@@SingularityMedia how dont those two correlate Why can we force men to pay child support if he doesnt want responsibility But its the womans choice to kill a mans child against his will before its born
Damn... you right on the money homeboy... I have 4 daughter's, I love them, my mom, n my 3 sisters... but I'll tell u the truth and so will they , this world is full of double standards and priveledges for women. Women are not forced to be accountable for anything.
daniel bermejo, Daniel what are you talking about, my mom was a single mom who raised 3 kids on her own, my dad was in and out of jail never had to pay child support because he had no money, I have a lot of friends whose dads just left and we’re barely there for them, none of my siblings have kids because we chose to, and no women don’t often have the best privileges so you can argue this point fruitlessly, it doesn’t work like that
Danny B I mean if you’re suggesting Josh knows he’s arguing about something entirely different from what Joe is saying, keeping in mind that Joe started this conversation, that would mean Josh is being disingenuous (which I don’t think he is)
This was the oddest conversation on abortion I've ever heard where at least five times I was convinced that each guy was on a certain side of the argument and then turned out to be wrong over and over.
You can fight against abortion and still believe it should legal. Here's why: We don't like killing babies but some females actually NEED an abortion. I think abortion should be legal but i think it should be RARE. What legal abortion has become is disgusting. Anyone for any reason can get one.
Cendy Pfortmiller Are you assuming that’s typical? If my wife was pregnant and she wanted/did abort the baby without my consent, I would file for a divorce. I think what you mean only applies to dead beats? I don’t think exceptions should make the rules. (I respect your opinion btw!)
@@rogerrabbitz9746 If your wife has an abortion without your consent, I completely understand why you would file for divorce. That violates the very basis of your marriage- trust, respect, love, etc. I'm talking about casual hookups where woops, the woman gets pregnant. If woman decides she wants an abortion, it is her choice. If the man doesn't want to have to pay for child support and isn't interested in raising a child, then he can make that choice too.
@@TheOracleMissy The state isn't gonna let any man off the hook on child support unless there's evidence the mother is getting support from someone else usually another man. The reason being that the state can't really afford to take the man's place concerning financial support. The will if there's no one else, but it is simply not that easy.
@@TheOracleMissy Ahhhh yes, the ol' "oops I had a baby because I'm irresponsible with sex and now I want to scramble it's brains and have it sucked out of my vagina because I don't want to accept that my actions have consequences" one night stand, aye? We've all been there before.
What the hell are you talking about? 🤯 clearly this conversation went over your head, because they aren’t agreeing whatsoever. Literally not at all. It just sounds so silly when someone watches a full video & still comes to the obviously wrong conclusion 🤦🏼♀️ don’t feel bad though... there’s about 7 people who all said the exact same comment as you, even before you did. I’m assuming you’ve read those comments & came to this conclusion based off that. 🤷🏼♀️ I hope so anyway!
Sid Vicious lol I think you may have missed out of part of the video? Or maybe just over your head? Both men believe abortion is a women’s right and that the gov. Shouldn’t have a say in what a women can do with her body/her baby. They were just nit picking all the details and that’s where they didn’t fully agree with each other but overall they both think abortion should not be restricted at all and totally up to the pregnant female
The question of whether or not men should be able to vote on abortion issues is ridiculous. Every man and woman now has a constitutional right to vote. Regardless of the topic. I'm not down with overriding constitutional rights and muddying the waters just to be as ultra feministic as possible. Jfc the daddies should have a say too
Completely agree, but it's one of the major issues with the pro choice (which I am) men can vote if they agree but none of they're pro life, both pro life and pro choice sides are nuts when you get into it though n arguments get crazy
I liked the way you threw in "JFC"! I've been trying to do that for a long time. Well done! I also like my "HTF" for "how the fuck". Like it? BTW, I also like your opinion on the issue.
@@renegadetherapper Every man who chooses to have sex with a woman does so knowing the consequences. He knows that if she gets pregnant it is her choice and her choice alone whether or not to go through with the pregnancy and he also knows that is she chooses to go through with the pregnancy that he will be legally responsible for the child monetarily. In reality, men make the decision to have sex with women knowing full well what the potential consequences so acting as if it's some kind of surprise that they don't get a say on what the woman does with her body after the fact is completely stupid. If they don't want to deal with the potential consequences then they shouldn't 'choose' to have sex. The daddies are dealing with the consequences of their actions.
@@ok-xx1wy he also is responsible for raising the baby, for being a father who must instruct and form his child. As a society, we agree that if the man decides to be an asshole and run off, or if the couple does not stay together at least, he must pay child support. This inherently recognizes the father’s responsibility within a legal framework, and it is a precedent we collectively accept. It’s his child too, is that not a large enough stake?
His whole point is to bring out the discussion, and let the guest determine their position ... on the other hand, Rogan is a live and let live guy beyond politics ..im glad he discusses things and isn't as jaded as some political hosts on either side.
Thats the whole point. The issue is more Jones' being the alternative to the official accepted media narrative , and consensus being built around - yeah he's a cool guy (but he's crazy) Very important to be with the crowd. Social relevance is everything to "credibility ."
Actually from the moment of conception, which is when a woman's egg is fertilized by a man's sperm, life is created and that life is a human child with the potential to be born and live their life the same as you. The value of human life is not based on how big or old you are. The Constitution clearly states that EVERY human person has the right to life. The most basic right of any and all humans is the right to be born.
@@Obsessedwith.alenah uh it's two cells, a sperm cell is a sperm cell. A "fetus", baby, is a sperm cell and an egg cell that becomes one and then multiplies. So it's not "just" a sperm cell?
That's literally asserting dominance that's all i always pick up if someone is able to it to me even when just chatting if so i know the person is a very dominant man just like joe most people don't have that in them and Joe here does.
It should be viewed as a conversation between 2 regular guys sharing their opinions. Some people here hold Joe as some sort of intellectual. You have to understand, the stuff that comes out of Joe’s mouth on his podcast, 99% of the time is some recycled opinions from people he considers intellectuals. Plus, Joe’s opinions vary depending on who’s sitting on the other side of that table.
He said that men have no stake in the decision, even though men have 18 years of child support IF even have the option. I am pro life, but men should be in the conversation. They should be able to opt out, if women can opt out. (Again, I think both should grow up and raise the baby)
Yea. Im pro abortion but im surprised joe is unclear about his premise. The democratic process should allow us to discuss, debate and converse about abortion, regardless of identity than via vote as to if aborting a 6 week year old clump of cells is murder.... Dont see how u can say only women can vote on this issue especially if your anti abortion and 200% think its straight murder. Id say allow women and their doctor to make w.e decision they deem as appropiate period.... But if you steelman my opponents argument. I agree and disagree. I agree that if its murder men have every right to be able to vote and be part of the voting sector. But disagree that abortion before 8 weeks is murder. Post 8 weeks that's a separate discussion for another day
@@markbaker5599 Sounds like a smart responce. Id rather be hated for being unclear with good intentions. Think about why an influencer would respond this way...
@@Cuzzin_eth I don’t think it’s that, I can relate highly to his opinion. He sees both sides, but neither are 100% right. There’s middle ground for almost every argument and that’s usually the right choice
I enjoy a lot of the conversations joe has on here and the issues he picks and doesn’t just bring on people that agree with him, but you can tell when he knows when he about to get in a spot where they gonna school him and he slides right out of it and agrees to disagree without saying that lol he not dumb
As long as abortion is publicly funded men have say in it. You can't simultaneously say "this has nothing to do with you" and "you have to pay for this". It makes no sense.
gt0sold1er It's also ridiculous to say that men have no stake in their progeny or issues of ethics, regardless of whose body is involved in ethics. Women murdering other women is illegal and men decided that, no issues there. Women love to tell us what to do but feminists don't want men to ever to tell women what to do.
yeah i totally agree. he want on a weird tangent about abortion accessibility not having a racial context and i dont even know what that had to do with the argument that the other guy was saying. idek what he was arguing for. it seemed like the other guy made the point I think joe was trying to make lol
PigIron BigIron that’s why I love him. His standup is okay. Not my cup of tea. But he’s got the perfect personality for interviewing and he also interviews people on the left and right.
Mike Bready -- That's really unfair. He genuinely tries to understand other human beings and the weird shit that goes on in this universe. He's not the smartest person, nor does he claim to be, but he's grown as a person into a man who is more empathetic, open-minded, and generally more kind to others. He's not the simple-minded idiot you're painting him to be and he's made further progress being a better human being than a good majority of the people on this planet. I don't accept your viewpoint and reject your opinion.
We are life on earth. Religion has duped many into believing that humans are superior and all that matters. Therefore, we tend to identify as human rather than simply life. There is no right or wrong. No God to teach us. We make our own rules and draw our own lines. We must kill and consume life to live. Food chain. This subject is a tough one. Realistically speaking, eating an egg is so much more fowl than having an abortion, but we've been raised not to care about other life. Women should have a bigger say culturally, but morally this is a human debate.
Not being allowed to take drugs and alcohol while pregnant because it's damaging to the baby is controlling what a woman can do with their bodies to. Is that okay?
Laura taking illegal drugs is always illegal, as for alcohol in the u.s. there's no federal law but there are laws at other levels like certain states. A quick Google search will show you that
Laura Actually when you're near giving birth the hospital does blood tests and if you have drugs or alcohol in your system the state will take custody of the baby and the woman will be charged with various child endangerment cases.
Muse Russell23 why are more ppl not upvoting this comment? You make a seriously good point that I never considered. So women can hold these 2 thoughts, I won’t do drugs or drink alcohol while pregnant cause it’s bad for the baby, but I can abort it if I don’t want it cause it’s not a baby yet.
"do you think its problematic that a guy should be able to make laws about women" the answer is : NO. If the guy is right, has science to back his argument, then he is not suddenly wrong for having a penis instead of a vagina.
The same is true for the flip, I have no issue with a woman talking about a male problem. Joe is also wrong that men have no stake, a potential father certainly has a stake.
no i don't actually. When I was in college i used to say "Im personally pro life but i believe in pro choice". But the more i look at the issue there is no intellectual consistency with it. You either think it is a cluster of cells the entire pregnancy or you think it is a human organism that deserves to live. If you pick the latter than killing it makes it murder whether its 24 weeks or 24 years.
Murder is a social construct. A woman can't possibly murder her baby before it's born. That isn't my opinion. What defines civilization is "a system of shared values and customs". Capital punishment may be viewed as murder or justice for the offense of murder. So, a group organizing themselves to establish the boundaries they agree on can claim abortion is murder. But there is no society before the agnatic bond (mother and viable child). How small can a society be? Two people: mother and child. Two people sharing language, customs, acquisition and distribution of required resources constitute a society. They can even decide to call abortion murder. As long as the accuser has been out of the womb long enough to turn around and point a finger (in the prescribed custom of the group).
Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws that punish people from murdering a pregnant woman by charging the murderer for two counts of murder: The mother and "child in uterus". So the majority of society has deemed it murder if someone (other than the mother) murders it but not if the mother does it.
Dr Shahoo -I'd repeat the situation I gave on another thread: you're told your newborn baby is grossly malformed, existing in a vegetative state and agonizing in excruciating pain that it will never recover from. It does happen! Is there no situation where you could justify infanticide?
That’s how difficult discussions are supposed to work. If you did your heels in, no one gets anywhere. I think you’re saying that they change their positions and act like they haven’t and that’s definitely annoying
Yeah but the man has a choice whether or not to deal with the situation. The woman has to make a choice one way or the other, whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term, etc. And I’m sorry but nine times out of 10 it’s a woman getting up 20 times a night to feed a screaming newborn and the one having the huge toll taken on her body by pregnancy, childbirth, and breast-feeding. It can be a wonderful thing if you want it and plan for it, but that doesn’t make it easier. And if it’s not something you wanted in the first place…
@@liamsmom6177 how about the guy who has to wake up at 5 in the morning to go cut grass for 10 hours making just a few bucks over minimum wage to never see his children?
@@Cryptogram44 It was just really conspicuous. He didn't say it even once before that. He was saying embryo. It wasn't until after hearing Josh say blastocyst that he started saying it, and he kept saying it. And he really did seem to enjoy it, which is why it's funny.
Fascinating stuff going on here. Zepps is asking the exact right questions and reaching the abominable conclusion that infanticide is morally justifiable. What he's showing, actually, is something that pro-life philosophers have known for years. The only reasonable standard for determining the right to life is that a human has the right to life from the moment of conception. There is no other reasonable argument you can make. Zepps knows this, which is why he believes that infanticide is justifiable, because there's no morally significant difference between an unborn child a minute before birth and a minute after birth. What you're seeing is the, for lack of a better word, evil philosophical underpinnings behind the abortion movement. If you believe abortion is morally justifiable, you are either a) unstudied in the philosophical arguments regarding abortion, as is the case with Joe, or b) morally insane, as with Peter Singer and his acolyte Josh Zepps. That they can say, with a straight face, that killing babies, actual born children, is morally okay, should give us all pause.
Yes I was thinking the same thing. Like it’s so sick and jaw dropping to hear Josh say it, but at the exact same time very refreshing to hear someone be philosophically consistent- it’s absolutely the logical conclusion of that worldview.
@@daseanclark5462 Oh my goodness im glad im not the only one who sees the consistency of Josh Zepps argument on abortion. The only logical conclusion of the pro choice ideology. Its horrifying to think about
so many pro life people here, how do you all believe that abortion should be illegal? thats nuts. 1/75 pregnancies ends in the death of the mother. say someone's life were at risk and you could save them, but in order to save them there was a one percent chance youd die. do you think you should be legally required to save them?
@@atlas9k965 Making abortion illegal is saying that due to an uncontrollable event, the women is required to risk her life to attempt to save another. That standard is not held with the day to day life we all live, imagine living in a world where if you dont risk your safety to help others you can be criminally charged. Thats not fair at all. And thats what making abortion illegal would be doing.
With great power comes great responsibility and therefore abortion should be illegal, it’s murder, women have the gift to give the gift of life, just how the super powers have great power to end the world and have the responsibility not to start a war to end earth with nukes, women have power to give life and end it and therefore shouldn’t and should be illegal.
how is he terrible at this? You never explained yourself. Kinda sounds like you don't get this. Idiot's like you just like to comment and leave. Pathetic.
So a man doesn’t have a stake in it as long as the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy. She can literally do it without the consent of the father. But if she decides to have the baby then the father is legally obligated to pay child support because now he does have a stake in it? How is that for double standards.
Zepps was talking like he was in the middle until that point and then finally presented his sincere position; which is that he is for abortion (prior to birth) and murdering a baby (after birth).
Miles Hamilton I agree with abortion in most circumstances but you just blew my mind with that one. I’ve never thought of it that way if I’m being honest
@@queenbella4399 yep, it's a good point. The other one I've heard is some animal rights groups say people deserve jail time if they let a puppy die due to deformities at birth but are fine with babies being left on the table to die after a failed abortion attempt results in labor delivery. Or drowning puppies after their born is cruelty but waiting till a baby crowns during labor and then sucking it's brains out with a tube should be legal. Sorry for the graphic nature of the message but the truth is ugly
@@queenbella4399 That honesty is admirable. You should think deeply about what criteria is valid for determining the start of life. You'll find that with any criteria other than conception, you will be able to justify horrible actions (e.g. killing people in coma). I'm still pro-abortion but only if it's called pro-abortion and not pro-choice. After I could no longer deny the fact that abortion is indeed murder, I began to despise the pro-choice movement for their evil semantic trick. Of course, that doesn't apply to the followers who don't understand, but the PR-strategists that are aware of what they are doing.
I've listened to so so so many JRE episodes and never heard him once say that it was a bad word to use. I suggest you listen to Jonathan Rose, as it was Milo who originally said to not use that word.
I don't agree with everything Josh Zepps tweets, but he clearly had the upper hand in this debate because he clearly thought a lot more it than Joe and he clearly is a lot more factual and less emotional about it than Joe. Sure, this decision affects the woman carrying that baby more than any man out there, but that shouldn't take away the opportunity for any man to try and preserve life, be it his own or someone's baby.
I have to give Joe's guest credit, although I'm fiercely pro life, he is one of the few pro abortion folks that I've heard accurately portray the pro life view. That is very rare. Also, he is very consistent, as is Peter Singer. I totally disagree with him and Singer, but they are consistent.
the pro-life movement is merely a whataboutist construction of the republican party for the purpose of virtue signaling and tired oppositionism. truth is we've have the least horrible solution in place for decades and right wingers keep shouting about it because it earns them votes from stupid people/closet theocrats
The only props I give him is for having the courage to take the argument to its logical conclusion. Hopefully saying it out loud on record makes him rethink his entire position, but I doubt it...
Didn't shock me a bit . People are truly evil... I'll support abortion in certain circumstances.. me and my wife almost aborted our second because of risk to my wife.. we decided against it and it turned out okay. But in my mind that was a viable reason. A rape victim.. to me that's viable... But just for two people that had sex and dont want a baby.. nah... Get you a morning after pill sis.. if not your stuck with it
I don't think he actually believes what he says he believes. I think he took his stance out of the argument so it wouldn't be a strawman storytime hour. That way he could state the facts without Joe arguing his stance but instead argue against the facts. However, Joe seems to be completely hammered so nothing productive is taking place here. He made the point that killing an unborn baby and one that is born is equally moral/imoral without the "well you are just against womens' rights" stupidity.
It drives me crazy that in all these conversations nobody realizes that a mans sperm is in that womans body and he should have a say in what happens to his seed.
I was raised very traditional and religious and I am pro choice- as a mother who has had very serious medical issues in both of my pregnancies I hate how people disregard how complex these decisions are for a mother and adding shame and “murder” to the equation is very unfair. I am very grateful for my children but also appreciate I was given a choice during my pregnancies here in Australia without shame or judgement. It is a very grey area.
I feel like Joe was getting frustrated because he was feeling some of that CD some of that cognitive dissonance lol. right when he told the dude to stop interrupting was right when Joe was making the least amount of sense and he lashed out a tiny bit
Most men are too much of a pussy to admit abortion is murder. When they kill the baby it's 'cells' when PP sells the body parts they're 'human organs'. Be pro or anti but don't be a pussy and say it is what it isn't. Also women don't get over it. Sorry.
I think that abortion should depend on circumstances. If my 13 year old daughter was r*ped and got pregnant and we couldn’t get an abortion until the embryo was 9 month old, she doesn’t have to live her whole life remembering that awful experience and I feel like she has the right to have an abortion. Some might say have the baby and give it up for adoption but that experience of delivering a baby would be much worse for her as 13 year old girl plus having to remember that experience her whole life while having the baby. On the other hand , if a woman chose not to have protected sex or the condom broke as some might claim and she gets pregnant. She shouldn’t have an abortion and has to deliver that baby. If she doesn’t want the baby she can give it up for adoption because every choice has a consequence and nobody forced her. But if she was forced then yes she should have an abortion even if it’s 9 month old. ( btw I’m no expert on this, it’s just what I think)
I do think that a man shouldn't make the decisions on a womans body just the same as a woman shouldn't be able to make the choice on mens bodies if roles were flipped about getting vasectomies. Really refreshing to have a man stand up against other men about womans rights to abortion. We need more men like you! I dont believe anybody should fear loosing a reproductive right. This subject is very scary for alot of woman and very angering and it is very angering to hear pro-lifers or people who dont care to laugh and joke while debating on the side of anti-abortion especially those who do not have to ever fear those consequences. These debates and opinions will definitely help me with who to have respect for and who to support.
Josh Zepps really hit it on the head when he said both sides are insane. I do think that abortion is a terrible unwanted thing and nothing good comes of it. Now if people want to make that personal choice I don’t think there’s anyway I can stop them but I would want them to have better access to things that would help them. Abortion is a termination of a unwanted pregnancy. So make things that prevent pregnancy more accessible. (Education and health care)
Not always unwanted, and that definition doesnt refer to what we are talking about, we are talking about induced abortion. Anyways basically what you saying is big people killing little people is a persona choice for he big person and it should be legal and accessible to the big people so the big people don't get hurt in the process of killing little people and increase education and other stuff so the big people don't have that much reason to kill the little people.
I think lots of good things come from abortion. The biggest statistic is the reduction in crime. Surely we can agree that’s a good thing? Not only arguably for that child who would have a miserable life inside prison but also for all the hurt and destruction they cause the people who are the victims of the crimes.
I mean it’s illegal to do anything to corpse, which obviously has no potential for life. Surely it’s only fair that we keep that same energy towards a foetus?
I usually think Joe is being fair but he is way off here. Women having babies gives them no special say on if abortion is ethical. Men don't have to be able to have babies to have a say. That is ludicrous.
A woman consenting to sex which results in pregnancy and then wanting to kill her child out of convenience is what's ludicrous. Consenting to sex is consenting to pregnancy. Take responsibility for your actions. Your perception of body rights is beyond flawed.
Women's bodies should remain pregnant if we can determine that that is a life they are responsible for. Since they consented to creating that child in the first place. You don't get to dismiss responsibility for convenience, you are not more important than an unborn child. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too +Cynthia
Cynthia --Those who claim righteousness for protecting the unborn with no chance of enduring the situation they advocate are the equivalent of "chicken hawks" who rattle sabers for wars they won't have to fight!
