General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Scott Charney
CNN
comments

Comments by "Scott Charney" (@scottcharney1091) on "She was fed up with anti-abortion protesters, so she broadcast them on TikTok" video.

Many of them have a problem with contraception also.
64
@electricblue2920 No, the point isn't the species. Personhood, the characteristics by which we decide that killing is wrong, is what makes all the difference.
5
@Nah Brah Your Wrong Abortion doesn't cause sterility, unless of course we're referring to unsafe, black-market abortions.
4
@electricblue2920 Which comment does this refer to?
4
@electricblue2920 Personhood is always how it starts, then people start making qualifications/exceptions. We all do; don't kid yourself.
4
@electricblue2920 The DNA is irrelevant, and the dependency is a quasi-parasitic state. Nobody can force you to donate blood or an organ, even if the potential recipient will die otherwise.
4
@electricblue2920 Embryos have no innocence, nor do they have guilt. They aren't developed enough for that sort of thing. (Also, is English not your first language? If it is not your first language, you are doing pretty well! If it is, then you need some help!)
4
@electricblue2920 How does it not make sense? Nobody minds not being born. Nobody can have a preference about it. No one's autonomy/wishes are violated.
4
@electricblue2920 I don't remember deleting a comment, but I might have had a typo or something. Anyway, you've missed the point. Someone else can presumably be found to take care of a child, and said child is no longer in that quasi-parasitic state with a host organism.
4
@electricblue2920 As a matter of fact, refusing to donate organs can indeed kill one's own children. I'm referring to actual children there, with personhood, not mindless embryos/fetuses.
4
@electricblue2920 Embryos & fetuses lack said rights. Yes, this does stem from science, along with the philosophical question of why/when/how we judge killing to be wrong.
4
@electricblue2920 Innocence doesn't apply here. Embryos have neither innocence nor guilt. They lack the capacity. Being aborted is no punishment.
4
@electricblue2920 No, you are dense if you can't grasp why such concepts as innocence don't apply to embryos. (Incidentally, in legalese, those judged to be not guilty are not necessarily innocent, but in the judgment of the jury and/or judge, the evidence against them did not meet the standard required for a conviction.) That bit about a rubber ball is actually apt, in that one can't judge a ball as being guilty or innocent, the same as with an embryo.
4
@electricblue2920 Right, but they can still be accused of a crime, and then found incapable of understanding the nature of their acts. No one can accuse an embryo of anything. Guilt & innocence don't apply.
4
@mattpowell6291 Hardy-fucking-har.
3
@doomguyayy What does fascism have to do with Christianity? Francisco Franco, Efrain Rios Montt, and many others have shown us.
3
@mattpowell6291 No, you don't. Abortions usually involve embryos. That's not in dispute.
2
@mattpowell6291 That has nothing to do with it.
2
@jj8stin Embryos aren't babies yet.
2
@westdeuce The phrase is "rite of passage," i.e. a ceremony (or act of some type) that marks one's transition to adulthood, or to another new place in society, or whatever. No, nobody is saying that about abortion.
2
@MaryJones-rx3my They have biological autonomy, among other things. They're not in a quasi-parasitic relationship with a woman. Someone can presumably found to take care of them. They have personhood. They have no capacity to be guilty of anything, so I don't know about the usefulness of the word "innocent," but they definitely are persons.
2
@MaryJones-rx3my How is abortion a punishment, or anything worse? Nobody minds not being born.
2
@MaryJones-rx3my And if you weren't? So what?
2
@MaryJones-rx3my There isn't any murder involved. Regarding newborns, they aren't in such a situation. They have personhood. Someone can presumably to take care of them. There's a difference.
2
@MaryJones-rx3my No, not every human is a person. Newborns are no longer in a quasi-parasitic relationship with a perhaps unwilling host. In contrast, someone can presumably be found to take care of a newborn.
2
@MaryJones-rx3my True, but embryos and fetuses aren't children.
2
@guardtheham1233 In a lot of cases, simply going through with the pregnancy is the problem, not only childrearing. You will notice also that very few unwanted pregnancies lead to adoption.
