Comments by "Ego Brain" (@egobrain6826) on "Ana Kasparian Calls Out Anti White Nonsense" video.

 @Len-jk4zi "bodily autonomy is more important" Except for the body autonomy of the body that was put there through no fault of its own?
6
 @Len-jk4zi Babies are also people with the right to boduly autonomy.
5
 @kylespringer2355 Exactly. 😂 They want to be garden tools with no consequences.
5
 @ronaldjeffrey8712 Exactly. There are an overload of choices that can be made that are not murder.
5
 @Len-jk4zi Forgive us for considering the well being of their son or daughter that the woman put there willingly.
5
 @skylerarndt3179 Exactly.
4
 @Len-jk4zi No, it is not about someone else's body when they jab you against your will. It isn't stopping others from getting it, first of all. Second of all, the person is not sick.
4
 @Len-jk4zi It doesn't have to be murdered at that point. It can be born.
4
 @Len-jk4zi The mother gave consent when she put her son or daughter there.
4
@Len-jk4zi Recognizing that there are 2 bodies and one of them cannot deprive the other of its bodily autonomy just because she isn't pleased with the consequences of her own actions that put it there, is not taking away bodily rights. It is protecting the other body when there is no reason to end it. Inconvenience is not an appropriate reason to murder.
3
 @charchartay For real. 😂
3
@Len-jk4zi She willingly did the action that we all know would put her son or daughter there. That is full consent. No. Her autonomy was the choice to give herself a son or daughter in the first place. No, responsibility means being responsible for your own actions. Responsibility in this case is to care for the human son or daughter she created with full consent. Murdering her son/daughter is the exact opposite of responsibility. The "day and age" is not excuse for murder.
3
@Len-jk4zi It is full consent. We are talking about a human life. Once she consents and creates her son and daughter, she can't (I don't mean legally. Law does not equal right) just take back consent. It is done. She created a son/daughter. She knew her actions could result in a son/daughter. She knew that their normal stage of development uses her body for sustenance for a few months. She consented to this being done. Consenting to secks (censor), consents to pregnancy. Full stop. Or she can do what I did and get a tubal ligation. Her autonomy was all of the choices that led to her son/daughter being created. It is her choice of the many forms of contraception. It is also her option of adoption. Law does not equal right. The law allowing one person to end anothernis the law exceeding its proper functions. I'm not the one giving consent. The mother did. I'm a woman.
2
@Len-jk4zi "There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because law makes them so. Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it." "The Law" by Frederick Bastiat
2
 @Whickedlee Calling it a fetus is how they dehumanize it. It is a euphemism to make murder sound more pleasant. Pregnant women do not call babies they want a fetus.
1
@Len-jk4zi Fault does matter in this context. And the mother has no right to violate her son or daughter's autonomy unless they are an actual threat to her life.
1
@Len-jk4zi Yes, it is. The Mother knowingly put her son or daughter there. That is where that son or daughter begins. Tge mother had plenty of autonomy to make personal choices that created her child. She gave explicit consent. Boy how you hate the idea of being responsible for your actions. 😄
1
@Len-jk4zi False. We are talking about a human life. Not a sock. Her son/daughter. Not an unimportant, inanimate object. Once she consents to its creation and it is created, consent cannot be taken back. That is murder. Any law that allows that is a law that exceeds its function. Her having secks is consent. Unless she makes the claim and files a gRape report, she consented. Her having secks is explicit consent. She knows that human life can be created from secks and she knows that her son/daughter will reside in ber body. She consents. It isn't violating her right. She chose to put the human life there. Her son/daughter is a human life in a normal stage of development. Human life. Even the US definition of murder is the ending of a human. That is exactly what this is. Her choices is consent. If she was not gRaped anf if her son/daughter is not a true and real risk to her life, ending it is murder. I am the one that just said law doesn't equal right. Lmfao. You were advocating for the following of laws and I said that and now you're using my argument? Bahaha And it is absolutely correct. Allowing the ending of humans, which is the law now, is the law overstepping its function and is not just. You "helping her" is also not just. It makes you an accomplice to murder. Of a baby.
1
@Len-jk4zi Secks is consent. Stop pretending that women are clueless and don't know how their children are made. It is insulting.
1