The Redirect: Why facts matter on both sides of abortion debate
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 01. 2020
- Abortion is deeply tangled up in politics, personal beliefs, and individual experience. But the key is to have every conversation, no matter how contentious, grounded in facts.
Over the Christian Science Monitor’s 108-year history, we’ve built a legacy of high-quality, distinctive journalism because we recognize that news is more than facts. It’s the story of how we are each trying to make our homes, communities, and nations better. What matters are the values and ideals that drive us, not just the who, what, when, and where of the news. Visit us online at: www.csmonitor.com/daily
Subscribe to our CZcams channel: / csmonitor100
Follow us on Facebook: / christiansciencemonitor
Follow us on Twitter: / csmonitor
This is one of the most fair and unbiased pieces of media I have literally ever seen related to abortion, and it came from a Christian channel!
You haven’t seen much then
@@AndrewF321 i have actually. Almost all media related to abortion is clearly biased and relies exclusively on strawmen representations of the other side
Pro-life people people claiming that pro-choice people are trying to kill babies, and pro-choice people claiming that pro-life people hate women and are trying to create a punishment for sex.
It's all just ridiculous petty squabbling, all in unbelievably bad faith. This video is a breath of fresh air properly representing both sides of the argument.
@@iSchmidty13 You think saying abortion is the killing of babies is bad faith?
Because NOT ALL Christian are unreasonable
Yesss
My thing is that, you can't just say "no abortions" and be done with it. You don't think abortions should be legal, fine, but what is your solution then? women that are going to get abortions don't want the child or can't take care of it, so we need to find an alternate solution for abortion if you don't like it.
Adoption. Adoption is so expensive. When anti-abortion people say every life is valuable, they really mean it lmao. Why isn't adoption free? Are you saying that a child needs to be bought in order for it to have parents? That just limits their chances of being adopted and having a family. So then they go into foster care and some foster homes are nice, but the majority aren't. Most kids will just be tossed from home to home to people who only care about a check. Then when they get to a certain age, they'll age out and practically be thrown to the curb. Most in those situations will either become homeless, end up with an addiction, or in a life of crime/prison.
All that could be avoided if someone had an abortion. But you still disagree with abortion? Okay. If you have to come up with alternatives. Whether that be working on child service reform( with lower adoption prices, better social workers, etc.), giving money to women who abort only because of financial issues, etc. You can't just ban abortions and think that the debate will end. That's naïve and not how the world works.
Sex education and contraceptives. We need to have sex education taught in school and not just that awkward moment where you all go to the auditorium and the gym teacher tells you about sex. No we need to have full units in health class about it where you learn about condoms, how to out them on, why we need them, different types of them, risk of having sex, sexual diseases you can catch, pregnancy, birth control, etc. Studies have shown that schools that have proper sex education have less teen pregnancy rates. I mean it's common, the more you educate someone, the less they'll make bad decisions.
We need to put our religions and our morals aside and start talking about practicality. If you ban abortions cold turkey, children will just be thrown into the system or will end up in bad homes.
Incredible explanation, love this man.
So you're saying that the parent that have birth to the child isn't sufficient enough to raise them? So they just give them away to the state? Sounds to me that abortion is just bad parenting.
@@_steamfunk_2271 That isn't what they are saying at all. There are reasons why women get abortions. If we focus on resolving those issues, women would be far less likely to get an abortion and would be far more accepting of an abortion ban.
It has nothing to do with bad parenting.
Even though I don’t support abortions, I agree with the consequences of many adoptions, but it’s all about solving the problem before it happens, we may never get to the point where there are no abortions or everyone can financially sustain the baby, but we can work for that goal, just as we want murder rates to go down or robberies to go down, I believe that the same effort it is put right now to legalizing abortion everywhere, should be redirected into prevention (sex ed, economy) and the after effects (adoption agencies etc) I truly believe that both sides can work together, because even though many people support the right to abortion, I believe or want to believe that they know it’s not a good thing to do, so if we can work towards less abortions instead of more, why not?
I'm sorry. Practicality over Morals? Do you hear yourself? That's basically saying Convenience over Life.
While I believe all lives, even unborn ones, are important, making abortion illegal wouldn't decrease the abortion rate. According to the statistic presented in the video, abortion rate rather increases when abortion is illegal. Since we clearly can see making abortion illegal is not helpful, we should rather let abortion to be legal, giving people freedom of choice.
They didn’t say abortion increases when it becomes illegal they said in places where it’s illegal there are higher rates. I don’t think more people get abortions when it becomes illegal, that really doesn’t make sense. I think countries with higher abortion rates just implemented the laws. Idk for sure but those are my thoughts
Also look at the Texas abortion ban that happens recently. Within a month abortions reduced by about 50% that seems effective to me.
@@nickstojic6995 the number of reported cases reduced by 50%. The back alley abortions never stop no matter how strict the ban gets
@@nickstojic6995 decreased by 50% of reported cases
@@HaventSleptIn30Years Can you point me towards that stat that indicates that almost all of the other 50% got a back alley abortion. I seriously can't find any illegal abortions stats for texas
I love this video. It’s not on either side. It’s just an informative video where you yourself can make your own idea and opinion out of the information from this video.
YESSS
@@EnderEntertain pack your instruments, head outside, take vests also, it's a bit cold and chilly, we are going to andover today, put everything next to the side window, hopefully we get a good rating this is professional
it is firmly on the pro-choice side
@@AvgustGeorgi Kells and windmills and shay mccay dark wood cabinets while there's oil and grease on the chemistry lab tables while there's lots of complaints about that in the new room you go in one day.
Next Andover trip in 2 days when you're on the bus and when you hear the noise, it reminds you of compounds
"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners, immigrants, the sick, the poor, widows, orphans. All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible, they all get thrown under the bus for the unborn
true
W
Pro-lifers don't "defend" unborns.
They attack them all the time.
What you need to understand about the pro-life ideology is that they don't see women as villains, they see unborns as villains.
Pro-lifers will bark and whine up and down about how "all lives are precious" and "how could you kill such a precious little baby".
But listen to pro-lifers on literally any other topic and they reveal their true face.
Pro-lifers can't go 5 seconds without whining about how "Kids these days" are lazy, disrespectful, entitled, spoiled, bratty, or whatever cliched insult they pull out of their ass.
And they explicitly use their imaginary beliefs to defend real violence and abuse towards kids.
Everything from baptism to circumcizion to spanking to shock torture to molestation to beating a child to death are all atrocities that pro-lifers commit everyday, and they believe they are in the right doing so.
Don't believe me? Listen to PragerU's video "How to get kids to listen", and then remember that EVERYONE who opposes abortion has those exact same attitudes towards unborns.
If you didn't already hate pro-lifers, you have more than enough reason now.
Pro-lifers always come with their massively egos, saying "You're murdering an innocent baby".
But pro-lifers are left speechless when I rub their own words against them.
Pro-lifers say, in clear english, that they believe children are born evil and need to be physically tortured because their religion says so.
"Spare the rod, spoil the child" is every pro-lifer's catchphrase.
I wish I was joking.
All I can say is, pro-lifers can go die in hell.
I don't wanna hear another one of those entitled bastards pretending they have empathy for unborns, when they themselves have a declared hatred for the youth.
Pro-lifers are the same assholes who whine about teenagers being "stupid" or "lazy" or "too sensitive".
Now take pro-lifers insults and apply them to unborns.
Baby killer? Don't you mean brat killer? Or snowflake killer? Or little monster killer?
Pro-lifers seriously believe that children are the villains of the world and that child abusers are "poor souls" suffering at the hands of "those brats"!
That's why they voted for a child molester as their president.
That's why christians and priests molest children.
That's why they beat children to death for "being gay" (which is what people mean when they say they "Defend the family", by the way).
That's why they bully innocent trans people into commiting suicide.
Pro-lifers are to children are to children as Nazis are to jews.
Pro-lifers are OK with a woman murdering her child, as long as she does it in the name of "defending the family".
To say I despise pro-lifers would be putting it lightly.
I want these bastards to be locked up and beaten daily for the rest of their lives. Only then will pro-lifers have a taste of their own medicine.
Yes, let's ignore the thousands of pro-life pregnancy resource centers, of which some care for mothers and their children for years after their child is born, and let's also ignore the fact that the vast majority of adoptions in the US are by Christian couples and Christian adoption agencies.
@@nippymutt9018 Let's ignore the ammount of Christians who are complete assholes towards minors in an infinitude of ways.
No one in this planet has a moral high ground to oppose abortion.
Thank you for mentioning that making abortion illegal doesn’t stop it from happening. That is such an important fact that anti-abortionists miss.
Good to see a video on the subject that isn’t just rhetoric
I agree.
appreciated this video. Found it though provoking to consider some of the information presented. Thank you. Please keep making videos and having them available for viewing
I really like the fact that this video focuses on information rather than conveying an absolute position on the matter. Like most things in life abortion falls in the gray part of the spectrum and education is the key for us humans to take a right personal decision. My point of view is that all lives matter. I think a better way to attenuate abortion rates is proper education on contraception and more support offered to struggling families. Furthermore, personal responsibility is very important. Having an abortion mereley for our personal convenience and then camouflazing that with human rights is insulting. Dividing people in sides is not gonna help us. Maybe a humane and educational support and evaluation before every abortion could be beneficial. At the end of the day let's try to understand each other because every person such us every situation is different and needs different solutions. We need more love than judgement.
@@justmeandi8256 Did not know about that. I don't live in America. Thank you for letting me know.
Im not American, but this debate has opened my eyes about not just abortion, but peoples views in general, and despite being on country, it it so divided and seems to be always at war with each other.
I’ve never liked abortion. I dont know anyone who does. Like the video said, its such a grim thing to have to pick a side on as you lose either way.
I do believe that abortion should be legal, just by the fact that the relationship between pregnancy and education on contraception/consequences need to be further explored and solved. It too difficult for a society and its people to continue supporting children they cant care for properly. I could add other reasons too but I will spare everyone the time lol.
Although saying this I dislike the idea of abortion in general. I find it hard that abortion in some cases, is performed at late periods in the pregnancy, but then again the facts in the video are quite telling.
Conclusion: Until better progress is made to and educate + protect women and men of how to be accountable and smart with adult choices, we need to legalise abortion so that foster homes, poverty, and trauma will be reduced. Its just unfortunate that we live in a world that can be both so grim and grey.
Good for you for being the smart one here. I believe that abortion should be legalized for life and death situations and r@pe cases. I don’t support it being a form of brith control.
@@gracierondeau6497 I think we should make better orphanages and orphanage systems in the world. Tbh, I'm a centrist in terms of abortion. I'm both pro-life and pro-choice and neither of them at the same time.
@@EnderEntertain same
I don't hate women who have the full control over thier bodies and have the guts to say NO TO SEX.
So does that mean you hate women who say yes to sex after binge drinking and get pregnant, then take the morning after pill?
@@gerrydonohoe2765 yes, because they have Zero self accountability and responsibility. They don't want to own their actions and want to run away from responsibilities.
@@neostoic19 And with this hatred in your heart, you think you're taking a moral position? Moral outrage is not moral behavior. Let's test your definition of "accountability and responsibility": What are you willing to do to stop a woman having an abortion? Pretend it's your sister.
Women who have abortions have to deal with the mental health effects for the rest of their lives. In case you forgot, the religious right are all over this, pointing out the negative effects of abortion on mental health. You can't have it both ways.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 let's pretend it's my sister. First of all, If she's a Minor, Sex shouldn't be even be promoted to her. She shouldn't be encouraged for sex. In case she got pregnant as a Minor or an Adult due to consensual sex and wanted to abort I would be totally against that. Unless of course her life was on the line or that the baby would be born with deformities. And if that's not the case I wouldn't subscribe to an abortion
Abortion may also cause mental trauma to my sister while at the same time killing HER child.
@@neostoic19 Re: "I would be totally against that." This is what I'm getting at: What does that mean, "totally against" - Again my question: What are you willing to do? There's no trick here; I'm pointing out that you are accountable and responsible for whatever you choose to do to prevent an abortion. Some will blow up abortion clinics. In Texas, people are encouraged to sue people despite having no skin in the game.
