General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About
King Orange
PragerU
comments
Comments by "King Orange" (@kingorange7739) on "The Most Important Question About Abortion | 5 Minute Video" video.
Dat G same. But I am more understanding of rape cases. Honestly I just think that some form of financial compensation should come to a rape victim who is pregnant.
2
Isabela Caovila Baldim true true
2
Radoslav Pantić go head and do so
2
robert rickwood Dr. Frazale Rana, Ph.D, states the following: “Instead of being passive tissue that absorbs available nutrients from the mother, the placenta dynamically distributes nutrients between mother and fetus, optimally ensuring the health of both mother and developing baby… [by] receiv[ing] metabolic signals from both the mother and fetus and respond[ing] to this input by regulating the nutrient amounts made available to the fetus.”
2
Kareem Fadel why?
1
Petr Vošoust pro life does not have a basis in religion but of basic morality in general. Also whether or not u think religion is true is not relevant unless it’s being directly used in the argument, then there is nothing u can use against said people.
1
@PetrVosoust "statement "life is infinetely valuable" is religious believe and not an argument." Intrinsically valuable. That is not rooted in religion but of basic morals in general. "1) killing annoying fly when eating lunch is ok (fly is life)" Ur right. It is not a human being. So this ain't being discussed. Society by its design is protecting our own kind first and foremost. Also do not attempt to equivalent a human being to a fly. Category 3: Irrelevant 2) "women period is ok (killing unfertilized egg with own body -> which is made from cells -> again life)" I said the life of a separate human being. until an egg is fertilized it is not yet a separate human being. Category 3: Irellevant. "3) taking medicine to kill bacteria or cure disease (based on microorganism infection) is ok..." Again, not a human being. Stop strawmanning arguments. "4) when you drink alcohol, you are killing neurons... I can go on..." Yep and they are all equally irrelevant in the grand scheme of ur argument. "so where are exact borders? a) there are none (every life is valuable - equal) then you cannot exist" I said that of human beings. "b) you are hypocrite and choosing which rule you want to obey and which you don't (as Christians always do whole life - moral or not)" What rule am I choosing not to obey? Tell me which commandment tells me I cannot kill an animal so I have food on the table.
1
Tiernan Wearen how is it feelings to say that killing an innocent human being is wrong?
1
Tiernan Wearen what are you talking about?
1
Tiernan Wearen what evidence is required? We are the ones that are advocating for the death of innocent human beings
1
Tiernan Wearen also you’re the one who made the claim so as such the burden and responsibility is on you to provide evidence when their counter claims
1
Akira Mishtokaru how so?
1
Akira Mishtokaru which is why I intend to do both
1
Last Word agreed
1
예진 why is that? What does that have to do with abortion laws?
1
Bryan Turnbow or u can just illegalize it and then deal with the problems after the fact.
1
Tightt Af someone’s own rights to their body does not extend to the right to infringe on the lives of others.
1
Tightt Af it’s not her body. The body is housing the fetus, it is by its own design. Technically it is it’s own body autonomy. I don’t care about ur uterus. I care about what’s in it the child. Also full body autonomy is a myth as there are things we restricted on to ensure the protection of human beings and to prevent exploits. This is why a 40 year old man can’t have Sex with a 14 year old girl even if she consents to it.
1
Tightt Af no it isn’t. It’s stating that we have never had full body autonomy. Also a fetus should have equal rights to a baby. Not more and not less. It is still a duty of a mother to feed her child and ensure her child does not die. This is why child neglect laws exist.
1
Tightt Af so sex isn’t physically or emotionally exhausting? Also under certain circumstances a baby can’t live without a mother. Remember breast feeding as a concept?
1
Tightt Af formula exists now but there was a time that it didn’t. So imagine for a second that formula was not an option and that breast-feeding was the only way to feed the baby, what the mother then have the right to say oh I don’t want to feed my baby because my body my choice and deliberately starve the baby to death by refusing to breast-feed it
1
Tightt Af u realize Sex can do many other destructive things right? Also if people are desperate enough not to go through these problems related to pregnancy there’s a very simple solution, don’t have sex.
