Interesting, I've never heard that

or young one or little child. great point to bring up

What I've come across it means unborn baby.?

@@anomalousviewer3164 Etymology of the word in Latin means young child, young one.

According to Google translate it to "offsprings"

Yes that’s what it’s all about. Give Joe the credit he’s due, he gives people a platform even when they are unpopular.

Good take

Well said sir.

"Conflict sells clicks." It's the grifters way.

@@fakename3208 Especially if they are unpopular..............it is all about ratings.

He might want to try, but he's another democrat owned puppet. He flip-flops to whatever fits the agenda.

No he doesn’t. He just runs over anyone that tries to share a different opinion. The video they showed literally showed this happening over 10 times

@Steve French I have, which is why I say that I certainly don't agree with everything he says. I will say, however, he seems to have gotten better over the years with being disrespectful. He used to say Christianity was outright "stupid" or "dumb", but I've recently seen him say that a person's QOL will be better by living by the morals that Christians do, even though he still doesn't believe in God.

@@DrPeppa 100% agree, even if people aren’t religious there’s still some great guidelines & morals to live by from the bible (some but not all of them i will say though)

@@Drifty325i Definitely 👍

Well, I for one hope that if I'm in an "actual conversation" about abortion, my interlocutor doesn't use vacuous bromides like "it's such a human problem". I may pluck my eyes out if he does.

@@scottbuchanan9426 🙄🙄

Is there a source or does this just sound good to you? Not to mention that in structuring the argument like this, if there's even one counter example the argument is false.

Two men that got nothing with caring a baby for 10month lmfao hahahha smh#pro choice

SO FUCKING TRUE

The pro-life argument is a red herring. The fact is, women have been on the planet a very long time, and along the way have learned a few things. One of those things is how to terminate a pregnancy. A woman can terminate a pregnancy at any time, whether you like it or not, or whether any law says yay or nay, and no one would be the wiser. You would require that she do it in the most unsafe way. So the sum total of what you want is to hurt a woman. If you wanted a baby to be born, you would take a very different approach. End of story.

@@frostfree7 "So the sum total of what you want is to hurt a woman" strange extrapolation relative to the content you are replying to. But.... end of story.🙂

Thats only in the 30+ pro life states buddy

It’s shouldn’t even be a political debate either it’s just common sense

Damn... OWNED!

Interesting lane to direct the argument of individual choice to. If we are going down that line of thinking, you think US census counts all fetuses? Do you think families should receive SNAP/TANF/ Medicaid/ Tax Credits for fetuses at any stage? What if a woman has just found out she’s pregnant, can she immediately be called a mother and become eligible for all resources and services reserved for mothers/families? We’re likely looking at additional billions in spending every year. Wanna subsidize all that with higher taxes? No? Didn’t think so.

@@madhavchr Yes, I do think a woman should qualify for all those benefits the moment she becomes pregnant. You made lots of assumptions by answering your own questions in the negative. A pregnant woman is a pregnant woman, period. My point is why does the law consider a fetus not a human being in one case, but makes the opposite argument and considers it a life when talking about homicide. If a murderer can be charged with double homicide for killing a pregnant woman then a fetus is a life. You can’t have it both ways.

I’m so sorry to hear that. My cousin had two abortions in her 20s and also just got more and more messed up as the years passed. She became obsessed with hating anyone who won’t actively cheer on “abortion rights” despite knowing that we, her family, did not judge her as unworthy of God’s love or of our love.

Trust me, I'm a try hard in my early 20s no gf since birth. What I just said is irrelevant but what I just read is something else, Im sorry to hear about it and knowing you went through something like this but this feels like being a newbie in a rehab realizing you (I) aint something you think you are. There are literally other people who have experienced something else. By the way I love you man and thank you for sharing this. This hits deep on another dimension.

And? That's one extreme other people it's the best decision they made and they have made a life for themselves got themselves a good job, bought a house got married and had children when they were ready. It's personal choice. You can't use one argument about it say well, that's it that's what it leads to no women can have abortions. They should have to have their rapist kid and if they don't want to keep it throw into the already overwhelmed system of foster and aoption services...is that good for a child? Really?