Josh is more technically correct, and Joe is more morally consistent. Josh is not as morally consistent cause he can say: fuck it, you can just kill it if you want to.
It’s more divisive because Europe and Australia is far more secular/atheist than America is. And given its a hot topic in the religious camp, you you should expect it to be more pronounced here in America. Not a shocker.
Shit I would go off the rail to if someone says abortion should be legal up to 9 months and even after birth. Religion aside, if you don't want a kid adopt it. Problem solved..
This was one of the most obscure arguments I've ever seen. One of those moments when you get into an argument and forget what you are arguing about, but still remember you are in an argument. So you proceed to argue about something but something you were arguing about is nothing.
I've never heard an argument where I agreed with virtually everything that was said before in my life. That was magic. (Okay no I dont agree with terminating born babies but I can appreciate and respect the argument for mandatory care of a child. There should be options always, perhaps not so barbaric however.)
Joe is an enlightened guy and his podcast contains interesting content, but I was happy to read all of the comments flagging his ridiculous contention in this discussion. Women's autonomy is totally irrelevant in this. The ultimate factor, which the Aussie exhaustingly tries to assert, is humanity deciding WHEN it is murder. It's simply connected. Everyone has a stake in the morality of murder and this is an extension of that. Arguing that strictly women have the right to decide to terminate a human organism inside her body is moot.
You're contradiction yourself as the "it's a woman's body argument" is literally a stance within the morality of murder, thus totally relevant. You're also wrong when you say that "everyone has a stake in the morality of murder", they honestly don't most of the time(right of might) The attempt to give right of way to "arbitrary" cut off points is moot because the "humanity deciding" processes isn't some whimsical affair as lots of humans use science and logic to inform their arguments. It's not just an empty box you can put anything into, it's going to have to tick boxes if it's to be accepted and frankly, josh's positions (self admittedly) aren't popular. This makes the "muh body" arguments extremely relevant. It gets worse though, as his "incremental" (he used the word incorrectly) argument is ultimately a "right of might" argument and the "collective stake as social beings" is a subjective moral axiom that can easily be dismantled through raw might alone (violence monopolies). This means that in the same way one could just "decide and enforce" that infants are not humans, one could alternatively "just decide" that life begins at conception and proceed to force other views into political irrelevance. As prevailing attitudes contribute significantly to political might, who do you think would win a war of annihilation between pro-life child protectors vs literal child killers? So ultimately, joes kinda goofy stance of "man it's crazy complicated man" and "mannn" are actually vastly superior arguments to what the uneducated, illogical and functionally illiterate Josh is fielding.
The legality of abortion is partially an ethical and philosophical question. This aspect allows men and women who would never recieve an abortion for whatever reason the right to participate in the debate.
@@NinaSaneHFX You thinking you can take the life of your partners seed is indicative of YOUR imbedded greed as a woman. Stop thinking men are trying to take away your rights. That is not, I repeat IS NOT what is happening here. If you sit and look at this from a 3rd person view you will see how you thinking it's morally acceptable to say men have no say and what happens to THEIR half of the 46 Chromosomes that makes up a child is absolutely preposterous and is quite sad, truthfully. Please do not get married. Do not subject your idiotic ideologies to some poor man looking to bear a child.
Nina Abbas no women carry baby’s but both raise it. Both make it. Me. Definitely have a stake in the game. Are you crazy. If you don’t wanna carry it. Don’t have unprotected sex. It’s that’s simple. If the problems is carrying it for 9 months. Wrap your ole mans dick up. Problem solved! And it’s way cheaper. Lol. There is a doc to this dummy’s! Condoms. They work well you know!
Unfortunately, Joe is wrong on most things in this video. Also when he interrupts his guest and then claims they are interrupting him, that is so fkn annoying. But his guest stance on killing a live baby is ridiculous.
I think his point is that the reason its moral fine to abort a fetus is because it is not sentient or autonomous. his point was that even after birth baby do not become sentient or autonomous for years to come. for instance most people have their earliest memory being at around the age of three. so I think his point was that the baby even after it is born still falls under the morality umbrella and holds them and a fetus to the same moral standard based on their ability to think.
@@RedditStoriesAITAH1 I watched through the whole video and I think it's apparent to me that Josh is pro-choice while Joe is pro-life. The thing that makes it confusing is that they use phrases that are typically what the other side uses. For example, Joe says men don't get a say in a woman's body which is typically what pro-choice would say. And Josh says it isn't right to say life begins at birth control hich is typically what pro-life would say. Josh is technically correct and his phrases are more straight-forward than Joe's is. But at the same time, Josh doesn't have an underlying principle to say killing a fetus/child is wrong whereas Joe says it's wrong.
Bottomline if you want women to have 100% say on this issue then end the Divorce and Child Support Industrial Complex. If you want men to have no stake in this then the women are on their own when they get pregnant PERIOD
Men have a stake in whether a lesbian couple with 12 female children decide to kill one of those kids. Why? Bc it's MURDER. So how is it that it's a "medical procedure" if you stab it in the head and suck it's brains out while in the woman, but you do that after the baby is born and it's murder. Men, woman, and people of all races, creeds, and colors have a say in murder in a free democracy. I think the issue of abortion needs to be revisited.
Child support divorce industrial complex??? Wtf, lol!!! Maybe people should make better choices in life, rather then create an imaginary boogie man to blame it on? No ones forced into marriage or to have children. Man up, u sound like a baby
@geezusispan problem with that is you consent to pregnancy when you have sex without using protection or birth control. Pregnancy is the result of a deliberate action and the person making that action bares the responsibility for the results of their action.
@missconduct024 you are pretty ignorant to some of the situations some men find themselves in. Many Women will use children as leverage and there is no legal recourse for men to take. The system is set up to help single mothers. Very few single fathers get the same rights as their female counterparts.
13:58 should have just been the whole thing on repeat. Hurt my head listening to this and hearing Joe basically forming questions adjacent to the points that Josh was making the whole time immediately after he'd addressed the sticking points.
I'm not trying to justify this but uh-huh black people should over rule white peoples opinions on abortion right. 😒 Yes what I'm saying is wrong technically or morally wrong but but legally you can't accuse of of racism just like you can't accuse a drunk man of rapc even if it's technically rapc.
Why joe, oh why? The man agrees with you on the most important part of your argument, but has better points than you, so you get butt hurt. I respect you so much and idolize you as an intellectual which is why this video hurts so much to watch. But I still love ya bud. Other dude: 1 Joe: 0
You idolize Joe as an intellectual? I just have one question for you, have you tried DMT? 😂 Joe is dumb as a rock but he is entertaining that’s why I watch him
“Joe rogan is an intellectual.” Ahahahahahahahhahahaahahhahahahaahhahashahahahahahhaahhahaahahahahahahahahhahahahahahah. Hahahahahaha. Funniest shit I’ve read in years.
Great discussion. There were a couple of babies killed with state sanction in Belgium I believe. These kids were euthanased because they had a rare condition in which if touched their skin comes off. These babies never last more than a few painful weeks under these circumstances These babies where humanly euthanisaed. Not because they were not loved or wanted but to save them weeks of suffering. As a teenager I looked through a medical procedures manual used by doctors. I was shocked to find the procedures used to save mothers in labour when the babies head was to large to exit the birth carnal. This was clearly done to save the mothers life but right up to the day of birth doctors will kill the baby to save the mother in the west this is now probably rare due to ultrasound and thus the ability to know when to deliver via c section. But I too bridle when women claim the right to abort up to delivery. I would think a more reasonable position would be the right to abort up to the date at which delivering the baby is no more risky to the mother than the abortion. But happy to be convinced otherwise.
The disease you're referring to sounds like Epidermolysis Bullosa, the slightest touch causes the skin to tear off and blister. I went to school with a girl with it and she's in her thirties now. People do live to adulthood with it but not as long as everybody else because of infections etc. It's very painful but that doesn't mean you should kill babies or children who have it! They can still lead fulfilled lives and hopefully live long enough to see a cure. There's no cure possible if there's nobody living with it!
@@xgridlockx when they're old enough to make their own choice, they can choose to kill themselves, nobody else has the right to make that decision for them. And yes, people can have fulfilling lives in spite of extreme hardships.
I've never understood the argument that a man has no say... I am not for abortion and I'm not going to change my mind on that...the idea that I could impregnate someone and then have zero say on whether or not my child is born is a disgusting and infuriating concept.
Extremely refreshing to hear a pro-abortion person actually grasp that the issue is about when life begins and acknowledge that anti-abortionists stake their claim on the view that life begins at conception.
This is wrong. It is a matter of bodily autonomy, which is self-evident once proper reflection is rendered. If the government can tell a woman that they must carry a gestation through to term delivery, based solely on the mere _possibility_ that the fetus _might_ deserve full human rights, then the government can do whatever it wants to anybody for any reason, so long as the government does so in the name of protecting human rights. This is clearly a philosophically heinous position - we have acknowledged in western political theory that, basically, our individual right to autonomy of our own person trumps virtually any other right. To illustrate this one need to consider a few, but only a few, relatively simple points and a few relatively uncontroversial views. For instance, virtually nobody thinks that the government can forcibly extract blood from you against your will, even if there is a blood shortage, even if you have a rare blood type, even if it can be used to save soldiers' or sick peoples' lives...even though if there were a blood supply crisis forcible blood extraction of blood could theoretically save many lives, at very little cost and risk to the person being forced against their will to donate the blood. The forced donor don't even lose anything - their body will produce whatever blood they lose, and donating blood takes about 20-30 minutes and can only be safely done two or three times a year - that's substantially less time and energy and cost than 9 months of constantly gestating a fetus, followed by a hazardous delivery procedure, which come with permanent body changes for the mother afterwards, followed by a society that potentially has to raise the unwanted child to age 18. We don't even allow the government to force us to use our bodies donate our blood in the name of saving human life, simply because we *recognize* the self-evident truth that what I do with my own body is *solely* my decision and not subject to democratic vote - nobody who understands this relatively uncontroversial position could (should) turn around and say "the government may not be able to force me to donate my blood three times a year for 30 minutes, but it should be able to force women to gestate this fetus to term for 9 months and then deliver it and abandon it to the state authorities."
Lol yeah I like Joe, but he looked really bad in this one... Kept saying it's problematic and ignored the point which is that he doesn't want any men to have a say in it
If men can’t decide on the legality of abortion because of perverse incentives, then women who have had abortions should not be able to decide if abortion is murder because of perverse incentives. $50 says that one of Joe’s old lady friends has had an abortion within 9 months of meeting him, and Joe paid for it.
