Comments by "Mark Zuckergecko" (@markzuckergecko621) on "The Dumbest Takes On Roe v Wade Compilation" video.

I'm not really hardcore on one side or the other on the abortion issue, my personal view is that it's gross, and immoral, but I do understand that there are certain extraordinary circumstances where the one moral wrong can't supercede other moral wrongs that could come from not doing it - it's complicated. And more importantly I don't generally support sweeping federal laws on things that are so hotly contested, so I think the best compromise is to leave it at the state level. But with all that said, I don't think there's any denying that the majority of the crazy we're seeing these days is coming from the pro abortion side. And before I get any "well, actually..." Replies, yes, I'm aware of the anti abortion nutters that attack abortion clinics, and back 20 years ago you may be right that they're more crazy. But these days the pendulum has swung, and not only in the crazy way, in the ignorance way too. It seems like the majority of pro abortion people don't really know anything at all about existing laws, they don't know what Roe means, they don't even have a real coherent reason why they hold their position, it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric about "women's rights", or "bodily autonomy" their arguments are always a convoluted mess of nonsense, they have to try and set up "gotcha" traps to get people who disagree in some kind of imagined hypocrisy. The anti abortion argument is simple and straight forward - abortion is murder, murder is wrong. And maybe you disagree with that argument, but that's the argument, it's consistent and doesn't require an entire owners manual of mental gymnastics to support. So I've floated closer to that side than I've been in the past.
33
@oneoflokis except not everyone agrees that it's a women's rights or human rights issue, in fact a lot of people think that performing an abortion is stealing the human rights of an unborn baby that has no defense and no say in the matter. Maybe you disagree with that (obviously you do), and that's fair, but to pretend like everyone who disagrees with you is somehow against human rights is just plain dishonest and childish.
22
@shobvious it's not a religious view at all, there's definitely a strong correlation to religious beliefs, but as you stated, there are many religious people who don't think it's murder, but there are also atheists (like myself) who do think it's murder, most libertarians are anti abortion, and libertarians are largely secular. But "causing undue harm" is generally the line in the sand libertarians draw for when government intervention is necessary, that's what separates them from anarchists. Trying to make it a religious thing is ignorant at best, dishonest at worst. Do better.
9
@jayg1438 does she have to be in the 3rd trimester? I thought it was considered a double homicide if any pregnant woman was murdered. Genuine question, I don't know.
2
@zapazap yea sure buddy. We know where your head was at🤣
2
Republicans' general platform has always been to not fuck anything up too bad, to keep the "status quo", democrats' platform has always been to fuck things up as badly as possible and blame it on Republicans, to rally a base of rage voters.
2
@acbower4468 it's just a cop out for identitarians who make sweeping generalizations on how people should vote, according to their race or sex, etc etc. And when it's pointed out "well there's black Republicans....." They'll just say they're "voting against their interests". They're basically saying that anyone who belongs to a class that they think should belong to their preferred ideology doesn't actually have any personal agency, and they're just tokens to further their agenda. They're just too stupid to realize that's what they're saying, or they think you're too stupid to realize that's what they're saying.
1
@naasking I'm genuinely curious what a porn porn waiver would be. Also pretty funny, I'm pretty sure the OP meant "waver" and not "waiver". Adds another layer of curiosity to the whole thing🤣
1
@topcatmatt there are many people on the left advocating for unrestricted abortion up to the point of birth.
1
@topcatmatt I'm sure my link will get deleted, because you know. Leftist censorship. But it's an article from the NYT stating that all but one 2020 democrat candidate supported abortion even up to 24 weeks, when the fetus is generally viable outside of the womb.
1
@madashell7224 why does every leftist argument somehow equate to "just give people more stuff for free!!"? You act like it's some kind of hypocrisy when people say you shouldn't kill unborn babies because it's inconvenient, and they also don't want to give people free stuff, when that's completely consistent. It's about encouraging personal responsibility. It's not even about forcing anything, it's just saying "hey, don't do stupid shit, and if you do stupid shit don't expect a stranger to bail you out". No hypocrisy there. Maybe you don't agree. But someone isn't a hypocrite just because they don't think your stupid decisions are their responsibility.
1
@topcatmatt yes, exactly, the overwhelming majority of mainstream Democrats support abortions up to the point of viability, meaning that many of these babies would be fully viable outside of the womb. Which is precisely what you're dishonestly claiming is not true.
1
@Stan lmao, "he's going for the "tire you out by beating my ass, and hopefully hurt your hand" method. It's a bold strategy, Cotton!"
1
@madashell7224 well what I mean is that it's not as simple as saying "I believe in the mothers rights, therefore I'm for human rights and you're against human rights", because a lot of people think an unborn baby is also a person. And in the argument of what a person is throughout time, it tends to only expand, not retract. The left used to think slaves weren't people, you were wrong then, and history will probably show you to be wrong again this time. And unborn baby will always be a fully formed adult human, without any intervention resulting in their death, they will never be something else though. It's never going to be a chair, or a rhinoceros, or a poem, it's always going to be a human baby.
1
Because they don't have any principles, they just want power.
1
@sheeplebeware9511 but nearly every decision you make can potentially effect someone else negatively, but when it comes to abortion we're not talking about a potential effect, we're talking about the necessary effect of terminating an unborn baby, that's the specific purpose of the procedure. The jab is an attempt at reducing risk, making a mandate or law to potentially reduce risk is completely separate than a mandate or law to prevent a specific procedure with a specific desired outcome.
1