My issue with this is that I feel you haven't addressed the reason people don't like men talking about the issue. I think they feel that since men can't get pregnant, they're missing an important part of the woman's struggle. This doesn't mean you're wrong, but I feel like by reducing the argument to sexism, that's going to potentially alienate people because it's not getting to the root of their argument.
Still love the video!
Premise 1 is taken from the Code of Hammurabi on the purpose of Law.
I am going to steal your arguments. Great video.
Very logical and sound argument. Thank you very much
Ask Stephanie about abortion in the case that both the woman and the baby will die unless she gets the abortion or if in the case one or the other will die and if abortion in that case is justified or not.
Would you also ask her about contraceptives and how that closed mindset to life leads up to the thought process of abortion/justification of murder.
Thank you Matt. We need more common sense more than ever these days. And that's what you gave us in this video 😂Looking forward to your interview with Stephanie Grey. She's another person with lots of wisdom!!!
I like your approach, but I ask then what then do you think about the disposal of stored embryos? Is that not also big strong people killing little weak people? Should every one of those embryos be grown to viability? What happens to all those little innocent people that have no parents that want them?
We can let them die a natural death. The Church has already considered this problem
I just wish my friends would listen to this argument. Instead they say, “it’s not scientifically proven that life begins at conception!” Or “but what about women’s life?
I want to know more about the "life begins at conception" argument.
Conception creates a scientifically distinct organism, that is human and also has its own DNA that is *not* the mother's. That is a distinct living organism. The science on that is very clear. I would suggest looking up some embryology textbooks. In recent editions, they've scrubbed the conception statement but they haven't contradicted it or said life does not start at conception, which seems to say they've been pressured to be quiet on the issues. Nonetheless up until recently these textbooks did say that.
@@EC-rd9ys thanks!
the abortion arguments in the USA come from "ethnic radical" racist ideologies from time to time. I don't know if people always recognize this or not. For example, an illegal mexican migrant comes across the border. She is 14, lets just say. The conception was by rape. Her body was small in stature but the man was large in stature. She was found by authorities late in the pregnancy (third trimester)......so then the political spin will begin.....What if she gives birth to a "dead baby"....does she deserve life in prisosn? What if the baby in her womb is severely disabled (she never had ultrasound)? and so forth.....
Unfortunately the spin occurs when people don't recognize the "error" in the extremes of arguments, particularly when women and men are extreme pro-choice.....aka eugenics is the "newest fad" in their mind.
Faith based and practical reasoning are the true options that will bring about true justice from USA perspective.
I go with the "life begins before conception" (biblical Jeremiah), and then life is fully viable after first breath and first week of life.....(heart beating and breathing)....and deserves full human-rights protections. Within one week of life after birth (congenital defect DNR as needed, extreme poverty woman, failed pregnancy protection......etc.) womanhood needs certain forms of protection else many women who give birth to "dead babies" would end up in prison for no reason.
As a side note: people in america with "blue eyes and blonde hair" could a. have minority heritage b. have a close family member with minority heritage c. have conceived children in the womb with minority heritage...... so yes to disregard the "opinion" of what is true about human life just because they sport "blue eyes and blonde hair" would be racist in a way (though sad history of ww2 and eugenics exist before that time)
I agree completely! Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Matt.
Great argument Matt
Thanks for this!
Your absolute right
Premise 2 is solid, you could add something about the DNA giving the foetus a distinct identity. I am trying to play devil's advocate on premise 1. Admittedly struggling, but that is where this *could* be attacked. Greater good type arguments, using military examples to set the principle. I think you need to "do a Summa" on Premise 1 to make it watertight.
Great vid
Simple and strong argument at the same time.THANKS MATT..KEEP GOING
I agree with the arguments. I wonder, Should it be penallized? In all cases?
Abraham Lincoln was a white male. If he lived today i wonder how they'd react re: his opinion on slavery
Excellent! And True!
Roe should be re-decided on all the science we have now that we didn't have back in 1973.
Cathy Caten Roe should have already been decided based off so there’s nothing in the constitution hinting that abortion should be tolerated or allowed legally. Because the supreme court is not supposed to be used for passing laws that you want when congress and the executive branch don’t implement policy that you want. Not that you are saying that
@@jessejive117 Abortion got the old penumbra effect meaning a shadow of something they thought they saw which wasn't really there. It was a slight of hand that worked. By doing so they successfully removed unborn babies from having a legal designation of "personhood" and the babies right to life was pulled from them. Abortion was forced on this country by the majority on the Court. It is just really bad law and like moral philosophers of old used to say "Bad law is no law at all."
