Do Our Morals Conflict, Abortion, & Bodily Autonomy | John - Florida | Atheist Experience 22.27
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- The Atheist Experience episode 22.27 for July 8, 2018, with Tracie Harris and Jen Peeples.
Call the show on Sundays 4:00-6:00pm CDT: 1-512-686-0279
Don't like commercials? Become a patron for ad-free content & more: / theatheistexperience
We welcome your comments on the open blog thread for this show.
► freethoughtblog...
TH-cam comments are at present disabled in our channel, to the displeasure of some. However, each video has a prominent link to the associated open thread that appears on our blog. In the past we've tried opening up the channel to comments, but we found that a very high number of episodes wound up being flooded with a combination of spam, long winded apologists, and various obscene or misogynistic comments directed at various hosts by people with an axe to grind. This seems to be the nature of TH-cam comment sections, in our experience.
We do moderate the blog, the same way that we moderate chat during the show, as well as comments on our Facebook group. For comment sections that are "officially" associated with our show (and, to a much lesser extent, channels that may give the unintended appearance of being official), we prefer not to play host to straight up ad hominem attacks and bigotry. As a general policy we do not block commenters simply on the basis of disagreement with our point of view. However, we do prefer discussion environments that don't actively chase off more reasonable contributors.
-------
The most up to date Atheist Experience videos can be found by visiting atheist-experie...
You can read more about this show on the Atheist Experience blog:
► freethoughtblog...
WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?
The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES
► www.atheist-com... (The Atheist Community of Austin)
► www.atheist-exp... (The Atheist Experience TV Show)
More shows and video clips can be found in the archive:
► www.atheist-exp...
DVDs of the Atheist Experience can be purchased via:
► www.atheist-com...
NOTES
TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Opening Theme:
Shelley Segal "Saved" www.shelleysega...
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal
Copyright © 1997 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.
"Was the genocide correct?" "Sure, why not?"
John...you are the reason we need abortion. We can't have more of you running around
A walking, talking argument for abortion; a pro-choice billboard with legs
no don't be like that. He got brainwashed, he doesn't sound stupid, and unlike you, he's actively trying to understand the other side's perspective
@@yvancluet8146 Yes he does, & no, he's not.
Ouch....... but I sorta agree
@@yvancluet8146 He's not arguing in good faith.
I'm yet to hear women call in about abortion, it's only been men so far. I'm keeping my eyes peeled.
*under his eye*
And ears.
Blessed be the fruit.
I'm sure thats intentional on the shows part. There are many pro-life women.
@@petezipardi4022 may the lord open..
Hm. A Christian who doesn’t understand consent. Imagine that.
What a condescending little turd. Around the 14 minute mark, Traci loses it and calls it pathetic! These 2 women could fart a more intelligent thought than this bird brain.
Does the separate being that's inside of a mother's womb have consent of you ending its life. I think not
@@wellitstrue1138 Just as you do not have the right to hook up a tube to somebody else and have your blood flow through their organs, A fetus doesn't have that right over the woman as well.
@@seanjones2456 You are comparing a unvoluntary blood trasnfer to a unique 100% human being... Next will be a rape theory....
@@wellitstrue1138 As long as it is violating a woman's body that is not consenting to the pregnancy, then the woman gets to make the choice. At least up until the point where it becomes an independent life that is NOT dependent on the woman's body to survive anymore, and ACTUALLY is a person in it's own right. In that case there is now two independent people, and they both have equal rights to life.
I hope there will come a day when religion is gone.
Unfortunately, as long as there are desperate people in bad situations (which there forever will be as long as we are humans) religion will always be a thing.
I hope there will come a day when abortion is gone.
@@mathildeyoung1823 I hope there will come a day when everyone gets a livable monthly salary.
@@jcarc5701 you mean everyone EARNS a livable monthly salary and the government assists those who cannot for a period of time until they can... (unless they are disabled). Until that day comes though it's not OK to kill a child (born or unborn) to make your life easier.
@@mathildeyoung1823 So you kind of get the point. That is your hope for yourself doesn’t apply to everyone. And by the way, a sperm is not a zygote, a zygote is not a fetus, and certainly a fetus is not a human.
Just minutes after arguing God has the right as the “Lord of life” to kill a child “for whatever reason” he then scoffs at the idea that Hitler was correct just because he had the power and “called the shots”
This AF
You might need to clean your ears. His point is, it's wrong that God killed people in the Old Testament but it's okay if we kill people here now. What is the difference between you in a fetus inside of a woman's belly? Genetically speaking? I'll tell you what the difference is, nothing.
Well, there is a small difference, Well. Developmental age. At one point we are all eggs and sperm, most of which are destroyed one way and another. something like 30-40% of all pregnancies end spontaneously, without the woman's consent or the fetus' consent or even anyone's particular knowledge. Is that a travesty on their humanity? As we get old and face death, is that with our consent? I bet it's not! Why do you think we had to invent eternal life and salvation? To pretend we can somehow circumvent the inevitability of our own permanent demises. We are as ephemeral as the butterflies...but a little less fluttery.
@@wellitstrue1138 Using genetics as a determinant is incredibly reductionist. What's the difference, genetically speaking, between you and a tumor in your liver? It's also nothing. So, genetically speaking, removing that tumor is murder.