2
@JLitt-us4vs First, embryos aren't babies. Second, the word is "you're."
2
@joshlock4627 Stop shouting. Embryos aren't infants. They lack personhood, and thus they have no choice in the matter. There's no harm in not being born.
1
@ericapoitras9223 Secular pro-lifers don't, but the religious ones (the majority) have become (or always have been) uneasy with contraception. For one thing, they have a problem with unmarried people having sex in general, and particularly sex without "consequences" (they sometimes use that term) in general. For another, many are convinced that the most effective contraceptives (IUDs and implants, often referred to as LARCs [Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptives]) are actually abortifacients. Some say the same about emergency contraception as well. They also subscribe to a concept called "risk compensation," in which a false sense of security leads to people acting in ways that end up harming themselves and others. It's studied in relation to (for example) protective gear in some sports. In this context, the idea is that people will get a false sense of security due to contraception, and have so much sex (or become lax about proper use) that eventually they will have a contraceptive failure. Do a search for the phrase "contraceptive mentality," and you'll see what I'm talking about. For an early look at these developments, search for an article titled "Contra-contraception."
1
@mattpowell6291 Embryos aren't babies. They are human, but not persons yet. They have no rights.
1
I'm on your side, but there's no such thing as a soul.
1
The theocrats aren't gone yet, that's what's happening. If you're not armed yet (in any way that's feasible for you), and at least loosely organized and prepared, you should be.
1
@samuelsouza3054 What baby?
1
@samuelsouza3054 Also, no, the vast majority of women who have abortions feel relief, not regret.
1
@samuelsouza3054 There's no harm in not being born. Abortion usually involves embryos, sometimes fetuses, but never babies. There it is again: "easy way out for irresponsible women." You want to punish people for having sex.
1
@Diana-xm1dm If so, how would you like to punish women who have abortions? You don't have to be too specific. Keep in mind that this would require investigating every miscarriage in the country.
1
@ladyofbast250 Exactly (also: *you're).
1
@samuelsouza3054 Embryos aren't babies.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Yes, of course human embryos and human fetuses are human. Nobody is saying otherwise. The issue is personhood, and that comes later. There is no baby involved. If you want to remove choices from people, then you want to punish them.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Yes, human babies are human. That's not the point. Personhood makes all the difference. The factors/criteria therein constitute why we generally decide that killing is wrong, by our actions or inactions.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Again, species is not the deciding factor. There's no harm in not being born.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Those are not the same thing. If you stop to think about why we usually say that killing is wrong, it becomes easier to understand.
1
@samuelsouza3054 The first clause is true, but your last one is not, as there is no baby involved.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Abortion involves embryos (usually) and fetuses (sometimes), but not babies.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Human? Of course. That's not the deciding factor, personhood is. There's no such thing as "late term abortion," as the phrase "late term" in obstetrics refers to pregnancies that have persisted past the due date. Also, no, fetuses and embryos are not infants yet. That comes later.
1
@samuelsouza3054 No, personhood is not synonymous with humanity. It consists of the characteristics by which we decide that killing is wrong. Ob/gyns do not use the phrase "late-term abortion," and I doubt that PP employees are still saying it. If they are, they should get with the times and stop.
1
@samuelsouza3054 On the contrary, you are lying to yourself. Plugs are pulled every day; people seem to love "justifiable homicide;" you probably have no idea how many embryos are destroyed as part of IVF (an example for you)... all of us, due to our actions or inactions, play a role in a huge number of deaths every day. The same people who most strongly oppose abortion were also the strongest supporters of the war against Iraq. Their beloved Trump vetoed legislation to cut off the Saudi-led war against Yemen that is causing a humanitarian disaster that has killed well over 100,000 people and is threatening millions more. Don't kid yourself. There are criteria that determine whether or not killing really bothers us. Face the facts.