1
Tightt Af again say that wasn’t available. Would a mother have the right to say “I don’t feel like feeding my baby” and deliberately starving them?
1
Tightt Af yes it does. Within poor countries that is a simple reality that does exist. But again I will ask, should a mother be able to refuse to breast feed her child and deliberately starve him or her to death.
1
Tightt Af also whether or not it’s currently happening is irrelevant when we are discussing this at a moral level. So please answer my question.
1
Tightt Af that’s incorrect. Because by using this example will truly determine if u truly have the conviction that in all cases a mother’s “right to her body” is higher than a baby’s right to live. Stop dodging the question and answer it!
1
Tightt Af so I will ask you one last time, if no other source other than the mothers breast-feeding was available to feed that baby, does the Mom have the right to go, “oh I don’t want to feed my child, my body my choice, and deliberately starve the child to death. Yes or no? It’s not a hard question so just answer it. Whether u believe it is a straw man argument or not is no relevant as it is an accurate analogy. So answer the question or u will have forfeited ur argument.
1
Tightt Af the hypothetical isn’t the point. Yes I know that it is insanely unlikely. But that’s not the point. I’m saying that if it were to happen, should a mother have the right to refuse to breast feed her baby and starve it. “Her body her choice right?” By being unable to answer this question u are proving the gaps in the pro choice logic. It’s not a difficult question to answer. It requires one of two words, yes or no. Also it’s hypocritical to say that u won’t argue on a hypocritical when pro choice people argue on those all the time.
1
Tightt Af again ur ignoring the point that is being made. Yes I can. Because the realism isn’t the point, the principle is. So stop being ignorant and answer the question! Should a mother have the right to refuse to breast fee the child even if it means starving them to death? Yes or no! Stop dodging the question and answer it. If it is so inconsequential to this argument then it shouldn’t be difficult to answer. And I will keep asking till u answer it. So do us both a favor and answer this very simple question so we can move on with this argument.
1
Tightt Af if u want me to be more “realistic” to make u feel better then just say the woman and her newborn baby is stuck on a deserted island or something. Problem solved now answer the simple question I asked u.
1
Tightt Af should a mother have the right to starve her child by refusing to breast feed? Either answer or admit defeat.
1
robert rickwood really? What species is it?
1
robert rickwood because it’s not a parasite biologically speaking for 2 reasons. See if u can figure them out.
1
robert rickwood so eating another thing is a parasite? That’s not what a parasite is. First of all. A parasite in literally almost every case is that of a separate and external species, secondly the “host” body is going through active harm during it, and finally. A pregnancy actually creates multiple positive effects for the mother. So the relationship is actually mutualism.
1
robert rickwood Biologically defined, parasitism is a “form of symbiosis in which one organism (called a parasite) benefits at the expense of another organism usually of different species (called a host). This host-parasite association may eventuate to the injury of the host.”
1
robert rickwood Furthermore, there are three classes of parasites, none of which describes a fetus. The protozoa is a single celled parasite, and a cluster of cells is certainly outside of that class. The second are helminths which are worms, and a fetus was only ever going to develop into a human and a not a worm. The third are ectoparasites like mosquitoes and ticks that attach themselves to the skin’s surface, which again cannot describe a fetus.
1
robert rickwood no counters? Nothing?
1
RiggsBF no not really
1
Βασίλειος Λιάκος yes
1
no name nope because condoms never guaranteed they would work 100% of the time.
1
no name abortion is not even close tomorrow there are plenty of other options outside of it. Adoption, contraceptions, and abstinence. U chose to ignore those or not carry them out properly. So yes, killing a baby because u couldn’t be bothered caring for it is immoral. Also it may be legal for now but I will ensure if trump gets re-elected it won’t last.
1
no name where do u live?
1
no name ok well I will assume it’s a first world nation. So what difference does it make? Just because something is legal, doesn’t mean it’s automatically ok.
1