@@libertasdemocratiam887 For starters, babies do not get “thrown into the foster care system”. For every baby that is up for adoption there are many, many couples who would LOVE to adopt that baby. (Once upon a time many babies were adopted in this country. I had at least four friends growing up who were adopted --and very happy to have been adopted, by the way. The issue is that the human being in the womb is just that. He/she should not be killed simply because his or her life might have difficulty in it, any more than a three month old baby ought to be killed just because we might be able to predict that the kid will face hardship. A three month old baby cannot reason or talk or walk or fend for himself in any way. Should we say that he is “not really fully human” because he cannot do those things and “would never know what he was missing” if he were quietly killed? Any argument for,abortion can also be made to justify infanticide because honestly there is no difference other than that abortion can be done without others knowing there was a pregnancy (that is, an innocent little human) there to begin with. I get your feelings and your objections. But people have a right not to be killed in the womb. It’s just wrong to do that to someone.

@@Featherfinder if every single child a woman wante stop abort was born and put into the social care system aka adoption and fostering, the system would crumble. You may not like it but that's fact. That's the absolute fact of the matter. Whether you like it or not right now there are couples with 4 kids who are struggling to keep a roof over their head and feed 6 mouths, who truly cannot afford to have another child, who have been taking precaution via contraception which failed on them (that does happen) that's upto them to decide if they want to keep that baby or not. They may after careful consideration come to the conclusion that they simply cannot put their other children through the possibility of losing their home because the motherwould no longer be able to work because someone would need to look after the baby. She maybe working part time already while her other kids are at school, and she and her husband physically cannot afford to do that, not without losing everything and putting their other children in the position of having no home. Which would likely result in all the kids being taken into the system. Life is not perfect, life is fucking hard for alot of people, and sometimes those people have to make god awful choices they don't want to make not for their own personal gain because they couldn't be arsed taking the pill, but because they're putting their existing children first. Is that harsh? Yes but if it's a case of not being able to afford to live and support your kids, or I don't blame people for making that choice. Now you can say they shouldn't be on poverty and all that which I'm sure you will, but poverty has and always will exist, there will always be a poor. There's always be women who have been raped who do not want the child they did not consent to being put inside of them, for every on of them there's a woman who chooses to keep the child of rape, it's upto those women to make the choice, not you. Because you believe your views are more important than theirs. For every woman who chooses to sacrifice herself for her baby who dies during birth, there's another woman who chooses to abort her child and adopt or use a surrogate because she thinks it's better for her child to have two parents not a single dad riddled with grief. That's upto them not you. If abortion is taken away those women mentioned above will find alternative means that will result in death or losing the ability to have children completely. If you want to stop abuse of the system to stop allowing women who have had repeated aboritons to get them, they're clearly taking the system for a ride. But do not force other women who have very valid reasons as to why they want aboriton not have access to them. If you were homeless would you opt to keep a baby? If you'd been raped by your father or uncle would you want to keep your baby? If you were at risk of death from birth would you want to keep your baby? You can say yes to all of those things but the truth is you simply don't know until you are on that situation.

Also the mother

This is a fantastic comment.

Well said!

I love the bibles moral clarity and consistency. “Though shall not kill”. Then proceeds to kill everything on the planet except those in an Ark. Morality per se is messy.

Yeah, but you can have a definitive & fixed moral system without grounds in the divine. Moral clarity and consistency don't preclude irreligiosity, and having consistent values and principles that one consistentally adheres isn't something that proves the holistic and inherent value of said values and principles. Moral relativism is only messy when you're unwilling to live as a human. God didn't put us on this planet to force his will onto each other. God put us on this planet to live and be human, so we could express our love and illuminate others with kindness and compassion regardless if they adhere to our moral truths. There's no value in forcing others not to sin, only in deciding not to when you have all of opportunities to do so.

@@horridhenry9920 THOUGH shall not kill. God creates life and ends life at His own will.

what?

@@aice336 Their own head and the head of the baby in the womb

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vds a34asdfda

@@desales20 got it, so abortion is okay prior to the formation of a head.

😂

Never pleasured a woman eh?

no life matters and especially a fetus they havent touched grass. by the way in the animal kingdom kids are eaten by their own parents all the time, and guess what we used to do the same when we were monkeys,

Heart is formed and starts beating 21 days after conception

And she had a soul too

@@michellemcdermott2026 how do you know there are souls?