Wtf happened in this discussion, am I the only one that noticed that Joe just jumped to the opposite opinion almost like a nervous twitch each time Josh spoke or made a salient point
Corey Bridge he was consistent. It should be legal up until a point. Nine month old - no. First day - yes. Somewhere in between is where it changes and that's where he doesn't exactly know his stance on it.
A baby born a week prematurely can not be aborted while a baby the exact same age still inside the womb can be aborted blurs this line you're trying to make. At what age inside or outside the womb do you consider abortion to become murder.
Darian Willis, He didn't lose everyone. Some people would argue that cases of complications at birth that result in severe cases of mental or physical impairment, should be open to the parents' right to terminate the child's life. it's not my stance, but it is a valid standpoint.
Darian Willis, No he didn't. He's making a point that it's strange to think 'killing' a 1 week old baby that was premature (so let's say there was life for 31 weeks) is not debatable at all. and 'killing' a 31 week old foetus (still 31 weeks life) is debatable. They have the same life expectency, they are the same age and they are both human. In special cases (rare diseases etc) it might be debatable to 'kill' a young baby, just like it's debatable for us to discuss abortion. Ofcourse I (and probably him as well) am against killing 1 week old babies, but it is not something totally sick and not discussable.
If you care about babies you wouldn't have them. Read "We Are Creatures That Should Not Exist: The Philosophy of Anti-Natalism" By Professor David Benatar
Every generation before us has had it worse off in terms of quality of life and knowledge of reality. I personally value there decision, or more likely, there lack of sexual discipline, for my and others existence. The risk that our children will suffer, or that other species will suffer or be destroyed, is not sufficient reason to me to non-violently genocide the human race. As our knowledge and mastery of the physical universe expands, we can diminish the amount of human and non-human suffering in the world, and in time, we can resurrect extinct species and individuals. All that the existence of suffering should do with respect to our decision to procreate is be super responsible about it. Mankind is not conscious enough to commit to anti-natalism, which is why we create unconsciously. And when mankind is conscious enough to commit to anti-natalism, the policy will no longer be needed.
Farnhamification That is not a valid point. Physical and mental abnormalities does not mean you are a "good enough" to keep on going. People whom are blind, crippled, and this, that and the other thing are sometimes thee most amazing people. Stephen Hawking for example; Brilliant physicists and intellectual. If laws were implemented for enforcement of eugenics, he would be dead. There is no thing as a perfect human. With every human I can guarantee you can find at least one flaw in all of them genetically.
Tough subject I think developing a framework that is agreed upon and voted against of when a baby becomes human solves the problem of if and when abortion is moral. Talk of Terminating babies after birth is off the charts and shouldn’t be discussed
This was a very interesting debate but at least both parties were willing to have a discussion and both sides admitted they don't have the answer hence the importance of conversation
Great open intelligent discussion. I like how Josh Zepp says that you need to take an empathic leap to see where the other side is coming from and also that he is open to having his mind changed.
How is it problematic that a man can observe biology data and make a conclusion just as a good as a female and know when a life is viable and past the legal point of abortion.
Joe kind of talked himself into a corner on that one. It’s obvious that he has very strong views and opinions on abortion whereas his guest has put more thought into the nuances of the situation.
![ทัศนศึกษาโรงงานผลิตโค้ก [THAI/ENG SUB]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M9y-TJBNem0/mqdefault.jpg)
So if men have no say, then why do they have to be forced to pay child support?
tyler coffey Because ‘having one’s cake and eating it too’ is the standard position of these warped freaks.
Because the 2 don't correlate and your point is kinda silly?
@@SingularityMedia how dont those two correlate
Why can we force men to pay child support if he doesnt want responsibility
But its the womans choice to kill a mans child against his will before its born
Damn... you right on the money homeboy... I have 4 daughter's, I love them, my mom, n my 3 sisters... but I'll tell u the truth and so will they , this world is full of double standards and priveledges for women. Women are not forced to be accountable for anything.
daniel bermejo, Daniel what are you talking about, my mom was a single mom who raised 3 kids on her own, my dad was in and out of jail never had to pay child support because he had no money, I have a lot of friends whose dads just left and we’re barely there for them, none of my siblings have kids because we chose to, and no women don’t often have the best privileges so you can argue this point fruitlessly, it doesn’t work like that
Summary: Joe and Josh argue about two different things without realizing they are arguing about two different things for 20 minutes.
Ramazan Elsunkaev they arguing about same theme....different opinions...same theme!
eljokerjce from what I gathered Josh is arguing whether men can have an opinion on abortion while Joe is arguing whether men should have a say.
Only joe doesnt know uts a diferent thing
Joe is being very ignorant and comes across very ugly here
Danny B I mean if you’re suggesting Josh knows he’s arguing about something entirely different from what Joe is saying, keeping in mind that Joe started this conversation, that would mean Josh is being disingenuous (which I don’t think he is)
This was the oddest conversation on abortion I've ever heard where at least five times I was convinced that each guy was on a certain side of the argument and then turned out to be wrong over and over.
yep, totally agree.
This is my favorite conversation abt it that I’ve ever encountered
So you hate nuance and devil's advocate argumentation then, got it
You can fight against abortion and still believe it should legal.
Here's why: We don't like killing babies but some females actually NEED an abortion.
I think abortion should be legal but i think it should be RARE.
What legal abortion has become is disgusting. Anyone for any reason can get one.
That means they are master debaters.
When joe gets trapped by his own words he says... “I think what we’re talking about is a really complicated subject”
And he’s says things like, “it’s hard to have a conversation if we (meaning YOU) keep interrupting each other (meaning ME) LOL
3:44 no stake in the game? 18 years of child support payments is most DEFINITELY a stake
Men have the option to sign their rights away. Sign your right away to the child, pay no child support.
Cendy Pfortmiller Are you assuming that’s typical? If my wife was pregnant and she wanted/did abort the baby without my consent, I would file for a divorce. I think what you mean only applies to dead beats? I don’t think exceptions should make the rules. (I respect your opinion btw!)
@@rogerrabbitz9746 If your wife has an abortion without your consent, I completely understand why you would file for divorce. That violates the very basis of your marriage- trust, respect, love, etc. I'm talking about casual hookups where woops, the woman gets pregnant. If woman decides she wants an abortion, it is her choice. If the man doesn't want to have to pay for child support and isn't interested in raising a child, then he can make that choice too.
@@TheOracleMissy The state isn't gonna let any man off the hook on child support unless there's evidence the mother is getting support from someone else usually another man. The reason being that the state can't really afford to take the man's place concerning financial support. The will if there's no one else, but it is simply not that easy.
@@TheOracleMissy Ahhhh yes, the ol' "oops I had a baby because I'm irresponsible with sex and now I want to scramble it's brains and have it sucked out of my vagina because I don't want to accept that my actions have consequences" one night stand, aye? We've all been there before.
This is a great example of 2 guys who totally agree on the subject struggling to argue.
They don't agree. Or rather, Joe doesn't know what he is arguing for.
What the hell are you talking about? 🤯 clearly this conversation went over your head, because they aren’t agreeing whatsoever. Literally not at all. It just sounds so silly when someone watches a full video & still comes to the obviously wrong conclusion 🤦🏼♀️ don’t feel bad though... there’s about 7 people who all said the exact same comment as you, even before you did. I’m assuming you’ve read those comments & came to this conclusion based off that. 🤷🏼♀️ I hope so anyway!
Sid Vicious lol I think you may have missed out of part of the video? Or maybe just over your head? Both men believe abortion is a women’s right and that the gov. Shouldn’t have a say in what a women can do with her body/her baby. They were just nit picking all the details and that’s where they didn’t fully agree with each other but overall they both think abortion should not be restricted at all and totally up to the pregnant female
Joe Jack he’s got the sentence spot on just needed a comma
Joe Jack ‘two people agreeing on the subject, struggling to argue’
I feel like this is one of the rare occasions when the viewers, myself included, are confused and disagree with both Joe and his guest...?
The question of whether or not men should be able to vote on abortion issues is ridiculous. Every man and woman now has a constitutional right to vote. Regardless of the topic. I'm not down with overriding constitutional rights and muddying the waters just to be as ultra feministic as possible. Jfc the daddies should have a say too
Completely agree, but it's one of the major issues with the pro choice (which I am) men can vote if they agree but none of they're pro life, both pro life and pro choice sides are nuts when you get into it though n arguments get crazy
I liked the way you threw in "JFC"! I've been trying to do that for a long time. Well done!
I also like my "HTF" for "how the fuck". Like it?
BTW, I also like your opinion on the issue.
@@MrDANGitall HTF? haven't seen that one yet. Love it. Gonna use it forever now. Thanks!
Vote.?....this is open and shut.....You have no business in anybody else medical condition...PEROID.!
@@renegadetherapper Every man who chooses to have sex with a woman does so knowing the consequences. He knows that if she gets pregnant it is her choice and her choice alone whether or not to go through with the pregnancy and he also knows that is she chooses to go through with the pregnancy that he will be legally responsible for the child monetarily. In reality, men make the decision to have sex with women knowing full well what the potential consequences so acting as if it's some kind of surprise that they don't get a say on what the woman does with her body after the fact is completely stupid. If they don't want to deal with the potential consequences then they shouldn't 'choose' to have sex. The daddies are dealing with the consequences of their actions.
"a man has no stake in the game." Pretty sure that at least one man is involved in every natural pregnancy ever.
He wasn’t talking about the man who knocked the chick up
But a stake none the less lol
@@ok-xx1wy Yes, because 18 year child support is not a big stake....
PRAD0GEE a woman has to support the child as well but I can agree and say that is a big steak 🥩
@@ok-xx1wy he also is responsible for raising the baby, for being a father who must instruct and form his child. As a society, we agree that if the man decides to be an asshole and run off, or if the couple does not stay together at least, he must pay child support. This inherently recognizes the father’s responsibility within a legal framework, and it is a precedent we collectively accept. It’s his child too, is that not a large enough stake?
Joe has no idea what his own argument is..
God dammit bobby...
His whole point is to bring out the discussion, and let the guest determine their position ... on the other hand, Rogan is a live and let live guy beyond politics ..im glad he discusses things and isn't as jaded as some political hosts on either side.
Thats the whole point. The issue is more Jones' being the alternative to the official accepted media narrative , and consensus being built around - yeah he's a cool guy (but he's crazy)
Very important to be with the crowd. Social relevance is everything to "credibility ."
SuperOmnicron He's putting the mother before the baby
The devils advocate should be informed on the topic they are debating...
The funniest quote from this whole thing is when Zepps says “at least your consistent”
Had me laughing so hard 😂
"a person is a person, no matter how small" -Horton the Elephant 🐘
It’s literally jus a sperm cell
Actually from the moment of conception, which is when a woman's egg is fertilized by a man's sperm, life is created and that life is a human child with the potential to be born and live their life the same as you. The value of human life is not based on how big or old you are. The Constitution clearly states that EVERY human person has the right to life. The most basic right of any and all humans is the right to be born.
