Comments by "Len" (@Len-jk4zi) on "VICE News"
channel.
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PaxMundi118 "I believe that there are objective moral laws"
This has never been the case throughout history.
The world has always had differing views on morality, and depending on where you go and what circumstances you are in, morality changes.
Murder for example is something that can sometimes be "right" to the vast majority of people, as with theft.
"You contend that if one suffers significantly or has the potential to suffer significantly then it is justified to kill them. "
No, this is is not my position.
It is justified to kill those that wish to be killed because they are suffering, or to kill those that are inside of your body without your consent, or to choose not to give birth to a human being in the first place to prevent suffering.
"The best way to approach all of this confusion is the practical one: education, prevention, supporting existing systems, reforming those that are failing, etc"
This doesn't actually work, because your "objective moral laws" aren't objective, so people will never follow them.
People like me will always exist, we are a type of animal and we do not have laws beyond those of nature by default.
"Laws" are a contrivance.
If you lost your ability to speak English, you'd find yourself a lot less confident in those "objective moral laws", because you will have no way to preach them, and will be powerless in the face of those that don't agree or care.
"Do you think he should be pro-abortion?"
I haven't met anyone that is pro-abortion, just pro-choice.
I also haven't met anyone that is pro-life, just pro-overpopulation.
That said, I don't have any of those things, so your anecdote does not affect me.
I will have to make my predictions based on what I have, and based on my circumstances.
Miracles are statistically rare and I don't gamble with human lives.
"To say which life gets a chance and which life can be destroyed is playing God. It is assuming a moral responsibility no one rightfully possesses."
This is simply not true, there is no such thing as playing God; only being human.
Making decisions regarding life and death is something we all have to do, the modern world makes it less often that we have to make such literal decisions.
But throughout the course of our species, that responsibility has fallen on our shoulders time and time again.
You need to grow up a little if you view it as "playing god".
We have bigger issues to worry about, and judging people for being human does not help.
"Abortion, by its definition, involves another body, a body that is at risk of being eradicated."
That's where "my body, my choice" comes from.
You don't need to make that choice if another body isn't violating yours in the first place.
"But if you're honest you realize: you support killing. At least be honest."
I do not consider fetuses to be alive prior to birth, counting your chickens before they hatch is stupid.
Sentience is a crucial part of being a human being, and self awareness is vital to personhood.
We kill beings with greater sentience than a fetus by the thousand on a daily basis.
"I also believe life has intrinsic meaning and purpose (to love and be loved)."
I do not believe this.
Love is simply a method of making life more bearable, when we die it is over.
"A generation of beautiful black leaders, artists, engineers, inventors and doctors will never be."
The vast majority of people that don't exist would not have been so useful.
We can spend forever crying about what will "never be", but we have people that are already alive and are not adequately provided for.
The abortion rate is high, but you don't seem to care why.
Why not focus on making the world a better place so people willingly start to have children again?
"This is the opposite of justice."
You're right, it's childishness.
Instead of crying over spilled milk, you're crying into the fridge over milk you haven't poured.
People that exist are suffering FAR MORE than people that don't.
There is an infinite number of people that don't exist, and we cannot afford to increase our population by an infinite amount.
Resources are limited and we can only sustain our current population at what it is because of globalism, the Russia-Ukraine war has caused people to die of starvation.
Abortion is slowing the progression of this problem.
Do you have any other answers?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PaxMundi118 So why are those minority groups choosing abortion?
It's not abortion depopulating them, it's their choices depopulating them.
Much like any non-minority group, if given enough resources, they will willingly choose to have children.
How crappy of that specific white woman aborting purely for racial reasons.
It is absurd to claim this her racial motivations have anything to do with other people's medical decisions, though.
Blame the person, not the gun.
If you want to blame the gun, you'll have to consider ALL police racist as some of them do in fact perpetrate violence against specific racial demographics for racist reasons.
The founder of Planned Parenthood is dead.
Planned Parenthood isn't the only place women go to obtain abortions, and they're definitely not considering the agenda of a dead woman when making their own medical decisions.
A certain evil man with a narrow mustache drank water, must I swear off water too because water is anti-Semitic?
I'm not going to swear off laser eye surgery that could cure my blindness simply because it was tested on prisoners in Germany.
In a similar light, people are continuing to play Hogwarts' Legacy despite Rowling's opinions against trans people no matter their political alignment, because their intent to enjoy the game is not relevant to her political opinion.
Minorities are not suffering from abortion, they're suffering from the same thing everyone else in their financial situation is suffering from.
Poverty.
As poverty is, removing abortion as a decision for those minorities would only make their situation even worse.
It will increase discrimination against them as they are forced to populate beyond their means and resort to crime.
So here's a question for you:
Do you think abortion should only be illegal for minority groups, or is race not an issue to you?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@oscarbenigsen4538 Not everyone will be able to access your solution.
