The US is the top spender on foreign aid internationally. If Chomsky is attacking the *percentage* of foreign aid expenditure compared to GNI, then he's clearly more concerned about making Americans sacrifice more money, not about helping people overseas.
I agree in the sense that, If all these people who were protesting against abortion actually volunteered to help the poor and starving, they would probably have saved more lives as a result. Knowing that my time/resource are limited I'd much prefer do something that can yield the moth impact, and protesting against abortion will not be high on the list. Whether you are pro-abortion or not, we ought to agree that there is a much bigger evil out there worth fighting for.
Chomsky is attempting to take the moral high ground here by saying that those against foreign aid are not compassionate enough about life to be worth discussing abortion. Foreign aid doesn't help poor people in poor countries, it helps wealthy people in poor countries - it transfers wealth to foreign GOVTS, who use the aid to build up their militaries and further starve and kill their own people, as well as to help them wage war on other nations. sometimes we even fund both sides of conflicts
The "execute blasphemers" guy wasnt questioned closely enough and I would wonder just how well he knows his bible. For example: there is a clear instruction to execute people who work on the Sabbath. Try to imagine an America where it was a capital crime to work on Sunday. Any work. So no shops, no restaurants for sure and probably no ambulances!
They may be stock piling arms but somehow I dont think they are going to win any arguments at the ballot box
OK but its not anyones place to kill blasphemers. I thought its accepted that GOD is the judge. Why punish people in this life when god is supposedly going to do it in the next life.
I don't think there should be anything controversial about the fact that the wanton murder of babies is barbaric.
Beyond that, the Constitution demands "equal protection under the law" for all persons. I don't see any exemption for persons who have not yet undergone delivery from the womb. To argue that such a person deserves NO RIGHTS WHATSOEVER--EVEN JUST TO BE RECOGNIZED AS A HUMAN BEING is the height of moral bankruptcy and barbarity.
@UncleIrv2 It's woman's right to choose. Fetuses aren't people! Do babies get rights? Until they're born they're not people yet and women shouldn't bring children into the world unless they are ready . 25,000 people die from HUNGER daily. Does anyone seem to care about them?Idiots think a fetus is more important than a human that's already been born.Even if abortions are stopped people will still get them. Wouldn't you rather they get safe, legal ones?
Ignorant fools. We need funding for our public schools so we can teach these dumb dumbs and men need some real engaging work. How about flipping our economy to clean energy? They needs some real consuming work to do. Leave us (women) alone and the gays. Silly boys.
I once resumed what it was to be a conservative in the US: it's to revert to freedom when it suits your interests and then forget about it minutes later when you promote your answers; it is in short to be a liberal in the classical sense (freedom comes before everything else) while also having a fascist agenda for social values.
He speaks the truth. Education is the best way, these are our bodies and it's so important that we know everything about them especially when it comes to family planning.
This is a great clip. A warning to anyone who hasn't seen the film yet and might want to - there's a fairly graphic abortion scene. It's from pretty far off, but you see some nasty stuff get sucked into a tube. I've got a weak stomach, and I don't remember if the scene was prefaced by any warning, so I thought I'd help out some fellow wimps :)
@thereddog223 almost half of all pregnancies self-abort. Often the woman doesnt even know--this is how small a 2 months foetus is. It is not in any sense a baby. Did you actually listen to the video? America--pushed on by the religious right--gives enough money to Israel every year (all in all about 5 billion dollars) to save a substantial number of living children every year--and over a 10 year period America--al by itself--could virtually end preventable deaths of children world wide. So...?
Is there any evidence there is a higher number of religious people who are extremists preparing for civil war than secular extremists. truth be told neither has a high number in the US. It only takes one or a few to reak some Havic though, such as a Paul Hill.
I'm pro-life. "I think they should be executed." Even points at people standing off a short distance says THEY should be executed. "Usually" those who are pro-choice are "lesbians" ...so: execute them! Nevertheless, I'M pro-life.
@eulex10 If you watch the movie its been proven women get abortions wither they are legal or not. But if they are illegal they get back ally abortions from people who aren't medical professionals and both the mother and baby end up dying. Or they try to perform it themselves with a coat hanger, which I don't think I even have to tell you how that works out. Its even more immoral to have more people die than is necessary.
@eulex10 Children, yes, but foetuses have no concept of their own existence & therefore, no concept of what they want; a foetus is completely dependant on it's mother to survive inside the womb, but a child depends on it's parents' protection in order to survive outside the womb
Also, morality depends on the person, not some underlying rules we should all follow; I class blindly believing something without evidence as immoral, but people say doing so is moral because their beliefs say it's moral
Further lies, in the Soviet Union when Abortion was made available it BECAME the principle method of contraception... And female health declined as well... Is Noam deluded or just making this shit up?
America gives MORE FOREIGN AID than EVERY OTHER COUNTRY COMBINED. American charitable contributions ARE the highest on average in the whole world...
What are Chomsky's values? (he opened the door) If his values ignore simple facts with American Charity, then there is little else that he can contribute, he is most certainly biased in this regard...
@Funkyflorist the percentage of of the U.S.'s wealth, whether measured by GDP, or by the percentage of the federal budget, is among the tiniest in the developed world. Our country is very big, so the raw number of dollars expended on foreign aid matches the level of dollars donated by much SMALLER, POORER countries. As far as charity goes, charity is irrelevant to Chomsky's point. His point was about the politics of abortion and the politics of foreign aid. Not charity. Glad u watched tho
"the percentage of of the U.S.'s wealth, whether measured by GDP, or by the percentage of the federal budget, is among the tiniest in the developed world"
Wait, is this a Logic fail? You REALIZE that you are saying that the US' "wealth among developed nations is the tiniest"....
I've also double-checked these stats and America STILL gives the most foreign aid, whether by percentage or gross dollars...
I've also double checked Chomsky's quote, he states / implies / assumes that the United States has the 'worst and most miserly foreign aid among developed countries'...
This is BLATANTLY FALSE and further implies that American's in general are 'miserly' (thus the statement regarding charity)
Now we DO give a very small amount in comparison to military expenditures... But our military does regular foreign aid all over the globe!
@Funkyflorist military aid is not foreign aid. most of military aid is primarily used to secure foreign military dictatorships against revolutions by their own people, in order to allow for the people in charge their to cater to US interests. But that's irrelevant, this clip had absolutely nothing to do with military aid, nor did his criticism of the pro-life movement.. Also, he stated that the US to other "developed" (rich) countries. Please post the link to the research you did
@Funkyflorist So a military helicopter airlifting goods, supplies, medicines, etc to isolated areas after a disaster (Haiti, Japan, Indonesia, etc.) is not aid? It is not military aid. Such relief efforts are usually performed by the Red Cross, and the United Nations. The US is a member of the UN. US supported Mubarak for 30 years, until the regime began collapsing. The US opposed Kaddaffi because of his politics, not because he was a dictator. All irrelevant to Chomsky's point, anyway.