Whenever it comes to the government, Christians will talk about how "absolute power corrupts absolutely" but they either conveniently forget when it comes to God, or they give insipid justifications about his "great understanding."
This is so painful. Really unfortunate that this guy procreated
Merp! You’re advocating eugenics.
It's honestly painful listening to both sides of this. I really don't care if someone wants an abortion, that's for them to decide and deal with later. I'm more concerned with the so called logic these two hold lol and the fact that I'm the only one in the comments section that points out their flaw is very undiscerning.
Bacon Sizzle point out the flaw in their understanding
He was annoyed these women weren’t as stupid as the poor dull woman that mates with him.
He is just realizing that he didn't have to have kids. lol
think about whats going on in his head.
"so you are saying i could have........"
He had it explained to him over and over and completely failed to understand a very simple thing.If, immediately after the call ended, he was asked to explain Tracie and Jen's position, i'm certain he would misrepresent them.
This could be a video displaying dunning krueger.
Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body. Though it’s possible for someone to have a transplanted organ that does not share the same genetic code as the rest their body, that transplanted organ does match the genetic code of the original donor. The same can not be said of an unborn child.
Right
he'd be too busy holding down his unwilling wife and thrusting into her his views on consent
Remember kids, John is just ONE of MANY people who think like this.....and vote!
That thought always scares the shit out of me.
When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.
And they vote for the idiots who pretend to think like that do. Easily conned like they are being right now.
People who think like this are overwhelmingly republicans...think about that
@@adas2409 They are pretty much all Republicans. Low information voters.
These conversations go so similarly almost every time. The caller asks a question then interrupts when they try to answer. Once they have answered, the caller gets confused and does not understand the answer completely, prompting more explanations of basic concepts. If the caller would just listen and have the ability to comprehend basic concepts, he might have a chance to actually argue his point.
Always a man too! Weird?
They don't want to listen. They just spout their perceived superior moral position.
@MrBosif95 - If the caller was able to do that, they wouldn't have called because they would have figured everything out for themselves.
Exactly, b/c the caller is not listening when the hosts speak. He is too busy trying to create a rebuttal in his feeble mind.
damn this guy is hard to listen to
It's always hard to listen to somebody when the truth convicts them
It's hard to listen to all of them tbh.
Poptartking 99 - Yeah, he is clearly a product of inbreeding and poor schooling. I fell bad for people this fucking dumb.
@@wellitstrue1138 - He couldn't convince anyone of ANYTHING except that inbreeding is clearly a problem, that the schools where he lives are horrible and have failed him.
I don't know what's worse.
• the rottem potato quality phone call
• the annoying voice
• the bad mental acrobatics
• the changing subjects when he's wrong,
• The really weak arguments
"now... are you reading that in greek or in hebrew"
That was sooooo dishonest.
"Why do care about innocent children dying in the old testament?" Wtf?
The best retort to that would be "then why do you care about women aborting their fetuses?"
"Some people having unprotected sex cuz they're idiots" the freaking irony...
“You mean...consent actions matters?” Yes John, CONSENT!
Did the baby have consent in having it's heart stop???
@@wellitstrue1138
My words exactly, even if I'm not on your side
@@wellitstrue1138 That's irreverent. Only the mother's consent is relevant because its *her* body that's being used. The baby has no right to her body without her consent.
@@wellitstrue1138 Even if I disagree with what was said on this show(I don't really like abortions) we both have to admit that all woman does is terminating pregnancy, now if that terminations results to fetus death is separate matter.
@@wellitstrue1138 What heart? At 6 weeks, all you're seeing on an ultrasound is some electrical activity in a region of cells that will become the AV node. There is no real heart to beat until around week 20. Sure, the cells that will become he heart are present earlier in gestation. But they do not show the organization necessary to effectively circulate blood around the body until week 20.
This guy is just another example of callers who simply don’t have the communication skills to have productive conversations.
Take it to fourth grade 😂 this man has a mind of a fourth grader
He doesn't get it.
Jon Quist he doesn’t have a uterus.
@@ThugByChoice - That too. But I know lots of other people who don't have a uterus, who get it.
The bodily autonomy argument is a bad one. They need to stick with the "It's not a human, so it doesn't have any rights at all", argument.
@SWAGGQUEEN200 I didn't make an argument, so your response is dogshit. If it has nothing to do with Bodily Autonomy....then why the fuck would the hosts of the show be mentioning a thing that is has nothing to do with?
@SWAGGQUEEN200 no response to Brad then? Lol
When the instructions from the bible doesn't suit their narrative " you're taking it out of context" "that's your perception of the story" how can you argue with someone like this.. its impossible
Jordan Peterson argument tactics.
I got into argument over the biblical conception of the universe, but it somehow shifted to whether the Bible encourages genocide. I pointed out the beginning of Deuteronomy 7 and this girl told me to read the rest of Deuteronomy to get the true point of it. So I did. And what I read only strengthened my original point. I seriously do not understand how some people don't realize that some statements stand alone and do not need context as they say exactly what they mean and they mean exactly what they say as there is nothing else to say.
@@gagedillon8090 the point is religion sucks the living brain cells out of people and impairs them to view & process bible passages as anyone else...
John just can't wrap his head around the idea that a fetus is violating the mother's body.
or that a woman is something more than a life support system for a vagina
Not really moron .