@@Obsessedwith.alenah uh it's two cells, a sperm cell is a sperm cell. A "fetus", baby, is a sperm cell and an egg cell that becomes one and then multiplies. So it's not "just" a sperm cell?
Joe "this isn't gonna work if you keep interrupting me, but let me keep interrupting you" Rogan
That's literally asserting dominance that's all i always pick up if someone is able to it to me even when just chatting if so i know the person is a very dominant man just like joe most people don't have that in them and Joe here does.
You know Joe is getting in his feelings when he starts accusing people of talking over him
seriously dude. what the hell was that all about. he usually just listens
@@MasterofLightning true but joe usually just does it naturally so here he had to push it a bit.
Hahaha. Joe Rogan revealed!
OMG the inconsistencies and broken arguments on both sides of this conversation make it barely watchable.
James alt thank Joe
right?? theyre each so back and forth on their stances it makes them both wrong and the argument dumb
Seriously
It should be viewed as a conversation between 2 regular guys sharing their opinions.
Some people here hold Joe as some sort of intellectual. You have to understand, the stuff that comes out of Joe’s mouth on his podcast, 99% of the time is some recycled opinions from people he considers intellectuals. Plus, Joe’s opinions vary depending on who’s sitting on the other side of that table.
How was Josh's thinking broken? It was extremely consistent
Joe is normally super on point and fair. This is one of the interviews where he's not and the guy he's speaking to is nailing it
yeah until he started talking about killing baby's with rocks after their born lol
FACT!
Putting race into it just because he thinks “old white people drip privilege” is fucking stupid, racist, and has zero to do with the actual issue.
He said that men have no stake in the decision, even though men have 18 years of child support IF even have the option. I am pro life, but men should be in the conversation. They should be able to opt out, if women can opt out. (Again, I think both should grow up and raise the baby)
@@Lumbeelegend pro life allllllll the way
I don’t understand how men shouldn’t have a say in a woman killing his child
Thank you and I mean that truly.
We don't care.
It’s a societal issue, we have a morale obligation to a sensible unselfish opinion
Yea. Im pro abortion but im surprised joe is unclear about his premise. The democratic process should allow us to discuss, debate and converse about abortion, regardless of identity than via vote as to if aborting a 6 week year old clump of cells is murder....
Dont see how u can say only women can vote on this issue especially if your anti abortion and 200% think its straight murder.
Id say allow women and their doctor to make w.e decision they deem as appropiate period....
But if you steelman my opponents argument. I agree and disagree. I agree that if its murder men have every right to be able to vote and be part of the voting sector. But disagree that abortion before 8 weeks is murder. Post 8 weeks that's a separate discussion for another day
This statement will go over a lot of heads 😂
Joe should be a host on the View. This would be a good audition tape for him.
Person: Hey Joe are you for or against abortion ?
Joe Rogan: Yes
Yes. I mean no. I mean, its a complicated question.
@@markbaker5599 Sounds like a smart responce. Id rather be hated for being unclear with good intentions. Think about why an influencer would respond this way...
@@Cuzzin_eth I don’t think it’s that, I can relate highly to his opinion. He sees both sides, but neither are 100% right. There’s middle ground for almost every argument and that’s usually the right choice
Hee hee - exactly!
I enjoy a lot of the conversations joe has on here and the issues he picks and doesn’t just bring on people that agree with him, but you can tell when he knows when he about to get in a spot where they gonna school him and he slides right out of it and agrees to disagree without saying that lol he not dumb
Joe : * Realising he has no counter-argument *
- "Hey, we keep interrupting each other, this isn't gonna work".
Joe: * realizing he is arguing the same point with a troll and satirist *
"Hey, we can't keep interrupting one another."
There, I fixed it for you.
It’s like joe was having a conversation with someone who wasn’t in the room
This was the most confusing conversation I have ever watched
Phew, I thought I was just a dumb ass. Thanks for your honesty. I couldn't tell what was what in this conversation.
that's because joe is the most confused interviewer here
@@cleesely DMT is known to do that to individuals
14:25 Joe gets put in check. Not my favorite thing to see, but a necessary part of an important conversation
I’m totally with you on this!
As long as abortion is publicly funded men have say in it. You can't simultaneously say "this has nothing to do with you" and "you have to pay for this". It makes no sense.
gt0sold1er It's also ridiculous to say that men have no stake in their progeny or issues of ethics, regardless of whose body is involved in ethics. Women murdering other women is illegal and men decided that, no issues there. Women love to tell us what to do but feminists don't want men to ever to tell women what to do.
gt0sold1er not publicly funded.
abortions are taxpayer funded quite a bit
As long as men are expected to be responsible for their offspring, they have a vested interest in abortion.
Jesus what point is he arguing.
Joe just wants a conversation. It's how he learns.
@jc no you
“At least you’re consistent.”
That smug ass look that says “oh yeah, I won this argument we both agree on.”
What is ... what side is Joe even on? His whole argument was all over the place
yeah i totally agree. he want on a weird tangent about abortion accessibility not having a racial context and i dont even know what that had to do with the argument that the other guy was saying. idek what he was arguing for. it seemed like the other guy made the point I think joe was trying to make lol
The natural result of drawing arbitrary lines about what constitutes a person. The line is always shifting.
You don't know Joe. He is presenting all sides of the argument. It's what Joe does.
PigIron BigIron that’s why I love him. His standup is okay. Not my cup of tea. But he’s got the perfect personality for interviewing and he also interviews people on the left and right.
He’s notorious for sitting on the fence because he doesn’t have the balls to take a stance and then defend it and deal with whatever blow back.
This is obviously a blind spot in Joe Rogan's thinking.
he's got a thing for people telling him what to do, that's bled over into this argument
Mike Bready -- That's really unfair. He genuinely tries to understand other human beings and the weird shit that goes on in this universe. He's not the smartest person, nor does he claim to be, but he's grown as a person into a man who is more empathetic, open-minded, and generally more kind to others. He's not the simple-minded idiot you're painting him to be and he's made further progress being a better human being than a good majority of the people on this planet. I don't accept your viewpoint and reject your opinion.
We are life on earth. Religion has duped many into believing that humans are superior and all that matters. Therefore, we tend to identify as human rather than simply life.
There is no right or wrong. No God to teach us. We make our own rules and draw our own lines. We must kill and consume life to live. Food chain. This subject is a tough one. Realistically speaking, eating an egg is so much more fowl than having an abortion, but we've been raised not to care about other life.
Women should have a bigger say culturally, but morally this is a human debate.
@@BenHerbivore I'm atheist and still believe abortion is wrong.
Brian Payton if you don’t mind explaining, why do you feel that way about abortion?
the white knight was strong with joe on this one
Joe Rogan: I don't own a bank so I can't weigh in on whether or not bank robbing is right or wrong.
Not being allowed to take drugs and alcohol while pregnant because it's damaging to the baby is controlling what a woman can do with their bodies to. Is that okay?
yeh but women chose whether or not to take drugs or alcohol....it's not illegal if they do....
Laura taking illegal drugs is always illegal, as for alcohol in the u.s. there's no federal law but there are laws at other levels like certain states. A quick Google search will show you that
Laura Actually when you're near giving birth the hospital does blood tests and if you have drugs or alcohol in your system the state will take custody of the baby and the woman will be charged with various child endangerment cases.
Muse Russell23 why are more ppl not upvoting this comment? You make a seriously good point that I never considered. So women can hold these 2 thoughts, I won’t do drugs or drink alcohol while pregnant cause it’s bad for the baby, but I can abort it if I don’t want it cause it’s not a baby yet.
yes if the baby comes out retarded as result, there should be some charges brought up
"do you think its problematic that a guy should be able to make laws about women" the answer is : NO. If the guy is right, has science to back his argument, then he is not suddenly wrong for having a penis instead of a vagina.
The same is true for the flip, I have no issue with a woman talking about a male problem.
Joe is also wrong that men have no stake, a potential father certainly has a stake.
no i don't actually. When I was in college i used to say "Im personally pro life but i believe in pro choice". But the more i look at the issue there is no intellectual consistency with it. You either think it is a cluster of cells the entire pregnancy or you think it is a human organism that deserves to live. If you pick the latter than killing it makes it murder whether its 24 weeks or 24 years.
Murder is a social construct. A woman can't possibly murder her baby before it's born. That isn't my opinion. What defines civilization is "a system of shared values and customs". Capital punishment may be viewed as murder or justice for the offense of murder. So, a group organizing themselves to establish the boundaries they agree on can claim abortion is murder.
But there is no society before the agnatic bond (mother and viable child). How small can a society be? Two people: mother and child. Two people sharing language, customs, acquisition and distribution of required resources constitute a society. They can even decide to call abortion murder. As long as the accuser has been out of the womb long enough to turn around and point a finger (in the prescribed custom of the group).
Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws that punish people from murdering a pregnant woman by charging the murderer for two counts of murder: The mother and "child in uterus". So the majority of society has deemed it murder if someone (other than the mother) murders it but not if the mother does it.
Dr Shahoo -I'd repeat the situation I gave on another thread: you're told your newborn baby is grossly malformed, existing in a vegetative state and agonizing in excruciating pain that it will never recover from.
It does happen!
Is there no situation where you could justify infanticide?
So Joe, this questions comes in 5 years later. Do you think a legislator that is not a father can legislate about children’s rights?
This is blowing my mind
They literally change stances on the subject matter
That’s how difficult discussions are supposed to work. If you did your heels in, no one gets anywhere. I think you’re saying that they change their positions and act like they haven’t and that’s definitely annoying
Josh is more technically correct, and Joe is more morally consistent.
Actually men do have a stake in the game, because every child has a father. It takes a man and a woman to make a baby. It belongs to both.
Yeah but the man has a choice whether or not to deal with the situation. The woman has to make a choice one way or the other, whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term, etc. And I’m sorry but nine times out of 10 it’s a woman getting up 20 times a night to feed a screaming newborn and the one having the huge toll taken on her body by pregnancy, childbirth, and breast-feeding. It can be a wonderful thing if you want it and plan for it, but that doesn’t make it easier. And if it’s not something you wanted in the first place…
@@liamsmom6177 maybe fir you but there are just as many father's are very much apart of the child's life
For *
@@liamsmom6177 Nope, men have to pay child support or go to jail. Women are the only parents with choices
@@liamsmom6177 how about the guy who has to wake up at 5 in the morning to go cut grass for 10 hours making just a few bucks over minimum wage to never see his children?