@Funkyflorist Go and check your figures again. America gives most of its aid to Israel--for weapons..they call it "aid" but Israel has a higher gdp than New Zealand! (who gets nothing). And "our military" does foreign aid all over the world? A comment worthy of goebbels. You should try to see some other news sources mate; the American mainstream press is utter "embedded". Try(on line) al-Jazeera, or the BBC or France24; for a more critical view try RT. You might start to see things more clearly
@Funkyflorist truthmonk. com states that while US gives most in contribution, it's "0.16 percent of Gross National Income (GNI) contribution is lower than the other member nations of the G-7 (Graph 7). Comparing the U.S. with all the OECD countries, the U.S. again has the lowest percent of GNI with the exceptions of Greece (0.16 percent) and South Korea (0.07 percent)". It seems like you are ignoring this idea of comparing amount of contribution relative to the wealth of the contributor.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
Wait wait wait.. we are the nation with the WORST foreign aid? Excuse me? Every single catastrophe that occurs will receive American aid, not just from the government, but also from individual contributions. Regardless, his assumption that because we want to stop abortion here means we don't care about other countries is absurd. They aren't mutually exclusive ideas. Besides, are pro-choicers any more adamant for helping people overseas? I doubt it. Show me wrong though if you can.
@Sickopath333 He didn't say that they were mutually exclusive. He just pointed out that you are hypocrites. Whatever it is that pro-choicers do, it doesn't make you any less hypocritical.
@martindj88 We are only hypocritical if we don't care about other countries and other people dying though. If we do care, then we aren't hypocrites whatsoever. Which is what makes my point that they are not mutually exclusive so important, because you can easily support both. That's a very bad assumption to start with, and it does indeed matter what pro-choicers do, because if they are guilty of the same crime (so to say) then what makes their side any less hypocritical or inhumane?
@Sickopath333 However, if you don't BEHAVE like you care and you don't put just as much effort into promoting foreign aid as you do in campaigns against abortion in US, you ARE hypocrites. "Pro-choicers" are not hypocrites over this issue since the arguments for their stance have nothing to do with how well other people are. "You are just as inhumane as me, therefore I am right about X" is not a valid argument. Either side in this issue is judged by its arguments not by its "humanity".
@martindj88 One's passions and energy can differ in different areas you realize, without being hypocritical. That isn't that uncommon. I'm not saying that they are equally inhumane, therefore I am right, I'm saying that if pro-lifers are inhumane or hypocritical for not caring about other countries, why are pro-choicers immune from that same label? Their side has to do with how well people are as well; a woman's rights, it's her body, etc. That doesn't deal with how well people are?
@Sickopath333 Hypocrisy is pretending to have opinions, feelings, beliefs, etc one doesn't have. Pro-lifers:
1) claim that they hold life sacred, that they care about children, etc
2) behave contrary to this
Hence they are hypocrites. Pro-choicers are immune from the label since they don't satisfy condition 1). Claiming to support women's rights (and the Constitution) has nothing to do with dying children. Claiming to support children does.
@martindj88 What is wrong with your presented point is that you have not demonstrated 2 to be correct, let alone in such a sweeping way to indict most pro-lifers, if not all. When do pro-lifers behave contrary to their claims? When they don't speak out loudly enough for foreign aid? Though based on a similar concept one can rally behind a pro-life stance and not be as vocal for another idea; there is a difference between killing a child of your own volition and a starving child.
@Sickopath333 "Though based on a similar concept one can rally behind a pro-life stance and not be as vocal for another idea;"
When your arguments against abortion are "Life is sacred", "God wants us to protect children" and similar nonsense, it's not "another" idea. Abortion is not the same thing as killing a child, by the way. Even if it were, I don't see how that supposed difference implies that starving children should be excluded.
@martindj88 "Life is sacred", [] "and similar nonsense." Yeah, nothing more nonsensical than to say that life is sacred. They are different ideas; starving children in another nation deals with different problems than a legalized practice in this nation. They require different approaches and different solutions. Besides, since pro-choicers speak about rights and freedoms, I suppose they would be hypocritical for not doing more to give people from other nations their freedom, like sex slaves.
Once we make the world's problems our own then we go down the shitter with them. I am all for helping American mothers get care for their babies. Nor am I crusading against abortion in other countries.
Who are these people? This is not the love of Christ. They are showing. I could easily make a video about the attacks on christians. You must realize that for sure there is a war but not war against flesh and blood, But a war within the hearts and minds of all human life.
He also assumes that the unborn child has no desire to live and that during the pregnancy the child in not conscious and therefore we do not have to weigh the right to life of the fetus vs the rightsor desires of the mother. That logic would suggest that you could be in danger of being terminated anytime you take a nap. If you remove the requirement that you must be concious in order for your life to be valued then the life of a fetus should have value.
@SuperSeaknight Rubbish. A person taking a nap is a being full conscious and aware of his or her existance prior to falling asleep. An unborn feotus has no such awareness.
Here is the part that I don't understand, he seems concerned with increasing the health and well being of mothers and children and that having abortions accomplishes that. Why not just put your dollars and support behind actually improving the lives of women and their children through all of the things that he said in the first part (education, etc) and not focusing on abortions. It seems that abortions are the easy and immoral answer to poverty.
I love it when that dude consults with the other one about execution for saying goddammit. He sounds so casual, like he's ordering a sandwich or something.
valuable, but that this is how we improve the health, happiness, survival and progress of the human species as a whole. That is why I value HUMAN life, not fetuses. This being said, of course ideally I would prefer never to abort a fetus, but if not doing so will lead to more suffering of CONSCIOUS human beings (the kid and the mother), then it is worth allowing.
"Seriously" I am not at all surprised that i don't have a highschool degree, I have a diploma. And secondly - there is NO evidence that abortion increases the health of societies. In fact - more women die due to abortion than to natural childbirth - so you are completely wrong there. And you still havent answered the question - Why should I care about the health of a group of people, if I don't even value the life of any single person. Your argument hasn't even gotten off the ground.
@muel0341 my god, how many things can you make up that were never said and are complete non sequiturs. I will go go over each one and then I'm done with this. In my last post I said "giving control over reproduction to women" greatly increases the health of societies. Then here you are simply saying there's no evidence for this just like people say there's no evidence for evolution. And you cite this as evidence against it: More women die from abortion than to natural childbirth. WTF?!?!
@trtnec you also misuese the term non sequitur - I'm done wasting my time with you. You're a very arrogant person and you are not as smart as you think you are. And you have completely avoided my main point - what value is soceity if life has none. I will not respond to anymore of your nonsense.
@muel0341 Second, I quoted "rediculous" because I wanted to spell it the way you spelled it, like an idiot. And yes good catch, I meant diploma, same thing though.
