@prochoicenz As a matter of fact… You’re from New Zealand, aren’t you? For somebody who comes from a country that elected the world’s first transsexual mayor you sure seem intolerant--against anyone who disagrees with you, against the prenatal population, and against gays. To be honest, I do not understand how somebody raised in the twenty-first century can harbor so much hatred and bigotry against so many. Don't suppose you can rationalize your prejudices with an argument?
@WarThemedRevolution I don't have anything against gays but I do have something against little faggots like you telling women what to do with their private parts. If you want to suck cock all day, that's fine with me but don't think you or anyone else like you has the right to tell the rest of us what to do with our sex lives.
@prochoicenz The fact that you use homosexuality as an insult shows that you do indeed have something against gays. Look, you're obviously not interested in a honest or open discussion and you're so blinded by bigotry that no magnitude of rationality will ever sway you from your hatred. I've asked you politely in the past and I'll ask you one more time. Please don't troll my videos. If you want to intelligently discuss the issue, fine. But what do your personal attacks accomplish?
@WarThemedRevolution well if you don't want any hassle you should delete your videos and your channel and piss off. We don't need your sort here on youtube.
@WarThemedRevolution yes and I'm going to complain to youtube about you putting me in your "montageof hate" video. Delete it now and save yourself the hassle.
damn, youre very well articulated. I hope youve got confidence with whatever way you are going cause it seems like you got the brain to succeed. Also I appreciate how respectfully this video was done, just facts and rhetoric no insults or hostility. Youve got the logic thing down. This argument was solid, I'm normally more convinced and motivated by appeals to emotion and to the soul, but this was solid. good job
@vikingsls Thanks, and I'm glad that you enjoyed the video. If you like it please rate up and subscribe so that I can reach a larger audience. Personally, I prefer logos to either ethos or pathos. While the other two are pragmatically useful tools they accomplish their goals by distracted people from the facts. Logos, on the other hand, simply shows people the information and logically deduces it in a way that they can interpret with their own critical thinking.
@WarThemedRevolution Very true. while emotion and ethics speak more directly to me, I must admit I do appreciate a well done appeal to Logos, And as much as pathos and ethos may be more common for getting people excited, enthusiastic, or motivated; logic obviously cant be discounted because it carries tremendous weight for providing conviction when used exclusively, or as a supplement to the other two tools of persuasion. It's rare to see an effective or honest use of any of the three.
@vikingsls Well, you cannot dishonestly use logos. You can just use false-logos and dishonestly present it as true logos. However, if somebody uses false logic this can be revealed using three simple checkpoints. I have a video showing how to accomplish this, if you are interested. Anyway, I don't think logic constitutes manipulation. Because in logic you merely interpret facts. What the people do with or think of those facts is up to them.-
@vikingsls things like emotional appeal, on the other hand, intentionally try to keep people from thinking about it to win them to your side like mindless pawns. So these things may be tools of persuasion, but logic is just a tool of education. You educate people and they, based on their values, decide whether or not to support something based on what they have learned. But I do loves it. :D
What a shitty argument. Nice way to misrepresent what the pro-choice argument actually is. "Fred" is already born and the fetus isn't. That is the major difference.
@DrunkSamurai There is more than one prochoice argument. People with an elementary understanding of the abortion issue tend to say fetuses are inferior because they have not been born, but more educated prochoice leaders as Wayne Sumner or Peter Singer use the absence of sentience. In any case, whether or not something is born or unborn is not relevant to the nature of that being. It's just a matter of location, and most of us think it's wrong to discriminate based on location.-
@DrunkSamurai Hints, the vast majority of people identifying themselves as prochoice do not support operations like partial or very late term abortions. Because being located inside the womb as opposed to outside the womb has nothing to do with whether or not the fetus is a person. If you are interested in an intelligent, honest discussion please private message me. I'm willing to listen so long as you show the same respect I show you.
First off your argument is weak because Fred and Wilma are not the same persons. A fetus is by law, and biologically the same person as the mother. That is why the law affords her the right to abort it. The cell from which it is made is her cell, and physically the fetus is her own body. Also, structurally, if that is where you are coming from, an abortion is just, as the scriptures and I quote,before six weeks of pregnancy:"Is as nothing" end quote.
@Elenkhos Actually, zygotes, embryos, and fetuses are genetically, biologically, and anatomically distinguishable from their respective mothers. Each one constitutes a whole, individual, living human all on its own. While they are dependent upon the support of their mothers, they are not a part of their mothers’ body. I'll PM you a series of videos proving this with professional testimony, simple science, and deductive logic.-
@Elenkhos As to the law, it does not hold that the fetus is a part of the mother's body and that is not the legal argument used in defense of abortion. The case of Roe v. Wade justified abortion on the doctrine of Griswold v. Connecticut and never once said the fetus was a part of the mother's body.