When Joe heard the word "Blastocyst," he was like a kid with a new toy. He just kept saying it. Haha.
Enasai he started saying it right as I read this 😂
gollygeewonkers it’s the term for it tho, what would you rather him say?
Dbot Music it was just funny how many times he said it - he seemed to enjoy it 🤪
@@Cryptogram44 It was just really conspicuous. He didn't say it even once before that. He was saying embryo. It wasn't until after hearing Josh say blastocyst that he started saying it, and he kept saying it. And he really did seem to enjoy it, which is why it's funny.
It’s entirely possible
This dude danced logical circles around Joe
Fascinating stuff going on here. Zepps is asking the exact right questions and reaching the abominable conclusion that infanticide is morally justifiable. What he's showing, actually, is something that pro-life philosophers have known for years. The only reasonable standard for determining the right to life is that a human has the right to life from the moment of conception. There is no other reasonable argument you can make. Zepps knows this, which is why he believes that infanticide is justifiable, because there's no morally significant difference between an unborn child a minute before birth and a minute after birth. What you're seeing is the, for lack of a better word, evil philosophical underpinnings behind the abortion movement. If you believe abortion is morally justifiable, you are either a) unstudied in the philosophical arguments regarding abortion, as is the case with Joe, or b) morally insane, as with Peter Singer and his acolyte Josh Zepps. That they can say, with a straight face, that killing babies, actual born children, is morally okay, should give us all pause.
Yes I was thinking the same thing. Like it’s so sick and jaw dropping to hear Josh say it, but at the exact same time very refreshing to hear someone be philosophically consistent- it’s absolutely the logical conclusion of that worldview.
@@daseanclark5462 Oh my goodness im glad im not the only one who sees the consistency of Josh Zepps argument on abortion. The only logical conclusion of the pro choice ideology.
Its horrifying to think about
so many pro life people here, how do you all believe that abortion should be illegal? thats nuts. 1/75 pregnancies ends in the death of the mother. say someone's life were at risk and you could save them, but in order to save them there was a one percent chance youd die. do you think you should be legally required to save them?
@@FillenNaymeer Obviously no. You should not be legally obligated to put your life at risk, I don't even know what parallel you're trying to draw.
@@atlas9k965 Making abortion illegal is saying that due to an uncontrollable event, the women is required to risk her life to attempt to save another. That standard is not held with the day to day life we all live, imagine living in a world where if you dont risk your safety to help others you can be criminally charged. Thats not fair at all. And thats what making abortion illegal would be doing.
This conversation hurts both the pro life and the pro choice movements simultaneously lol. I love Joe, but dude.
He’s usually at least trying to be intellectually honest. This was embarrassing
I think he did good you think you can do better being filmed and just freestyling thoughts. Its not easy
@@gammawave1739 Actually it's quite easy 🤣.
Gebdoe how so?
@@gammawave1739 Freestyling thoughts? You mean having a conversation? Oh yeah, super difficult lmfao
Love joe but he was terrible in this
How?
Chan Kamcellor I would explain but your leftist views will block out the truth
Chan Kamcellor my bad g I was stoned
With great power comes great responsibility and therefore abortion should be illegal, it’s murder, women have the gift to give the gift of life, just how the super powers have great power to end the world and have the responsibility not to start a war to end earth with nukes, women have power to give life and end it and therefore shouldn’t and should be illegal.
how is he terrible at this? You never explained yourself. Kinda sounds like you don't get this. Idiot's like you just like to comment and leave. Pathetic.
So a man doesn’t have a stake in it as long as the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy. She can literally do it without the consent of the father. But if she decides to have the baby then the father is legally obligated to pay child support because now he does have a stake in it? How is that for double standards.
Medical ethics and paternity suits are two different issues
I was loving everything Zepps was saying until 16:47
Zepps was talking like he was in the middle until that point and then finally presented his sincere position; which is that he is for abortion (prior to birth) and murdering a baby (after birth).
Yeah that's when I went to check the Early Life section.
We are quicker to call bacteria on mars, life, than a group of cells with a heartbeat on earth.
Miles Hamilton I agree with abortion in most circumstances but you just blew my mind with that one. I’ve never thought of it that way if I’m being honest
@@queenbella4399 I appreciate your honesty
It’s not about life, it’s about human life.
@@queenbella4399 yep, it's a good point. The other one I've heard is some animal rights groups say people deserve jail time if they let a puppy die due to deformities at birth but are fine with babies being left on the table to die after a failed abortion attempt results in labor delivery. Or drowning puppies after their born is cruelty but waiting till a baby crowns during labor and then sucking it's brains out with a tube should be legal. Sorry for the graphic nature of the message but the truth is ugly
@@queenbella4399 That honesty is admirable. You should think deeply about what criteria is valid for determining the start of life. You'll find that with any criteria other than conception, you will be able to justify horrible actions (e.g. killing people in coma). I'm still pro-abortion but only if it's called pro-abortion and not pro-choice. After I could no longer deny the fact that abortion is indeed murder, I began to despise the pro-choice movement for their evil semantic trick. Of course, that doesn't apply to the followers who don't understand, but the PR-strategists that are aware of what they are doing.
i like how Joe is fine with using the word problematic after telling other people not to say it
I've listened to so so so many JRE episodes and never heard him once say that it was a bad word to use. I suggest you listen to Jonathan Rose, as it was Milo who originally said to not use that word.
I like how Joe interrupts constantly and when he's interrupted he goes "Ok we can't interrupt eachother.."
Was literally thinking this.
That's right! Joe tells James Damore the Google guy not to use the word problematic
I don't agree with everything Josh Zepps tweets, but he clearly had the upper hand in this debate because he clearly thought a lot more it than Joe and he clearly is a lot more factual and less emotional about it than Joe. Sure, this decision affects the woman carrying that baby more than any man out there, but that shouldn't take away the opportunity for any man to try and preserve life, be it his own or someone's baby.
wow that went downhill after about 17 minutes when he just admitted he think it should be allowed to kill an already not even prematurely born baby.
I have to give Joe's guest credit, although I'm fiercely pro life, he is one of the few pro abortion folks that I've heard accurately portray the pro life view. That is very rare. Also, he is very consistent, as is Peter Singer. I totally disagree with him and Singer, but they are consistent.
the pro-life movement is merely a whataboutist construction of the republican party for the purpose of virtue signaling and tired oppositionism. truth is we've have the least horrible solution in place for decades and right wingers keep shouting about it because it earns them votes from stupid people/closet theocrats
@@pixelbath2131 I don't think I've ever read a better explanation. kudos
@@pixelbath2131 61 million dead babies since 1973 are unavailable for comment, now go and wash that blood off your hands.
teachdontpreach that is one of the dumbest things I have ever read and that is saying a lot in this day and age
Western Hunter valid point.
That moment Josh Zepps says "even if it does come out it should maybe be legal to kill it." Pure evil.
The only props I give him is for having the courage to take the argument to its logical conclusion. Hopefully saying it out loud on record makes him rethink his entire position, but I doubt it...
Agree. Made me sick to my stomach to hear that. He is obviously a very intelligent person, I was shocked when he said that.
Didn't shock me a bit . People are truly evil... I'll support abortion in certain circumstances.. me and my wife almost aborted our second because of risk to my wife.. we decided against it and it turned out okay. But in my mind that was a viable reason. A rape victim.. to me that's viable... But just for two people that had sex and dont want a baby.. nah... Get you a morning after pill sis.. if not your stuck with it
@@no.step.on.snek.2423 agreed. In your circumstances where it puts the mother in danger, I can see that. Glad it worked out for you guys!
I don't think he actually believes what he says he believes. I think he took his stance out of the argument so it wouldn't be a strawman storytime hour. That way he could state the facts without Joe arguing his stance but instead argue against the facts. However, Joe seems to be completely hammered so nothing productive is taking place here.
He made the point that killing an unborn baby and one that is born is equally moral/imoral without the "well you are just against womens' rights" stupidity.
It drives me crazy that in all these conversations nobody realizes that a mans sperm is in that womans body and he should have a say in what happens to his seed.
He loses his say once he leaves it in the woman.
He has a say as long as it's not in another body.
you lost this one joe.
I love this guys arguement. Stating the extreme position to prove that it doesn't matter at what time you choose, the action is the same. Brilliant!
Jimmy yea, fucking genius innit, I bet he doesn’t believe that also. Great theatery at play
Yeah let’s just kill babies with rocks….
Joe constantly interrupts the first half of the clip and then gets mad that he gets interrupted. Lol.
I was raised very traditional and religious and I am pro choice- as a mother who has had very serious medical issues in both of my pregnancies I hate how people disregard how complex these decisions are for a mother and adding shame and “murder” to the equation is very unfair. I am very grateful for my children but also appreciate I was given a choice during my pregnancies here in Australia without shame or judgement. It is a very grey area.
Murder
It’s still murder to end the life of a human being, regardless if you have medical problems or not.
@@SirCast999 what about when you bust a nut? Is that murder?
Lol it's murder
Murder
I feel like Joe was getting frustrated because he was feeling some of that CD some of that cognitive dissonance lol. right when he told the dude to stop interrupting was right when Joe was making the least amount of sense and he lashed out a tiny bit
Gettin some of that CD up in him, just millin about.
Most men are too much of a pussy to admit abortion is murder. When they kill the baby it's 'cells' when PP sells the body parts they're 'human organs'. Be pro or anti but don't be a pussy and say it is what it isn't. Also women don't get over it. Sorry.
Drew Genders lmao who the fuck are you to say women don’t get over it?
Caught that too lol
Joe's great, but like everyone he's got blind spots and gets defensive when he's wrong.
Raw Hall dude ikr he’s so close to understanding but just wont
@@LeFaisDoDo The other guy was reasoning circles around our boy... what you think of abortion?
@@rawhall1265 I love it. I wish I was aborted
He made a real mug of himself here and came off extremely aggressive towards someone who was agreeing with him
@@benniboii987 lmfao
I think that abortion should depend on circumstances. If my 13 year old daughter was r*ped and got pregnant and we couldn’t get an abortion until the embryo was 9 month old, she doesn’t have to live her whole life remembering that awful experience and I feel like she has the right to have an abortion. Some might say have the baby and give it up for adoption but that experience of delivering a baby would be much worse for her as 13 year old girl plus having to remember that experience her whole life while having the baby. On the other hand , if a woman chose not to have protected sex or the condom broke as some might claim and she gets pregnant. She shouldn’t have an abortion and has to deliver that baby. If she doesn’t want the baby she can give it up for adoption because every choice has a consequence and nobody forced her. But if she was forced then yes she should have an abortion even if it’s 9 month old. ( btw I’m no expert on this, it’s just what I think)
I do think that a man shouldn't make the decisions on a womans body just the same as a woman shouldn't be able to make the choice on mens bodies if roles were flipped about getting vasectomies.