@@aice336 Jeremiah 1 I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb

@@aice336 Who's asking? 😉

Do I have to be forced to carry my rapist kid while being a kid

You are not going to die for your fathers crimes but you will have to deal with the consequence of your fathers crimes.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vdsassdfdsa

A sperm that goes into an egg within a week cannot speak and ask questions.

According to the bible you do. We die because Adam and Eve brought sin into the world.

With respect; I do not want to appear to correct you and I hope you do not mind me tagging this along here. But, your statement tickled an old thought. It is certainly true that accepting Christian morality would make the proposition of abortion morally impossible. But, really, all one has to acknowledge is that the life of human beings is sacred. Once that is accepted; and since human beings have a predictable series of development (stages of life), with one stage predictably following another. Then we must accept any stage of that continuum of development is human life and is sacred. There are small things that are destined to remain small things. But, there are also small things are destined (ie in the absence of intervention) to develop into an adult human being. These things are babies, fetuses, toddlers, preschoolers, first graders, teenagers, fertilized human ovum, and certain clumps of cells. These entities (or manifestations) will develop into adult human beings without the need for intervention. These are all forms of human life. If one form is sacred; then they all are sacred. Because, each is just a temporal manifestation of the same entity. They are all one. A more difficult argument or question is, when is it ever appropriate to take human life? How and whom determines innocence. Do we usurp gods will/ judgement by taking "guilty" human life? Are we to judge innocence and guilt on such a profound level? If we say that human life is only sacred under the circumstance of innocence; then the sacred life is only sacred relative to the changing whim of man and his determinations of guilt and innocence (ie moral relativism). That seems to me to be an impossible condition. Best to you.....

Just remember, if you're having a discussion about abortion and you invoke your religion at all, please dismiss yourself from the conversation. Let the adults talk.

How do you kill something that isn’t alive?

@@imanilabady7151 ok you claim the unborn is not alive so when does it become alive? What does the unborn baby have to possess for you to agree that it is living?

@@Sim6dot9 actually premature babies have survived younger than 24 weeks. You really should keep up with medical advancements if you think you can be the arbiter of truth while putting a cut off past the age babies can survive. But I do have a question - do you call the baby alive just because at x weeks it can survive on its own? Is that the distinction of life you give humans? So as a nurse when I care for patients should I turn off all life support as I mean in your definition they aren’t human anymore as they are no longer sustaining themselves…

He went so far as to make it personal stating, "You don't have the right to tell *my daughter* she has to carry a rapists baby." The answer would always be the same but to take it so personally shows how irrational some people take arguments.

Stupid comment. That nerd was interrupting him that entire time 😂 prolly why Joe got mad

@Jered Keller Not to mention the money you make from the right. I mean some of you are still sending Bannon your money.............

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vds43asdfsdaads

@@FullDottle the guest kept interrupting. also forcing women to carry babies is irrational :P

@Jack Hummell It’s strange how Rogan kept pressing the question of whether its a human life even down to the nano-second when sperm enters egg.. Did he think that Mr Dillon would cave and say, “Well Ok.. maybe its not human at the half-nano second upon sperm entry into egg...so therefore not human and abortable.” Mr Dillon was poised, calm and confident... just a masterpiece to watch.

@@dija5578 I would say its not a human life unless it was born.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vd adfdsdsa

@@kos-mos1127 why?

@@mikelroa8719 A human is an individual organism. An individual organism is an organism that has been born.

Having it be emotionally charged didn't help.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?dvs 34asdf afda

Well said sister .Thank you for choosing LIFE!

My first girlfriend confided in me that she had an abortion when a former boyfriend had date-raped her before we met. Abortion brought her no peace. She told me every time she saw a baby she cried.

@@jamesflynn4741 I'm starting to think it never gives peace (of mind). I mean there is the moral realization that abortion is a horrible thing, especially when done by yourself. You can become a murderer only once, after that its just the amount of bodies you leave behind (and I am not trying to equate abortion to murder here). And then there is the emotional state, which is heavily affected not only by the rationale, but also by her hormonal balance. Hormonally, an abortion is something like a stillbirth. It causes her already messy hormones to be in much more disarray. So even years after an abortion, a woman can feel the after effects. I've chatted with one or two women who had an abortion and said it wasnt so bad or even was good, after prodding a little bit, asking some uncomfortable questions, presenting my views, they became unhinged and toxic. Its became obvious they were rationalizing it, lying to themselves.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Joesephine

because they have been trying to destroy the family unit for years, they have made men weak

Genesis talks about this concept. Metaphorically.

and they are disagreeing calmly.