Third, I've said over and over we SHOULD value the life a PERSON, and therefore society. You are essentially calling a fetus a person now, which is what you wanted to say the whole time and I've been saying that they are NOT the same and I gave my reasons (consciousness, feelings). And the reason isn't because life is intrinsically
And one objective, scientific observation is that all societies that allow choice to women are significantly healthier by every metric. Just do the research yourself and you'll see. And what is the cost of allowing abortion? Offending people who just "know" that life is intrinsically valuable always. We should do what we can to improve human life (keyword human), and if giving women control over reproduction does this almost inarguably, while at the cost of hurting feelings, oh well.
Another thing Mr trtnec - If life doesn't have instrinsic value, then why the worship of "society" who cares what benefits society? Give me a reason why I should believe that society is even a good thing to begin with. You can't deny life's intrinsic value on the one hand and then worship the good of "society" on the other. This is an absurd position.
@muel0341 Because there are things that just about everyone can agree on, that a functional, healthy society is good for the human species. We all desire to SURVIVE as a species and be HAPPY, and to have said society is the best way to increase the happiness and survival of as many members of the species as possible. ALL (sane) people agree on this, no matter their spiritual beliefs. Once you agree on this you can objectively, scientifically determine the best way to achieve that result.
@trtnec That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard. MOST people disagree with you on the issue of abortion, and yet here you are telling me that because all people agree on something that makes it objective? People agreeing on something doesn't make it true. Science once told us that the reason why things get hot is because some invisible substance called caloric was being released. This was only about 100 years ago, that wasn't true. And now your telling me that science = true? Ha...
@trtnec That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard. MOST people disagree with you on the issue of abortion, and yet here you are telling me that because all people agree on something that makes it objective? People agreeing on something doesn't make it true. Science once told us that the reason why things get hot is because some invisible substance called caloric was being released. This was only about 100 years ago, that wasn't true. And now your telling me that science = true? Ha...
@muel0341 no, the "rediculous" thing is that you totally misread what I said and just believed whatever BS you wanted to believe I said (not surprising for a religious person). I did NOT say most people are pro-choice, (most used to be, now it's about 50/50). I'm saying it is AN OBJECTIVE FACT that allowing choice to women increases the health of societies, not that it is an objective fact because most people agree. Seriously, I would not be surprised if you did not have a high school degree.
@muel0341 And yes science does equal truth very often, nothing can equal ABSOLUTE truth if that's what you're looking for in your world that doesn't exist. And the fact that it's sometimes wrong (it gets less and less wrong btw) is just something we have to run with. Science is the best method we have to find out truth and reality, not some person's superstitious gut instinct. Just like what the top-rated comment says, we've tried societies run that way, it was called the Dark Ages.
way you come to the conclusion that all life has intrinsic value. Abortion may violate that superstitious gut instinct, but in the real world, it has huge benefits to societies of FULLY LIVING and thinking conscious human beings. Some people base their views on this reality and some like you don't.
But if it's okay to kill unborn babies, why is it so important to save lives of grown adults? If life doesn't have instrinsic value, then saving it is meaningless. The whole pro-choice movement is a self contradiction.
@muel0341 I suggest you think a little more on the topic before suggesting there's no difference between aborting a fetus and killing a human being. You honestly can't think of ONE difference? People who base their opinions off of reason and science recognize that there is no "intrinsic" value of life. It just is. Some life is worth saving (conscious creatures who suffer) some isn't (cancer for example, I bet you don't find "intrinsic" value in that). Superstitious gut feelings are the only...
@trtnec I have thought a great deal on the topic. There is no fundamental difference between the two. First off - science and reason are not the same thing. There are many things in reason that cannot be called science. The scientific method itself is not science - but philosophy. Second, science cannot answer questions about value. Third even if it could - you deny that life has intrinsic value then it's okay to kill anyone adult or unborn.
Hmmm! Children die of poverty abroad, so until we do something about that we have no right to oppose abortion? That's a bit like saying we have no right to investigate rape until we've solved every murder.
If you buy into this sort of dissinformation and wanna be journalistic endeavor , you dont even deserve intelligent discourse. You 'want' to believe what has been depicted here. What's really shameful about this video, this farce, is that they used Naom Chompsky to lend credability. Naom would be the first to denounce this compilation because the author took 'one' idiot, who is not even a christian ,to paint a false, distorted view of all christians. You want to be decieved.
Are you seriously denying that Christians are more prone to ignorance? It's pretty well established that they more than all other religions are anti-progressive. Don't stress yourself by trying to justify it. Just embrace your dogmatic religion in all of it's ignorant glory!
@MCcookiebreath More prone to ignorance ? No, I believe that 'all' human beings from every set and sect of society have the capacity to be ignorant, no matter what the religion, financial status, or even education. Besides the average low I.Q. , there is personal bias, selective memory and learning, and a 'lot' of self delusion to contend with. So your take on the 'christians' being more prone to ignorance is not only poor logic, but biased reasoning that is obviously based on predjudice
@MCcookiebreath More prone to ignorance ? No, I believe that 'all' human beings from every set and sect of society have the capacity to be ignorant, no matter what the religion, financial status, or even education. Besides the average low I.Q. , there is personal bias, selective memory and learning, and a 'lot' of self delusion to contend with. So your take on the 'christians' being more prone to ignorance is not only poor logic, but biased reasoning that is obviously based on predjudice
@MCcookiebreath what it must be like to live in a self contrived fantacy world of your own making. Your supposed factul base predicated on self delusion and personal bias. You see, yet do not. You hear, yet cannnot make out the forest for the trees, and all because of you desperate need to supress the truth, at all costs.
The U.S has the most miserable foreign aid program? When it comes to government foreign aid maybe your right but when it comes to private voluntary aid from citizens it gathers more than 6 times more money than any other country in the world. But of course, that is not interesting right. Chosmsky please, learn some economics.
I understand now how people like censortube can be so certain that all christians are dangerous. You rabidly and unfairly discredit all who disagrees with your ideas. This psycho at 4:20 does NOT represent christianity. These people are a tiny minority of christians, but don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. You people are so brave when you slander the entire christian religion. You're pathetic cowards when it comes to radical islam.
@crowleac Well, maybe if religion weren't such a safe haven for pedophiles and sociopaths people might actually see religion as having some moral currency. All religions require blind faith, obedience to some mystical authority and irrational beliefs. A perfect hiding place for scoundrels.
The U.S. has a weak foreign aid policy? Are you kidding me? The U.S. government, corporations, and people are amongst the most charitable in the world. People are taking this guy seriously?
Every "intellectual" needs their tinpot cult to milk for a fat government salary while pretending to loath the government that makes their cult possible.