@Elenkhos Besides, whether or not Fred and Wilma are the same person is not relevant to my argument. My conclusion here was not that abortion should be made illegal. It was that the fetus' lack of sentience is not sufficient grounds for dismissing it as inferior and undeserving of protection. Fred lacks sentience but deserves protection, so clearly a lack of sentience is not sufficient grounds for defending abortion. Hints, you bring in another argument--that the fetus is a part of the mother.
@WarThemedRevolution As to my message: an argument that a fetus is not human is mute. It is human. As to the legality of abortion based on viability is the crux of the argument. As I have stated, you cannot supersede the rights of a viable person over a potentially viable one.
@Elenkhos Well, you're changing your argument...but viability was the crux of the pro-abortion argument proposed in Roe v. Wade, but that aspect of the case was overturned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Viability is dependent upon things like income and location because people in different areas with different economic means have access to different technology. So then a thirty week old child with poor parents would get less protection than a child with rich parents.-
@Elenkhos But in any case, you are correct. The rights of a dependent person--the potentially viable one--cannot supersede the rights of a viable person because, in this nation, we rightfully follow the doctrine of equality. Saying that the rights of one person supersede the rights of another simply because the former individual is more able to survive on his/her own than the latter is simple bigotry based on an arbitrarily selected, physical characteristic.
@Iguana1138 Thanks a lot. That actually means something--I have a serious problem with rambling. If you like the video please remember to rate up and share. May I ask your thoughts on the content as opposed to merely the quality?
@Iguana1138 Oh, you're the one from the group! XD Well, I dunno who did dislike it bu I guess you can just never-mind that request for comment on the content since you've already given it. Sorry for the confusion.
@helllababe Goodie! I'm quite pleased! :D Somebody's already disliked it...I think it was a guy from my atheist and agnostic prolife group on facebook. He said he couldn't get passed my bushy eyebrows. So mean, I like ma bushy brows!
@10290gilmore
"any man who is in hell is there by his own volition and without voliton there could be no hell"
God created hell for satan not man
those who follow satan find themselves in hell because they followed him there by their own choice
its going to sound outlandish but God has in fact through tangible physical contact proved his existence to me
i have doubted my Gods existence in the past and he responded with irrefutable proof
however many have not experienced what i have
beserkerpatroit1337 2 weeks ago
faggot...
prochoicenz 1 month ago
@prochoicenz stop staring at your father and just watch the video
beserkerpatroit1337 1 month ago
You look like you'd be good at sucking cock...
prochoicenz 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos 2
@prochoicenz There's nothing wrong with performing the occasional fellatio.
WarThemedRevolution 1 month ago
@WarThemedRevolution so you admit to being a cock sucker? Do you take it up the arse as well?
prochoicenz 1 month ago
@prochoicenz As a matter of fact… You’re from New Zealand, aren’t you? For somebody who comes from a country that elected the world’s first transsexual mayor you sure seem intolerant--against anyone who disagrees with you, against the prenatal population, and against gays. To be honest, I do not understand how somebody raised in the twenty-first century can harbor so much hatred and bigotry against so many. Don't suppose you can rationalize your prejudices with an argument?
WarThemedRevolution 1 month ago
@WarThemedRevolution I don't have anything against gays but I do have something against little faggots like you telling women what to do with their private parts. If you want to suck cock all day, that's fine with me but don't think you or anyone else like you has the right to tell the rest of us what to do with our sex lives.
prochoicenz 1 month ago
@prochoicenz The fact that you use homosexuality as an insult shows that you do indeed have something against gays. Look, you're obviously not interested in a honest or open discussion and you're so blinded by bigotry that no magnitude of rationality will ever sway you from your hatred. I've asked you politely in the past and I'll ask you one more time. Please don't troll my videos. If you want to intelligently discuss the issue, fine. But what do your personal attacks accomplish?
WarThemedRevolution 1 month ago
@WarThemedRevolution well if you don't want any hassle you should delete your videos and your channel and piss off. We don't need your sort here on youtube.
prochoicenz 1 month ago
@prochoicenz So what you're saying is that you're going to continue harassing me and spamming my videos with troll posts until I delete my account?
WarThemedRevolution 1 month ago
@WarThemedRevolution yes and I'm going to complain to youtube about you putting me in your "montageof hate" video. Delete it now and save yourself the hassle.
prochoicenz 1 month ago
damn, youre very well articulated. I hope youve got confidence with whatever way you are going cause it seems like you got the brain to succeed. Also I appreciate how respectfully this video was done, just facts and rhetoric no insults or hostility. Youve got the logic thing down. This argument was solid, I'm normally more convinced and motivated by appeals to emotion and to the soul, but this was solid. good job
vikingsls 6 months ago
@vikingsls Thanks, and I'm glad that you enjoyed the video. If you like it please rate up and subscribe so that I can reach a larger audience. Personally, I prefer logos to either ethos or pathos. While the other two are pragmatically useful tools they accomplish their goals by distracted people from the facts. Logos, on the other hand, simply shows people the information and logically deduces it in a way that they can interpret with their own critical thinking.