Re: Mental trauma, yes, this is a feature, and so is the mental trauma of raising a child that is not wanted. Neither is your responsibility, neither is a moral dilemma.
Since you are not a radical, and allow for deformities (perhaps rape too?) and you avoided the question, I'm going to assume you won't do anythig forceful, and would advise your sister to adopt or whatever. That's your right, and her right to choose to follow your advice.
I do have genuine questions on abortion, not to judge nor attack anyone, but as an attempt to educate myself. I'm aware that to have an abortion must be a very difficult decision and that the decision maker, might unintentionally not be viewing abortion, from all angles (with all its implications). These questions are the result of me discerning on the topic and having these data gaps as a result.
I am solely attempting to educate myself, understand better all perspectives and reach a common ground-one.
1) In order to reach a truly objective point of view (on any topic), isn't it not only valid, but necessary, to analyze such in terms of all the parties involved? In the case of abortion, is it valid to ask not only questions on how the parents are affected by it, but also how the conceived being is affected as well?
2) Religion aside, is there any SCIENTIFIC evidence, that human life does NOT begin at conception?
Is there any other phenomena during pregnancy, that is MORE prominent than conception (to the point in which such event could be considered the actual beginning of human life, instead of conception)?
3) If anticipating a challenging life for the child justifies the abortion, does that mean that poverty and adverse life conditions, are reasons for people's lives to be ended? If I assume that your life will be difficult, does that give me the right to decide whether you get to live or not? Does that give me the right to decide over your life? Is ending your life because I am assuming that it will be difficult, fair to you? Wouldn't I be eliminating all possibility for you to build YOUR life and overcome adversity, by cutting it and taking it away from you right from the beginning? Isn't that a much bigger abuse over another human being (ending its life), than any other type of abuse he/she could go through in life?
4) Why should standing up against an alleged abuse towards someone (i.e. the human being whose life is being ended through an abortion), mean that those standing up are obliged to financially support the alleged victim of abuse? If my neighbor abuses his child and I report such abuse to authorities (as an attempt to stop it), does that mean that I am obliged to adopt my neighbor's child and financially take care of him? How is opposing abortion linked, to having to become financially responsible for those whose lives are ended through abortion? Does that mean that, if I witness someone being abused in anyway, my moral responsibility does not end at denouncing the abuse to authorities, but I am also morally obliged to embrace full financial responsibility, for that abused someone?
5) If I claim that those against abortion are wanting to decide over my body, isn't exactly that what I'm doing, if I get an abortion? By ending the human life growing inside of me, ain't I deciding over another human body as well (the one growing in my womb)? Am I not doing the same thing, that I claim those against abortion are doing to me (choosing over someone else's body)? Am I not doing an actual worse thing than "choosing over someone else's body" by getting an abortion, since through the abortion I'm actually choosing over someone else's LIFE? If so, isn't a double standard to claim that others want to decide over my body (by not supporting abortion), when that's exactly what I'm doing to the human being growing inside of me (deciding over another human life)?
Complementing above, many pro-abortion people have used the "right to bodily autonomy", as their main argument. My logic makes me ask: Is "bodily autonomy" a more important right, than the right to life itself? Whichever damage or inconvenience your body suffers due to pregnancy, will last 9 months (or a little longer with post-labor recovery), but you will most likely recover most of that bodily autonomy, after giving birth. On the other hand, ending your life (which is what's done to the baby), is irreversible, there is no going back and the damage to the human killed, is perpetual. Also, isn't LIFE indispensably needed in the very first place, before any other type of right? If you have a combo of "life with rights"...and you take the "rights" element, life itself can still exist. This does not happen the other way around. If you take the "life" element out of the "life with rights" combo, rights can not continue existing without a life. Therefore, life on its own, DOES come above any other right. This is why, the violation made to the newly alive being, is more aggravating (ending its LIFE) than the violation of "bodily autonomy" made to the mother, by the NATURAL phenomena of pregnancy. Whichever inconvenience suffered by the mother due to pregnancy ("bodily autonomy"), does not reach the same level of aggravation, as that of the violation committed against the newly alive being (ending its LIFE), in order to justify such life being exterminated. Or does it? How?
Again, I am verbalizing my discerning process and resulting doubts on abortion, solely to try to educate myself, understand better all perspectives and reach a common ground-one.
In my opinion - in short - fetal dehumanization is bad for living people.
Whether an act is bad or good is based on the influence on the outside world and the influence on the ACTOR. Therefore, it can be argued that the fetus (until its brain and nervous system is not developing) is not important in itself - because it is not aware - but still be against abortion.
I - I can understand some of the pro-choice arguments, but I don't accept the rhetoric that abortion is fun, neutral.
Someone who is pro choice, not by unpleasant necessity, but by some kind of war, pride, immaturity is deleted for me.
I believe that supporting abortion is due to the moral weakening of people (as well as men and women). The right to abortion is just comfortable and unresponsive. To justify this, there are terms for a fetus like "clump of cells" and are cloaked in intellectual slogans.
These are all valid points in the sense that they make sense as critical arguments given a viewpoint you already hold. And that viewpoint is the following: abortion (termination of a fetus) is equivalent to murder (termination of a human outside of the womb). All of these arguments / equivalencies stem from that, and my understanding is that the pro choice side does not believe abortion is equivalent to murder, it’s more equivalent to putting down a pet. Thus you can have an opposing and logical argument against all of these points if you have this viewpoint (yes I’m ending a life / potential life, but it matters less than the impact it has on me).
I'll add my own response for whatever it's worth. (hoping i dont get attacked) I WAS pro life at one time, thinking nothing could justify me, a female person, to have an abortion if i ever got pregnant.... but... then i started experiencing chronic pain that requires alot of pain medication to get through the day at times. if i were pregnant i would be VERY limited on what i could do for my pain because pain medication poses a risk to the pregnancy. I started thinking about what if i got pregnant even when trying not too (contraceptives dont always work) and now im suddenly faced with the dilemma of sparing the child but suffering in pain for nine months resulting in my mental health declining even more than it already has due to the pain or end the pregnancy so i can continue to limit harm to myself.
i realized with this constant nagging fear that pro lifers would/were basically telling me that my life, my mental and physical health and comfort didnt matter in comparison to even a zygote. i would basically be told to suffer for nine months because the zygote/fetus ALWAYS matters more than the one carrying it. the fetus isnt conscious of its pain and suffering to point of longterm effects. the one carrying it is. but according to pro lifers the longterm effects of suffering (not just the pain i mentioned i fear but also sensory issues, issues caused by financial instability, some have actual self harm levels of negative reactions to feeling of something growing inside them) on the conscious individual isnt if any consequence in comparison to preserving life of unborn. nevermind tgat some can be traumatized by pregnancy. it doesnt matter to pro lifer because the trauma/harm the pregnant person experiences is so much less important compared to the unborn that the unborn is chosen every time. screw how the one carrying it is being affected both in the moment and longterm. (btw if i did get pregnant like this and went through with carrying it, true i would love the child but id also hate and likely be traumatized from the pregnancy. but it should be my decision on whether or not im willing to put myself through all that and whether i think i can handle it. pro-lifers want to take tgat decision away and say they kniw whats best for me when really they show they only care about the unborn. not me and not any other female dealing with these complex issues)
2) it's not about when does life start, it's about when does life become a right to them.
But what defines a right in the first place is a will, if u have a will to live then you have the right to live, u must want to live first (and not affected by your mental health, indoctrination or temporary state)
And pretty much fetuses don't have that, since everything in them is controlled by the mother through the umbilical cord
Now once that cord is cut/they are born, they start crying, crying for food, sleep, feeling pain... All are indirect indicators of a will to live, becuz when they want to eat, they also want to live...etc
Basically it's just about wether they have that right to life or not
@@ziad4826. The baby cries for food outside of the womb because the cord gives it all the necessary nutrients, it’s always alive, it will become a human being and every human being has a right to live.
Abortion per 1000 women is a useless statistic when you consider that pregnancy per 1000 women varies considerably. In many countries the fertility rate is four or five times greater than in the USA, so having 37 abortions per 1000 women vs 31 abortions per 1000 women is in fact misleading. A far more useful statistic would be abortions per 1000 live births.
It mind boggles me that no can talk about education. Education on how we can take many steps to avoid even getting close to the idea of abortion. Responsibility has never been a top priority in this country, rather compensation. We never can focus on root issues. I definitely dont agree with abortion, and the only time I would agree would be in the case of rape. but that is such a small percent of all abortion cases that it is ruled out. Instead if everyone could focus on being better humans we wouldnt even have to divide ourselves this way and save this practice purely for when it is truly needed. Idk just my thoughts
The world is fundamentally wrong, the fact that rapes even happen is just disgusting. I agree with you, I don’t agree with abortion, but situations of rapes shouldn’t put the victims in jail for killing the baby. They should get a fine, but the rapist should get an even bigger punishment. As for miscarriages and the mother accidentally falling and killing the baby, I’m not sure why people decided woman should go to jail for that. It’s not their fault, they didn’t intentionally kill the baby.
@@ducksama8448 their not even baby’s? A fetus is not a baby?
@@kal-elcastillo8453 it has a heart beat and its living your striping a person from there life just because your to lazy to be pregnant or if your a guy to lazy to put and balloon on
@@justmeandi8256 just because I dont agree with abortion do I believe the woman should be sentenced as a felon, i definitely think that what theyre currently doing is rather harsh and I can understand your emotions towards it. However notice how I said we need to educate each other instead of always compensating for the worst. If a womans life is in jeopardy or she was raped, basically forcibly impregnated by somebody, than I believe they should not be criminalized, but I dont believe it should be an openly available thing to every individual if they don't meet certain requirements. Obviously knowing how congress is those requirements would probably be dumb but thats not what im arguing. My point is that if we educate each other on the reality of the situation all of this can be avoided. Such as responsible sex. You live under a rock if you think sex isnt over glorified to out simply and is way too common than it should be. Mainly amongst young teens. I wont lie i was definitely irresponsible at times but i was more than prepared for what could come had i had a weak pull out game. But people need to wake up to reality and realize that while sex does feel good, that doesn't mean it's something you should abuse or treat irresponsibly. Its literally how we reproduce so youre a fool if you dont expect the POSSIBLE outcomes. People have have such an entitled sense to victimhood its astonishing. Another thing to add is if you do your education or research, youll learn that more than 85-90% (depending on sources) of reasons for women getting abortions is due to self inconvenience, not personal health or rape. The amount of people that try to push abortion as some sort of necessity is astounding actually, they like to make it seem as if every single abortion case is a life crisis. No hate or nothin either I got nothing but love for everybody and i only wish for peoples safety and well being, but we also have to remember that responsibility is a core fundamental aspect to life, without out you will fail.
@@splat-boy5414 Based virgin opinon. Let me break it to you : mistakes happen, condoms aren't 100% safe, same thing for other contraceptives. Nobody uses abortion as a contraceptive method, it's a worst case alternative and women should be able to make that decision themselves. Regarding the heartbeat part, I can name you a variety of lifeform with a heartbeat and with far greater cognitive abilities, being slaughtered on a daily basis. Pro-lifers are the apogee of hypocrisy.
I just want to say this: Your probably right, no matter what side your on. It’s a matter of which life you value more. Which also means the other side is also correct. When it comes to the worst case scenario, it is one life or another. Both choices are equally valid. There is little reason to continue the debate, when the time could be spent finding a compromise. Neither side will like it, but if one isn’t found then the debate will never end and no progress will take place.
I must say, I find America's politics really strange. In my country, this topic isn't even up for discussion, and neither is gay marriage.
It's interesting to watch. But I suppose every country has it's issues.
@@kingmonde I’m curious, what is the law on this in your country?
@@trevordillon1921 abortion is 100% legal, it's actually free if you can't afford it. Actually going to the hospital for anything is free if you can't afford it.
As for gay rights, well in our constitution, it states that nobody can be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. So gay marriage is allowed. No business can reject a person based on their sexuality, you can get fined a lot of money if your business if you claim religious freedom.
@@kingmonde canada?
@@trevordillon1921 Clearly, yes. He said "Constitution" so I tend to think of that one Constitution who is really open on that subject.
How can you messure how many illegal abortions are being done in a country where it is illegal?
hax
I think that people should learn more about preservation before they have sex. Education is very important and with better education, we won't talk about these questions about making abortion illegal or is abortion murder...