This video is a travesty. I know quite a few religious people in the United States and none of them support a theocracy or hope for a holy war. They don't want to control other people. They only wish for the freedom to live their beliefs without persecution. It is intellectually dishonest to interview someone with extreme views and then pass it off as the general belief system of whatever group one dislikes. Sadly, this tactic has become increasingly popular with both the left and the right.
@spudmustang This video clearly outlines and demonstrates the militant wing of the Christian religion. For every one of these wing nuts, there's 10 that would stand by while someone was being murdered in the name of Gods Law.
@kokopelli314 Your supposition sounds somewhat biased, especially considering your failure to account for the many cowardly secularists who stand by while millions of infants are murdered in the name of women's rights. Whenever you point a finger...
@kokopelli314 Silly me. You made your non-biased position so clear from the beginning with your pejorative labeling, how could I have missed it?! (I hope you sense my sarcasm because it's pretty thick.)
@spudmustang Its not my opinion, it's my observation that there are many militant evangelical bible-believing Christians who would love to see the prophecy of the book of revelation happen, including all the death and destruction.
@kokopelli314 Actually, I was referring to your self-perception of being biased towards reason. But, since you brought it up, your "observation" of Christians is a subjective and fear-based opinion. Again, you're applying the traits of a very small subgroup of extremists to a much larger group. That is neither fair nor reasonable.
@spudmustang I'm not applying the traits of the militant wing of militant evangelical bible-believing christians to the entire group. I'm just writing about people that I know and what I've observed from living in a community heavily influenced by evangelical Christianity. The fact is that many of them have memorized a doomsday script from the bible.
@kokopelli314 Your limited experience has skewed your perspective of Christians. First of all, there are many different sects (Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, Mormons, etc., etc.) of Christians so it is impossible to fairly use one as a template for the others. Second, we all have several influences in our lives, so even within one group you will find that individuals react differently to a situation. Blanket statements, even those based on our own observations, are neither fair nor reasonable.
@spudmustang Frankly sir, you know nothing of my experience. I'm just saying that militant evangelical bible-believing christians constitute a death cult, bent on global annihilation and that moral certitude is a form of psychosis.
@kokopelli314 I don't need to know your experience because you stated it yourself. And I'm just saying that your fear-based assumptions and generalizations make you about as rational as the militant Christian "death cult" that you condemn. Check your own Kool-Aid, sir, before you accuse others of being delusional.
Chomsky doesn't really say anything too outrageous here. And I certainly don't see the particularly anti-religious viewpoint you're all reacting to. Chomsky rightly points out that Christians are capable of hypocrisy, and any sober Christian would tell you the same. I think, especially given his own worldview, Chomsky's view of religion and the religious is very well-mannered and fair, here and elsewhere.
I like Noam a lot and agree with virtually every thing he says but was somewhat taken aback by his comment on the "miserly" US foreign aid. Is this true? I mean, foreign aid is one of Rush Limbaugh's and Bill O'Reilly's biggest beefs. Even Bill Buckley harped on that one, and in fact I think even Noam would agree that US foreign aid is a significant component of US imperialist policy. Possibly European nations' foreign aid comes with fewer strings...
I hate when people just fucking look at retards like that guy in this video, and make their judgements about Christianity from his stupidity. 99% of Christians aren't insane like that guy... i.e. ME.
hmmm so he should take most christian denominations seriously since most help so many children and mothers all around the world. His argument is mostly a strawman against the facelss christian or pro-lifer. Once they state they do help children then it turns into that they do not help children the way the pro choice person wants them to support children. So the pro life person cannot win.
He denigrates Christians for supposedly saying (by not focusing on providing them with minimal healthcare or necessities), "Let the children die,...". And yet he is DEFENDING abortion! What an incredibly intelligent but clueless hypocrite he is.
Chomsky's point about being equally concerned for children's suffering worldwide really applies to everyone not just within the anti abortion movement. The 'christian' man in this video does not represent all Christians or Christianity. This is propaganda using Chomsky as the bait .In the end both sides are arguing the case for death be it abortion or execution, and the Eugenists are laughing at both of their malleable perceptions of morality..
Noam and the makers of the following mockumentary are fools in assuming that a great number of people against abortion are also miserly, ignorant, supporters of genocide. He takes a small sampling of the media-sensationalized kooks and applies it across the board to everyone who doesn't match his political take on the subject. Never mind the huge amount of religious-based charities actually practicing "Do Unto Others". You want hypocrisy - Google "Noam Chomsky Tax Shelter"
@adminwrh "He takes a small sampling of the media-sensationalized kooks and applies it across the board to everyone who doesn't match his political take"
Utter bullshit.
"Never mind the huge amount of religious-based charities actually practicing "Do Unto Others""
Not important.
"You want hypocrisy - Google "Noam Chomsky Tax Shelter""
Im not exactly the most religious person but these extremists kind of give religious people a bad rap. There are tons of good religious people who are concerned with family and community and giving back and serving humanity by volunteering their money and time but you never see those people in the media. All you see is the extremists and fundamentalists. I'm sure a lot of religious people are pro life but it wouldn't even enter their head to kill a doctor performing abortions.
The fallacy in his argument lies at 1:53 when he says our country...the United States of America...is wealthy. Trillions of dollars in debt is not wealthy. We do not have money to afford this man's plan. Our government just recently nearly declared itself bankrupt. Listen to the little details in his argument and you will find more fallacies.
@theanonymousretard Dude. America is the wealthiest country in the world, in absolute numbers. And many of the measures available to help others live are very cheap. American far-right conservatives and fundy Christians care about life only in the abstract. They don't give a shit about people from birth to age capable-of-doing-military-service.
@theanonymousretard Umm then why do CEO's and hedge fund managers have billions of dollars? Cause they control the government and basically gave themselves a bailout after they collapsed the economy and then have themselves bonuses and pay raises. I bet one of these CEO's salary and bonuses could feed, provide drinking water and some basic medicine and save thousands of lives of people in third world countries.
"The system is designed to enrich the wealthy and let the poor suffer."
@theanonymousretard I'm sure you will find tons of fallacies of what Chomsky says if you don't actually listen to what he says and hear what you want to hear.
@TempusFugit101 Call me stupid but don't say why. good stuff.
You can't prevent people from dying from whatever so what you said is stupid. I'll make an analogy. People die from crossing the street. All society can do, like Chomsky said, is try to educate people, like by teaching them to look both ways before crossing but people will still die from crossing the street. J walking laws and enforcing them might reduced the rate some but people would still die.
@TempusFugit101 It seems like you people want to completely removed the problem where that is impossible for just about anything, "Oh we don't like abortion, lets get rid of the abortion clinics." No, you attack a problem at its source, like removing the need for abortion through what Chomsky said, giving women proper education, opportunities and medical care and family planning. You reduced the number of abortions by reducing the need for abortions.
@TempusFugit101 Women are going to get abortions wither they are legal or not, only difference is if they are legal they will get it done by a trained professional with proper methods instead of back alley ones where they are way more at risk to die. I'm guessing you didn't actually listen to the video because that is exactly what chomsky said.