@@laurenbatson5918 I don't think Joe was behaving calmly at all. He was extremely emotional, and because of that was talking over his first and attempting to shut down his argument.

He's not pro-life, he's pro-birth. No regard for the mother or child beyond being born.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vd safdsa

He hasn't soften his position he has said the same thing forever...pro life people are weird

@@legion24100 all of us are weird brother.

he was owned, doesn't matter if they agree, he made no good counter

Ye he didn’t get owned but he definitely didn’t come out of that a winner

@@shadykracker not a winner means he lost ....AKA owned

@@plinnytheother6107 bro in what world do you win a moral debate when you could have different fundamental beliefs?

@@Purdin347 It is called a learning process. So I guess every professor owned you.

Or fertilised even. Implantation is when the fertilised egg attaches to the womb and any intervention to prevent this is akin to abortion whereas preventing fertilisation isn't.

“Owned” was used as clickbait. Human nature and it works

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vdsadfdsaa

But the ones that are should be forced to give birth? You guys never wanna address what to do when it DOES happen.

Tell me you know nothing of libertarianism without actually telling me. His major mental block here is thinking about his 14 yo daughter in this situation. That definitely shifts his view and understandably enough. It's a bad argument but an understandable one.

"Everything we do affects someone" includes the mother. Even if we assume the fetus is a person on day 1, a pro-life view is still forcing someone to carry that person for 9 months, all potential medical complications included. I don't know your expertise, but the views of a KZfaqr (Matt) and a satire editor (Seth) should mean nothing when it comes to the healthcare of a 14 year old rape victim. "Abortion is healthcare like rape is making love." Again, is there an expert source for that or is that just a kneejerk bumper sticker slogan that sounded good?

​@Corporate Overlord actually he posited a fair summery of Libertarianism. It's a basic description, sure, but when its encapsulated in a nutshell it shows just how ignorant, selfish, and untenable Libertarianism really is; it's no wonder it's not a major 3rd party in the US. It's a stupid ideology that doesn't really work in practice, and if followed to its core would destroy almost any nation.

Based and true

​@@tjaysteno Please, I beg and implore you, do some actual research and find out the truth about abortion, and the right to life. Your reasoning skills and mental acuity is equal to a toddler; you should be embarrassed, really.

Yea, it's so easy to tell if a person has a hangup with Christianity. It's like spotting an elephant a mile away.

That's my impression of him as well. When it comes to any topic he likes to talk with you, but when it comes to Christianity he likes to talk about you...

@@jonson856 he's been pictured with head of the satanic church. He knows more than he lets on

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vd sasdsd

I have a very justified hangup with any religion that tells me I deserve to burn in a lake of fire forever for not following it

Very succinct way of putting it. You highlight the idea that the unborn is punished the most

Brilliant and indisputable point.

If you think that a woman who has been raped should keep the baby of that rapist then you are a very disturbed person and it's very unsettling that people like you are in society.

@@stephenwilson9480 Actually, your comment is unsettling and makes one question your place in society.

@@CatholicNonno You would say that though wouldn't you because your trying to justify an horrendous crime.You are in the minority with your very disturbed way of thinking and I thank God the rest of us have compassion, dignity and respect for other people when they most need it.

Feminist would probably just say abortion is a form of self defense from the parasite that is feeding off of them.

Agreed. It is wrong to harm or kill innocent human life

I would argue capital punishment is wrong. I'm against capital punishment because I think giving the State the power to end human life is giving the State too much power. How can you be sure they will only use it against the guilty? St. Maria Goretti and Br. Alessandro Serenelli would argue that giving a man a chance to reform himself is worthwhile.

@@Jimb0tr0n I agree, and I’m a nationalist conservative. Generally people on my side of the isle are pro death penalty, but I just can’t.