When she is the one who helped plant it there.
@@jasperhernandez7364 Nah, sex doesn't always lead to pregnancy. People who have sex for the goal of pleasure consent to sex, but don't consent to pregnancy.
John can't wrap his head around the *radical notion that women are people!*
I think this guy needs to be taught what’s autonomy means.
Because men (and I am one) can not understand what a woman has to go through in the process of pregnancy
He was taught for 20 minutes, and his brain was on short circuit the whole time and did not learn a fucking thing.
An Autonomy definition would help.
A lot of people, including those who use the word, don't fully understand what that word means.
As a man I am tired of men coming and saying what a woman should do with their body.
Regardless of whether it’s a person in the womb or not, someone does not get to use another person’s body without consent. It is NOT hard to comprehend
What's not hard to comprehend is that if you put a defenseless human being in a position of dependence on you then you need to BE RESPONSIBLE and ensure that human being's safety to the best of your ability.
@@mathildeyoung1823 What's not hard to comprehend is that life does not begin at conception. The sperm is not dead when it swims up to the egg.
@@mrsatire9475 Perhaps this will help in your education:
“gametes are human cells, but embryos are entire living human beings.”
Dr. Joachim Huarte and Dr. Antoine Suarez
@@mathildeyoung1823 Since it is a baby, let him adopt the embryo
@@mrsatire9475 people need to BE RESPONSIBLE and ensure the safety of their offspring, born or unborn, at least as long as it takes to hand them off SAFELY to someone else.
I am learning so much from you guys. I sincerely thank you for doing what you do.
@Lady Skeptic Same....
Adam Grotto- Me too! I totally envy Tracie's debating skills! She is so eloquent, and always manages to maintain her composure. There are certain topics that I refuse to debate, and THIS is one of them! I just really resent anybody who feels that they have the right to tell ME what to do with MY body! Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course, but they do NOT have the right to force their beliefs on other people. I would have lost it with this guy a long time ago! What a fucking moron! 😡
So you learned that abortion kills a human being and still support it?
@@elisapelaccia6484 Only a moron would believe that abortion is about doing something to your body. It's about doing something to the body of another human being (i.e. KILLING THEM).
As far as laws based on our beliefs by your "logic" we should get rid of animal cruelty laws. Those laws are based on our BELIEF that dogs and cats shouldn't be abused....
It's not the woman's body killed in an abortion though. Both men and women need to be responsible for their offspring, born and unborn. Neither should be allowed to kill them. Both should support their offspring - financially, emotionally etc.
I've been listening to the show since before I was an atheist and I never recall anyone saying "atheist only" in regard to any kind of get-together they've ever talked about.
It would not tax my imagination one bit that he misunderstood that as well. His comprehension is practically non-existent.
It's scary how many people don't comprehend what consent is😐
I’m not the originator of this but if men got pregnant there would be absolute no question about abortion. I hope I can remember Tracies analogy about rape vs consensual sex, makes it crystal clear to me.
Religious people say god is crystal clear for them......
Your first argument is hypothetical and generalises across all men.
@Jerry Penna
"If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." - Florynce Kennedy
@@YY4Me133 💯
Yeah and we would be probably forcing women to get vasectomies
Yes John.... A woman has rights....
Scary to hear how hard this is to understanding for religious nut jobs.
Do you think that a woman has bodily autonomy?
@@EvenGodsDie - That she DOES have bodily autonomy, or that she SHOULD have bodily autonomy?
Women SHOULD have full bodily autonomy. But with the way abortion is being regulated (and rape isn't taken seriously), they don't have it right now.
@@jonquist9950 if a person has the right to full bodily autonomy, it would make it completely legal to leave children to die on the side of the road. Or leave their children in parked cars with the windows rolled up when it's 100 degrees outside.
@@EvenGodsDie - No, because that effects the childs right to bodily autonomy.
Please don't start a disingenuous argument that you know doesn't make sense, just because you can't defend what you really want to defend.
@@jonquist9950 the bodily autonomy argument being made in this video is that a mother has the right to deny the unborn child the use of her womb, which will lead to the death of the child. The mother created a situation in which an unborn child is dependant on her womb for survival, and the mother then can decide that it's her body, and she no longer wants to allow the unborn child to use it, and that directly leads to the death of the child. That is no different than me walking into the middle of the desert, carrying a baby, and then deciding to deny the child the use of my body to carry it, so I just drop it in the dirt and walk off. In both of those scenarios, the child is dependant on a person for it's survival, and that person invokes their right to bodily Autonomy, and decides they no longer want to use their body to support a child, and the child dies. Nothing about that infringes on the child's right to bodily autonomy.
If I am going to die without one of your kidneys can I take one without your permission?
nancy white if the reason you’re dying is a result of my own choice then yes, have one of my kidneys.
Doug Royce it’s a joke. A fetus exists of your own actions and sustains itself from your own actions. Is it okay to drink and do meth while pregnant? Obviously not. Ask yourself why.
Your last comment exist either because of faults in your logic or being intellectually dishonest. Were you this interested in protesting the Iraq/Afghanistan war? @@grayson0916
Doug Royce lmao I support abortion right and wasn’t old enough to know what a war in Iraq was. Wicked comeback though. If the fetus shouldn’t be able to change your actions or life why shouldn’t you be able to smoke meth when pregnant? It is violating the woman’s body after all, apparently she owes nothing to the fetus.