1
@samuelsouza3054 No, embryos & fetuses are not babies, and have neither innocence nor guilt. They lack personhood. There's no harm in not being born. Don't put words in my mouth; I'm referring to people who claim to be pro-life showing a great deal of antipathy towards life- the life of sentient persons, at that. That's why I mentioned Trump. He gained the support of those who claim to be pro-life, and yet his highly lethal actions didn't bother them. I'm pointing out their gross hypocrisy. The gunwalking scandal began under Bush (Operation Wide Receiver), but I certainly don't defend the Obama administration for continuing it. Regarding al-Qaeda and ISIS, you're referring to Syria, and I also don't support the way that the Obama administration (indirectly and directly) supported such people as part of an attempt to overthrow the government in Damascus. (Note that this was the Israeli preference as well.) The point is that Obama never claimed to be "pro-life," so there's not any hypocrisy at hand regarding abortion.
1
@samuelsouza3054 Let's try this again. Abortion is not inhumane (I'm not sure what "is very guilty" means in that sentence), while the lack of access to safe, legal abortion is in fact inhumane. The lethal actions I'm referring to are the kinds of policies, foreign and domestic, that kill a huge number of people and yet the "pro-lifers" don't mind or support. There have been roughly a handful of casualties resulting from pro-choice direct actions, as opposed to a long list of deaths and injuries (some of them permanent) committed by "pro-lifers." When it comes to property destruction, the balance is also not even close.
1
Besides that, it's not like anyone minds not being born anyway!
1
@jboydayz Surely you know how the anti-choicers harass patients (and those who escort said patients). It's not hard to find.
1
@jeffwvu4602 Baby?
1
@jj8stin *you're
1
@Tom-cz9op If you really think that embryos & fetuses are tantamount to babies, then you wouldn't support rape exceptions. People try to have it both ways.
1
@Coolkc456 Contraception is the key to limiting abortions; that 47% figure primarily comes from human error (due to lack of education, forgetfulness, being under the influence, etc.). Outright contraceptive failure is rare. This is why subsidizing LARCs (Long-Acting-Reversible-Contraceptives [IUDs & implants]) along with accurate sex-ed has cratered the abortion rate in many places- The Contraceptive Choice Project in St. Louis, a program focused on teens in Colorado, Upstream USA in Delaware, etc. The God Squad seem to have a problem with this, however. They want to punish people for having sex.
1
@Tom-cz9op It's often extremely difficult to get sterilized: "You don't have any/enough kids; you're too young; you'll change your mind; smart people aren't having enough kids; white people aren't having enough kids; what if you meet a billionaire and he wants kids; you're not married; you're married but we need your spouse's consent," and so on. I was lucky; the first urologist I went to treated me like an adult.
1
@Coolkc456 This is off the subject now, but more people should know that combining condoms with withdrawal is nearly foolproof.
1
@georgelenny1694 Brainwaves don't indicate a mind. Not even close, actually.
1
@MirrimBlackfox Note also that most people who get abortions already have at least one child.
1
@laurastreet7600 You just wouldn't exist. You wouldn't care. Had I been aborted, so what? There's no harm done.
1
@TheGuiltsOfUs There is no almighty.
1
@JLitt-us4vs They're a nonprofit.
1
@jboydayz Oh really? What do you call this (and there's a lot more where this came from, unfortunately)? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF5LPrAz6nA&ab_channel=everysaturdaymorning https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcFaGh4HesQ&ab_channel=DemocracyNow%21
1
@westdeuce Rape is severely underreported, so no, the number is much higher than that. Do you think that every woman who gets an abortion fills out a questionnaire regarding their reasons? In any case, it doesn't matter. Said reasons are nobody else's business.
1
@westdeuce It's not required to give a reason in, for example, Connecticut: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/AG/Press_Releases/2022/SG-Post-Dobbs-Memo-101122.pdf Why the hell do you think that USA Today is leftist!?? It's a major corporate capitalist news publication! It's not Crimethinc or Anarcho-Syndicalist Review or Democratic Left (no, not a reference to the party!) or whatever. Thanks to the Hyde Amendment, unfortunately no public funding can go towards abortion, although an eye-popping amount can go towards war, but never mind. Yes, I have a job. PP provides a great deal of healthcare, including contraception and sex-ed that reduce the abortion rate, not to mention various other things that save us all money in the big picture.
1
@Coolkc456 Exactly. She might have been lying to you, or he was, or he "stealthed" her, or perhaps it broke, etc.