Really refreshing to have a man stand up against other men about womans rights to abortion. We need more men like you!
I dont believe anybody should fear loosing a reproductive right.
This subject is very scary for alot of woman and very angering and it is very angering to hear pro-lifers or people who dont care to laugh and joke while debating on the side of anti-abortion especially those who do not have to ever fear those consequences.
These debates and opinions will definitely help me with who to have respect for and who to support.
Josh Zepps really hit it on the head when he said both sides are insane. I do think that abortion is a terrible unwanted thing and nothing good comes of it. Now if people want to make that personal choice I don’t think there’s anyway I can stop them but I would want them to have better access to things that would help them. Abortion is a termination of a unwanted pregnancy. So make things that prevent pregnancy more accessible. (Education and health care)
Oh wow, another man that wants children who were raped to have babies. Seek help, ppl like you are truly deranged.
Yeah keep repeating the same nonsense everyone says 👃
Not always unwanted, and that definition doesnt refer to what we are talking about, we are talking about induced abortion. Anyways basically what you saying is big people killing little people is a persona choice for he big person and it should be legal and accessible to the big people so the big people don't get hurt in the process of killing little people and increase education and other stuff so the big people don't have that much reason to kill the little people.
I think lots of good things come from abortion.
The biggest statistic is the reduction in crime. Surely we can agree that’s a good thing?
Not only arguably for that child who would have a miserable life inside prison but also for all the hurt and destruction they cause the people who are the victims of the crimes.
Unwanted pregnancy , that’s a very clever way of not acknowledging that there’s a baby in there.
Glad to see Joe is resisting identity-politics in regards to the abortion debate
Prince JellyFish did you watch the whole thing? He actually did push the identity politics
Jake Ybarra he's being sarcastic
Chase Borden i highly doubt that, there is no indication at all he was being sarcastic.
haha dont you get it!? your inability to infer sarcasm is the problem here. we should all know what people MEAN rather than what they SAY.
RE: *"Glad to see Joe is resisting identity-politics in regards to the abortion debate"*
One of these things is not like the other. #Doublestandard
I personally think as a man we shouldn't have a say, and the cut off line should be around when the baby is able to breathe on its own....
I mean it’s illegal to do anything to corpse, which obviously has no potential for life.
Surely it’s only fair that we keep that same energy towards a foetus?
I usually think Joe is being fair but he is way off here. Women having babies gives them no special say on if abortion is ethical. Men don't have to be able to have babies to have a say. That is ludicrous.
A woman consenting to sex which results in pregnancy and then wanting to kill her child out of convenience is what's ludicrous. Consenting to sex is consenting to pregnancy. Take responsibility for your actions. Your perception of body rights is beyond flawed.
Women's bodies should remain pregnant if we can determine that that is a life they are responsible for. Since they consented to creating that child in the first place. You don't get to dismiss responsibility for convenience, you are not more important than an unborn child. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too +Cynthia
I hate to be a hater but joe is an idiot and people think he is philosophical he is a bully
Cynthia --Those who claim righteousness for protecting the unborn with no chance of enduring the situation they advocate are the equivalent of "chicken hawks" who rattle sabers for wars they won't have to fight!
caseyjoanz There is no claim to righteousness but morality. We are talking about ethics here. Being able to endure is irrelevant.
Most confusing debate. They literally just switched sides in their argument. Wow.
I was thinking the same thing.
And Joe said to him "at least youre consistent"
they didn't though, they argued about to separate arguments (1st right to discuss/create abortion laws and 2nd right to abort baby/fetus)
Josh is more technically correct, and Joe is more morally consistent.
Josh is not as morally consistent cause he can say: fuck it, you can just kill it if you want to.
It’s more divisive because Europe and Australia is far more secular/atheist than America is. And given its a hot topic in the religious camp, you you should expect it to be more pronounced here in America. Not a shocker.
Holy shit JOE goes off the rails sometimes.
Shit I would go off the rail to if someone says abortion should be legal up to 9 months and even after birth. Religion aside, if you don't want a kid adopt it. Problem solved..
I don,t get Zepps retarded position of killing a newborn more than I don't get Rogan's problem with men legislating about aborting blastocysts.
Joe "when I'm interrumping, it's not interrumping" Rogan
"Interrumpting" sounds like cock blocking lmao
This was one of the most obscure arguments I've ever seen. One of those moments when you get into an argument and forget what you are arguing about, but still remember you are in an argument. So you proceed to argue about something but something you were arguing about is nothing.
I've never heard an argument where I agreed with virtually everything that was said before in my life. That was magic.
(Okay no I dont agree with terminating born babies but I can appreciate and respect the argument for mandatory care of a child. There should be options always, perhaps not so barbaric however.)
So you still haven't heard an arguement where you agree with everything?.... Also did you type the comment before you listened to the whole argument
@@flatlinerking I don't know cuz it's been 9 months and I don't care enough to watch it again lol. Shit disturber.
Joe is an enlightened guy and his podcast contains interesting content, but I was happy to read all of the comments flagging his ridiculous contention in this discussion. Women's autonomy is totally irrelevant in this. The ultimate factor, which the Aussie exhaustingly tries to assert, is humanity deciding WHEN it is murder. It's simply connected. Everyone has a stake in the morality of murder and this is an extension of that. Arguing that strictly women have the right to decide to terminate a human organism inside her body is moot.
You're contradiction yourself as the "it's a woman's body argument" is literally a stance within the morality of murder, thus totally relevant. You're also wrong when you say that "everyone has a stake in the morality of murder", they honestly don't most of the time(right of might) The attempt to give right of way to "arbitrary" cut off points is moot because the "humanity deciding" processes isn't some whimsical affair as lots of humans use science and logic to inform their arguments. It's not just an empty box you can put anything into, it's going to have to tick boxes if it's to be accepted and frankly, josh's positions (self admittedly) aren't popular. This makes the "muh body" arguments extremely relevant.
It gets worse though, as his "incremental" (he used the word incorrectly) argument is ultimately a "right of might" argument and the "collective stake as social beings" is a subjective moral axiom that can easily be dismantled through raw might alone (violence monopolies). This means that in the same way one could just "decide and enforce" that infants are not humans, one could alternatively "just decide" that life begins at conception and proceed to force other views into political irrelevance. As prevailing attitudes contribute significantly to political might, who do you think would win a war of annihilation between pro-life child protectors vs literal child killers?
So ultimately, joes kinda goofy stance of "man it's crazy complicated man" and "mannn" are actually vastly superior arguments to what the uneducated, illogical and functionally illiterate Josh is fielding.
The legality of abortion is partially an ethical and philosophical question. This aspect allows men and women who would never recieve an abortion for whatever reason the right to participate in the debate.
I didn't know I would ever see two people have an argument about something they pretty much completely agree on
Joe hates when people interrupt but he does the same thing 🤣🤣
Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa JOE? A MAN HAS "NO STAKE IN THE GAME"??? You don't have a "stake" in your children???????? You're my dude, but seriously?
stake... are you carrying that child for 9 months ... is your body recovering from labour... greed is definitely imbedded in men.
@@NinaSaneHFX You thinking you can take the life of your partners seed is indicative of YOUR imbedded greed as a woman. Stop thinking men are trying to take away your rights. That is not, I repeat IS NOT what is happening here. If you sit and look at this from a 3rd person view you will see how you thinking it's morally acceptable to say men have no say and what happens to THEIR half of the 46 Chromosomes that makes up a child is absolutely preposterous and is quite sad, truthfully. Please do not get married. Do not subject your idiotic ideologies to some poor man looking to bear a child.
Consider looking up the definition of "stake".
Nina Abbas yeah it's all about the woman.... Magically until it becomes time to pay for it.
Nina Abbas no women carry baby’s but both raise it. Both make it. Me. Definitely have a stake in the game. Are you crazy. If you don’t wanna carry it. Don’t have unprotected sex. It’s that’s simple. If the problems is carrying it for 9 months. Wrap your ole mans dick up. Problem solved! And it’s way cheaper. Lol. There is a doc to this dummy’s! Condoms. They work well you know!
Unfortunately, Joe is wrong on most things in this video. Also when he interrupts his guest and then claims they are interrupting him, that is so fkn annoying. But his guest stance on killing a live baby is ridiculous.
I think his point is that the reason its moral fine to abort a fetus is because it is not sentient or autonomous. his point was that even after birth baby do not become sentient or autonomous for years to come. for instance most people have their earliest memory being at around the age of three. so I think his point was that the baby even after it is born still falls under the morality umbrella and holds them and a fetus to the same moral standard based on their ability to think.
Andrew Hickman which is stupid, i understood what he was saying
@@johnburgundyyy yeah keep thinking killing babies out of the womb is okay LOL oof
Agreed. Spot on.
Thousands of live birth babies are killed outside of the womb every year due to botched abortions.
Josh is more technically correct, and Joe is more morally consistent.
The title is very fitting.
@@RedditStoriesAITAH1 I watched through the whole video and I think it's apparent to me that Josh is pro-choice while Joe is pro-life. The thing that makes it confusing is that they use phrases that are typically what the other side uses. For example, Joe says men don't get a say in a woman's body which is typically what pro-choice would say. And Josh says it isn't right to say life begins at birth control hich is typically what pro-life would say. Josh is technically correct and his phrases are more straight-forward than Joe's is. But at the same time, Josh doesn't have an underlying principle to say killing a fetus/child is wrong whereas Joe says it's wrong.
The size of a stake is determined by it’s level of replaceability.
Money is a refillable resource.
Health and time are not.
Bottomline if you want women to have 100% say on this issue then end the Divorce and Child Support Industrial Complex. If you want men to have no stake in this then the women are on their own when they get pregnant PERIOD
Men have a stake in whether a lesbian couple with 12 female children decide to kill one of those kids. Why? Bc it's MURDER. So how is it that it's a "medical procedure" if you stab it in the head and suck it's brains out while in the woman, but you do that after the baby is born and it's murder. Men, woman, and people of all races, creeds, and colors have a say in murder in a free democracy. I think the issue of abortion needs to be revisited.
men should also pay slightly less taxes so our money doesn’t go towards abortions.
Child support divorce industrial complex???
Wtf, lol!!!
Maybe people should make better choices in life, rather then create an imaginary boogie man to blame it on?
No ones forced into marriage or to have children.
Man up, u sound like a baby
@geezusispan problem with that is you consent to pregnancy when you have sex without using protection or birth control. Pregnancy is the result of a deliberate action and the person making that action bares the responsibility for the results of their action.