Humans are more complicated than you seem to understand, and not everyone is "tireless".
The best you've given is "this is how it would work in an ideal world", but we're not living in an ideal world, and we must make our decisions based upon reality.
I am frequently alone, frequently depressed, and there is no means to fix either.
"(please forgive. I am still growing)"
This much is evident.
What works for you doesn't work for me.
"No one but other gays would want to take in some gay guy and all the mental illnesses associated with him, along with his desire to groom children"
What the hell is wrong with you?
I might as well say that you touch children because you're a member of a church.
Any other example you used was fine, but that crosses the line.
"We really hate one another"
And you clearly have a part to play in that hatred.
"Abortion will never help these women. "
Abortion does help these women.
It enables them to remain in control of their body and decide whether or not having children is right for them.
"They need men who are willing to beat the hell out of men who get women pregnant and who will not care for them."
No.
If they don't want a pregnancy in the first place, violence will not make that pregnancy wanted, or any less expensive.
Not everybody has the great wealth that you do.
Get that through your head.
" They need extended families who would never permit their own to fall. They need The Church."
Will "The Church" provide for them if they enter as disrespectful atheists?
Your religion isn't for everyone, and unless you'd take people in that hate your guts and never expect them to change, they don't need the church.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
We cannot have exemplary role models if the cost of labor declines as the cost of living rises.
People that live close to or below the poverty line have the most "unrestrained sex" of any demographic, and parenthood is not anywhere near feasible for them to handle.
The triplets experiment has already proven that you cannot "raise" a human being to follow a specific path, it's in their blood before they're born.
People that have the potential to do well in life will often fail if they do not have the resources.
This does not mean that if everybody was fully provided for that everyone would function well in society, but there are plenty of "average" people that are physically and mentally capable of doing better than they are.
College isn't in everyone's future.
Not everyone is cut out for a high-paying job, but everybody is still alive.
Poor people still have the inclinations of human beings that aren't poor, they need intimate relationships to give their lives meaning, and intimate relationships means sex.
Those of us with less to live for than you will never live our lives up to your expectations.
Your expectations only work for the people with the means to meet them.
We are all animals, and we all want to enjoy our lives.
People that don't enjoy their lives tend to do bad things.
They tend to care less about human lives because their own life isn't valuable to them.
If I don't value my own life, why would I value yours?
Why would I value the life of a fetus that I don't even consider to be a person, especially if it's going to impoverish and potentially kill me?
Why would I endure the fear of a hospital visit for something I do not value?
Human misery is on the rise, and abortion is one of the things that is slowing its' progression.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Tam-Ruh4856 It's the winning argument, as without 100% effective methods of protection, healthy, responsible individuals with healthy intimate relationships will sometimes become pregnant when they are unprepared to raise children.
That said, it is not a reasonable expectation that people should be prepared to raise children before they have sex, nor is it a reasonable expectation that they give birth should conception occur.
Abstinence is not an option for these people, they're in healthy intimate relationships and they must fulfill their partner's needs, or the relationship must end.
Telling people to end their relationships is an absurdity, and you know it.
Telling them to have less intimacy when they're already happy isn't going to win you any favor, either.
If the cost of something is too high, people turn to piracy and other methods of circumventing the price.
They'd rather take gambles to get what they want or need and worry about the consequences later, and large enough numbers of people avoiding consequences becomes a societal problem that you WILL have to deal with.
Look at countries like India, where everything everywhere smells like human waste.
If that's what you want, keep going the way you're going.
If not, grow up and start advocating for adults to make the decisions they need to make without harassment from the law.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@John-ls4xh Superb triple negative.
You have zero credibility and your anecdotes cannot be proven, and it is counterproductive to your argument if they are.
Abortion typically is not a mistake, as in 95% of cases, it is the right decision for all involved.
That said, you were free to do what you think was a mistake, others should not be denied the very same freedom that you have already enjoyed.
Women are free to decide what they do or don't regret, you can find plenty of stories of women that regret giving birth, and they are FAR more horrifying in comparison.
Abortion causes less bleeding than childbirth, with childbirth having over twice as many casualties.
Deadly force is deadly force.
No, it is not an "equivalence" to murder, it's just deadly force.
This is pointless to argue, I listen to far too many court cases for this "talking point" to be worthwhile.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@carsonsmusic You mean the fetus?
Fetuses do not have sentient minds and are not people.
I'm not particularly concerned with bills that ensure women remain the primary patient in abortion care, it's better for their health.
"because only half (51%) of people who had abortions used any form of birth control"
This is false information, as this data cannot be accurately gathered due to people having the right of privacy.
That said, the supposed half that DID use birth control and had it fail should not be punished for those that opted not to use birth control.
Sometimes, birth control may not be taken due to unexpected circumstances.
This is not a valid reason to punish women by stripping them of their right to bodily autonomy, either.