@@TheProphecyTV In some circumstances, but an animals life never shares the same value as a human life and I believe lowering human life to such a level is evil. The definition of murder is “The killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.”. The killing of an animal cannot fit the definition of the word,

Well, how else would he get clicks?

If someone who thinks killing innocent children isn't your adversary then idk what is

@Andrew Andrew may God bless you Andrew x2 Thanks for clicking👍

I think preventing financially reasoned killing of children is a perfectly acceptable place to be adversarial.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vdsafdsa

Is Kristen in somebody else’s body?

@@horridhenry9920 She’s in Mother Earth’s body

Right? Everything in existence is a clump of cells.

Fr

thats fine. you shouldn't agree with someone on everything.

This Seth guy looked like a fool, his belief is radically unpopular with the country

@@ewessel560 and that makes him a fool? what is your definition of 'fool'...he is a fool because he believes an unpopular viewpoint?

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vd sa4asfsa

@@ewessel560 He may have only looked like a fool to the fools that are successfully brainwashed into “knowing” human life starts after the baby is born.

What about war... Many innocent people are killed? It's it EVER ok to kill innocent lives?

@@KJ-lb4tj No

I think it's a problem with language. There are indeed times when it's permissable to end a human life, but it's never a "good" thing. Think of all the soldiers with PTSD or the guilt people feel if they ever accidentally got someone killed. Unless your a psychopath killing a person damages us in a horrendously psychological way.

@@KJ-lb4tj your tone is implying everyone enjoys war.

Well if that child grows up to be a serial killer then it wouldn't be innocent. You don't know what the child will be or even if it will be born. You can't quantify it as either. But there are many times an innocent life should be taken. If I am driving next to a car that is going down the street out of control with a baby in the back. and it is about to run through an intersection and mow down a pack of school kids. And I ram it out of the path and into a tree killing it but saving the others. It had to go. Period.

Shooting a criminal is still taking a life.

You bring up a valid point but pro life doesn't mean pro all life. There are very bad people out there who are rapists and killers. Why shouldn't truly evil people be put to death but an innocent baby should? Guns to some degree I agree with you that you should try as much as possible to not kill someone but someone's you have to protect your family from bad people and that's just what it is. War is politically complex, depends on if you think what we're going into war for is absolutely necessary. Which everyone will have different opinions on. So no, you can be pro life and still not be those things.

Nobody cares to change your mind

so joe's 14yr old daughter should have to raise some rapists kid ?

What did it have to do for you?

@@paxcoder Having a co-worker have 3 abortions in 5 years with no real medical or psychological follow-up (this shocked me as I had always thought abortions were rare, a last resort scenario) // realising that even in a country like France (where I live), where access to contraception is widely and easily available still 1 out of 4 pregnancies end in an abortion (not rare) // having an internship at a clinic and seeing high school girls going for their 2nd or 3rd abortion // questioning when life starts, when consciousness starts, when and how personality develops in an unborn baby // researching what an abortion actually does to the mother's body and then researching the different "abortion techniques" // not understanding how - with all the scientific progress and knowledge we have, with the different contraception methods available - there are 25% of pregnancies that are terminated in abortions // realising that abortions that are done are not practised because the baby is ill, or because the mother might risk her life, but because of convenience and because women are told that you have to be at a certain situation in you life (with money, job, partner) in order to even fathom the idea of having a child This took years as it is difficult to go against what one has been taught, explained for years, especially as a woman - you are told that without abortion, women would go back to coat hangers and knitting needles or other dangerous self-destructive methods in order to abort. You are taught that this is the lesser of the evils to stop an unwanted pregnancy... That if you are against abortion, somehow you are a traitor to all women in time and worldwide... because abortion is "progress". And before even considering the life of the unborn child, I was considering the ramifications of an abortion for the mother. How women were treated, discarded, no thought for the consequences that too many abortions could have on her body, not telling them the truth of what they were doing to their body (it is quite an upheaval for the woman's body) ... it angered me. Then, and then only was I able to even consider the possibility that the unborn baby was not just "a clump of cells". Nothing at all having to do with religion. I do not find that fighting to limit or even ban abortions ought to go the route of a religious argument. For me it comes down to one very simple yet important question : what is a human life worth? If human life is priceless, and society and laws make certain to protect all human life, then I find society is better ordered. Once society and laws can make the claim that some lives are worth more than others, then there will be disorder and decadence.