@TempusFugit101 That is such a god damn stupid comment, tobacco kills tons of people every year and its perfectly legal, Would people be better off if they didn't smoke at all? Yes! but people will still fucking smoke.
And women will still get abortions wither they are legal or not.
The US is the top spender on foreign aid internationally. If Chomsky is attacking the *percentage* of foreign aid expenditure compared to GNI, then he's clearly more concerned about making Americans sacrifice more money, not about helping people overseas.
jonathanaconway 3 days ago
I agree in the sense that, If all these people who were protesting against abortion actually volunteered to help the poor and starving, they would probably have saved more lives as a result. Knowing that my time/resource are limited I'd much prefer do something that can yield the moth impact, and protesting against abortion will not be high on the list. Whether you are pro-abortion or not, we ought to agree that there is a much bigger evil out there worth fighting for.
XXjazzfiend99xx 2 weeks ago
Is this part of a documentary? If so, what is it called?
InfiniteDejaVu 3 weeks ago
@InfiniteDejaVu Yes, it's in the description. It's called "Lake of Fire"
Sammo1357 1 week ago
Where can I read (preferably academic sources) about women and education, family planing and other things that Chomsky talks about at the beginning?
mindauggas 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Chomsky is attempting to take the moral high ground here by saying that those against foreign aid are not compassionate enough about life to be worth discussing abortion. Foreign aid doesn't help poor people in poor countries, it helps wealthy people in poor countries - it transfers wealth to foreign GOVTS, who use the aid to build up their militaries and further starve and kill their own people, as well as to help them wage war on other nations. sometimes we even fund both sides of conflicts
ACDC7369 1 month ago
Comment removed
reformationband1 1 month ago
The "execute blasphemers" guy wasnt questioned closely enough and I would wonder just how well he knows his bible. For example: there is a clear instruction to execute people who work on the Sabbath. Try to imagine an America where it was a capital crime to work on Sunday. Any work. So no shops, no restaurants for sure and probably no ambulances!
They may be stock piling arms but somehow I dont think they are going to win any arguments at the ballot box
CobinRain 1 month ago
OK but its not anyones place to kill blasphemers. I thought its accepted that GOD is the judge. Why punish people in this life when god is supposedly going to do it in the next life.
vidfreak56 1 month ago
execute blasphemers.
rofl
selvmordspilot 1 month ago
I don't think there should be anything controversial about the fact that the wanton murder of babies is barbaric.
Beyond that, the Constitution demands "equal protection under the law" for all persons. I don't see any exemption for persons who have not yet undergone delivery from the womb. To argue that such a person deserves NO RIGHTS WHATSOEVER--EVEN JUST TO BE RECOGNIZED AS A HUMAN BEING is the height of moral bankruptcy and barbarity.
UncleIrv2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@UncleIrv2 It's woman's right to choose. Fetuses aren't people! Do babies get rights? Until they're born they're not people yet and women shouldn't bring children into the world unless they are ready . 25,000 people die from HUNGER daily. Does anyone seem to care about them?Idiots think a fetus is more important than a human that's already been born.Even if abortions are stopped people will still get them. Wouldn't you rather they get safe, legal ones?
ChrisInRealLife0707 1 month ago
Ignorant fools. We need funding for our public schools so we can teach these dumb dumbs and men need some real engaging work. How about flipping our economy to clean energy? They needs some real consuming work to do. Leave us (women) alone and the gays. Silly boys.
juliegrimme 2 months ago
@juliegrimme
I once resumed what it was to be a conservative in the US: it's to revert to freedom when it suits your interests and then forget about it minutes later when you promote your answers; it is in short to be a liberal in the classical sense (freedom comes before everything else) while also having a fascist agenda for social values.
In short be an idiot.
KrugmanTheKing 2 months ago
He speaks the truth. Education is the best way, these are our bodies and it's so important that we know everything about them especially when it comes to family planning.
8azile8 2 months ago
This is a great clip. A warning to anyone who hasn't seen the film yet and might want to - there's a fairly graphic abortion scene. It's from pretty far off, but you see some nasty stuff get sucked into a tube. I've got a weak stomach, and I don't remember if the scene was prefaced by any warning, so I thought I'd help out some fellow wimps :)
warbread 2 months ago
I dont believe religion,i care for women,i hate racists,i am pro choice and last but not least i love everyone. - 15 year old boy
SuperAsi666 3 months ago
50 million babies have died due to abortion More then Hitler killed in total
thereddog223 3 months ago
@thereddog223 almost half of all pregnancies self-abort. Often the woman doesnt even know--this is how small a 2 months foetus is. It is not in any sense a baby. Did you actually listen to the video? America--pushed on by the religious right--gives enough money to Israel every year (all in all about 5 billion dollars) to save a substantial number of living children every year--and over a 10 year period America--al by itself--could virtually end preventable deaths of children world wide. So...?
CobinRain 2 months ago
@thereddog223 Embryo != Human life
deepstarsix 2 months ago
huh?
thereddog223 2 months ago
@thereddog223 != means does not equal... sorry I'm a programmer.
deepstarsix 2 months ago
Poetry vs reality. You can't live without poetry, but if only by it, it's gonna be though not to become an idiot.
claudiobenassi85 4 months ago
Comment removed
claudiobenassi85 4 months ago
and that is how you own a group of people
NeroSNT 4 months ago
Is there any evidence there is a higher number of religious people who are extremists preparing for civil war than secular extremists. truth be told neither has a high number in the US. It only takes one or a few to reak some Havic though, such as a Paul Hill.
Spillers72 4 months ago
I'm pro-life. "I think they should be executed." Even points at people standing off a short distance says THEY should be executed. "Usually" those who are pro-choice are "lesbians" ...so: execute them! Nevertheless, I'M pro-life.
Uh-huh?? Yipp yipp yipp yipp!!! Uh-huh??!!?? Uh-huh??!!!???
Frankly, I don't even think the little Martian guys I saw on "Sesame Street" (when I was a kid) could even answer that one.
ndrussiangerman1 4 months ago
he is missing the point.abortion on demand is not moral from child perspective.children want life not death.it should be regulated abortion
eulex10 4 months ago
@eulex10 If you watch the movie its been proven women get abortions wither they are legal or not. But if they are illegal they get back ally abortions from people who aren't medical professionals and both the mother and baby end up dying. Or they try to perform it themselves with a coat hanger, which I don't think I even have to tell you how that works out. Its even more immoral to have more people die than is necessary.
LeadVitamin 3 months ago
@LeadVitamin bs
eulex10 3 months ago
@eulex10 Great argument, I'll take that as a "Your right."