You're not old enough? It just ended in like 2013! Are you 10?@@grayson0916
“The fetus isn’t violating her body, it’s a natural process!” YES IT IS violating her body because it is using her bodily organs against her will and living inside of her when she doesn’t want it there!!
Why are men....in this case "white" men, so fixated on this subject? Why?
Because the willful destruction of innocent human life is a problem.
Because their dominion over women has been gradually eroding, and they see this a chance to fight it.
Caller: it's not a fetus, it's a human and therefore a person.
Host: People aren't allowed to violate another person.
Caller: it's a baby and more than a person. It gets to do whatever it wants.
LOL. It's hilarious to me that this idiot would WANT to call in and be dominated.
Genetically speaking is a fetus different than a person. If so can you please explain. Don't worry I'll wait. I'll allow you to go on Google and do your research
I'm pretty sure that genetics don't indicate personhood.
It gets a chance at life, abortion takes that away.
@@rebekahplatzer6203 The sperm gets a chance at life, abstinence takes that away
You ladies are going to have to stop using rape as an analogy. These guys aren't getting it.
Instead, use a prostate exam as an example. Point out the difference in consenting for a doctor to insert a digit, and someone randomly sticking a finger in there.
La Bella
You'd be surprised how much people are able to "not understand" when it's convenient for them!
It's bodily autonomy, why is that hard to comprehend?
If the caller would listen instead of interrupting while assuming what he is being told this call could have been less painful and 10 minutes shorter.
He doesn't understand the difference between a fetus not being an infant and a child outside of the womb that can survive on its own. And neither side is picking up on that.
Because, women don't actually have bodily autonomy, as far as I can tell.
@@Wraithknight2 Why do you make a distinction between it being inside or outside of the womb?
@@EvenGodsDie
Do you have bodily autonomy?
@@davec-1378 If I am allowed to leave a baby to die in a hot car, then I have bodily autonomy.... Does the government have the right to force me to use my body, to remove my child from a hot car with all of the windows rolled up, in the middle of the summer?
Well, that went on for about 20 minutes too long.
10:38
Paraphrasing: "It's like when we say we annihilated the other team in a game. I don't think they really annihilated those people".
Wow.
That's some hard-core mental gymnastics.
Tracie and Jen, you have the patience of ten saints apiece. I was convinced that the person was a prank caller; I probably would have hung up on them, and I'm impressed that you didn't.
HIM, not THEM.
@@docwobbles Both are grammatically correct. I'm guessing you're uncomfortable with recent schools of thought about gender?
@@davidstorrs i think he pointed out "him" because the only ones who seem to fight abortion are the ones who don't understand how hard pregnancy is, of course this is not to say all people who don't understand it fight it, because I am a man and am strongly in favor of abortion
Doesn't the bible give instructions on how to perform abortions?
The commonality of these frustrating callers like John here is they are unable to listen and understand. He makes an argument, the hosts respond, he goes on to make the same point as though it wasn't already addressed. When they are challenged on their very argument's reasoning, they ignore the question. They aren't interested in or even able to have a dialog.
I'm a guy and this was frustrating to listen to.
When he realizes women have rights, he then tries to argue thats rights arent even real
"do you believe genecide is immoral?" um... who asks that question?
John: uhh.. which God am I answering to? I'm gonna need your access code for security reasons...
Body autonomy, HE CANT UNDERSTAND IT
He rather expressed himself clearly. He values life of a human being more than convenience. If for instance you're irresponsible enough to have unprotected sex, you're healthy and the fetus is healthy, then terminating a human life (of your own offspring, not some random life) to avoid inconvenience for 9 months doesn't look like a very decent behavior.
18:41 EXACTLY 🤷🏾♂️😂🚫✝️
It’s solely the mother’s decision! This caller is clearly slow, like many of his religious peers.
@davidblack741Maybe if you ate a bullet you could stop being so butthurt about this. Women can get abortions all they want, you aren't the arbiter of abortions.
lol trying so hard for the “gotcha” moment and failed miserably
With theists it is so often the case that they have to explain really simple ideas to them as though they were 9 year old children.
This needs to play on every tv in Alabama on a loop.
Television? That's witchcraft
I don’t know how people can get soooo confused about this.
Should you be allowed to consent to X happening to YOUR own body?? If Yes then everyone should have the same choice.
As long as a fetus isn't sentient and/or conscious, I have no problem on DESTROYING it with unicorn farts.!...!
That's why i'm pro-choice... the feelings that matter are the mother's... cause ..you know... she FEELS...
End of week 8. The embryo becomes a fetus, all structures present in rudimentary form.
Week 14 or thereabouts. “Quickening,” the flutter a woman feels in her abdomen that will progress to squirms and kicks from within.
Week 21. A fetus has a (very slim) chance of becoming a premature baby if delivered.
@@VYDZ Demonstrate that a fetus can be sentient and/or conscious (which is ridiculous imo) and i'd still be pro-choice.
Nothing has the right to live at the expense of someone else's health/body. Thinking otherwise is immoral and disgusting imo.