Yeah but then it’s also school’s responsibility too about education
Yes, education on contraception and safe sex should be available as much as possible. But some women who actually _want_ a child also need an abortion, for health reasons for example. It's not pretty, it's a heart shattering decision but it happens and it should be available and legal.
Okay, why do rapists still exists then?
People learn that from school, they still keep doing it.
If abortions are illegal (denied) every child conceived has a right to an appropriate environment, including nutrition, and medical care. We must do a better job of protecting them, the maximum sentence for abusing an infant or child is life in prison or death.
@Ace Spades women and men alike should take every step to ensure unwanted pregnancy doesn't occur. Doesn't mean people can't have safe sex. If a girl or woman does become pregnant, instead of shaming them like I assume your the type to do, assure the mother and child have the resources to be healthy and safe. Then maybe they won't feel the need to try and seek out an abortion.
Or just be a weirdo
@Ace Spades That is just incredibly backwards and you are actually shaming people for not being as brainwashed as yourself and believing every single thing religion says. It seems you aren't aware that such a thing as condom and birth control exists. Be honest and admit you're being influenced by outdated ideas of sexuality that come from religion.
@Ace Spades
Good parents keep their legs closed until marriage?
So that means you’re having sex in your marriage right? Or are you just having sex when you want to procreate. A woman can do everything she is supposed to and still wind up pregnant. But apparently you’re only allowed to have sex, only when you want to procreate.
Just because you want to push your religious views on us and act better than us doesn’t mean we will just shut up and listen.
Some people don’t have a choice of whether or not they want to have sex or if they want to get pregnant. Some Children do not get the choice. I’m not going to assume but some people blame women and sometimes children for being raped.
Catholicism has a Virgin woman who gets pregnant, so either you believe a women can get pregnant without having sex or you don’t.
I can go on and on how stupid your comment is because you obviously have one train of thought and you want to stay that way.
@Ace Spades let’s say you do wait until you get married, what happens if you get pregnant and your husband decides to leave you and the child?
The husband has a right to leave if he doesn’t want to but the wife is forced to do it on her own now?
A woman and her husband can plan a pregnancy and there’s a chance the father will still leave.
What then?
@Ace Spades that is already a developed child, that child can breathe, feel pain etc. stop comparing a fetus to child who was born. It’s not the same.
This video needs to be watched by a lot of people
That’s a very bizarre statistic but at the same time I believe that abortion rates are caused by the culture of a society. I say the statistic is bizarre due to the rise in the number of abortions per person, a further promotion of promiscuity/hook up culture in America, lack of accountability for people who have abortions and most importantly a rise in viewing life as disposable
Most people I know who support abortion view it as a last resort. Even women who have abortions in tough situations can feel extreme guilt after- further guilted by protests outside abortion clinics.
I do agree with you about safe sex and sexual education for Americans. We have a high percentage of teen pregnancy compared to other developed countries and that’s definitely worrying.
However, I don’t agree with blaming everything on the women “viewing life as disposable.”
Pregnancy is actually really dangerous for the mother! Especially because the USA has high maternal death rates (in comparison to other developed nations) due to extremely expensive healthcare in the US.
In addition, the adoption system in the USA is a total- complete mess. There’s cases of foster families stealing from their children, abusing them, or selling them.
I hope this sways your views on the women who choose abortion. Of course, there are always people who misuse and abuse abortion, but I’d argue abortion is extremely necessary until the USA gets its shit together.
If you want links for further reading, I can totally supply that :)
@@sticksandabush7491 wait do you have statistics on the cause of pregnancy for those having abortions or is that information not asked? A lot of the stats are usually really vague
thank you! and I agree. I knew a girl who basically used abortion like birth control and honestly didn't seem to give a f, even when the dude who got her pregnant wanted her to NOT get one.
@@-obamium5320 This part of the article is probably what you’re looking for, though.
“In the 2004 US data, 89% of women reported more than one reason for having an abortion; slightly more than half reported at least four reasons. The most frequently cited reasons were lack of financial preparedness (56%), partner-related (55%), and interference with future opportunities (54%). These results were comparable with the findings on women’s main reason for having an abortion using data in the same survey (Table 2), in that lack of financial preparedness was also frequently cited as a main reason. While partner-related concerns and interference with future opportunities were frequently reported when multiple reasons were allowed, they were less likely to be cited as the primary reason. The recent US data from 2008-2010, presented in Table 3, show that the top three motivations for seeking an abortion were not being financially prepared (40%), not the right time for a baby (36%), and partner-related concerns (31%).” Cited from the Multiple reasons for abortion section.
Well, my previous comment with the link keeps getting deleted. I apologize. The source is from Reasons why women have induced abortions: a synthesis of findings from 14 countries from the NCBI.
Additionally, women are generally not forced to explain their reasons for abortion but there are surveys.
Are there any people out there who are prepared to look at this subject carefully, critically and without just emotionally defending 'their side". All I see are bad arguments from both sides.
You can't choose for other people.
I guess we should get rid of all murder laws then. After all, it's there choice to get rid of someone that's a nuisance to them. It's not my business
True but you can definitely choose God who is the absolute truth.
@@christiansnaturestudio6599 but you also cant choose God for other people 😂
@@shivamsrivastava6312 but we can have some Christian values as the law of the land like “do not murder” for example
@@jannettowers6731 Im pro-life
I'm not a huge fan of abortion but I have these issues with the prolife crowd. 1) these people are often against thorough sex education for kids to prevent abortion 2) they underplay the fact that birth can kill a woman, and can maim her for life in various ways 3) they don't seem to care about victims of rape, incest, domestic violence for whom pregnancy has been imposed on them and 4) they don't seem to care about the impact on families, societies and the children themselves of having large numbers of unwanted and neglected or abused kids in society, where are the prolife people lining up to adopt these unwanted babies? I personally think those who are militantly prolife are just authoritarian and I don't believe they care about babies at all.
I'm pro life, and I understand where you're coming from. To me these seem like diversions that are thrown in order to get people to turn away from the bigger issue of baby genocide thats happening in America. I'll just go through each point to explain why none of these things persuade me on my opinion:
1) rather than being against sex education, I personally see more pro lifers saying that they want sex education to be between parent and the child. After sex education was introduced in schools, there was an uptick in terms of sexual promiscuity withing the education system. It has more to do with the type or connotation of the sexual education that is currently provided in schools. I'm currently in highschool, and we were told about different sexual positions, gay and lesbian sex, masturbation, etc. All of which I view to be unecessary in a school environment. Sex education should only really involve the biological aspects of sex; cause and effect type of stuff concerning pregnancy and stds. I personally don't see the need to bring in sexual preferences to the subject, as that is for the individual to figure out without being coaxed.
2)it depends if we're talking about a national or global scale. If we're talking about America purely, less than 1% of women die in child birth (I've cranked the numbers for a school report sophomore year, take how many babies are born in a year then take how many women die from labor complications in a year and you get the number) and it is tragic, I'm not denying that. But to use that as a reason for abortion, I see unfit. A) because abortions are dissportionatly not for the purpose of saving the mothers life, this is the more pragmatic reasoning. B) do you blame the mother if the baby is miscarried? The proper answer would be no. I don't blame the baby for what happens to the mother. Neither party should be blamed for an accidental death, and I stick by that opinion. This is the one that has more ideological reasoning. Both contribute to my opinion on that issue.
3) you're right they don't really seem to care about that issue in comparison to their fervent opinion on abortion. Again, it has to do with the overall numbers of how many women get abortions are rape and incest related as well as the whole blaming an innocent byproduct of an ugly reality. Rapists and horrible criminals should get the death sentence, innocent babies should not. (Foot note: a lot of people call pro lifers hypocrites for supporting the death sentence, which I truly find moronic. You truly have to commit acts of pure evil in order get the death sentence. And I personally believe that it should be a selective punishment for those who have done horrific crimes. An innocent baby is not comparable to a homicidal maniac)
4) actually, historically, being pro abortion was a republican opinion to have because of the effects financially and the burden it creates within the home. The whole stereotype of Republicans only caring about money kinda divulges from that, and btw a lot of republican congressmen and governors still only care about the financial aspect. Which is why I'm not a republican, I'm an independent. Just because someone is a burden does not mean that they are any less human or have any less rights than you. The constitution clearly states that every American person has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The key word is pursuit. It's not the guarantee of happiness, it's the pursuit. Just because the baby is going to be raised in financial hardship does not mean that their personal pursuit of happiness is obstructed. However, aborting them completely obstructs their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
All people are equal under the eyes of the law, and by extension God. It's not authoritarian to draw a clear line in what a person has the right to do and what they don't.
I hope this explains why a lot of stereotypical pro lifers give no leeway when it comes to abortion. ---a stereotypical pro lifer :)
(Edit: you may not be American based off your username so that's a big oof, sorry if my arguement doesn't really culturally translate well)
@@dingdring6317
1) Right, conservatives are against sex education in school and prefer to talk to their children at home. The problem is that they either don't or give substantially and noticeably worse sex education.
Your personal experience with sex education may mean that your sex education system needs to be adjusted or maybe that the parts you didn't find helpful or interesting were helpful and interesting to others.
2) I think he meant that they underplay the risk when compared to abortion and that there can be lifelong effects of childbirth for the mother. I agree these are very rare but both sides should be as truthful about the possibilities and their chances of occurring, right?
A) I am not sure if he is using it as a reason to get an abortion but rather that the option of abortion should be allowed. This is a health issue for the mother and the mother should be allowed to make her decision with the best information.
B) I don't understand why you are talking about miscarriages or blame.
3) Being raped and it resulting in a pregnancy is rare, true. However, the idea that you must not abort the unborn child just because it didn't commit a crime is crazy. This is trying to treat the unborn as equal to born humans. We don't do that almost anywhere else currently.
4) The point is that we need to make sure children are doing better in this country now. Republicans don't seem to want to do that.
The Constitution doesn't say we have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit to happiness. You are thinking of the Declaration of Independence, which is not the same.
Their beliefs are influenced heavily by religion and nothing else. In the comments here you can see them trying to pretend like Science is on their side by arguing the fetus is 'life' or 'alive' at conception. Shows how little they actually know about the Science. Embarrassing how arrogantly certain they are of themselves too when they know nothing.
@@polarbear1713 The Ninth amendment states that listing specific rights in the Constitution does not mean that people do not have other rights that have not been spelled out.
@@cliffisaac6158 Right.
Honestly, this is refreshing from a Christian channel. Thank you, this is awesome.
WHY - is it because you are USE TO LYING from the chri$tian channel
@@davem3325 Well Yeah usually Christianity is a bunch of lies lol
@@simbodu8662Ironic but false
Very well balanced and helpful video. Thanks for making it.👍
Pro choice ( abortion or mandates) should never mean tax payer paid. Your choice, you pay! Simple. Don't you dare say that I have to pay for YOUR CHOICE. You want it, YOU pay for it!
Nailed it
It's a medical procedure, of course americans are gonna pay on their own
That's not how tax distribution works.
You might not own a car yet your money might be used for infrastructure maintenance.
Same for war, military expenses aren't up to your opinion even if you're a pacifist.
You hardly can influence directly.
Your sense of fairness is misleading.
"Money does not stink"
@@sandraeastwick2517 true
I disagree.
This was an incredibly prudent and helpful video for anyone who considers the issue. Thank you 🙏
Pro abortion is kind of wrong because the baby is stay alive even if the is no heart beat because if the baby was dead it would have smelled and the body would have been as a rotten corpse. But a baby in the womb do not smell or look like a corpse. So they are alive.
@@salometipsandtricks2786 that's not how it works. There's alive, dead, then there's neither. Dead is non life after life. Neither is non life before life.
@Ace Spades, murdering babies is always wrong. Abortion, even though I would argue is morally wrong, is not morally wrong because it is murder. If by abortion you mean "the termination of a pregnancy through medical means", then it is not "murdering babies". The fetus is not a baby. This is a crucial difference. Lest a debate ensure, you could argue that a newborn baby, fetus, and embryo all occupy similar ethical categories, but that is a real argument, unlike saying a medical procedure is simply murder.