LeadVitamin 3 months ago
@eulex10 Children, yes, but foetuses have no concept of their own existence & therefore, no concept of what they want; a foetus is completely dependant on it's mother to survive inside the womb, but a child depends on it's parents' protection in order to survive outside the womb
Also, morality depends on the person, not some underlying rules we should all follow; I class blindly believing something without evidence as immoral, but people say doing so is moral because their beliefs say it's moral
Tarynus 3 months ago
0:25
Further lies, in the Soviet Union when Abortion was made available it BECAME the principle method of contraception... And female health declined as well... Is Noam deluded or just making this shit up?
Peter Hitchens goes into detail on this;
/watch?v=CHqM0V3MtLw
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
@Funkyflorist
Abortion Law Reform 1957
Every year since this legislation's passage abortion use has GONE UP...
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
1:49
ABSOLUTE LIE
America gives MORE FOREIGN AID than EVERY OTHER COUNTRY COMBINED. American charitable contributions ARE the highest on average in the whole world...
What are Chomsky's values? (he opened the door) If his values ignore simple facts with American Charity, then there is little else that he can contribute, he is most certainly biased in this regard...
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
@Funkyflorist the percentage of of the U.S.'s wealth, whether measured by GDP, or by the percentage of the federal budget, is among the tiniest in the developed world. Our country is very big, so the raw number of dollars expended on foreign aid matches the level of dollars donated by much SMALLER, POORER countries. As far as charity goes, charity is irrelevant to Chomsky's point. His point was about the politics of abortion and the politics of foreign aid. Not charity. Glad u watched tho
meeg2005 4 months ago
@meeg2005
Whether you go by % of GDP or gross wealth, ITS STILL HIGHER THAN ALL OTHER COUNTRIES!
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@meeg2005
"the percentage of of the U.S.'s wealth, whether measured by GDP, or by the percentage of the federal budget, is among the tiniest in the developed world"
Wait, is this a Logic fail? You REALIZE that you are saying that the US' "wealth among developed nations is the tiniest"....
I've also double-checked these stats and America STILL gives the most foreign aid, whether by percentage or gross dollars...
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
@meeg2005
I've also double checked Chomsky's quote, he states / implies / assumes that the United States has the 'worst and most miserly foreign aid among developed countries'...
This is BLATANTLY FALSE and further implies that American's in general are 'miserly' (thus the statement regarding charity)
Now we DO give a very small amount in comparison to military expenditures... But our military does regular foreign aid all over the globe!
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
Comment removed
meeg2005 4 months ago
@Funkyflorist military aid is not foreign aid. most of military aid is primarily used to secure foreign military dictatorships against revolutions by their own people, in order to allow for the people in charge their to cater to US interests. But that's irrelevant, this clip had absolutely nothing to do with military aid, nor did his criticism of the pro-life movement.. Also, he stated that the US to other "developed" (rich) countries. Please post the link to the research you did
meeg2005 4 months ago
@meeg2005
So a military helicopter airlifting goods, supplies, medicines, etc to isolated areas after a disaster (Haiti, Japan, Indonesia, etc.) is not aid?...
And the recent events in Egypt and Libya prove that we are not using military aid to protect 'dictators' but to quash them.
Funkyflorist 4 months ago
@Funkyflorist So a military helicopter airlifting goods, supplies, medicines, etc to isolated areas after a disaster (Haiti, Japan, Indonesia, etc.) is not aid? It is not military aid. Such relief efforts are usually performed by the Red Cross, and the United Nations. The US is a member of the UN. US supported Mubarak for 30 years, until the regime began collapsing. The US opposed Kaddaffi because of his politics, not because he was a dictator. All irrelevant to Chomsky's point, anyway.
meeg2005 4 months ago
@Funkyflorist Go and check your figures again. America gives most of its aid to Israel--for weapons..they call it "aid" but Israel has a higher gdp than New Zealand! (who gets nothing). And "our military" does foreign aid all over the world? A comment worthy of goebbels. You should try to see some other news sources mate; the American mainstream press is utter "embedded". Try(on line) al-Jazeera, or the BBC or France24; for a more critical view try RT. You might start to see things more clearly
CobinRain 2 months ago
@Funkyflorist truthmonk. com states that while US gives most in contribution, it's "0.16 percent of Gross National Income (GNI) contribution is lower than the other member nations of the G-7 (Graph 7). Comparing the U.S. with all the OECD countries, the U.S. again has the lowest percent of GNI with the exceptions of Greece (0.16 percent) and South Korea (0.07 percent)". It seems like you are ignoring this idea of comparing amount of contribution relative to the wealth of the contributor.
XXjazzfiend99xx 2 weeks ago
@Funkyflorist truthmonk. wordpress. com/2008/04/21/does-the-united-states-spend-too-much-on-foreign-aid/
XXjazzfiend99xx 2 weeks ago
Anyone who supports abortion is evil and morally warped.
GoldenHarvest454 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
I've had enough of the Christian Jihad.
ndrthrdr1 4 months ago
Executing someone for blasphemy is considered murder in the this country, god damn it!
JazzyJonas 4 months ago
Wait wait wait.. we are the nation with the WORST foreign aid? Excuse me? Every single catastrophe that occurs will receive American aid, not just from the government, but also from individual contributions. Regardless, his assumption that because we want to stop abortion here means we don't care about other countries is absurd. They aren't mutually exclusive ideas. Besides, are pro-choicers any more adamant for helping people overseas? I doubt it. Show me wrong though if you can.
Sickopath333 5 months ago
@Sickopath333 He didn't say that they were mutually exclusive. He just pointed out that you are hypocrites. Whatever it is that pro-choicers do, it doesn't make you any less hypocritical.
martindj88 4 months ago
@martindj88 We are only hypocritical if we don't care about other countries and other people dying though. If we do care, then we aren't hypocrites whatsoever. Which is what makes my point that they are not mutually exclusive so important, because you can easily support both. That's a very bad assumption to start with, and it does indeed matter what pro-choicers do, because if they are guilty of the same crime (so to say) then what makes their side any less hypocritical or inhumane?
Sickopath333 4 months ago
@Sickopath333 However, if you don't BEHAVE like you care and you don't put just as much effort into promoting foreign aid as you do in campaigns against abortion in US, you ARE hypocrites. "Pro-choicers" are not hypocrites over this issue since the arguments for their stance have nothing to do with how well other people are. "You are just as inhumane as me, therefore I am right about X" is not a valid argument. Either side in this issue is judged by its arguments not by its "humanity".
martindj88 4 months ago
@martindj88 One's passions and energy can differ in different areas you realize, without being hypocritical. That isn't that uncommon. I'm not saying that they are equally inhumane, therefore I am right, I'm saying that if pro-lifers are inhumane or hypocritical for not caring about other countries, why are pro-choicers immune from that same label? Their side has to do with how well people are as well; a woman's rights, it's her body, etc. That doesn't deal with how well people are?