I had my opinion changed in a 10 minute KZfaq video. But I wasn’t staunchly proabort, I just never really ever thought about it before

Great point, Nerd, regarding religion. Seems to me it's not so much a religious issue as a human rights issue. Joe wanted to say that "it's complicated", but the guest essentially calmly stated that no, it's really not complicated at all, and I think that's why the guest is able to remain so calm and respectful.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vds asd fdsa

Jesus and God have not been shown to exists and there is no test can objectively determine they exists. Adding God or Jesus to the conversation does not add anything.

@@kos-mos1127 You saying "exists" doesn't really help your argument, especially when you give no examples.

@@kos-mos1127 everyone who lives by God knows that God exists. there's no reason that needs to be proven to you, until the moment you go looking

It's better to say "it's always wrong to kill an innocent human life". Of course degenerate criminals deserve getting shot.

@@__Man_ it’s a direct quote from the video. So it’s not dishonest in any way. But even if you amend the premise to in overt who adjudicates innocence?

Rape is less than 1% of abortion reason, incest similarly as low

The rape incest argument is equivalent to abortion is acceptable if the father is an asshole. Joe's daughter could be raped by her future or ex husband so kill the grandchild?

You say we cannot live in a society where the exception is the rule, yet you just made an exception to the rule of no one should take a life, when you say if someone harmed your daughter, you would be pro death penalty.

@@_Peregrine_ Yeah but rape is the topic at hand and it is being denied.

Rape is always brought up because it's the last resort and the extreme. Of course rape is one of the worst if not the worst things that can happen to someone and yes, but is any action the baby's fault?

ironic isn't it?

Not sure what's odd. You want it but lost it. i.e it's a loss. If you didn't want something in the first place (e.g sympathy, affection/gift from someone you dislike, etc), would you treat it as a 'loss' if they take it back?

@@munkitchew5829 I am praying for you child ☦️☦️☦️

@@justinreid2422 Little one, shouldn't you pray for Drew who suffered an actual loss instead? It's ... odd that you chose to pray for me instead, just for trying to resolve his logical conundrum.

@@munkitchew5829 he lost a child and shared his personal experience and you did not respond kindly I'm still praying for you🙏

When human life begins is an important question in biology.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oJujjNFom6_Rmo0.html

And small boys

@@meek6809 What are you trying to argue?

@@coralbricks Perhaps the love the Holy Catholic Church has for small boys?

@@SamStone1964 Indeed the Church, the bride of Christ, loves children very much. So much so that thankfully there are tons of orphanages and hospitals created by the Church around the planet, notwithstanding fake news-filled situation like that in Canada. At the same time, thankfully the Church is not limited to those members who behave in an ill, abusive manner towards children. Finally, us catholics abhor all kinds of abuses towards children and hope and pray so that they get to live, in spite of the evil logic of child-murder espoused by many.

@@coralbricks Oh yes the priests just love the orphanages don't they? Constant supply of small boys.

Lol, I thought the "destroys" titles were reserved for parody at this point.

Can you imagine what those same scientists would do to those cells? The answer is NOT let it be and flourish

I think most pro-abortion people regard the unborn baby as being "biological life" from the very earliest stages. The logic gets kind of fuzzy, though. I think they would say that the unborn baby is not "human life", or at least "human life with human rights". It gets even fuzzier if you inquire about when an unborn child acquires the status of "human being". For some, this seems to happen when the child has a recognizably human appearance in utero. Maybe they would oppose abortion if the baby looked like a miniature little newborn from the moment of its conception, just a microscopic little infant? Maybe their minds just can't conceive of a human being that is shaped differently for a while? This is the "clump of cells" argument. For others, this happens when the baby passes a significant developmental milestone like when the living pre-born human being develops a circulatory system and the heart begins to beat for the first time. Interesting fact: the obviously alive human being has not developed and does not even require a functioning circulatory for its first 5 - 6 weeks! Having a heart does not make you a human! When you need one, you grow one. For others, babies apparently don't achieve this status until they have fully emerged from the birth canal. The baby undergoes a change in location, and begins to use its already developed lungs for the first time, but it's still pretty much the same baby that it was an hour ago. Personhood was not visibly conferred when the baby was delivered, so I'm not sure where they think it came from. Pro-abortionists employ extremely magical and irrational thinking where the beginning of human life is concerned, a sort of "it's like, when you know, you know" kind of approach. The understanding that life begins at conception is logical and scientific. That human life begins with conception is a cold hard fact, not matter how inconvenient.