@Ace Spades, fetus is Latin for baby, but this etymological fact has nothing to do with the ethical implications and differences between a fetus and a baby.
A baby and a fetus are not the exact same thing, as you have insinuated. I will illustrate why it is important to distinguish the ethical categories here. If there is no difference between a fetus and a baby, ethically speaking, then what is the difference between a fetus and an early stage embryo? If there is again no difference, then what is the difference between an unfused sperm or egg cell and an embryo? The only difference is that a new genetic predetermined cell hasn't been created yet, so if in a lab the genetic information of two individuals is combined via AI, then this is of the same ethical value as a living breathing human baby, according to this line of reasoning.
"Terminating" a pregnancy doe not mean carrying to term. Medically speaking, terminating a pregnancy means the opposite of carrying to term.
Again, I will point out that I hold the position that abortion is morally wrong. But we need to be clear with our understanding of the complexity of the issue and our terminology if we ever hope to have a holistic perspective.
@Ace Spades, Like I mentioned:
"...I will point out that I hold the position that abortion is morally wrong. But we need to be clear with our understanding of the complexity of the issue and our terminology if we ever hope to have a holistic perspective."
Even though I am fairly familiar with embryology and medicine, could you please explain to me how to 'terminate a pregnancy' without killing the fetus at 14 weeks?
As you mentioned: "...for a child created by AI in a lab being equivalent morally to a born child. Yes."
In my example there is NO actual child created by AI, just the genetic information (ie the genetic information of the father and mother). Not a biochemical copy, simply the information drafted on a computer program. Are you actually arguing that a computer document is morally equivalent to a living breathing recently-born human baby?
"Murdering the Unborn is morally abhorrent."
You may have some good points, but you need to define what you mean by "murder" and specifically lay out the categories of moral significance when it comes to baby, fetus, or embryo in order to have a "pro-life" position and not simply a "pro-birth" one.
One tip I will offer. It is not enough in the academic realm of ethics to simply state something normative with only descriptive claims. In saying:
"...it's wrong to murder an unborn child for the convenience of it's mother"
you made a normative claim. You need to explain why though, and with normative claims.
Take care. I do hope this helps.
It is actually 12 weeks. And it should be 4.
I'm watching this to do homework and I found multiple issues in the first 2 minutes
It's definitely a polarising subject and although I'm inclined towards pro-life intuitions, I can also see some of the arguments put forward by pro-choice people.
What really gets to me is the language used particularly by pro-choice people, given that they're the majority view. Calling people anti-choice and pro-birth is no way to convince them of the merits of your view. What is needed is an honest discussion between both sides as I have realised that most people are drawn to the middle but feel compelled to choose a side.
I get cognitive dissonance from people that choose to call a fetus a bundle of cells when convenient, but in other conversations they call it a baby and admit its value despite being unborn. Most people even those who are pro-choice tend to maintain that, regardless of if they think the fetus is a human being, the fetus has some value.
Then there are those who are pro-choice who are willing to admit that sometimes it would be the better option for the mother and potential baby.
Generally, most people can agree on both the personal autonomy of the woman and the latent value of the fetus and human life.
The real issue is in constructing an argument that justifies abortion without disregarding an almost universal value for life. For pro-life advocates, "my body my choice" doesn't quite cover it so there needs to be an alternative and adequate response.
My honest opinion is that both sides should abandon inflammatory buzzwords and stop painting the other side with broad strokes. We really need a way to unify both viewpoints without having inconsistent perspectives. I'm exhausted by the entire discourse really.
This is really well said!
Saaame.
The problem is, we have idiots who always think they are right and think everyone should listen to them 😑
How about, what right do I have to use your body against your will, causing discomfort, pain, and stress, to sustain my life?
Or do the preborn have a right that I don't have?
@@polarbear1713 Well, abortion also gives the right to women if killing another human being without any consequences. That would be a right that no one else has.
If you’re truly anti abortion and want all abortions to decrease, then banning them is not the way. Places with better sex Ed have significantly lower abortion rates. That’s it. All you do is educate people and it goes down to practically zero.
Why not do both? We can ban abortion AND have sex education. They are not mutually exclusive
@@gopher7691The people want to ban abortion also hate sex education. Not to mention that banning abortion doesn’t actually lead to less abortions.
@@Baldbutstillhuman it does in Mississippi. I’m in favor of sex education. Kids should know that abortion kills a living human being and it should not be done for convenience because it is murder
We’ve had sex education for decades. And yet people still have abortions. How do you explain that?
I want to stop the killing. You can have all the sex education you want as long as it is illegal to slaughter unborn human beings in the womb just because they are inconvenient
@@Baldbutstillhuman there are fewer abortions in Mississippi
@@Baldbutstillhuman I think sex education is great as long as it explains that abortion kills a living human being
I am neither pro life nor pro choice I think what everyone should be aiming is to teach sex education to children and to stop treating sex as a casual thing it is not!usage of contraceptions etc should be taught to teenagers as well so that we don't alwysz reach the abortion area. But things doesn't always happens the way we plan so abortion is necessary sometimes (r*** cases etc) the only morally right way for abortion is to abort the child before it can feel any physical pain.
@Anon Ymous Yeah kind of but I hate the way most pro choice dudes in social media sees abortion
Hello, I found this video quite interesting, however I was confused by the channels name, is this channel connected to the group known as Christian Science? Or is it different?
Guys, is 2022. Why don’t we find better things to debate and fight for??? This is literally a simple useful resource for people in need, could be any case. You name it, if a mother is not ready to have a baby, let her not have the baby, wether she got raped, or a 14 year old that don’t want to drop out of high school to take care of a child. It doesn’t matter, your own beliefs matter only to you and your family.
Believe me no one else in the world cares if you like people aborting or not, and even if they did, you’re not gonna help at all on ANYTHING all you’re gonna do is give your unwanted opinion, and protest on banning a resource needed SPECIALLY nowadays.
Amazing how much you said was wrong
So true
@@kingorange7739 it's also amazing how many tears you dropped while writting your comment
@@xLanzer Not even slightly, but thanks for trying to gaslight. Really shows the left’s true nature even more
Well, its an interesting and important moral issue to consider. The facts are that in politics, your one vote will not impact your life very much if at all. Your work, your personal life, your relationships etc will impact your life tremendously. That does give a good argument as to why you shouldn't care about debating politics, like you say. But its a pastime that is interesting, maybe counterproductive, but still interesting.
You state the pro choice case as being obvious since it is a "specially" needed resource. But it point of the pro life argument is that this "resource" is killing the unborn baby at the wish of the mother because the mother doesn't want to take care of the baby for some reason or another. Maybe the mother is has a good reason to abort the baby - it could impact their future and financial situation, like in the case of the 14 year old girl. That is indeed very devastating to the would be mother. The contentious issue here is whether that financial and emotional devastation is more important or the unborn life is more important. Say the 14 year old gave birth to the baby, and it grew to two years old. Then the 14 year old wants to kill the baby because it impacts her life in a big way, and will hinder her future. Would society want to stop her? Most people would agree yes.
So the issue is not as simple as you say - the unborn life needs to be considered as well as the mother's consequences if the baby was born. You would want intervention on the mother's choice to kill the baby if the baby was born and 2 year old, so intervention on the mother's choice itself is not the main question. The question is how valuable the unborn life is. And that has a very split view in politics.
As I see it and have observed, abortion centers around the question of when does life begin-- at conception, somewhere during pregnancy, or at birth? Isn't this a theological question? If so, what ever happened to the separation of church and state? Why do the women and their doctors get almost all of the blame? Where are the men responsible? Something to ponder.
Stop pondering and stop abortion.
No, it's not a theological question it's science. A fertilized egg initiates life, scientists and biologists all agree. You don't need to be religious to think that ending a human life is immoral/should be illegal. Ultimately it's just been politicized so, in reality, the question of when does life begin is irrelevant.
@@Thelearner08365Scientists and biologists do not agree that life begins at conception.
The sperm and the egg cell do not initiate life because they are both already alive.
That’s part of why it is hard to determine when those cells become a person.
@@synchronizedchaos6099, made a nice argument. I would also point out that if conception is when a new life/person begins, then are true twins one life in two separate bodies? Note that if the answer is yes, then the actions one does should doom (legally and theologically) the other. If the answer is no, why not? They have the same DNA and the same conception event.
I think it's easier to argue that a person is a brain. So:
-two twins = two people;
-one body, one brain, two DNAs = one person (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_%28genetics%29#Humans);
-one body, two brains = two persons (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycephaly#Occurrence_in_humans).
Synchronized Chaos cells equal life. If scientists were to find cells on Planet Mars, then that would be called life.
I'm not firmly pro abortion but what the hell does the graph mean. It clearly shows the rate of complications is higher around 1973. When abortion became legal
Countries that prohibit abortion probably don't do much about sex ed and contraceptives, which would explain why they actually have higher abortion rates. If people really wanted to save lives they should invest more in sex ed and contraceptives, but being religious seems to be more important.
Well contraceptives dont always work, so its giving condoms to horny teenagers is like giving candy to sugar addicts. Its like saying “go have sex! Even though these condoms fail 15% of the time!” Seems like that would increase unwanted pregnancies right?
This is the only reasonable video I’ve found.
I dont think its reasonable to overcomplicate an issue when the issue is “Is murder wrong?”
Search for "dating single mother" and scroll down to the comment section. You'll see why you ought to have a choice and not be toyed with your emotions by other people's philosophical views on the issue. It's ultimately your decision to do one or the other. Do some introspection. Find out where you stand philosophically. You have the right to arrive at your own conclusions without feeling guilty about it.
The basic argument that you are making is not a very good one. Say you are a single mom and impoverished, living on food stamps below the poverty line. Let's imagine not that you're pregnant with a child but that you had the kid, and he is around half a year old. You are in the same position as the pregnant woman, except now the kid has been born. Why shouldn't you be able to kill the kid? The argument is that you're not going to be able to raise the kid in the circumstances proper to the child, guaranteeing them the best possible opportunity, so why is the child's right to life different now that the kid is born than before the kid was born? Because the argument being made is not about the stage of development or bodily autonomy, the argument is about the circumstances of the child. So if the argument is that living circumstances or future living circumstances of the child are insufficient to the needs of the child, you can kill the child; that argument applies equally to kids born and unborn. This leads to the green lighting of infanticide based on circumstance. Again the key issue with abortion is not the circumstances in which kids grow up because there are literally billions of kids who are growing up around the planet right now in rather unenviable circumstances, and killing them would be pure murder. The real "question" about abortion is whether this is a kid or is not a kid, and unless you are willing to at least acknowledge that is the question, then you are making a secondary question. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do everything we can to improve those living conditions. It doesn't mean that if you have a kid, you can't take care of, you shouldn't give up the child for adoption. There's a good argument you should, but the tying of social conditions to abortion is a particularly egregious moral error.
@Ace Spades Yeah, I was half asleep when I wrote that 😅. TLDR; You are making the case that suffering post-birth is justificatory of death before birth which is a rather egregious moral error. Poor or insufficient living circumstances to the needs of the child do not undervalue to child's right to life. That logic applies equally to kids born and unborn.
Philosophically I oppose killing human beings for convenience.
lol Centris be “ like this is fine”
Here are some dead baby jokes: @1 - What's the difference between a dead baby and a banana? ANS: It's easier to peel a banana! #2 - What's the difference between a dead baby and a football? ANS: When you kick them both down the field, the football goes further. And it stays in one piece! #3 - What's the difference between a dead baby and a tray of "Fast Food." ANS: The tray! #4 - How do you make a dead baby float? ANS: A glass of root beer soda, with two scoops of dead baby! #5 - How do you make a dead baby sink? ANS: A dead baby basin, with hot and cold water dead baby faucets!
If you can think of others, please list them below. Thanks for playing...
Lack of responsibility to justify their promiscuity, clearly shows how bad our society has turned from their own morality.
And male promiscuity, tony Lopez? That's always been fine, right? Since men don't get pregnant.
@@gamkal7231 bro male promiscuity adds to this problem. Nowhere did he mention in his comment that male promiscuity is fine. You're just making up things.
@@INCAnitysy True he didn't specify. But you know as well as everyone else that the word "promiscuity" is aimed at women 99% of the time. And that's not making anything up, dude. Sorry.
