Comments by "Daily Wire Third Stringer" (@DailyWireThirdStringer) on "Supreme Court strikes down restrictive abortion law in Louisiana" video.

@Helliott1218 Lifelong member of the Libertarian Party here, anyone feel like joining me?! We have guns and plenty of weed! Anything that makes you happy!
2
@jeckjeck3119 I hope it doesn't. I could really use another break right now. I need time to watch all of Star Trek.
2
@jeckjeck3119 The government has the power to outlaw murder. That's one of the fundamental laws of civil society. Is abortion not murder of a perfectly healthy and developing human baby? I think there's room for compromise though: any reason is acceptable before 6 months, after 6 month threshold (3rd trimester) permission will be granted only if the life of the mother is threatened.
1
@jeckjeck3119 If that's your reasoning, then the cutoff should be pushed back to 20 weeks. Fetuses have been known to survive after only 20 weeks gestation, or about half the total time it normally takes to develop. I say 3rd trimester though because it gives mothers a little more time to decide if they want to follow through with their decision.
1
@jeckjeck3119 With machines obviously. But why does that matter? All life is precious regardless of age.
1
@jeckjeck3119 So are you telling me that all the thousands of people hooked up to ventilators or life support are not alive right now? That we should just unplug them because they're dead anyway? If we have the means and the resources to do so, we should be trying to keep people alive, no? What about the people with diabetes who would die without their daily dose of insulin? Are they not alive either? You have a very weird definition of "life"...
1
@jeckjeck3119 How is birth any different? It's just another stage of life. Our life starts at conception and ends at death. That is science. So I still don't see the relevance of the use of life-sustaining machines immediately following birth as opposed to any other point in the lifespan. How do you explain that reasoning?
1
@Helliott1218 Well that's somewhat relieving. It's not nearly as egregious if that's the case. Even though it's still morally wrong it does some good if fewer children are born into poverty, fewer parents fall below the poverty line because they added a child to their household, and we stave off the effects of overpopulation. Still, even after accounting for all those things, it's hard to make the case that crushing the head of perfectly healthy baby in its 8th month and sucking it out in a vacuum is the right thing to do.
1
@jeckjeck3119 A parasite? You know that you were a fetus once too right? As a matter of fact we all were. Every single human in existence was a fetus at one point. Those aren't parasites, they're people. Plato, Julius Caesar, Marco Polo, Nicholas Copernicus, William Shakespeare, Galileo Galilei, Issac Newton, John Locke, George Washington, Queen Victoria, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, everyone. How is that hard to understand? Life starts at conception, ask any biologist. Sperm and egg meet to form a zygote, which divides rapidly to form a human infant ready to exit the womb. In no single instance in the entire human species has a baby been conceived and born the next day. It has never happened even once. Killing a viable fetus is no different than murder. I'll say it again: life begins at CONCEPTION. If you refuse to at least acknowledge that scientific fact then there is no way we can engage in polite, civilized debate.
1
@jeckjeck3119 That is not what "life" means. According to Princeton University: "Life begins at fertilization with the embryo's conception." This is a SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS among biologists and doctors who STUDY this for a living. Argue that 7 months is when a baby starts "living" all you want, but you are denying basic human biology and we cannot have a reasoned debate on such an erroneous premise. Here is my source in case you don't believe me: https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html
1
@jeckjeck3119 Oh and by the way, I'm not sure if you knew this but parasites are in fact LIVING ORGANISMS. You just contradicted your own argument.
1
@jeckjeck3119 What the hell are you talking about?! Princeton is a private Ivy League research university. Apparently you don't do your research before making your arguments (I already knew that once you started denying that an embryo is a living organism), but all you're doing now is demonstrating it further. Good job, maybe if you keep commenting I can find more egregious errors and false premises to tear your position apart with 😉
1
@jeckjeck3119 Ah so you do admit that embryos and fetuses are living human beings then? Good, I'm glad you're finally starting to come around to OBJECTIVE SCIENCE and the TRUTH.
1
@jeckjeck3119 And no you shouldn't because pro-choicism isn't science. And Princeton isn't exactly what you would call a "conservative" university 😂🤣
1
@jeckjeck3119 The scientific consensus is that viruses are not living organisms. Cells, on the other hand, are living organisms. They can multiply and differentiate to form a cohesive unit, which is exactly how an embryo is formed. Therefore, scientists and doctors also agree that an embryo is a living organism as well.
1
@jeckjeck3119 You said my evidence was pro-life. It isn't, it's scientific fact. Coming from one of the most prestigious (and nonpartisan) universities in the nation. And those pro-life arguments you presented aren't scientific. What's scientific is that a fetus is alive and capable of varying degrees of self-sufficiency. These aren't my words, these are that of the medical experts. Take it up with them if you don't like it.