Sickopath333 4 months ago
@Sickopath333 Hypocrisy is pretending to have opinions, feelings, beliefs, etc one doesn't have. Pro-lifers:
1) claim that they hold life sacred, that they care about children, etc
2) behave contrary to this
Hence they are hypocrites. Pro-choicers are immune from the label since they don't satisfy condition 1). Claiming to support women's rights (and the Constitution) has nothing to do with dying children. Claiming to support children does.
Is it clear now?
martindj88 4 months ago
@martindj88 What is wrong with your presented point is that you have not demonstrated 2 to be correct, let alone in such a sweeping way to indict most pro-lifers, if not all. When do pro-lifers behave contrary to their claims? When they don't speak out loudly enough for foreign aid? Though based on a similar concept one can rally behind a pro-life stance and not be as vocal for another idea; there is a difference between killing a child of your own volition and a starving child.
Sickopath333 4 months ago
@Sickopath333 "Though based on a similar concept one can rally behind a pro-life stance and not be as vocal for another idea;"
When your arguments against abortion are "Life is sacred", "God wants us to protect children" and similar nonsense, it's not "another" idea. Abortion is not the same thing as killing a child, by the way. Even if it were, I don't see how that supposed difference implies that starving children should be excluded.
martindj88 4 months ago
@martindj88 "Life is sacred", [] "and similar nonsense." Yeah, nothing more nonsensical than to say that life is sacred. They are different ideas; starving children in another nation deals with different problems than a legalized practice in this nation. They require different approaches and different solutions. Besides, since pro-choicers speak about rights and freedoms, I suppose they would be hypocritical for not doing more to give people from other nations their freedom, like sex slaves.
Sickopath333 4 months ago
Once we make the world's problems our own then we go down the shitter with them. I am all for helping American mothers get care for their babies. Nor am I crusading against abortion in other countries.
ssgurgs9 5 months ago
Who are these people? This is not the love of Christ. They are showing. I could easily make a video about the attacks on christians. You must realize that for sure there is a war but not war against flesh and blood, But a war within the hearts and minds of all human life.
Fleeko 5 months ago
@Fleeko
I challenge you to make that video...
ThatBlackPanda 5 months ago
Noam speaks the truth!!!!!!!!!!
godzilla1 5 months ago 14
He also assumes that the unborn child has no desire to live and that during the pregnancy the child in not conscious and therefore we do not have to weigh the right to life of the fetus vs the rightsor desires of the mother. That logic would suggest that you could be in danger of being terminated anytime you take a nap. If you remove the requirement that you must be concious in order for your life to be valued then the life of a fetus should have value.
SuperSeaknight 5 months ago
@SuperSeaknight Rubbish. A person taking a nap is a being full conscious and aware of his or her existance prior to falling asleep. An unborn feotus has no such awareness.
fileboy2002 5 months ago
Here is the part that I don't understand, he seems concerned with increasing the health and well being of mothers and children and that having abortions accomplishes that. Why not just put your dollars and support behind actually improving the lives of women and their children through all of the things that he said in the first part (education, etc) and not focusing on abortions. It seems that abortions are the easy and immoral answer to poverty.
SuperSeaknight 5 months ago
I love it when that dude consults with the other one about execution for saying goddammit. He sounds so casual, like he's ordering a sandwich or something.
kepstein8888 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And they say that we Muslims are terrorists
EgypTPHONIX 5 months ago
Chomsky for President
bluegreen1138 5 months ago 39
@bluegreen1138 Chomsky against Presidents!
ReX342 5 months ago
@bluegreen1138 the reasons you want him to be president are precisely the reasons why he wouldn't run.
litrehead 4 months ago
@bluegreen1138 if there's one person I would like to be my president, that would be Chomsky!
hugolescargot 1 month ago
valuable, but that this is how we improve the health, happiness, survival and progress of the human species as a whole. That is why I value HUMAN life, not fetuses. This being said, of course ideally I would prefer never to abort a fetus, but if not doing so will lead to more suffering of CONSCIOUS human beings (the kid and the mother), then it is worth allowing.
trtnec 5 months ago
"Seriously" I am not at all surprised that i don't have a highschool degree, I have a diploma. And secondly - there is NO evidence that abortion increases the health of societies. In fact - more women die due to abortion than to natural childbirth - so you are completely wrong there. And you still havent answered the question - Why should I care about the health of a group of people, if I don't even value the life of any single person. Your argument hasn't even gotten off the ground.
muel0341 5 months ago
@muel0341 my god, how many things can you make up that were never said and are complete non sequiturs. I will go go over each one and then I'm done with this. In my last post I said "giving control over reproduction to women" greatly increases the health of societies. Then here you are simply saying there's no evidence for this just like people say there's no evidence for evolution. And you cite this as evidence against it: More women die from abortion than to natural childbirth. WTF?!?!
trtnec 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@trtnec you also misuese the term non sequitur - I'm done wasting my time with you. You're a very arrogant person and you are not as smart as you think you are. And you have completely avoided my main point - what value is soceity if life has none. I will not respond to anymore of your nonsense.
muel0341 5 months ago
@muel0341 Second, I quoted "rediculous" because I wanted to spell it the way you spelled it, like an idiot. And yes good catch, I meant diploma, same thing though.
Third, I've said over and over we SHOULD value the life a PERSON, and therefore society. You are essentially calling a fetus a person now, which is what you wanted to say the whole time and I've been saying that they are NOT the same and I gave my reasons (consciousness, feelings). And the reason isn't because life is intrinsically
trtnec 5 months ago
And one objective, scientific observation is that all societies that allow choice to women are significantly healthier by every metric. Just do the research yourself and you'll see. And what is the cost of allowing abortion? Offending people who just "know" that life is intrinsically valuable always. We should do what we can to improve human life (keyword human), and if giving women control over reproduction does this almost inarguably, while at the cost of hurting feelings, oh well.
trtnec 5 months ago
Another thing Mr trtnec - If life doesn't have instrinsic value, then why the worship of "society" who cares what benefits society? Give me a reason why I should believe that society is even a good thing to begin with. You can't deny life's intrinsic value on the one hand and then worship the good of "society" on the other. This is an absurd position.
muel0341 5 months ago
@muel0341 Because there are things that just about everyone can agree on, that a functional, healthy society is good for the human species. We all desire to SURVIVE as a species and be HAPPY, and to have said society is the best way to increase the happiness and survival of as many members of the species as possible. ALL (sane) people agree on this, no matter their spiritual beliefs. Once you agree on this you can objectively, scientifically determine the best way to achieve that result.
trtnec 5 months ago
@trtnec That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard. MOST people disagree with you on the issue of abortion, and yet here you are telling me that because all people agree on something that makes it objective? People agreeing on something doesn't make it true. Science once told us that the reason why things get hot is because some invisible substance called caloric was being released. This was only about 100 years ago, that wasn't true. And now your telling me that science = true? Ha...