Find an argument that's against the right of a woman to have an abortion that is NOT religious non-sense and then we will talk ;)
The neural circuitry responsible for the most primitive response to pain, the spinal reflex, is in place by 8 weeks of development, this is the earliest point at which the fetus experiences pain in any capacity.
@@VYDZ And how exactly is showing that a fetus can have a response to pain demonstrates consciousness?
(We basically don't know what consciousness is... let alone what is or isn't conscious.)
And keep in mind that if this is your reason, you would also have to be against killing anything that has the capacity to respond to pain... I don't really know but, I guess that a lot of insects have the capacity to respond to pain...
Btw... I woudn't use the word "experience" pain... because it carries a lot of baggage that doesn't necessarily applies to this situation.
@@redmatrixx It depends.
Yes if the doctors say that I have practically no chance of ever waking up.! Take my organs to save as much people as you can.!
If my coma was probably temporary, let's say 9 months for example ;) .... then no.
Because it would make my family and friends suffer greatly unnecessarily.
(Does an abortion cause unnecessary suffering?)
If the pregnant person judges that the suffering carried by this decision is worth the result, then it's their choice imo.
I would not be surviving at the expense of someone else's health and AGAINST THEIR WILL....
So.... if that was an attempt to do an analogy.... then try again.! cause it fails miserably .!
Ok if men were the ones that got pregnant abortion would not be in question.
Exactly! Men would just suck it up and drive on without whining and bickering about not being able to kill their children.
No, most men would never go through pregnancy and childbirth. They’re not willing to have a watermelon-sized object pass through their penis. Nor are they willing to have a team of medical professionals touch their penis during labor and birth.
The Corruption
Men aren't even obliged by law to give their infant an ounce of blood to save its life, so what are you talking about?
Caller is ok to kill in self defense or war. So killing is not the problem.
Not his business, no matter what he thinks. Especially if religion based. Oh! Yahweh is the ultimate abortionist, according to the perfect book of morality.
It doesn’t matter he has a right to say want he wants
I remember growing up they would say the story where God hid babies from Pharaoh so he shouldn't kill him and bathe in their blood and God came and breastfed them... Believers out there you just need to pray God should give birth to all the babies that are being aborted case closed...
This "man" is like so many that post here....totally unable to comprehend that a woman's body is a woman's body.....HER OWN BODY, with zero input from ANYONE ELSE or their opinions. It is very clear, that when he says that "I just think", quite clearly he does not think. His opinion, to him, needs to over rule everyone else's opinion.
child birth is not an inconvenience, that shit is hard.
Yeah, its a bit more than just inconvenient. There are short term, long term, and permanent health risks involved with carrying to term.
Jen and Tracie's stance on abortion is the only philosophically consistent pro-choice position on the issue that I've heard. It's a position that acknowledges that the fetus is a human being and asigns it the same exact rights that it does to any other human being.
I know, so often the question gets turned into when a fetus is human or some bullshit
@@skindred1888Incorrect, the point is always "Is a fetus a person?" and the answer, objectively, is no it isn't.
No, OP, you moron, that isn't what happened here. A fetus doesn't have the same rights the rest of us do, if it did women would be charged with manslaughter if they had a miscarriage, and abortions would be universally illegal. Fetuses don't have the rights that we do, and they only have a tiny fraction of rights at all that are given only when their mother intends to carry them to term. They aren't protected by most rights until they're born, and none of them have the rights the rest of us have until they're eighteen. You're hearing what you fucking want to hear.
@NottherealLucifer We can sidestep the entire "is the fetus a person" question. Because going down that path leads to all sorts of thorny issues.
So I just grant that the fetus is indeed a person and go with the bodily autonomy argument.
Reductio ad Hitlerium. Every internet conversation which is long enough would call in Hitler as a comparison point.
Good old Godwin's Law.
I am so glad that I watched these episodes regarding abortion, because now it's better to argue using the idea of consent, because that is what is one of the reasons why a women's right to choice is so important, because if she didn't consent to having something (or rather someone) use her body, she should have the choice to terminate the pregnancy. I also have to take note that many men who call in, like in a previous episode, seem to be OK with men not having to be forced to give up their bodily autonomy, but women should be forced to. Misogyny is alive and kicking in this country, and it's scary AF.
As someone who supports abortion being a right to women I think you’re argument as well as hers are seriously flawed. The pregnancy is a DIRECT result of the woman’s actions (unless she is raped). Meaning it’s not a violation. It’s a result. Sex is in fact optional, especially unprotected sex. If someone falls off a cliff but you catch them before they fall all the way, it’s not morally justifiable for you to then let go because they are now violating your body by depending on it to get back up onto the cliff.
@@grayson0916 Having sex doesn't mean consenting to 9 months of gestation except under your bullshit patriarchal views. The conversation would be completely different if males got pregnant instead of females. You'd gain a thorough understanding of the meaning of consent and bodily autonomy shockingly fast.
@@emilyelizabeth8654
If roughly half of all pregnancies result in a male, isn't it a matriarchal society?
@@VYDZ lolwut
@@emilyelizabeth8654
What determines whether men exist?
How many fetuses will remember themself in the womb? Do they know they are a baby about to be born? Will they miss life? I don't think so. Will they know they are a unwhanted child? Might they end up in foster care or dumped in a garbage bin? Before u try to stop abortions try taking care of the babys of this world that already are born. When you've done that we can talk...