Abortion as a primary form of birth control is a myth.
It isn't healthy, it is expensive, and there are incentives to use proper birth control.
Increase the quality of sex education and stop preaching abstinence and the rates of unprotected sex will decrease.
Unfortunately for you, abortion remains a vital part of a healthy society.
Vilifying sex accomplishes one thing; creating resentment and ignorance.
When a tyrannical state government outlaws abortion, people perceive that as an anti-sex stance as it greatly increases the risk with no good reason.
This causes individuals to stop listening to anti-sex rhetoric and reduces birth control awareness by making sex a taboo topic.
This doesn't make members of our species any less sexual in nature and without a significant increase in asexuality, greatly raises the number of accidental and teenage pregnancies.
Of course, the impact of this is greater and significantly more concerning on individuals that come from less fortunate families.
As is regularly observed, the first world has a lower birth rate than developing countries, and there are several factors to point to as the cause.
For one, poorer people tend to have access to lower quality education, and tend to "misbehave" more due to the hardship that comes with their circumstances.
This misbehavior can often overwhelm the education systems that are in place, leading disadvantaged individuals to receive an even lower quality education and have no prospects.
People with no prospects in the first world cannot simply "work harder" to increase their output, first world societies must first have a place for them to work.
Typically, disadvantaged individuals are not able to secure significant enough pay to make savings AND cover medical bills for the numerous health issues that often crop up in these troubled families, so they remain have-nots.
Have-nots, as the name implies, have nothing to lose, and tend not to have any hopes for the future.
People without hope for the future are reckless, and preaching abstinence to them is not going to work.
They have sex to cope with their circumstances and aren't even likely to listen to a lecture on birth control.
At this point, little can be done for them but improving their circumstances so their offspring will be more receptive to education, but these disadvantaged families STILL exist, and they STILL are going to do what they need to do to cope with existing under such unfortunate circumstances.
I am conscious of this cycle of suffering, and recognize that improving peoples circumstances, education and increasing access to abortion services are the only ways to put an end to the cycle.
If you wish to blame those that are victims to the cycle, would you blame a tiger for killing and eating someone?
No, it's a wild, predatory animal.
It does what tigers do, and humans are going to do what humans do when they're born into poor circumstances.
If you know the next generation will follow the same path as the first and choose not to help improve their circumstances, you are stepping into the tiger enclosure.
You know what's going to happen, and it is your fault, not theirs.
Some would use this analogy to support anti-sex rhetoric, but pregnancy is actually an uncommon occurrence should one do their due diligence.
"Uncommon" still means "nearly guaranteed to happen at least once in your lifetime", but one or two abortions a lifetime is not excessive.
Should someone maintain a safe distance from the enclosure when visiting the zoo, and the tiger somehow escapes its' enclosure, one should not have to lay down and accept death when they took every necessary precaution.
Pregnancy is no different.
The cautious are already going through enough anxiety as it is, don't punish them when they're already doing their part.
1
-
@carsonsmusic Why would you want to kill people that are sleeping or in a coma?
The fetus' right to bodily autonomy is respected when it is removed from the woman's body using whatever necessary means.
Why is that?
Because its' right to bodily autonomy does not grant it a claim to *her body*.
"I believe that people should know the bare minimum about sex and that it should come from a purely biological viewpoint."
The bare minimum is not enough.
"People getting abortions know about birth control."
If you don't want to teach them about birth control, you don't have that as an excuse to hide behind.
"Whenever you push meaningless sex as empowerment, people will live on the streets"
No, people will live on the streets when their circumstances are poor enough.
Nobody is pushing sex as empowerment, it's a natural part of being human and measures should be taken to ensure people can have sex safely and responsibly.
Teaching abstinence does not work, as you cannot teach humans to stop being human.
"There will be a dramatic increase in sex. Peoples' minds will become dull and diluted."
An increase in sex isn't a bad thing, so long as it is an increase in responsible sex.
Irresponsible sex happens the most in disadvantaged communities, or communities where birth control and abortion are not readily available.
"What does telling people that you can have pleasure-based sex with people accomplish?"
They don't need to be told, they figure that out on their own.
"Babies should not be killed."
Babies are not being killed, and women can abort with impunity.
"You know that the abortion procedure and that abortion are indefensible"
Nope, that's a Carson problem, not a Len problem.
I have no issue with abortion and view it for the positive effects it has on individuals and society as a whole.
I recognize poverty as the main driving factor in rising crime rates and recognize it as the cycle it is, but you seem to have very little to say about poverty!
But hey, if you really think you can choose not to improve the quality of sex education and keep it at the "bare minimum" without people figuring it out on their own in unsafe ways, why don't you use your godlike powers to change reality to fit your narrow perspective to touch up your nothing-burger of a comment a little bit?
Your beliefs cause an increase in unsafe sex and poverty, mine shrink both and fix problems.
You create what you hate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1