1
@Coolkc456 Indeed. Exactly.
1
@georgelenny1694 You just entered crackpot territory.
1
@Green Blue And? What's the harm in not being born?
1
@Green Blue You're only seeing it from your own vantage point. There's no harm for anyone in not being born; they just wouldn't exist. (In fact, there's a convincing case that not existing is the ideal outcome.) The right to choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy does not hinge on whether or not their hypothetical child will be a great friend someday.
1
@Green Blue Embryos aren't babies. The issue isn't one of life, but of personhood, the characteristics that make killing wrong. Embryos & fetuses don't have that. No one is harmed by not being born.
1
@Green Blue It's a misnomer. Fetuses haven't sprung off.
1
@shanenguyen3867 So what?
1
@Green Blue They haven't sprung off from the host organism, which is what the phrase means (I think), but that's completely beside the point. Life? Yes. Personhood (the characteristics that make killing wrong)? No. That comes later, and it makes all the difference.
1
@Green Blue People always mention comas. No, that's very different. For one thing, I might be wrong about this, but while doctors can assess the likelihood of a comatose patient emerging from their coma (and what condition they will be in when they do awaken), I don't think that doctors can predict when a coma might end. For another, comatose people already had personhood, obviously, and the hope is that they'll regain it. It's case-by-case, hence the decisions to continue life support or not.
1
@Green Blue That seems to describe the cases when the plug is pulled.
1
@Green Blue If someone has no (or virtually no) chance of awakening, or if a hypothetical awakening would leave them in a state that isn't much better, that's the kind of case in which life support is discontinued. They aren't going to regain consciousness, sentience, the will to live, and everything else that is taken away when a person is killed.
1
@teopalafox How so?
1
@teopalafox That's your opinion. In this case, don't have an abortion.
1
@teopalafox Indeed, that's the point, abortion is a morally neutral act, unlike the others that you mention. There's no harm in not being born.
1
@teopalafox Indeed, but there's no murder involved.
1
@teopalafox Embryos & fetuses aren't children.
1
@teopalafox I do know what it means in Latin. Also, "sex" is Latin for "six." So what?
1
@teopalafox Yes, as I said, I know that's what it means in Latin. The thing is, it's different in English, as fetuses haven't sprung off. And yes, of course human fetuses are human. Nobody is claiming otherwise.
1
I'm pro-choice and I shoot back! You ought to be armed against these people! I am.
1
@electricblue2920 Fetuses haven't sprung off. They aren't children yet. In fact, abortion usually involves embryos, not even children.
1
@electricblue2920 Embryos & fetuses have neither innocence nor guilt. They are capable of neither. There's no harm in not being born.
1
@electricblue2920 No, innocence is impossible for embryos/fetuses to have. There's no harm in not being born.
1
@electricblue2920 The idea of punishment is relevant, but never mind that now. Embryos don't have innocence because they don't even have minds. They can't do anything at all; they can't exist outside of their quasi-parasitic state. They aren't people yet. The very ideas of innocence and guilt don't apply to them. Those concepts imply the capacity to do things, or not do them. All of the rights lie with the pregnant woman.
1
@electricblue2920 You missed the point again. Anyway, there is no murder involved. The best forms of contraception are often either out-of-reach or poorly understood (including by doctors, many of whom don't realize that IUDs can be used by nulliparous women). However, as we have seen again and again, comprehensive sex-ed (not absti-nonsense) considerably reduces unplanned pregnancy rates, and when it's planned with subsidized LARCs, the abortion rate collapses. Most people who claim to oppose abortion are not big supporters of that sort of thing, however.
1
@MaryJones-rx3my That's not true. Only about five percent of woman who have abortions regret it. Most express relief.
1
@jesussaves8549 There it is. You want to punish people for having sex. Also, by "real contraception" you are referring to IUDs & implants, right? LARCs? That drastically lowers abortion rates.
1
@guardtheham1233 How so? What am I getting wrong? Please be specific.
1
@guardtheham1233 I don't believe in fairy tales, there is no murder involved, and embryos & fetuses have neither innocence nor guilt. There's no harm in not being born.
1