@@MattBurrill one if the biggest arguments I think is around viability. An embryo, or fetus doesn't become a "baby" until it is viable which I think is around 22-23 weeks? Something like that, and even then it is still heavily dependent on Technology for several weeks.

@@cgordon3 The fetus/baby distinction is a very artificial construction of language, though. And so is "viability". It is true that a developing human being typically requires at minimum 23 or so weeks in the womb of its mother before it is able to survive outside the womb (and then with a great deal of medical intervention). But the question "how would the developing baby fare if it left the womb at this stage of development?" has no bearing on the personhood of the developing baby. Puberty is a significant phase of development that a born child undergoes, but it too has no bearing on personhood questions. The human person, whose life begins at conception, experiences dramatic bodily growth and change before he or she is born. This development slows but continues after birth. Pro-Abortion arguments rely on misleading use of language that dehumanizes obvious human beings. Terms like "embryo", "fetus", and "zygote" have legitimate descriptive purposes, but they are misused to rhetorically distance us from the personhood of the unborn person, effectively dehumanizing with language.

@@MattBurrill - I understand what you are saying, and I can say that you are right, from a certain point of view. If you assume that 'personhood' starts at conception, and still support abortion, then you have to admit to yourself that you just ok with ending that life up to a certain age measured in weeks. But most people who support abortion aren't willing to concede that point of view. And I think that is the biggest gap in the ongoing argument is an agreement to when the child in the womb is considered a person with rights. Also there is another argument that has nothing to do with the babies status of life, but has to do with the rights of the mother. The rights of the 'child' don't supercede the rights of the mother... in that lets say a person was dying in the hospital and needed an organ transplant for which you are a perfect match. you can't be forced to give up your organ to save the other person. Here the argument goes that you should not be able to force the mother to carry to term if she doesn't want to do so, ie gve an organ to save another life. that's a crude description of the argument, but I hope you follow what I mean.

Dude has done it a few times. I think the worst was when Steven Crowder was on the podcast and they were discussing marijuana. Joe literally stoops to insulting his guest outright. But just look up Joe Rogan loses temper, he's done it a few times. This time actually wasn't so bad haha

He was trying to make it personal because it is personal, and such examples happen in real life.

Not unprofessional. REAL and deeply harmful situation

nah his point is just like not a debating point its a point of like, listen to how fucked up what ur saying sounds

@@ratatoskr9366 crowder was the worst for sure. He asked Steven a topic he would have not address the way he did in the past, and Steven said marijuana. Then Joe forced him to defend that position Steven had just he wouldn’t have addressed. Joe’s arguments were idiotic also, sounded like a 19 year old neck beard wearing a Bob Marley shirt.

Agreed. If a pregnant woman wants the child , its a "miracle" . If the same pregnant woman , pregnant with the same baby , doesn,t want the child , its considered "a clump of cells" that can be aborted. The only difference is how the woman FEELS about the pregnancy. No wonder pro abortion people have to go through so many mental gymnastics to make abortion ok in their minds.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vdsafdsa

Society operates by rationalization. We have created laws for a general populace presumably without genetic or mental defects to operate in a mostly unified fashion while preserving individual's rights and desires to live in such a way with reasonable limitations, provided those rights do not infringe upon the rights of another. A woman who has been genuinely raped and impregnated should not be forced to bear a burden she was never given an option to carry or deny. While it is true that the unborn is effectively in the same boat as the potential mother, if we consider who then should we prioritize in terms of providing help for, I would like to believe that we would support the person who is already living and experiencing the world we all live in. This might be a terrible analogy to draw a comparison to (because I know a tooth is the not the same as a human life), but what people are asking of rape victims every time they tell them to give birth is the same as having someone walk up to unprovoked, and smash all of your teeth out. The attacker gets sent to prison for however long, you survive the experience, but everyone is telling you "you can't fix your teeth, even though we have dentists who can provide implants or dentures for you." Or how about the instances of parents invoking their religious beliefs upon their sick children who are at risk of death from a sickness, but denied medical treatment that would 100% save their life? That's a bit closer for a comparison I think.