These diabolical death worshiping people. Its abominable. However we must never stop praying for them or loving them. Its hard, for sure. But a necessary burden.
Excellent. Big people shouldn't kill little people. And this "white male" thing is really ticking me off. I'm glad you addressed this, Matt. Keep it up!
Tell Stephanie Gray hello from a friend from Costa Rica! (Monica :) we met at a prolife congress along with Dan Zeidler
Absolutely loveeee the hypocrisy here. Adopting the support of science-based beliefs when it is convenient to do so. Nice!
If it's growing it's alive. If it has human parents it's a human. Nice I'm gonna remeber those lines
Please clarify situations where a child dies as a secondary effect of necessary procedures to save the mothers life.
In many of these situations the unborn child is not directly killed (so the second premise still stands) but dies as a consequence of trying to save the life of the mother.
@@PintsWithAquinas That is exactly true. However your argument didn't address these cases. The unfortunate result could be a misinterpretation. There are those who might conclude that the babies life should take precedence.
Great job ask the question of a aborting for rape and incest and why it is wrong. Trump just came out and is for those reasons as well health of mother. I.am confused on the health of mother and termination of pregnancy. Last one a woman is raped can walls be scrapped or is that against church teaching?
"reeeeeeee! but they're NOT people!"
"philosophical nonsense" :/
Ask her how to respond to those that say a fetus is not a baby . THANKS!
BE CATHOLIC
What's a baby? Offspring. What's a fetus. Offspring. One is English, the other is Latin.
Questions from a Catholic perspective:
1) What is innocence?
2) Is the wrongness of deliberately ending a person's life determined by that person's innocence?
Brillemeister Innocence would be they haven’t earned execution with some sort of crime. And children are so defenseless and tend to not know right from wrong so they’re innocent in that manner of they haven’t technically intentionally done selfish immoral things. I’m not catholic
Brillemeister and yes the wrongness of deliberately ending a persons life is determined by whether they’re innocent or not. I know Hitler killed him self but I definitely think the only should he have been killed to save other people but he should have been killed for justice. Anybody against justice is against morality in for immorality. Execution is sometimes justice
@@jessejive117 I do know that the Catholic Church is officially against capital punishment.
@Wallace Michael Are you sure? My understanding is that we're not to kill unless in self-defense or defense of others.
Additionally, are you sure that people who are "free from sin or moral guilt" are the only ones whom we for sure can't kill? Imagine the bloodbath if it were open season on everyone who was guilty of some unconfessed sin.
I'm just trying to understand where many other pro-lifers are coming from. Obviously, it's my position that killing innocent life (which unborn babies definitely are) is wrong. But I'm worried that our hyperfocus on the innocence of these very young lives might hurt our argument by creating an implied, uncomfortable contrast with the "sinful" lives of those of us who've already been born. Uncomfortable as in "killing a random, already-born person isn't AS bad because they've probably sinned." I'm not saying this is what anyone believes, necessary.
G’Day fellow Aussie! Thanks for this logical and sound reasoning to the pro-life stance.
I think the real issue we face is that there are people who believe that an unborn child is NOT a living person, because life doesn't begin at conception - Potential is not actual!! Wow, really?!
And to confirm that this is NOT religious topic, but rather a discussion about morality (that ANYONE can have an opinion on) here is a link to a Pro-Life Atheist FB page - facebook.com/ProLifeAtheists/
Great! Great, Great....the best!
I don't think it's an argument that life begins at conception, but more so about when does sentience begin. I believe many arguments confuse the terms life and sentience, as some will say life when they mean sentience. Prior to the point of sentience, I think it could be argued that an abortion is no different than removing any cells from the body.
Your first two premises are also logical fallacies. You're making an emotional appeal and claiming the outcome of abortion is always wrong in a faulty analogy. Unfortunately, old friend, the problem is much more nuanced than that. There are many situations where not having an abortion could (or would) do much more harm (to more than one life). If you argue your two premises are valid and true, they can be easily applied against God in the bible. If god is a 'big strong person' (which he is the strongest most powerful being ever) it's always wrong for him to 'kill little weak' (smite the) humans, which he does quite a lot. So that rationale against abortion could be viewed as special pleading in that regard. Also, does the bible not have instructions for performing abortions if you believe your wife has been untrue? Yeah, that's Numbers 5:11-31. So god is pro-abortion, and just for infidelity? Interesting.
What humans has God killed since the death of Jesus? I’ll await an answer
@ Einhart
100% not a valid argument. You can’t have an opinion on abortion because your clearly highly invested and extremely emotional regarding this issue. Also your intellectually ill equipped to deal with an issue that you have never seriously considered the other side of.