Erika Furberg good point
ANTI's cant accept this though. They are taught only to find fault, to scorn and ultimately convert anyone that does not align with their beliefs. I cannot fathom how the bible even relates to the topic of abortion but they somehow apply it....
@@missminti The Bible is actually very pro-abortion. It's not even a religious position to be against abortion; it's just pure patriarchy.
So killing the child is helping the child? I don't get it, explain please.
@@rebekahplatzer6203 there is no child. It's just the beginning of one.
John is not listening.
I feel like John refuses to think about anything in any detail past the black and white. He wants to just rely on religion
That guy was a joke 😂
Engaging with fantasies like religion actually inhibits your capacity to reason with logic.
I love their arrogance to tell you what you think. He is jealous that you can. He can't figure how that works.
the best way to learn to be an athiest,,,,,just listen to a thiest
Every time the caller heard the word "rape" he just automatically thought they were talking about the abortion for rape victims. he literally could not understand any other context where the word rape could be used.
Saying aborting a fetus is the same as murdering an adult person is absurd to an extreme degree. I have 0 respect for these pro-life people.
I think the phrasing (of violation) confused the guy, like I understand what you mean, but also I understand why he was confused
It must be made clearer that those that are pro-choice are against an abortion after a certain time has passed. I do not know anyone agreeing to abortion very late i the pregnancy.
Why not late in the pregnancy? Why should a woman have to give up her bodily autonomy then?
I agree. Horrific genetic diseases and birth defects often don't manifest until the 3rd trimester. Fetuses die in the womb usually by strangulation, late in the pregnancy. A bad positioning of the child could endanger the mother's life. Why should the mother be stuck carrying these pregnancies to term for no reason?
@@druidriley3163 Anyone that's done 5 minutes worth of research knows that most late term abortions are purely elective though. But hey, that's only about 15k a year here in America.
Listening to this guy made me forget how to do basic algebra
John, so righteous, and so obtuse.
You know further watching this video has actually made me lose all respect for you guys. Are seriously saying, that if you found out that the child that you're potentially going to give birth to had green eyes instead of your preferable brown you would be justified in destroying them? That is horrific, and John is right here. Regardless of religion or atheism that is obviously f*cking disgusting and I would like you to explain why it isn't.
Well done.
You missed the point.
Jim - the point you missed was that the reason is irrelevant TO YOU. It's not YOUR business WHY she has an abortion. MYOB. Most people I see who want to know WHY a woman has an abortion or wants to have an abortion is simply because they want to mind her business for her. They want to be able to pass judgment on her. It really chaps these people when they're told they have no right to know why she's having a medical procedure.
@@druidriley3163 Abortion is not a medical procedure. The practice of medicine is the treatment of an illness or injury. Pregnancy is neither. FAIL
@@joshotey2967 - Having gallstones is neither an illness or an injury. Is the surgery to remove the gallbladder a medical procedure or not? Try again.
@@druidriley3163 Seriously? Gallstones aren't an illness? That's why people scream and cry with pain and go to the hospital. Wow, just wow.
🤦 hes not understanding what theyre saying at all, amd they just keep saying the same thing and the discussion goes nowhere, and its really making me angry
Numbers 5:11-26. Literal instructions for abortion,right out of the bible.
its sad to be watching this after the over turning of roe v wade these religious people just cant help but take right away
I don’t know how you do this weekly. I barely made it to 12 minutes and had to stop. Don’t know if I can take the rest. 🤦♀️
The issue is that this guy couldn't understand that pregnancies are an actual violation of someone's body. The change the woman's body, feed off of it, live inside it, and can pose a danger to it. If you don't want to experience this sort of violation, much like in rape, you shouldn't be forced to. Simple.
~ Thank you, Jen and Tracie, for this archived video. ~ There is no man on this earth that has the right to force his will on any woman about what to do with her body in any way 100%. Cheers, DAVEDJ ~
Oh you must be confused. He wasn't talking about her body he was talking about a separate body inside of her body
Where in the bible does it state that abortion is wrong? Doesnt God pretty much encourage it when you start to get suspicious of your wife?
Pick and choose. Say it together now, pick and choose, pick and choose...
If a baby needed a kidney or liver and the father is a match, is he required to contribute his body to the survival of the infant?
It seems asinine to say a woman is violated by a baby that she put in her body. If u really wanna go that route she's violating herself.
Ah, so in your world, every sex act that could lead to pregnancy-even when protection or birth control is used-automatically counts as consenting to 9 months of physically taxing gestation?
Dense as a rock, he is.
I'm pro-choice but some of the arguments here were undercooked. Rights are more than a legal term, they are a philosophical concept that suggests a space of autonomy somehow intrinsic to the individual that cannot be infringed upon, even by law. A law(s) can be in conflict with a right and therefore they are separate concepts. Also, I don't know who constructed the "Fetus violating the mother" argument but it is a misuse of language. By definition, violation requires a moral agent breaking a rule. Unless it is an instance of rape, the woman is consenting to at least the possibility of pregnancy. In that case, the zygote, fetus, baby (whatever you call it) is either a moral agent who can make a violation or it is not a moral agent. If you give it moral agency (which a violator would require) it hurts your pro-choice argument. You'd have to call it an intruder or parasite in order to be consistent.