@missconduct024 you are pretty ignorant to some of the situations some men find themselves in. Many Women will use children as leverage and there is no legal recourse for men to take. The system is set up to help single mothers. Very few single fathers get the same rights as their female counterparts.
"Abortion should be legal til the age of 18" - My Father
A JobDunWell in any age
Thats not a bad fn idea. Genious.
@@brandonanthony9488 Jeanious
Glen tennis woooosh
Glen tennis that’s the joke going over your head ^
Men can’t opt out of child support for 20 years. If we are gonna be pro abortion for mother’s, then fathers should be able to opt out
13:58 should have just been the whole thing on repeat. Hurt my head listening to this and hearing Joe basically forming questions adjacent to the points that Josh was making the whole time immediately after he'd addressed the sticking points.
Best abortion debate I’ve ever heard. All points make sense, and it’s not black and white. We need more conversation like this.
I'm not trying to justify this but uh-huh black people should over rule white peoples opinions on abortion right. 😒 Yes what I'm saying is wrong technically or morally wrong but but legally you can't accuse of of racism just like you can't accuse a drunk man of rapc even if it's technically rapc.
Why joe, oh why? The man agrees with you on the most important part of your argument, but has better points than you, so you get butt hurt. I respect you so much and idolize you as an intellectual which is why this video hurts so much to watch. But I still love ya bud.
Other dude: 1
Joe: 0
You idolize Joe as an intellectual?
I just have one question for you, have you tried DMT? 😂
Joe is dumb as a rock but he is entertaining that’s why I watch him
Joe rogan's galaxy brain
“Joe rogan is an intellectual.” Ahahahahahahahhahahaahahhahahahaahhahashahahahahahhaahhahaahahahahahahahahhahahahahahah. Hahahahahaha. Funniest shit I’ve read in years.
You're a disgrace to think Joe Rogan is an intellectual.
@@idontdance9547 We have slipped so far down the I.Q scale as a culture that Rogan is what passes for intellectual now.
Great discussion. There were a couple of babies killed with state sanction in Belgium I believe. These kids were euthanased because they had a rare condition in which if touched their skin comes off. These babies never last more than a few painful weeks under these circumstances These babies where humanly euthanisaed. Not because they were not loved or wanted but to save them weeks of suffering.
As a teenager I looked through a medical procedures manual used by doctors. I was shocked to find the procedures used to save mothers in labour when the babies head was to large to exit the birth carnal. This was clearly done to save the mothers life but right up to the day of birth doctors will kill the baby to save the mother in the west this is now probably rare due to ultrasound and thus the ability to know when to deliver via c section.
But I too bridle when women claim the right to abort up to delivery. I would think a more reasonable position would be the right to abort up to the date at which delivering the baby is no more risky to the mother than the abortion. But happy to be convinced otherwise.
The disease you're referring to sounds like Epidermolysis Bullosa, the slightest touch causes the skin to tear off and blister. I went to school with a girl with it and she's in her thirties now. People do live to adulthood with it but not as long as everybody else because of infections etc. It's very painful but that doesn't mean you should kill babies or children who have it! They can still lead fulfilled lives and hopefully live long enough to see a cure. There's no cure possible if there's nobody living with it!
@@anaromello fulfilled lives? yeah right, theyre in torturous pain their entire lives!!
@@xgridlockx when they're old enough to make their own choice, they can choose to kill themselves, nobody else has the right to make that decision for them. And yes, people can have fulfilling lives in spite of extreme hardships.
@@anaromello not people with their skin following off. Its called EB i suggest you look up some of the people living with it.
@@xgridlockx I went to school with a girl who has it. I know exactly what it is.
I've never understood the argument that a man has no say...
I am not for abortion and I'm not going to change my mind on that...the idea that I could impregnate someone and then have zero say on whether or not my child is born is a disgusting and infuriating concept.
Me: *nodding along with Josh Zepps until **16:55** then* "Wait... wut!?"
I agree with him.
Spot on epicure
Yeah, that is exactly why God will judge His creation
Yep at that point I wonted to late term abort him....
@Jonathan Renteria he didn't switch sides, you are incapable of listening, I think
Extremely refreshing to hear a pro-abortion person actually grasp that the issue is about when life begins and acknowledge that anti-abortionists stake their claim on the view that life begins at conception.
Yeah the problem is that prolife people have all sorts of stupid beliefs that should be disregarded. They're religious people lol
Life does begin at conception.
The guy thinks you can kill a baby that has been DELIVERED
@@Breaker2005 Well sperm and egg are technically also alive. As alive as a zygote or embryo.
This is wrong. It is a matter of bodily autonomy, which is self-evident once proper reflection is rendered. If the government can tell a woman that they must carry a gestation through to term delivery, based solely on the mere _possibility_ that the fetus _might_ deserve full human rights, then the government can do whatever it wants to anybody for any reason, so long as the government does so in the name of protecting human rights. This is clearly a philosophically heinous position - we have acknowledged in western political theory that, basically, our individual right to autonomy of our own person trumps virtually any other right.
To illustrate this one need to consider a few, but only a few, relatively simple points and a few relatively uncontroversial views.
For instance, virtually nobody thinks that the government can forcibly extract blood from you against your will, even if there is a blood shortage, even if you have a rare blood type, even if it can be used to save soldiers' or sick peoples' lives...even though if there were a blood supply crisis forcible blood extraction of blood could theoretically save many lives, at very little cost and risk to the person being forced against their will to donate the blood. The forced donor don't even lose anything - their body will produce whatever blood they lose, and donating blood takes about 20-30 minutes and can only be safely done two or three times a year - that's substantially less time and energy and cost than 9 months of constantly gestating a fetus, followed by a hazardous delivery procedure, which come with permanent body changes for the mother afterwards, followed by a society that potentially has to raise the unwanted child to age 18. We don't even allow the government to force us to use our bodies donate our blood in the name of saving human life, simply because we *recognize* the self-evident truth that what I do with my own body is *solely* my decision and not subject to democratic vote - nobody who understands this relatively uncontroversial position could (should) turn around and say "the government may not be able to force me to donate my blood three times a year for 30 minutes, but it should be able to force women to gestate this fetus to term for 9 months and then deliver it and abandon it to the state authorities."
How can a man have no stake in the game??? I mean fathers are men! And men start as babies! Definitely stake in the game!!!
When ur about write to a comment but then realize it’s about a year old😂😂
This must be Joe's SJW alter ego Roe Jogan... "problematic"
😂😂😂😂
Lol yeah I like Joe, but he looked really bad in this one... Kept saying it's problematic and ignored the point which is that he doesn't want any men to have a say in it
If men can’t decide on the legality of abortion because of perverse incentives, then women who have had abortions should not be able to decide if abortion is murder because of perverse incentives.
$50 says that one of Joe’s old lady friends has had an abortion within 9 months of meeting him, and Joe paid for it.
OoWINDEXoO I notice a lot of people like yourself mistake someone entertaining a position for actively endorsing it.
Haha well put sir or madam🤣
I usually agree with Joe but he makes no sense in this conversation...
Zepps even goes as far to acknowledge it’s murder to have an abortion then goes on to try and justify that murder
They never discussed enough about how the baby would feel about all this.
i dont think it can talk
Wtf happened in this discussion, am I the only one that noticed that Joe just jumped to the opposite opinion almost like a nervous twitch each time Josh spoke or made a salient point
Corey Bridge he was consistent. It should be legal up until a point. Nine month old - no. First day - yes. Somewhere in between is where it changes and that's where he doesn't exactly know his stance on it.
A baby born a week prematurely can not be aborted while a baby the exact same age still inside the womb can be aborted blurs this line you're trying to make.
At what age inside or outside the womb do you consider abortion to become murder.
I caught that too.
I think because the other guy sounded so cruel about it. It made joe jump back and be like ok because of people like u we shouldn’t be able to at all!
When he said woman should be able to kill children after birth.. he completely lost everyone. Back to back stressful podcasts for Joe
Darian Willis, He didn't lose everyone. Some people would argue that cases of complications at birth that result in severe cases of mental or physical impairment, should be open to the parents' right to terminate the child's life. it's not my stance, but it is a valid standpoint.
Darian Willis, No he didn't.
He's making a point that it's strange to think 'killing' a 1 week old baby that was premature (so let's say there was life for 31 weeks) is not debatable at all. and 'killing' a 31 week old foetus (still 31 weeks life) is debatable.
They have the same life expectency, they are the same age and they are both human.
In special cases (rare diseases etc) it might be debatable to 'kill' a young baby, just like it's debatable for us to discuss abortion.
Ofcourse I (and probably him as well) am against killing 1 week old babies, but it is not something totally sick and not discussable.
If you care about babies you wouldn't have them.
Read "We Are Creatures That Should Not Exist: The Philosophy of Anti-Natalism"
By Professor David Benatar
Every generation before us has had it worse off in terms of quality of life and knowledge of reality. I personally value there decision, or more likely, there lack of sexual discipline, for my and others existence. The risk that our children will suffer, or that other species will suffer or be destroyed, is not sufficient reason to me to non-violently genocide the human race. As our knowledge and mastery of the physical universe expands, we can diminish the amount of human and non-human suffering in the world, and in time, we can resurrect extinct species and individuals. All that the existence of suffering should do with respect to our decision to procreate is be super responsible about it.
Mankind is not conscious enough to commit to anti-natalism, which is why we create unconsciously. And when mankind is conscious enough to commit to anti-natalism, the policy will no longer be needed.
Farnhamification That is not a valid point. Physical and mental abnormalities does not mean you are a "good enough" to keep on going. People whom are blind, crippled, and this, that and the other thing are sometimes thee most amazing people. Stephen Hawking for example; Brilliant physicists and intellectual. If laws were implemented for enforcement of eugenics, he would be dead. There is no thing as a perfect human. With every human I can guarantee you can find at least one flaw in all of them genetically.
Where's the full episode???
Tough subject
I think developing a framework that is agreed upon and voted against of when a baby becomes human solves the problem of if and when abortion is moral. Talk of Terminating babies after birth is off the charts and shouldn’t be discussed
This was a very interesting debate but at least both parties were willing to have a discussion and both sides admitted they don't have the answer hence the importance of conversation
Great open intelligent discussion. I like how Josh Zepp says that you need to take an empathic leap to see where the other side is coming from and also that he is open to having his mind changed.
The guy does satire and you are making him out to be some sort of intellectual.
If that is the case that makes joe rogan a philosopher
@@roechambeau8420 🙄
such a good and critically constructive conversation
Lmao
How is it problematic that a man can observe biology data and make a conclusion just as a good as a female and know when a life is viable and past the legal point of abortion.
Joe kind of talked himself into a corner on that one. It’s obvious that he has very strong views and opinions on abortion whereas his guest has put more thought into the nuances of the situation.