Lack of morality is thinking you have the right to control someone else's body.
Pro-lifers don't give jack shit about unborns.
@@gamkal7231 Maybe it is because females control access to sex more than males does? the only "easy" way for an average guy to sleep with a women is via prostitution
there is a reason female prostitutes and hookers are more in demand than their male counterparts.
If you are pro-life, that’s great. Don’t have an abortion. But that doesn’t mean you get to force other people to follow YOUR personal beliefs.
If you are pro life that’s great. Don’t murder a newborn. But that doesn’t mean you get to force other people to follow YOUR personal beliefs on infanticide
@@gopher7691 Not infanticide at all. It’s called murdering someone out of self-defense, or more specifically murdering someone for the preservation of one’s own body/bodily autonomy. For example, if *YOU* tried to use my body against my will, I could kill you out of self defense and the courts would rule in my favor every time. So why should a fetus get more rights than you? Why should fetuses get special rights to use other people’s bodies against their will? You people say “right to life” but really what you mean is “the right to forcibly use someone else’s bodily organs against their will” because that’s exactly what it is. That’s not “the right to life”. That’s the right to use someone else’s body against their will, which isn’t a “right”, no person has that “right”. For some reason, you think fetuses should.
Also, for you people who love to say that abortion is genocide, there are four key differences between abortion and genocide. 1) Abortion can be considered self-defense since the fetus is living inside of and using the mother’s body against her will. Genocide cannot be considered self-defense because the victims are not violating the bodies of the perpetrators at all. 2) Genocide is systematic, whereas abortion is completely personal to that one woman, meaning abortions happen randomly and not systematically. 3) Genocide is coordinated. Abortions are not coordinated. There isn’t some Women’s Conference every year where a bunch of women get together and scream “YEAH! LET’S GO KILL THESE BABIES! YEAAAAHHH!!!!” And 4) Genocide is hateful. Abortion is not hateful. The woman doesn’t want her body being violated, so she ejects the human that is living inside of her without her permission. That’s not hateful. Also, most of these women don’t even want to have the abortion, they just feel trapped and they’re desperate; they feel that they *have to* have the abortion because they have no other choice. How do you stop that? By showing them their alternatives to abortion and providing them with the resources necessary for them to choose life instead. The woman has to tell you she’s pregnant and ask for these resources and support though. And why would a woman tell you she’s pregnant when abortion is banned? You’ll just report her to the police. So, counter-intuitively, abortion bans actually have been shown to INCREASE abortions.
If you are against murder, great. Don’t force other people not to commit murder. See the logic there? The only time abortion is “self defense” is when the mother’s life or health is in danger.
@@NinjaDog9123 The mother’s life/health are *always* threatened by pregnancy and childbirth. Why else would we need an entire armada of medical personnel devoted solely to pregnancy and childbirth? Because it’s so safe and dandy? No. And it’s wrong to force someone to endure threats to their health/life just because *YOU* want them to give birth against their will.
Also, let’s say pregnancy was perfectly safe and no one ever died or was injured from it. Even so, no one has the right to use my bodily organs against my will. Not even a baby. That’s infringing on someone’s bodily autonomy, so protecting one’s bodily autonomy is also self-defense.
We don’t even force criminals who stab people to give up their blood to save the stab victim. And yet here you are, telling women that they need to be forced to do a lot more than just donate some blood. She didn’t even commit any crime, either. All she did was have sex. And now you want her to “take responsibility” but what you really mean is “you need to be forced to give up your entire body and organs to someone else”. In what other situation are you okay with forcing someone to do that? Do you also think the father should “take responsibility” and be forced to give up his organs for the pregnancy as well? Or does this only apply to the woman for you people? For example, if the woman gets gestational diabetes and her kidneys start failing, that means both she and the baby will die because of the pregnancy, which was caused by the father. He CHOSE to have sex, he CHOSE to impregnate her, which is why she’s in this predicament now. So by your logic, the government should be able to force the father to donate his kidney to the mother, even if he says no because it’s a dangerous procedure that threatens his health/life.
@@azayzelderegis1655 their is risk in everything we do. Driving to work is risky. That is why there is an army of medical professionals at emergency rooms.
All laws banning abortion make exception for mortal danger to mom. The fact is almost all abortions are done for convenience. That is what pro lifers want to stop because killing an unborn human being for convenience is murder.
So I’ll make a deal with you. I will allow abortion in the case of mortal danger to mom, very serious health risk to mom, rape, and incest if you let me ban abortion for convenience. Deal?
Your straw man health argument is phony. No one wants pregnant women to die so all laws banning abortion make exception for that risk. What pro choicers want is for it to be legal for a pregnant woman to kill the unborn human being in her womb for convenience. Own it
How many abortions are a result of people over 21 choosing to have sex when it would be catastrophic for a pregnancy to result from such a thing?
"if it were overturned"... would you have thought that 2 years later it already happened ?
Thank goodness
It’s the woman’s choice period. And no one has the right to interfere with anyone’s life. Period.. not the government not the state.. the woman’s.
You’re right. No one has the right to interfere with anyone’s life, and that includes the baby’s life in the womb. The most basic human right is the right to life. It’s not a woman’s choice, because it’s not her body, it’s a baby’s body with separate DNA.
@@jessicazumbach1943 while I agree with your statement and stance on the issue.. fact is the mother is the one in the drivers seat..so she should have the say. It’s not up too you or me or anyone else to decide what’s best, your not the one in the situation nor am I..sounds cruel I know but nature can be cruel you and I are old enough to understand that. It is the woman’s choice.. she is the vessel to carry this life..and her life will be directly affected by this birth. Despite how you and I feel on the subject or anyone else feels..again it’s not our lives it’s hers.
@@travisdozier1357 no it’s not her life, it’s the child’s. The child didn’t choose death, as such the termination of said child is murder. The mother made her choice from the moment she spread her legs and let someone finish in her. Not to mention the plan b option. She made her choices, once that child is conceived it is no longer her choice to make as it is not her life most significantly affected by it.
@@kingorange7739 so if your wife was going to die because of the birth of a child or your daughter, or perhaps they were rapped.. you would not be for aborting the child?
@@travisdozier1357 firstly I love how you people keep trying to use statistical anomalies as excuses to justify the overwhelming amount of cases not done for that reason. It’s honestly baffling. To answer both your questions though because unlike you, I am not intellectually dishonest.
1. Nowhere did I say someone’s right to life had to end for the sake of the child. If there is a situation where the pregnancy is actively putting a high medical risk to the mother’s life, then her life would be prioritized. Obviously, especially given that the child would be likely to die along side her anyways. Almost no pro lifer would disagree with this. However a pregnancy that is actively endangering their life or health is not the same as one that is an inconvenience to said mother.
As for rape, once again statistical anomaly so it’s not even intellectually honest, but let’s play with it. Do i believe rape is bad? Yes. Do i believe the rapist should be castrated? Assuming it can be reasonably proven without a shadow of doubt, yes. Do i believe a child should receive the death sentence for the crime of his or her father? No. So no I would be against abortion even in rape cases, as it’s not the fault of the child. Also let’s just say rape was made an exception, how would that even be deducted and confirmed? Would we just take her at her word, or would there have to be some kind of investigation? So even taking away the practical issues and intellectually dishonest semantics, no. A child being killed to pay for the crime of his or her father is not morally right either. You punish the perpetrator, not a victim. And a child is victim of that like a mother is
”Abortion is safe”
The baby chilling in heaven: WHAT U MEAN?!
that's literally the purpose of an abortion: to end a potential life. a safe abortion is one that does not harm the mother.
@@dbuc4671 does harm the baby tho
@@scarecrow8201 Pretty sure it's supposed to
@@Kralkuscov didn't say it wasn't supposed to
@@justmeandi8256 Person B did not choose to be inside Person A or choose to use their parts, they were put in there by Person A's actions and have no choice but to use their Person A's parts as they can't do anything about it. This is more accurate.
An embryo is or isn't not a "person". If it is, then abortion is murder because the right to life trumps a woman's bodily autonomy right due to the "duty to rescue" being greater as the woman's decisions led to that circumstance of potential death of an embryo.
If it is not a person, then the woman's bodily autonomy right trumps.
All of this boils down to this, when does an embryo go from being human life, to a person. The burden of proof rests on the pro lifers here. They have not defined this point yet in a defensible and logically consistent argument which is why they have lost the debate in court each time thus far.
Sorry but I think you need to take more time and think about your arguments. At a quick glance I can see two hole. There may be more.
1) murder is the illegal killing of a person so if abortion is legal then by definition it can't be murder 😂
2) the body attorney argument starts with the claim that we have this as a right. This is not an axiom, only a claim and therefore needs to be shown to be true. Until such time, the argument fails.
@@bjhcvuaerpigfy incorrect on both accounts, so your quick glance must have been a bit too quick.
First, I did not claim abortion was murder, and my comment was establishing how the courts came to the ruling that abortion was not the taking of a person's life, and thus not murder by legal definition.
Second about body AUTONOMY (not attorney) here is the definition of an axiom: a statement or proposition which is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true.
The right to body autonomy is legally derived from the fundamental rights laid out in the constitution declaration of Independence/Charter depending on your country. I'll use the US as an example though:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
14th amendment to the constitution
What this effectively translates to is that the ability for one to get an abortion is necessarily defaulted as legally entitled until a law is justified and passed saying otherwise. Ie no support is needed to "justify" body autonomy as it is an axiomatic right. It is an implied and de facto extension of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
@@InAVanByTheRivr my apologies for mis reading the first bit. It seems we both agree that abortion cannot be murder while it is legal.
On the second bit, on body autonomy ( not attorney: bloody auto correct 😂) l understand where you are coming from legally but I would still like you to give me a good justification morally (if you can please)
@@InAVanByTheRivr PS I think we are both on the same side: pro-choice.
I'm just looking for the best arguement and I don't believe the body atonomy arguement is the best. In a philosophical arguement an axiom has value because of its utility. If I'm having a conversation with a normal person I could use "the earth is a sphere" as an axiom to start an argument.
Because the earth is a sphere and a single light source will only light half of a sphere at any point in time, we can say it will always be night on Earth for half of the earth.
But I can't use "earth is a sphere" when talking with a flat earther. They are just going to say "no it's not" and the arguement is over.
When you say we have body autonomy to a pro lifer they just say "no we don't".
The body autonomy arguement will never win until we can get it back to something that they agree upon: an axiom.
I think there is potential in "liberty" and "burden of proof"
@@bjhcvuaerpigfy "we have body autonomy because we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by default unless a court can legally an thoroughly define grounds to infringe on those rights"
"no we don't"
"OK.... See you in court then, where you will love again like you have for the last 70 odd years :P"
That's how that debate goes.
This video was 2 years ago….yet timeless after the decision was already made. Abortion is not banned in all states
One thing: it’s true that in the immediate-term, overturning Roe and Casey would not outlaw abortion, just let each state make its own choices. That’s usually, like in this video, presented in a mollifying fashion, as though pro-choice advocates are overreacting and making the consequences sound more extreme than they really would be. But does anyone truly believe that if that were to happen, anti-abortion activists would be satisfied and stop campaigning to make abortion illegal? If antiabortion activists are sincere in their beliefs, then surely they would continue until abortion is banned everywhere (at least in the US), and overturning Roe and Casey isn’t the end goal, but just the next step. And if that’s the case, it seems not unreasonable for pro-choice advocates to say that overturning Roe and Casey would lead to banning all abortions-but because it would represent the anti-abortion side gaining greater political power and making substantial progress towards their goals, not because that single decision would create that outcome, and pro-choice advocates should often be clearer about that distinction.
Remember this: "You still have the SAME heart that began beating in your mother's womb" ~Houston Kat
Reagan is not one to talk.
And pro-lifers don't care about unborns. It's a fact.
Reagan certainly never "saved" any unborns.
people who talk about abortion are polarized but most people are in the middle??? Most people are in the middle because they have not thought hard about the issue or because they are actively willing to arrive at a compromise. I too am willing to arrive at a compromise and therefore am in favor of legal abortion up to 10 weeks. But there is no middle position on abortion, as there is no middle position on slavery.
Shouldn't be a debate. Women need to learn to be accountable... be more responsible... not sleep around and use birth control before an abortion needs to even be cosidered.