Write songs - the fetus is using the mother's internal systems without her permission. No differnent that if someone stuck a needle in you and started to drain your blood for someone else. That's a violation. Clearly.
@@druidriley3163 Just as much as the woman is using the mans sperm without his permission. Clearly a violation too by your logic. FAIL - AGAIN
@@druidriley3163 That's a false equivalence. If you have consensual heterosexual sex as a woman you are consenting to the possible chain of events that creates a fetus. Obviously rape is different. The argument needs to be stronger on the prochoice side. That's a weak argument.
@@druidriley3163 That's a false equivalence. I don't think you understood my objection.
@@joshotey2967 - if a guy doesn't want his sperm misused, he should be careful that he doesn't leave it somewhere where it can be, right?
This guy cannot see logic, he asked a question, when you try and answer, he continues to talk, not waiting for an answer. Let's face it, he is not interested in your view, but only interested in you taking his.
It is a "moral right" for an individual to choose to protect and defend their own autonomy.
So let's be clear, pregnancy does not happen spontaneously.
Pregnancy is the result of a foreign biological entity infecting the host.
The host has final and ultimate right of refusal.
And the woman's body helped the sperm fertilize her ovum, used the fallopian tube to transport the unborn, and engaged in cell signaling to communicate to the unborn where to go.
It is very important to attribute fault correctly. The woman is 100% at fault is if she consented to the sexual act that created the baby.
@@michaelhunt372 - none of that bullshit you just spewed matters.
No living organism has an absolute right to any part of another living organism for survival.
The woman whose uterus is being coopted has an absolute right at any time to withdraw consent, regardless of the outcome to the coopting organism.
You can choose to donate a kidney, but you can also choose to not donate it, even if it means the recipient dies as a result of your choice.
@@fyimediaworld I reject any comparison to transplants. They are are not a part of normal human development and often fail anyway. That said, if I caused your need, I absolutely have a moral obligation, even if not a legal one.
Remember that for most of human history, the only form of sustenance available to newborns was breastmilk. And, in the developing world, that can still be the case.
Actually, at this moment, it may be coming close to that here as well.
A lactating state keeps many hormones elevated for months and increases the mother's caloric needs even more than pregnancy. Yet, I am sure most would agree that if there are no alternatives, a mother has no right to refuse to breastfeed, certainly if she consented to the sexual act that created the infant and knew there would be no alternatives when she consented to that act.
If you think she should have such a right to refuse, there's not much I can say. But, I consider that conclusion so outrageous as to not warrant consideration.
If you don't want a baby, the only moral option is to abstain from the sort of intercourse that creates babies.
I think I see the problem.
John : women ARE NOT incubators. They are human beings.
Getting information into a guy that never stops talking.
Why does this guy not grasp the idea of consent?
Potential solution. The man has to be with the woman 24/7 during the pregnancy. Has to pay all her medical expenses plus maintenance costs and pay 50% of the child's maintenance until it reaches adulthood. I wonder what men's opinions would be then.
Jiub Boatman
Still, the man wouldn't be risking his life or health, so I don't think that it's equivalent. Losing the right to body autonomy altogether is the only eqivalent.
I am confused as to why people like this invent these wild hypotheticals and then go on the offensive when they do get the answer they are looking for. It's so frustrating listening to people like him.
It's so frustrating looking at a male that's dressed up like a female. Hashtag profile picture
This is a great call. Really clarified the position. I needed that. Thanks!
I'm agreement with Tracie and Jenn. But better wording should be found re pregnancy is a violation.
An unwanted pregnancy IS a violation. Many women die from pregnancy, and in general, it's a huge strain on the body. Pregnancy is not a cake walk, and an unwanted pregnancy is most certainly a violation of bodily autonomy. It's the most accurate wording.
@@emilyelizabeth8654 every unborn human dies from an abortion. Which is worse?
@@rebekahplatzer6203 Which is worse? Well let's see, on the one hand we have a fetus being stopped from reaching full development-something which happens without human intervention quite frequently in nature for all mammals. On the other hand, we have one's agency over one's own body stripped from them for the sick desire to elevate the so-called "rights" of a fetus over the "rights" of the person who is being forced to carry that fetus to term so that the world has YET ANOTHER unwanted child, who, statistically, will fare worse than their peers. So in this scenario, we've caused harm all around. Yeah, I'll go with terminating a fetus being preferable to forcing women to give birth to unwanted children.
@@emilyelizabeth8654 So to help the unwanted child I will kill the unwanted child...........for it's own good? Ummmm what!?
@@rebekahplatzer6203 A fetus is not a child. It is a collection of human cells. It does not have more rights than the host it relies upon to continue growing-just like how I'm allowed to wash my hands without calling it genocide for all the bacteria I'm killing.
Listening to this guy is killing my brain cells. Even after 20 times of explanation, he still cannot get the difference between killing a born baby who is not violating anyone, vs losing the fetus because it was violating the mother's body.
I'd like to pose this question in response to the body violation.
A person has a property, on which people can violate if they trespass. The man has the right to shoot any trespassors dead with no legal reprecussions. Only problem, He doesn't put any signs up, nor is there a fence around the property. Does that mean that we should sell him the ammo to shoot and kill any unlucky shmuck who wanders on his property?