Does God retry to birth the same consciousness if the pregnancy is failed? It's the information paradox. Morality tells us it's wrong. Make your stories to justify your sins. Justifying my sins helped me down a wonderful path of drug addiction and self abuse. Your soul knows in your heart what's wrong. In our individual perspectivism

Knowing that children are lawfully considered property of their parents it is a human right to do what ever you want with your property.... a woman can burth up to 200 children why worry about 1 or 50 tell me that every human is worth living ..... then say you love rapest and molestation and Fuckers driving slow in the fast lane and people that abuse welfare

I don't know if I'd have risked saying it but did she change her mind or did it make her upset with you? Was it the first thing you said or after being happy for her etc? Sorry for the questions it's just this exact thought has gone through my head and I have wondered how it would actually go down.

@@colmwhateveryoulike3240 Sometimes you have to have the courage to be that lone voice crying make straight the path of the Lord and let the chips fall where ever they may. She is fine and is due anytime now. My next advise is for her not to stop calling a baby a bady and have more of them.

@@fedesetrtatio1 Yeah well fair play to you, I hope the point hit home and that she is blessed with healthy children and that God saves them all.

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vdsasfds

This is why I never took Rogan as seriously as his fanboys do. His level of inquiry is so utterly pedestrian when met with perspectives he disagrees with.

@@TickleMeElmo55 pedestrian is a good word for it

Eugenics | Planned Parenthood | Social Darwinism | kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jLKTa6xh0MWbaIE.html ?vds 43asdfsda

Just because he's not a great rep for pro choice doesn't mean pro choice side doesn't have strong arguments. Just means JR isn't well thought out on the topic.

@@BourbonForageFishing exactly not well thought out because there aren’t real strong arguments for pro choice. The fact is killing is killing and 2 wrongs don’t make a right, these are basic truths civilized humanity can agree on. Actually wait I’m wrong this only applies to everything else not babies apparently 😑

No reason it can't and shouldn't do both.

They won’t feel any agony, they will feel disgust to a rapist. Do not talk as a parent like you know everything. You didnot get raped so shut up with the emotional explanation.

100% , my evidence is anecdotal but after the umpteenth post abortive woman crying about her due date or binge drinking on the anniversary of their abortion made me change my mind.

What happens if taking the baby to term will kill the mother? Do you let the baby live and the mother die? What happens if both the baby and mother will die? Do you let them both die?

@@debuthunter5389 That's a risk you have to take. Murdering a baby shouldn't ever be an option. Luckily that scenario is extremely rare.

What do you mean bully homosexuality?

@@sudafedup I think Joe is more liberal in regard to sexuality so what he means is that when someone says that homosexual behaviour is deplorable (it is) on his show he bullies them

@@apoliticaldeviant1262 I've seen him get angry at guests for disagreements with his positions sometimes but I don't think that qualifies as bullying, but I guess we have a different lines as to what bullying is. I dunno. I won't argue why I don't think homosexual behavior is deplorable as it's off topic, but if someone feels strongly about a position I can see why they'd be upset at a guest. Though to be fair I think Joe Rogan isn't that smart of a guy on most of the topics he discusses so when his brain gets triggered by disagreements he tends to get heated.

@@sudafedup watch this clip again. See where he says "are you telling me my fourteen year old can't have an abortion after getting raped?" and see hownaggressive he gets with the guest. No one is telling him anything about his 14 year old. And he is trying to put that guy in a corner where he says its okay. Tell me thats not bullying.

@@elspethsilverstar6136 I'd call that an argument from emotion, not really "bullying." People get heated in debates and discussions a lot. But like I said, I have a different line into what constitutes bullying.

Good thing it can't hear.

@@topercaker2646 No, she literally doesn't. Roe v Wade was overturned recently. She has no "rights" to an abortion. Wake up.

You can, because it's still her baby.

@@elf-lordsfriarofthemeadowl2039 Mother's don't suddenly have the right to murder their babies.... That's not how the law works. Lol 😆🤦

Yeah except he sneers when Joe talks, f him.