I don't think this is fair tbh cause men can do the same thing and not get preggers. I think it's fine for anyone to sleep around as long their of age and are doing it safely. If there are ways to prevent getting pregnant I think women are entitled to them all because it really is a life changing process
@@bananajoe4940 and tht seems to be the problem
just bcoz a man can't get pregnant and will not be held accountable in any regards doen't mean that women shuld be allowed to do it
@@AhmadAneeq huh why shouldn't they be able to then? That seems like a double standard
@@AnonYmous-yj9ibSure. But bodily autonomy ends there, where hurting of other people starts. There's no such thing as absolute bodily autonomy. Fists are my body, right?
So can I violently throw my fists around on people's faces? It's my body, my choice?
@@AnonYmous-yj9ibFetus is not part of mother's body, it's invidual being, no matter if it's not fully autonomous yet. Organ donor argument fails at that refusing to donor organs to sick people is not murder. Person with sickness will die natural death. While abortion is not natural death of fetus, it's purposeful ending of life, known as murder. With sick patient, the man that refused donor did not cause the illness of patient, thus letting patient die is not murder. With woman, she did sexual act, that caused the existence of fetus. There's no such thing as absolute body autonomy. It's not the highest right above others. There are limits. You must wear seatbelt, even if you don't want to. You can't use drugs.
If fetus is another human being, then there's no right to choose murder it. Doing so is grave injustice.
It's shame people are selfish nowadays, all caring about themselves, and their feelings, not the other persons right to life, especially those who don't have a voice. Society has always abused the defenseless, innocent and weak.
Shame on all who defend abortion.
So what if it changes body?
Is having sexy scar free body more important than another person? My goodness people are vain and narsistic these days.
I remember hearing that the majority of abortions are done on women who’s pregnancies were mistakes done through irresponsible consensual sex, does anybody know if that’s actually true or not?
Abortions aren't easy I don't think somebody would do it unless they have to.
@@warm_lettuce473 Having to do it does not preclude that the pregnancy was attained through unsafe casual sex
@@theyautjawarrior6652 True, but you did ask about stats so I just provided the most logical answer I could think of based on what I've observed.
@@theyautjawarrior6652 Doesn't change the fact that restrictions increase it, not the other way around.
Keep the law out of women's bodies.
And stop pretending you care about unborns when it's blatantly obvious that you don't.
@@eymed2023 i do care about unborns, unlike you, who would advocate for women fucking all they want and killing unborn babies all they want
The only way to make abortion dissappear as a common option is to ensure an adequate environment where irresponsable sexuality doesn't go rampant and, when it does, have a backup humanly assistance. If you can provide help and wellbeing, half the arguments mean nothing. It would just depend on whether the people are selfish or not or just unwilling to go through the process.
Pregnancy and birth are body changing and life changing events for women and we should not be forced to go through this. If you are not a woman you will never understand.
@@billmartins5545 I know women who would never understand either. It doesn't matter whether you can do it or not, it's an opinion on reproduction of new life. You shouldn't be forced to get pregnant but once it's done you can't just get rid of the little one as if it was not your child (or as if it wasn't a human).
There was a card, you could open the low security door, but there is also the small space that is locked, a corridor to get there, one card, two keys, which one opens if you come from point b to a, if you used the card only once for both?
Maybe you could explain what you are on about? I'm sorry but I don't get your point.
Not fully analogous, but we banned alcohol for a couple years then gangs rose to power (ie. Al Capone etc) because it was going to happen regardless. But let’s go on this illogical loop as a nation just because our religious base will get us votes for now
Should we allow murder, prostitution, rape and all the other bad crap in the world too then if you think it will make the numbers go down??
@@jannettowers6731 murder and rape should be illegal and basically every person will agree with that and rape/pedophilia is the grossest thing ever. Prostitution should be legal and will never go away in any society regardless of how you feel. If drugs were legal and regulated that would undermine the Mexican drug cartels who have taken over that country selling drugs to the US, save tax payer dollars fighting this black hole of a war on drugs and militarizing the police, and stop subsidizing private prisons with our money as a nation who incarcerates more people than any other nation.
Anyways 92% of abortions are under 7 weeks (most don’t find out they’re even pregnant till weeks 4-6). 7% are under 21 weeks and 1% are after (almost 100% of those are for medical reasons. Baby is dead in the womb or will kill the mother in birth). I just think the government and religious people should get out of peoples private matters especially if it doesn’t affect them.
@@jannettowers6731 Stupid argument. It is very clear that some things are impossible to restrict.
Laws should be judged by what they do in practice. What the law says in theory doesn't matter.
The words "christian" and "science" in the same sentence is laughable
Well God created the universe, so…
Unless you think the universe came from nothing, because THAT is definitely not scientific
@@jannettowers6731 The big bang theory.
@@shoimi the big bang theory was thought of by a Catholic priest and is not incompatible with the Catholic faith. Whats your point?
@@jannettowers6731 Well there's no proof that God created the universe, and neither does if God exists or not.
@@jannettowers6731 So you can't just bring religion into this topic.
There's a slight issue with your abortion-related deaths chart. Every abortion results in at least one death of a human.
And if a foetus isn't a human, what species is it?
in microbiology fetus is a parasite
@@lolololgii754 I could almost agree if the baby appeared spontaneously. They don't though - the mother has to actively work (having intercourse) in order to make it happen. It's not a parasite if the mether herself creates it.
That is not a valid argument, since banning abortions increases the number of abortions.
@@eymed2023 that's a misrepresented statistic which is not true with anything ever. When it's illegal the people willing to break the law may get them. When it's legal all those same people may get them as well as many people who aren't willing to break the law.
The actual statement is "banning abortions increases the number of illegal abortions performed".
The reason is that every abortion would then be illegal. There would be less overall abortions, but none of them would be legal.
Think about slavery. Slavery in America used to be legal so nobody was holding slaves illegally. The Republican party banned slavery and many slaves were freed. Some weren't at the time, so those few were held illegally. As such, the number of slaves held illegally rose but the number of slaves dropped.
A reverse example would be marijuana in Canada. Was there more usage when it was illegal or legal?
@@eymed2023 and now that I think about it, what part of my argument would be invalidated by that claim?
people need to understand some choices are not ours. choosing our gender, race, nationality is not our choice so is deciding someone's fate. if you somehow get pregnant the baby is automatically your responsibility until it's born.no matter how you got pregnant.
0:23 sorry. I am not any of these clown. I am muslim men.
I mean it’s a little funny you said that complications are 1 percent but the death rate of the fetus is 100 percent
If abortions bother you, then keep the law of it. Legal = reduction. Restriction = increasing.
All that matters is what happens in practice.
Don't tell me you care about unborns if you support restrictions.
@@eymed2023 this is legit so fucking dumb. That’s like saying legalize meth to stop people from doing meth
@@Attain556 No, it's not. It's facts. It's how reality works, weather you like it or not.
Either way, no one has the right to tell someone what to do with their own body. It's not "legalizing abortion". It's the other way around. The government has no right to invade someone's uterus, or any other body part for that matter.
And don't you DARE use unborns as an argument. I know better than anyone how pro-lifers treat minors. The entire pro-life discourse is a blantant and disrespectful lie.
@@eymed2023 Wow so your calling me a child abuser to support your argument. How about you actually find how the procedure is done before glorifying it.
@@Attain556 I'm not glorifying anything. I don't need to.
There is no way abortion could possibly come even close to the barbaric things that pro-lifers do to children.
Those same assholes who believe abortion is murder are the same assholes who want kids to be paddled, belted and the like.
Compare how children are treated in pro-choice countries VS pro-life countries. Children are treated like shit in pro-life countries.
PragerU proves my point. This is a fact, weather you like it or not.
It doesn't matter. Banning abortion does nothing to stop it. It's not a discussion.
On the other hand, protecting a child's rights by the law DOES work.
Yet pro-lifers are against child's rights because they see kids as property.
If you actually cared about children, you'd be supporting the criminaliation of corporal punishment and circumcizion.
The fact that pro-lifers defend these barbaric practices, which I HAVE seen, is more than enough to prove that you're a liar.
Your view on abortions going up in countries that don’t allow abortion could be apple and oranges unless the countries are similar in education, health, economics. Seems to be a stat most people fall into. I would like to see more research.
@Eithan S I did research in this and can see now how this informative information is just opinion and not fact. Thanks for your Elvis comment I’m sure the makers of this video may consider it in their next video.
Exactly. Some of those countries the woman likley has no choice
Here is the USA it is an average of one abortion per eight women. In Russia the average is eight abortions per woman.
Elvis?
In 1915, my grandmother was having trouble with her pregnancy, the local doctors encouraged her to abort the baby, for her own survival, but she refused to kill her soon to be born child. She was in an area where illegal, but "safe" abortions were performed. She told the doctors that "God could not forgive her for killing her baby, and she could not forgive herself." She felt the love she had for her child in her womb. She went on to give birth her third child in January of 1916. The baby was premature, but survived. My grandmother sadly died one month after giving birth. That child grew up to marry and had two children of which I am the oldest. I am married and my wife and I have two sons. Both are married and one has a son. So, three generations later, my family is thriving thanks to the courage and strong faith that my grandmother had.
My grandmother made a decision based on her bonding with her child, faith and the risks at the time, to keep her baby to term and risk her life in the process. My family is forever grateful to her for that.
Now, if a woman chooses to terminate her pregnancy, and kill her baby, that's her option, but my faith tells me to thank God every day that I can live this life thanks to the faith and love of my grandmother.
If a woman decides to terminate their pregnancy for no good reason, she will have to answer to God for eternity.
My issue is that I don’t think it should be a unilateral decision.
What if it was that man’s last or only opportunity to have children?
Too bad for him foe choosing the wrong person
@@mishabalsh8771 And that's the argument they've made against abortion. "Too bad for her for choosing the wrong person".
@@ITAPTF240 ironic right?
@@mishabalsh8771 do you believe murder is wrong v
If both parents decide to kill their unborn human being then both should be put in jail
Is anyone willing to have a abortion dissuasion? I am pro life and want to understand the other side.
Sure, what right do I have to use your body against your will, causing discomfort, pain, and stress, to sustain my life?
@@polarbear1713 first I would like to thank you for responding to me. I want to understand the other side better. The problem I have is that yes there could be stress in a pregnancy however it doesn’t warrant the right to kill the baby. It’s tuff and I couldn’t imagine the stress however it shouldn’t give anyone the right to end a life.
@@abelasteway5726 I didn't think you were going to respond considering the age of the comments. So thanks for replying.
I would like to say you misunderstood my question. I was asking if you or I had a right to another person's body to sustain our lives. I wasn't speaking about pregnancy.
Oh I see. Forgive me for misunderstanding. I believe that we should have that right to live. The right for others to live should be first then the right to ones body.
@@abelasteway5726 So, I may as well just lay out my whole argument?
1) Let's start at the beginning. I do not believe that a woman should be forced to carry a baby just because she is part of the cause for the baby's existence. If you get an STD, I do not believe that we have to accept it. Instead, we can be given options for the situation. In the future, perhaps these options could include gene editing at this point. This is about options at this point, not what those options are.
2) Now the woman has chosen to have an abortion. We assume she has a right to bodily autonomy. We also assume the child has a right to life (I actually don't think the preborn do but let's act as if they do because you believe they do).
3) The question then is, does her bodily autonomy infringe upon the child's right to life? Seriously think about this. My view is that the removal of an intact foreign entity from one's own body is never infringing on their right to life.
4) If we believe that, the question remains, how can you justify the killing of the preborn while in the womb? Before viability the preborn child would perish outside of the womb, right? We already do procedures that kill a preborn child if they attach in the fallopian tube. The only difference is that it would eventually die and it would possibly kill the mother too.
5) So if we kill the preborn in that situation, a situation where it would eventually die, why can't we kill it earlier than it would if we required a c-section extraction?
6) Don't forget that at this point, the woman has already made up her mind, and I believe that her bodily autonomy is not infringing on the right to life for the preborn. It is not the mother's fault that the preborn is just not viable or able to use its right to life without infringing upon the rights of the mother.