Or, is it more moral to spend money to build a large fence outside his property and put signs around it? That way no one is likely to die.
This analogy doesn't really work because people who don't want to get pregnant do try to take steps to avoid pregnancy. The problem is that some people are poorly educated on how to use birth control or their birth control fails.
You can't use deadly force with the intent of protecting property in most first world countries. Full stop.
If the thing being shot at has sentiment then it's reprehensible but if it's a thing with no ability to suffer pain,why not?
If you shoot someone, DEAD, who stumbles onto your property, fence or no fence there will be legal repercussions, likely an arrest and probably a trial. As least in the USA.
@Karla Jordan Depends on why he is there and what he is doing. You cant legally just shoot someone for the sole reason that they are standing on your property. Now, if your dog were to inadvertently maul them, well, whose fault is that?
Why don't either of the hosts point out that a fetus IS NEITHER A BABY NOR A PERSON YET? To call it either, is like calling a seed a tree. There's a big difference between the two. It doesn't matter if the fetus has a heartbeat; it doesn't matter if it feels pain. Neither of those means you have a person there yet.
I've heard the argument everywhere that the woman is being violated by the fetus, the fetus doesn't have her permission to inhabit her body. IMHO, it just totally misses the point and is totally ineffective, and I don't think pro-choice women do themselves any favors by asserting it first and foremost.
If you're not killing a person, or anything sentient, IT'S NOT MURDER. IT'S NOTHING LIKE GENOCIDE. Even if it's going to become a person later. Abortion's not even inhumane when no consciousness could have ever awakened in the body yet, it doesn't have a develop brain, a cerebral cortex, or even a working limbic system yet. It hasn't ever been in the human community. This seems a perfectly effective point to me. Does anybody have a counterargument to that? Why don't pro-choice women give this as their first argument?
Suppose someone comes to your house during a storm and you don't know them but you invite them in to wait out the storm the storm is over but they won't leave whether it's one month or 9 months you have my permission to do whatever it takes to get them to leave. A home invader or a womb invader makes no difference if you don't want them there get them out.
Tracie got him good when she was like why are you against abortion if you're ok with killing children in the bible.
It causes me to eye-roll when someone says something about a text in an authoritative way that they clearly know nothing about. It would be like me telling an astronaut how they should fly the aircraft. Tracie clearly does not understand the text, but cherrypicks it to support her narrative that killing unborn humans is OK. There is no way to explain the meaning of the text to her because she does not believe in it anyway. It does not say what she thinks it does. It was not a "Gotcha" moment as you may think.
Tim Account since Christians can’t even agree on what the Bible is “trying to say” we have no choice but to take it at its word. It’s not our fault they wrote a shitty book that people like you constantly try to defend.
@@Hudathan - Traditional Christian interpretation does not have much disagreement. That is a straw man argument. When there is billions of a certain group, of course you are going to find those that disagree. The classical interpretation of the text has been relatively unchanged for centuries.
I am a little uncomfortable with applying the idea of autonomy in a black and white fashion. If there was an elderly or physically disabled person who depended on another person entirely for survival and that care taker killed them because they no longer felt like sacrificing their own personal autonomy most people would find that to be an heinous and wantonly selfish crime. I find it difficult to tell the difference when the fetus has reached a certain stage of development.
A some what less extreme example is one of a person who needs an organ transplant and will die without it and there is only one other person who is capable of providing that organ without sacrificing their own life. I certainly would not argue that they should be forced to donate that organ legally but I personally would feel that refusing to sacrifice their bodily autonomy in this case was a morally reprehensible decision on their part.
This caller is dishonest. And he is foolish. He won't stay on topic.
Tracie should have quit using the rape "example" as an "analogy" because he was too stupid to understand or dishonestly pretending not to. She just should further clarified for this sneaky slow-minded caller about what she meant about consent and safety/risk to mother and viable/non viable, etc.
Homeboy actually said "our uterus" who's the we in that sentence? 😂
Hm... I don’t think the line where a foetus can survive autonomously is the right cutoff point. I think it should be the point where a foetus can experience consciousness, can experience being awake. Because that’s when you can cause suffering to the foetus.
And this is of course all my own opinion, but I regard an unwanted sexual experience with another person as a more awful experience than an unwanted pregnancy. Unless of course a doctor deems the pregnancy as being dangerous. In fact, I’d argue that consensual pregnancies aren’t common in nature, because without consciousness there can be no consent. And animals that experience consciousness are rare. Rape in nature is also not rare, but it just seems to me like a rape would be a much more traumatic experience than an unwanted pregnancy. Either way, from the moment there is consciousness in the foetus, I think we are dealing with a person in the womb. A person that can’t have it’s rights to not be violated overturned.
My daughter was 9 months old when I found out (in a court room full of strangers no less) that the person I thought I had known for 4 years was all made up. Nothing about him or his past was true. I had consented to sex and a, eventually, a baby with a person who did not exist. The person who was genetically her father was a complete stranger to me. I felt I had been raped for three years and my daughter was a product of rape. My consent had been taken out of my hands by his lies. I understand how important consent is.
Why do so many religious folks have such a difficult time understanding the concept of consent? Is it really that foreign to them, or are they playing ignorant in bad faith?
A newborn baby is BIOLOGICALLY autonomous. This guy...
A fetus is not a person. Stop it!