1
@Helliott1218 I saw your death penalty comment but unfortunately it looks like CensorTube deleted it. Anyway, to answer your question no I do not agree with the death penalty. I think there are worse punishments that can be given while someone is alive. Allow me to explain: if you just committed mass murder (in which you were ready to die anyway either by someone defending themselves or by the police), and you were tried and convicted, which would you prefer: being sentenced to death (and possibly waiting years on death row), or living out the rest of your miserable rotten life in a jail cell eating nothing except one bowl of rice and a glass of water every day? Day in, day out in total isolation and possibly suffering from starvation. Which is the scarier outcome? That's the kind of torture these human filth need to be put through, both to get some justice for the victims and as a better deterrent for possible future criminals. Additionally, if the suspect was miraculously found innocent of the crime (as does happen on occasion), then he/she is still alive and able to be released immediately. An innocent man/woman wasn't sentenced to death. It's a win-win all the way around.
1
@Helliott1218 Not exactly. It's not cruel or inhumane to feed one a simple diet, and solitary confinement is already standard practice in American prisons. But yes, for the 1/1,000 who are wrongly convicted they will be suffering (not torture per se) until they're proven innocent.
1
@Helliott1218 I could spend a full 20 minutes replying to someone only to have CensorTube delete the comment immediately after posting it. And nothing I said in the comment was offensive. It's just ridiculous.
1
@jeckjeck3119 Okay I'm really growing tired of this debate. This has gone on for far too long already. So the results for viruses being living organism are mixed: it depends on your definition of "life." Viruses are dependent on a host to survive, much like an embryo and early fetus. So if you contend that they are indeed alive according to science, then you must also accept that the human embryo is alive as well. And I take issue with your wine analogy for one reason: grapes do not become wine on their own. Provided the mother is getting the necessary amount of nutrients to keep her and her baby alive, her child (statistically speaking) will develop and eventually reach the point of self-sufficiency. It is inevitable. So any time a mother gets an abortion, she is killing a human that would have had a chance to grow and (save for some rare congenital condition) become a fully-fledged adult. That is murder any way you slice it. Now I notice that your mother did not choose to abort you. You were an embryo/fetus at one point, does that mean you weren't alive? Of course not. The cells that made up your developing body were by all scientific definitions living organisms. But those weren't just any cells, they were human cells. Bringing about an intentional death to that creature is legally defined as murder. And we are no more monsters for eating eggs than we are for eating beef, pork, poultry, lamb, venison, or meat from any other creature that walks this Earth.
1
@jeckjeck3119 Okay if you want to believe that then that's fine, but I prefer to take a stance that is more supported by science, reason and morality. And you do know that a 2-month-old fetus will grow to become a 7-month-old self-sufficient human baby in just 5 months time, right? That does not happen with viruses. They do not grow to be self-sufficient no matter how old they get. That's why I believe it's still immoral to kill a fetus at just 2 months even though it has not yet reached the point of self-sufficiency.
1
@Helliott1218 Um yes I know. I'm just using that number for the sake of argument. Are you reading through this entire debate? 😂
1
@Helliott1218 Well you have to remember that it's his child as much as it's yours. I think men should absolutely have a say in the abortion process, because half of the child's DNA comes from him. Even though it's inside your body, it's his kid too. Just imagine how upset you would be if your first child was killed without your approval or even knowing about it until after the fact. You would probably (and rightly so) be devastated. Abortion is a tough decision that should be done only with both parents' approval, not just one. Of course, this all changes if the man files for divorce, breaks up with you or just flat-out leaves. If any of those things happen then please feel free to do whatever you want with the child. That's a tough experience as well, and I can't imagine what that would be like for a woman. Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject.
1
@Helliott1218 No no it's not private at all, I'm just amused that you would devote your time to reading all of this 🤣 Please tell me though, as a neutral third-party observer: who do you think is winning? 😆
1
@jeckjeck3119 Well believe it or not, I'm actually back to work now. I'm nowhere near "essential," but where I work at people are able to socially distance safely so we've remained open since late April.
1
@jeckjeck3119 Oh God that's another show I haven't seen. To tell you the truth, I'm not much of a TV guy. I've seen The Clone Wars and Rebels (because I'm a huge Star Wars nerd) but besides that the only major show I used to watch religiously was Spongebob Squarepants. 😅 I haven't seen Game of Thrones, M*A*S*H, The Simpsons, South Park, The Walking Dead, The Office, Breaking Bad, Stranger Things, nothing. I'm really pathetic in that regard lmao.
1