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@WarThemedRevolution Very true. while emotion and ethics speak more directly to me, I must admit I do appreciate a well done appeal to Logos, And as much as pathos and ethos may be more common for getting people excited, enthusiastic, or motivated; logic obviously cant be discounted because it carries tremendous weight for providing conviction when used exclusively, or as a supplement to the other two tools of persuasion. It's rare to see an effective or honest use of any of the three.
vikingsls 6 months ago
@vikingsls Well, you cannot dishonestly use logos. You can just use false-logos and dishonestly present it as true logos. However, if somebody uses false logic this can be revealed using three simple checkpoints. I have a video showing how to accomplish this, if you are interested. Anyway, I don't think logic constitutes manipulation. Because in logic you merely interpret facts. What the people do with or think of those facts is up to them.-
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@vikingsls things like emotional appeal, on the other hand, intentionally try to keep people from thinking about it to win them to your side like mindless pawns. So these things may be tools of persuasion, but logic is just a tool of education. You educate people and they, based on their values, decide whether or not to support something based on what they have learned. But I do loves it. :D
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
What a shitty argument. Nice way to misrepresent what the pro-choice argument actually is. "Fred" is already born and the fetus isn't. That is the major difference.
DrunkSamurai 6 months ago
@DrunkSamurai There is more than one prochoice argument. People with an elementary understanding of the abortion issue tend to say fetuses are inferior because they have not been born, but more educated prochoice leaders as Wayne Sumner or Peter Singer use the absence of sentience. In any case, whether or not something is born or unborn is not relevant to the nature of that being. It's just a matter of location, and most of us think it's wrong to discriminate based on location.-
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@DrunkSamurai Hints, the vast majority of people identifying themselves as prochoice do not support operations like partial or very late term abortions. Because being located inside the womb as opposed to outside the womb has nothing to do with whether or not the fetus is a person. If you are interested in an intelligent, honest discussion please private message me. I'm willing to listen so long as you show the same respect I show you.
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
First off your argument is weak because Fred and Wilma are not the same persons. A fetus is by law, and biologically the same person as the mother. That is why the law affords her the right to abort it. The cell from which it is made is her cell, and physically the fetus is her own body. Also, structurally, if that is where you are coming from, an abortion is just, as the scriptures and I quote,before six weeks of pregnancy:"Is as nothing" end quote.
Elenkhos 6 months ago
@Elenkhos Actually, zygotes, embryos, and fetuses are genetically, biologically, and anatomically distinguishable from their respective mothers. Each one constitutes a whole, individual, living human all on its own. While they are dependent upon the support of their mothers, they are not a part of their mothers’ body. I'll PM you a series of videos proving this with professional testimony, simple science, and deductive logic.-
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@Elenkhos As to the law, it does not hold that the fetus is a part of the mother's body and that is not the legal argument used in defense of abortion. The case of Roe v. Wade justified abortion on the doctrine of Griswold v. Connecticut and never once said the fetus was a part of the mother's body.
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@Elenkhos Besides, whether or not Fred and Wilma are the same person is not relevant to my argument. My conclusion here was not that abortion should be made illegal. It was that the fetus' lack of sentience is not sufficient grounds for dismissing it as inferior and undeserving of protection. Fred lacks sentience but deserves protection, so clearly a lack of sentience is not sufficient grounds for defending abortion. Hints, you bring in another argument--that the fetus is a part of the mother.
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@WarThemedRevolution As to my message: an argument that a fetus is not human is mute. It is human. As to the legality of abortion based on viability is the crux of the argument. As I have stated, you cannot supersede the rights of a viable person over a potentially viable one.
Elenkhos 6 months ago
@Elenkhos Well, you're changing your argument...but viability was the crux of the pro-abortion argument proposed in Roe v. Wade, but that aspect of the case was overturned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Viability is dependent upon things like income and location because people in different areas with different economic means have access to different technology. So then a thirty week old child with poor parents would get less protection than a child with rich parents.-
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
@Elenkhos But in any case, you are correct. The rights of a dependent person--the potentially viable one--cannot supersede the rights of a viable person because, in this nation, we rightfully follow the doctrine of equality. Saying that the rights of one person supersede the rights of another simply because the former individual is more able to survive on his/her own than the latter is simple bigotry based on an arbitrarily selected, physical characteristic.
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
I might be a hater, but this is a good vid, concise and on point.
Iguana1138 6 months ago
@Iguana1138 Thanks a lot. That actually means something--I have a serious problem with rambling. If you like the video please remember to rate up and share. May I ask your thoughts on the content as opposed to merely the quality?
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
No way did I dislike this
Iguana1138 6 months ago
@Iguana1138 Oh, you're the one from the group! XD Well, I dunno who did dislike it bu I guess you can just never-mind that request for comment on the content since you've already given it. Sorry for the confusion.
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago
Sound logic as per usual :) Loved it!
helllababe 6 months ago
@helllababe Goodie! I'm quite pleased! :D Somebody's already disliked it...I think it was a guy from my atheist and agnostic prolife group on facebook. He said he couldn't get passed my bushy eyebrows. So mean, I like ma bushy brows!
WarThemedRevolution 6 months ago