7) I asked if we had a right to cause discomfort, pain, and stress against your will while I use your body to demonstrate that we don't have a right to a separate entity's body. We must have their consent.
I still don’t know where I stand but probably more pro-life. Abortion before 8 weeks but even then it’s hard to decide. She said 98% before 21 weeks. Have you seen a 13/15 week baby in the womb. I just can’t get behind killing a baby when it has fingers and toes. Currently pregnant with my third and I know I am lucky because I want my children and can afford them. Not everyone is so lucky and finds themselves stuck with the hardest decision of their lives
"I just can’t get behind killing a baby when it has fingers and toes" is such an emotional statement. We need to be able to look past this in order to protect women.
No. No restrictions. It's been proven time and time again that restrictions never reduce the number of abortions.
It was after the pro-life movement came that abortions skyrocketed.
More restriction = More abortions.
Why?
1. Because legal abortion doctors can be mandated to suggest alternatives, such as paid child care or adoption, whereas illegal doctors will simply abort and that it's it.
2. With legal abortions, the government can interview women to figure out the causes and circumstances that cause people to look for abortion in the first place, and work to fix that.
Oftentimes, people look to abortion because their parents or partners are literally forcing them to and threatning to kill them if they don't.
I need this for school
Bare in mind these women reperaent the minority, however I watched an episode of Judge Jerry. A woman was suing her mother. The mothers argument on why she didn't owe her daughter any money was she carried her to term. I don't remember the number of abortions but it was high. Another woman I saw on a video of a womans march she has a sign listing the number of abortions she had as if she were proud of it. Further more in town where I grew up a teen was r**** by her cousin. Instead of taking her to an abortion clinic her aunt had family members beat on her stomach until she miscarried. She screamed at her niece that she want going get her babies taken from her. When burning the body in a grill didn't work a neighbor disposed of the body. All of this where a legal abortion could have been had. Everyone was found out and prosecuted anyway.
I am Pro-Life and anti Abortion, not because I am against sexual education and Abortion one it´s one, but because I am against the false premise and lack of responsibility sexual intercourse brings with itself. If you have sexual intercourse you should be ready to bring a life into this world or at least use protection. If you still get pregnant, it is the responsibility of both parents to stand for the choices they consciously made. I am not taking into account the very small percentage of cases where rape was the main cause of a baby. I am just against the idea that sexual intercourse is just a fun time for the sake of being and if a baby gets created it can be killed cause it just doesn´t fit my lifestyle to take responsibility in my doing and my decisions.
Why aren't you taking r@pe cases into account?
@@shoimi agree
Again, irrelevant.
Not a single pro-lifer takes into account the fact that restricting abortion increases the number of abortions, and thus the entire debate is meaningless.
@@eymed2023 No. The question remains, why the abortion rate is rising if abotions are not legally allowed. Is this just an reverse reaction ? Is it a act out of rebellion ? Is this the same case why americans drink to much, because they have stupid alcohol rules that forbid them to drink before 21 ? Maybe. I am as a pro-lifer take this into account. The question remains how to handle that and in my answer, as stated above I don´t think that rules and more guidelines like forbidding is always the way to go. I stand more for an general viewpoint that has to change about sexuality. The way we see sex and the consequences it has is independet from the rules we approve about abortion. It is about how the media talks about sex, the schools teach about sex, the churches talk about sex, that changes a system and the thinking of young teens that come in the situation to decide if they want to sleep with each other and want to face the consequence of having a baby, or the easy way out if that happens and take abotion into consideration. That is the question and the mind game that needs more information and eduation. More general awareness about the consequences of sex and sexuality in general and not rules.
@@sarius363 So you agree with me that the sex-obssession and sex-supression cultures are both equally evil ans need to be stopped?
For a video that begins saying that both sides have extreme view points, it sure does seem to be only countering the pro-birth side.
That's because reality skews in that direction
@@elbownio5820 How so?
@@justme-kr7lx most conservative or reactionary viewpoints aren't based in science and research.
Pro abortion is kind of wrong because the baby is stay alive even if the is no heart beat because if the baby was dead it would have smelled and the body would have been as a rotten corpse. But a baby in the womb do not smell or look like a corpse. So they are alive.
@@elbownio5820 Which ones?
"...it might be informed by your brand of theology, but what matters most is that your opinion isn't informed by misinformation." 🧐🧐🧐
To anyone that believes abortion should be banned, just think. We would never let a kid adopt a kid, so why would we support forcing a kid to have a kid?
You could just as well ask certain parents why they support letting their kids have sex with other kids. You're not legally an adult until 18 in this country, and not fully grown arguably until 21-25 years old. Yet at 14, 15, 16, and 17 parents are buying condoms for their kids and/or facilitating an opportunity to engage in sex acts with other kids their age. This is a COMMON reason teenagers keep ending up pregnant and their parents convincing them to go through with an abortion. We need to start talking about the root causes of the problem first.
*- A letter from the voiceless-*
Dear Mom,
I want to start by saying I love you, you were my first connection with another person. And I hoped I would get to see you face to face, hear your sweet voice sing to me sleep, But that never happened. Whatever I did I'm sorry, I didn't mean to hurt you or cause you any trouble, I just wanted you to be my mommy. What I went through physically hurt me, and I hope no one ever has to go through that again. But what hurt me even worst was the fact that my mommy that I love so much hated me. So much that you wouldn't even acknowledge that I was alive(lacking the ability to breathe unaided), you called me it(a clump of cells). And after all that you threw me away(like garbage), you wouldn't even do that to a pair of old shoes. Now it's to late for me, but on my behalf can you try to stop this from happening to any other babies. PLEASE!
Love
The Unwanted
P.S. I forgive you.
Dear Mom,
I'm only a zygote but already I can type a well-written email to you. I have all the feelings, thoughts, imaginations, desires, everything that makes us human, not animal. Please forward this to Science so they can rewrite the biology books.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 Jeremiah 1 1 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." "Ah, Sovereign LORD," I said, "I do not know how to speak; I am only a child."
@@villain5873 You're quoting the bible now? Sorry, that's a bronze age myth, not an argument. And while it's not relevant, that quote is for Jeremiah, not children in general.
Evangelical Christians who believe the bible is the literal word of God are a danger to society. We've already seen abortion clinics blown up by terrorists, let's not start quoting the bible to justify imprisoning women, ok?
@@gerrydonohoe2765 pregnancy is imprisonment?
@@villain5873 Yes, that what it means to make abortion illegal: You imprison women. Pregnant women. The pro-lifers will not be held accountable for suffering imposed, their scapegoat is the state.
BEEN teaching GOD & His Word over 40 years I think each side needs to understand better WHAT GOD THINK ON ABORTION? For Know GOD & most all does not like or want of Abortion to happen to babies. For GOD created us Mankind with Freewill for when comes to abortion GOD is always going to give a Woman Her Freewill Power & Authority over HERSELF & over that baby inside to HER NOT to Men trying make Laws to make have baby thinking they doing GOD some Favor to Look of GOD to gets votes & power in Governments. We need to let GOD deal with that woman on abortion NOT Men doing of sin & evil in churches & government. GOD BLESS
i can't fathom why people don't understand how to not wear a condom, take a pill or just not have segs at all to avoid being preg.....
Exactly.
Easy Rape. 1/3 of all woma have experienced some sort of sexual misconductt
"Segs"? That can't be a typo... How could you possibly spell it like that? What kind of keyboard are you using?
Re: "I can't fathom" - Now you know the problem, you haven't accepted that people are different to you, have different values, come from different backgrounds...
@Anon Ymous yeah Thanos snapped birth control away
@@gerrydonohoe2765 well shit accept me for being from Sparta and killing your sister's new born because he cried upon birth, cause its my culture and values.
"I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born".
--R. Reagan.
"Murderers are alive" -A dumb point.
@@daniellucas773 the more corect way to «transelate» it would be murderurs protesting against others murdering.
Great reminder of what a dumb comment looks like.
if you asked children alive who were born by forced insemination, I would bet that most would say that they are glad to be alive. Would that make it okay to force our wives and daughters to be forcibly inseminated?
@@LogicAndReason2025 are you saying is rape okay?
its the womens body. periodt.
i have major problems with this take because.There is another human there to.
The baby isn't the woman's body though..
This video is a great representation of how we can take a step back and be logical in the abortion debate, however I feel that they have downplayed the consequences of letting states make their own abortion laws. Physicians take an oath to “do no harm” to their patients, this is called non-maleficence. In states were state legislators have outlawed abortion, they have basically taken away a physician’s ability to follow this tenet. In many instances, abortion is life-saving healthcare. The red tape of these new laws has further complicated an already complex situation that many people find themselves in. Confusion surrounding these new laws is having numerous unfortunate downstream effects. Firstly, care is being delayed. In cases where a patient’s situation falls into the criteria that abortion is still allowed, physicians may feel the need to consult legal professionals before performing the procedure. This delay in care often places the patient at risk of life-threatening complications. Hemorrhage is often an imminent threat in pts who require a medically necessary abortion; this bleeding can be rapidly fatal. In patients that do not fit the criteria for legal abortion, they may travel to have the procedure done or not have decide to proceed with the unwanted pregnancy. Traveling to have an abortion performed carries an immense financial burden. Pregnancy and delivery pose substantial health risks that no person should be forced to undergo. The rates of complication are much higher for delivery than they are for abortion. In terms of the physicians that are now having to navigate this complicated legal landscape, there are increased levels of stress and burnout. The states that are passing these abortion restricting laws also have the fewest OBGYN providers per the NE Journal of Medicine. And these providers are leading in swaths. So these state laws that are so seemingly innocent are putting millions of people at risk for life threatening complications while simultaneously reducing the number of skilled professionals available to provide adequate care.
"You either hate weman or hate children" wdym I love both lol
Or hate both.
Just saw you sourced Planned Parenthood 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Did they help pay for this?
where else are they supposed to get the data from? they're the ones carrying out the abortions. I mean she could get it from Europe, but the numbers are the same anyway.
@@Google_Censored_Commenter data is fine…
I have the answer for abortion ...
It depends on the context
Murder depends on the context?
Mother who’s life is in danger: these are not abortions, theyre c sections and the baby is not directly killed, but sometimes the baby dies by itself because of a complication
Cases of rape: Punish the rapist. Not the baby
Cases of consensual sex: A woman accepted the risk of bringing a child into this world. The least she can do is not have it killed
No ir doesn't. Killing babies is wrong no matter what
That’s already miss information, it’s nonsensical to say something is done more when it’s illegal than legal. Crime is rampant now in all the places where crime is now overlooked and let go more people will do drugs if it’s legal, then if it’s on legal and more babies won’t die if it’s illegal for abortion.
I'm sorry but you didn't think this one through. We have other ways to discourage apart from just making something illegal. We have reduced tabaco by adding a very heavy tax. we can't add tax to something that is illegal. if a high tax works better at getting people to give up smoking than making it illegal then we wiould have more smoking when it is illegal.
I only consider abortion murder if it is done in an evil intention to wanted inflect harm and pain onto the fetus, I believe that women should have the right to choose what to do with their bodies, pro-lifers moan about it being murder but most them have never experienced childbirth nor pregnancy, not only that but banning abortion is just purely cruel, because that way you are forcing women into pregnancy and childbirth against their will, pro-lifers never think about the affects pregnancy has on a women, "the fetus feels pain when it's being aborted" and so does the mother during the entire 9 months pregnancy and childbirth, "if ki**ing a newborn is murder than why is abortion not murder" the newborn can breathe on its own and survive without being attachment to the mother and can at least eat and drink without the help of a placenta & the umbilical cord the newborn can survive without the mother attached to him/her whereas the embryo can't, it can't brethe on its own, it can't eat or drink on its own, it is surviving on because it attached to the mother, it is absolutely ridiculous the fact that people have the audacity to call abortion murder, the embryo is just a lump of cell growing nothing more.
If a women can choose to not be a mother and abort the child. Then a man who doesn’t want a baby can leave when the child is born.
He should be. In fact, if the state wants to save any baby, it should pay for it.
Exactly. Here's that argument in syllogistic form:
P1: If a woman has the right to kill her unborn child, then a man has the right to abandon his unborn child.
P2: A man does not have the right to abandon his unborn child.
Conclusion: A woman doesn't have the right to kill her unborn child.
Defense of P1: if "my body my choice," then "my money my choice" also.
Pro-aborts already accept P2.
So the conclusion logically follows.
@@IWasOnceAFetus Wrong. I am pro abortion and I don't think either parent should be held legally responsible for any birth. If the state wants a child to be cared for, then it is up to the state or the person(s) who chooses to. .
I also think assisted suicide should not only be legal, but highly encouraged. Soylent Green fertilizer!
@@LogicAndReason2025 you "think"? That's not how you refute deductive arguments. What you think is irrelevant.
@@IWasOnceAFetus You argued "Pro-aborts already accept P1" That is not true for everyone. Therefore the conclusion does not "logically follow." It is merely an opinion.
Also; rights are decided by vote, so what YOU think is irrelevant.
Abortion is not a reproductive right since reproduction has already taken place. The pro- choice to murder the unborn life of a child is not a right, it has always been wrong.
‘Life’
Its a group of cells
If you consider a group of cells equal to a life, then every woman should have a child one after the other because the eggs she produce are all lives
@@vitanera4032 A new human life begins at conception. Idiot
@@vitanera4032 It is alive if the "clump of cells" are able to grow, no dead organism is able to breath and grow, if the fetus wasn't alive it wouldn't be able to grow into a full human baby, like use your brain for a minute.
@@What-jj9ow so were all 9 months older now?
@@luvs879 never said it was dead, if every life has value then hope your vegan, heck lets just not eat plants either or walk on grass
CSM why are the amount of abortion rates higher in restrictive countries? It literally took me 5 minutes to understand why and look into the study you referenced. The reason they're higher is because there is less/no access to contraception! This in turn forces people to get an abortion they otherwise would not have gotten. Plus that same study says in those countries with stricter laws, it's less SAFE to perform an abortion. CSM your lack of journalistic integrity is showing. Very disappointing.
Abortion shouldn’t be banned it should still be legal under certain circumstances if the baby isn’t going to survive if the mother can’t physically have the baby safely if the pregnancy is threatening the mother’s life or if the pregnancy was the result of rape those are real legitimate reasons for abortion where the mother would actually need it.
@@MEDKIT_THE_DOCTOR If abortion was killing, pro-lifers would defend it. Just like they defend all kinds of atrocities commited against children.
@@MEDKIT_THE_DOCTOR I don't care. I'm tired of right wing bastards who see children as property.
An unborn does not owe you or your cronies' bulshit. They do not have to take your bulshit.
Abortion is a blessing, and if it offends the old-fashioned nazis, then that's all the better.
Welcome to the pro life movement. We only want to ban abortion for convenience
Guess what? The conversation is not complicated because slaughtering the most innocent among us is about the most evil thing you can do. Abortion doctors should be punished and women should be given actual help
“Most innocent among us”
You are talking about a group of cells
@@vitanera4032 i am a group of cells. You a group of cells. If you found a person who was smaller than you, and therefore had fewer cells than you, would you then declare you are more valuable than that person?
Number of cells does not determine number of value points in a human
@@jannettowers6731 I am a group of cells with a brain activity,
I did not said more cells= more valuable,
Since giving birth can cause death and there could be complications (ex. Errors)
The being with a brain activity that is pregnant IS THE ONLY to decide if choosing to take the risk or do not continue the pregnancy (she has time until she can’t postpone for medical reason)
No one else, because she risk her life.
Actual life>potential life
@@vitanera4032 Oh so now it doesn't have to do with "being a clump of cells"? It has to do with brain activity? so now, if a person has more brain activity than someone, that person is now more valuable than that other person? So teenagers are more valuable than infants? Be careful what you say.
Driving could cause death. Drinking could cause death. Heck, even WALKING could cause death. But we shouldn't ban those things or allow people to ban those things, right? If something causes death less than 1% of the time, that's not an excuse to murder a child is it?
Also, the mother chose the risk when she had sex. Unless she was raped, which is less than 1% of abortions.
@@jannettowers6731 “oh so now it doesn’t have to do with ‘being a clump of cells’v it has do to with brain activity, if a person has more brain activity than someone, the person is now more valuable than the other person? So teenagers are more than infants? Be careful what you say”
I find it funny that every time you are trying to put words in my mouth, tell where is said more brain activity=more valuable, you can’t because that not what I said, what I said was that if a group of cells have brain activity it is a living being, nothing about casts or gerarchy,
“DrIvInG CoULd CaSuE DeAtH, DrInKiNg CoULd CaUsE DeAtH, EvEn WaLkInG CoULd CaUSe DeATh,
But we shouldn’t ban those things or allow people to ban those things, right? If something cause death less than 1% of the time, that not an excuse to murder a child”
At this point I don’t know wtf are you talking about, those things when happen it’s a ACCIDENT, because even breathing can kill you, for ban those things you to consider pro and con, if the con>pro ban it, if pro>con let it stay,
Post a link where it say less than 1% of the time
“Also, the mother chose the risk when she had sex. Unless raped, which is less than 1% of abortions”
Source? Because I have one here that prove you wrong
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/
And even if she choose the risk, it’s her choice to abort, because it’s her body and her decision, no else
That group of cells is not a living being.
If you consider it a living being then a body of a person that died it’s a living being.
Ok, I am pro-life.
I had an abortion. It was the best decision.
@@sofiab.9129 murderer
@@HoleINFour yeah. Of a clump of cells. That doesnt feel pain. No heart beat. A worm has more Feelings. Btw, i was raped.
@@sofiab.9129 I am very sorry you were raped but would you kill some randome person just because you where raped
@@hazzerz she was premeditated into kill another human being that is the definition of murder
Why facts matter in the slavery debate
Explain your analogy.
There is a right and a wrong position on slavery. Just as there is on slaughtering unborn human beings in the womb.
This video is the equivalent of saying cotton production was more efficient when slavery was legal. Who cares?
To say that legal abortion is “statistically safe” ignores the fact that 100 percent of fetuses are killed in an abortion. If facts matter then shouldn’t that fact be mentioned? It’s like saying owners of slaves are statistically wealthier than non slave owners without mentioning that the slaves are held in bondage
Fetuses aren't conciouss
@@john-us4zwso what?
we'll make it illegal one day, guys!
I don't care if the abortion is "safe" for the woman. It's not safe for the child that the abortion doctor is slaughtering. That's like if I said I was against hunting tigers because they're endangered and someone replied, "Oh, but it's safe for the hunter." I DON'T CARE. Stop ignoring the murder victims!
Also, saying "Abortion will happen even if it's illegal" is also a horrible argument. Adults get murdered still even though murder of adults is illegal. A lot of immoral stuff still happens even if it's illegal. And you can't say that abortions will automatically increase in America if we slowly make it illegal and replace slaughter houses with Help centers for pregnant women.
My position is based on facts...the fact that a fetus is a human being, an innocent one, and the fact that the intentional killing of human beings is wrong. It can't be justified. Anyone has the choice to murder a human life, but that doesn't make it the right choice. Ever.
Also, since condoms and most forms of contraception are ineffective enough that teenagers who use them have a high chance of getting pregnant anyway. Why do people think it's a good idea to hand out condoms and teach kids how to have sex, when all it does is make the teenagers think that they're being encouraged to have sex? and therefore risk getting pregnant? I'm not saying teach abstinence only education. Just don't teach about sex in schools at all. That should be up to the parents. Schools are screwing kids up by throwing condoms to them as if they're candy
True
Ok so,listen me out either we have a dead miscarriage or a motherless child.. Hmm lets think
@@BeanOnTheFlipside Are you talking about "abortions" that are performed when the mother's life is in danger?
@@sophiathesophisticated1383 yes
@@BeanOnTheFlipside because those aren’t actually abortions. People call them abortions but that’s the wrong word. When there is a complication in the pregnancy that is affecting the mother’s health, the doctors are morally allowed to remove the baby (vis c section) to save the mother. But there is no direct killing of the baby because that would be murder. Sometimes the baby will die when the doctor removes it from the womb, but thats definitely not the same as decapitating the child or sucking it out with a vacuum
I’m very sorry, but there is never a good argument for killing a baby. We have to call it what it is. This is murder.
Bullshit
Hmmm??
@Amiana Hair What did I say that was Judge mental? What did I say that was wrong? You tell me. Is there ever a good time to kill a baby? Second, when you kill a baby in the womb what do you call it?
@@user-dk9dx3xb2t You seriously need to do your homework. I’m not kidding. Do your research. At fertilization, the complete set of DNA is there. A new person has been created. Don’t come at me with arguments if you don’t know your stuff bro.
@@user-dk9dx3xb2t a fertilized egg is 100% a living human organism. Science and embryology clearly shows that from the moment of conception life has begun.
Good video, but didn't explain the stance of conservatives on Anti-abortion.
What percentage of women vote for Anti-abortion.
Or is it just an issue of social perception?
Still why have many big American shots have refrained from granting this right??
I wish if this video had answered that
Believe me, abortion isn't even a plan B for pregnancies. It's like a a Plan Y.
1:54 florida is banning abortion, even though this chart suggests the citizens have favorable view on abortion rights.
Life does not begin at conception. In fact, life begins earlier. Eggs and sperm are living cells and contain human genetic material with the potential to become a human being. Every time a woman has her menstrual period, and every time a man ejaculates, these lives are expelled and die. What distinguishes a zygote from an egg or sperm is that it has twice as many chromosomes (it is diploid). What is relevant for me is when the fetus begins to feel pain, since at that point suffering would be inflicted on a living being, this happens at 24 weeks of gestation, when the nervous system has developed enough, at this point the abortion should not be a viable option if possible
If you anesthetize an infant it won’t feel pain when you kill it. Should it be legal to kill anesthetized infants?
Also: Let’s not let the right deflect the talk about making abortion illegal with “what a woman is” talk. That’s so decisive. Wether or not you are a woman who could need an abortion, taking away the right to choose one, degrades the integrity of the civil rights and autonomy in medical care choice for all women. Period. If we allow this dialogue, pretty soon it will come for middle age and elderly women too. You watch. Any thing that involves birth control (a hormone medication) female hormones for women in menopause, hysterectomy, menus traction problems, the right wing will restrict it. Just watch.
If you do not want a baby, just do not get pregnant! Be smart! Simple!
You know, Babies almost has a soul but they don't, so if a Baby dies it's a mehhh
@@aosadoifbaiosdfna Re: "Be smart!" So everyone should "be smart", including teenagers? is there a button to press to become a responsible adult? And married couples who want a child but run into medical problems - they should also "be smart" and...?
Re: "Simple" If you don't like abortion, look the other way. It's quite simple - just ignore it. What business is it of yours to interfere with a woman's body? What right do you claim to imprison a woman? Are you accountable for putting a woman in prison, or do you want to scapegoat your responsibility to the state?
@@sergegarabiles7754 Nice to see the nihilists helping the debate by giving ammunition to the far right.
@@gerrydonohoe2765 Comparing to adults who can not have children is unfair. Having children is a choice, unless you are raped, which should not happen in the first place. The teenagers need to be more responsible anyways.
Saint Joseph, protector of the Holy Infant Jesus and terror of demons
Pray for us. . . . ..
Compromise: women can opt to give birth at viability
This video omitted to touch on the main area, and that is science. When does science say life begins. As someone who is Pro-life and Pro-choice, I need this information to make an informed decision. I can totally let go of my Christian beliefs about abortion if I could be convinced scientifically that at conception a unique life with its own DNA does not come into existence.
Yes the zygote is a unique form of life with its own DNA, but can't survive on its own, unlike other single cells like bacteria, and cannot be considered a "life form" - it's not organized into a human being. A cell has no moral value, you destroy skin cells when you wash your hands.
The "unique" part also has no moral value, being one of many combinations which are so large we can't comprehend.
Many atheists and agnostics oppose legal abortion because it is murder. Opposition to abortion isn’t based on Christian theories about when life begins. The sciences of genetics, embryology, and biology all tell us that a human life begins at conception. To kill a human at any point in its life cycle for convenience is murder.
Thou shalt not kill is of course a religious moral instruction but many non religious people hold to it too
If science is your guide you have to human life begins at conception. Then morality tells us the law should protect this human being from being killed for convenience
It’s an easy two step process. First science informs, then morality tells you what the law should be