muel0341 5 months ago
@trtnec That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard. MOST people disagree with you on the issue of abortion, and yet here you are telling me that because all people agree on something that makes it objective? People agreeing on something doesn't make it true. Science once told us that the reason why things get hot is because some invisible substance called caloric was being released. This was only about 100 years ago, that wasn't true. And now your telling me that science = true? Ha...
muel0341 5 months ago
@muel0341 no, the "rediculous" thing is that you totally misread what I said and just believed whatever BS you wanted to believe I said (not surprising for a religious person). I did NOT say most people are pro-choice, (most used to be, now it's about 50/50). I'm saying it is AN OBJECTIVE FACT that allowing choice to women increases the health of societies, not that it is an objective fact because most people agree. Seriously, I would not be surprised if you did not have a high school degree.
trtnec 5 months ago
@muel0341 And yes science does equal truth very often, nothing can equal ABSOLUTE truth if that's what you're looking for in your world that doesn't exist. And the fact that it's sometimes wrong (it gets less and less wrong btw) is just something we have to run with. Science is the best method we have to find out truth and reality, not some person's superstitious gut instinct. Just like what the top-rated comment says, we've tried societies run that way, it was called the Dark Ages.
trtnec 5 months ago
way you come to the conclusion that all life has intrinsic value. Abortion may violate that superstitious gut instinct, but in the real world, it has huge benefits to societies of FULLY LIVING and thinking conscious human beings. Some people base their views on this reality and some like you don't.
trtnec 5 months ago
Bill Hicks without the dick jokes.
TroutMaskReplicaa 5 months ago
But if it's okay to kill unborn babies, why is it so important to save lives of grown adults? If life doesn't have instrinsic value, then saving it is meaningless. The whole pro-choice movement is a self contradiction.
muel0341 5 months ago
@muel0341 I suggest you think a little more on the topic before suggesting there's no difference between aborting a fetus and killing a human being. You honestly can't think of ONE difference? People who base their opinions off of reason and science recognize that there is no "intrinsic" value of life. It just is. Some life is worth saving (conscious creatures who suffer) some isn't (cancer for example, I bet you don't find "intrinsic" value in that). Superstitious gut feelings are the only...
trtnec 5 months ago
@trtnec I have thought a great deal on the topic. There is no fundamental difference between the two. First off - science and reason are not the same thing. There are many things in reason that cannot be called science. The scientific method itself is not science - but philosophy. Second, science cannot answer questions about value. Third even if it could - you deny that life has intrinsic value then it's okay to kill anyone adult or unborn.
muel0341 5 months ago
Hmmm! Children die of poverty abroad, so until we do something about that we have no right to oppose abortion? That's a bit like saying we have no right to investigate rape until we've solved every murder.
Vot63 5 months ago
The abortion debate in america seems to revolve around Religion.
The biological facts of DE and DX abortions should be the reason for being pro-life.
But if you are religious - that is your choice and I will defend your right to be religious. It is called Liberalism .
elegantlywasted100 5 months ago
On different occasions I have seen Chomsky express different opinions. I respect Chomsky but I think he is picking his words based on his audience.
But he is right more needs to be done to help women facing crisis pregnancies.
Socialism is the answer - equality for all.
elegantlywasted100 5 months ago
If you buy into this sort of dissinformation and wanna be journalistic endeavor , you dont even deserve intelligent discourse. You 'want' to believe what has been depicted here. What's really shameful about this video, this farce, is that they used Naom Chompsky to lend credability. Naom would be the first to denounce this compilation because the author took 'one' idiot, who is not even a christian ,to paint a false, distorted view of all christians. You want to be decieved.
MrDenverdan 6 months ago
@MrDenverdan
Are you seriously denying that Christians are more prone to ignorance? It's pretty well established that they more than all other religions are anti-progressive. Don't stress yourself by trying to justify it. Just embrace your dogmatic religion in all of it's ignorant glory!
MCcookiebreath 5 months ago
@MCcookiebreath More prone to ignorance ? No, I believe that 'all' human beings from every set and sect of society have the capacity to be ignorant, no matter what the religion, financial status, or even education. Besides the average low I.Q. , there is personal bias, selective memory and learning, and a 'lot' of self delusion to contend with. So your take on the 'christians' being more prone to ignorance is not only poor logic, but biased reasoning that is obviously based on predjudice
MrDenverdan 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MCcookiebreath More prone to ignorance ? No, I believe that 'all' human beings from every set and sect of society have the capacity to be ignorant, no matter what the religion, financial status, or even education. Besides the average low I.Q. , there is personal bias, selective memory and learning, and a 'lot' of self delusion to contend with. So your take on the 'christians' being more prone to ignorance is not only poor logic, but biased reasoning that is obviously based on predjudice
MrDenverdan 5 months ago
@MCcookiebreath what it must be like to live in a self contrived fantacy world of your own making. Your supposed factul base predicated on self delusion and personal bias. You see, yet do not. You hear, yet cannnot make out the forest for the trees, and all because of you desperate need to supress the truth, at all costs.
MrDenverdan 4 months ago
The U.S has the most miserable foreign aid program? When it comes to government foreign aid maybe your right but when it comes to private voluntary aid from citizens it gathers more than 6 times more money than any other country in the world. But of course, that is not interesting right. Chosmsky please, learn some economics.
alejandro163 6 months ago
@alejandro163
ht tp :/ /ww w.f orbes .c om/20 08/12/24/america-philanthropy- income-oped-cx_ee_122 6eaves.html
caleman22 6 months ago
one of the times i partially disagree with Noam.
phlather 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL. Chomsky is to Marxism what Squeaky Fromme was to Manson. I'm surprised the filthy old liar hasn't carved a hammer and sickle into his forehead.
byroninwahroonga 6 months ago
I understand now how people like censortube can be so certain that all christians are dangerous. You rabidly and unfairly discredit all who disagrees with your ideas. This psycho at 4:20 does NOT represent christianity. These people are a tiny minority of christians, but don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. You people are so brave when you slander the entire christian religion. You're pathetic cowards when it comes to radical islam.
crowleac 6 months ago
@crowleac I am more than happy to call it like I see it in the case of both Christianity and Islam. :P
atheistram 6 months ago
@crowleac Well, maybe if religion weren't such a safe haven for pedophiles and sociopaths people might actually see religion as having some moral currency. All religions require blind faith, obedience to some mystical authority and irrational beliefs. A perfect hiding place for scoundrels.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
The U.S. has a weak foreign aid policy? Are you kidding me? The U.S. government, corporations, and people are amongst the most charitable in the world. People are taking this guy seriously?
98nafets 6 months ago
@98nafets They only aid those countries who are important to Christian ideals.
atheistram 6 months ago
@atheistram How is Egypt, India, Indonesia, North Korea, (and the list goes on) important to Christian Ideals?
98nafets 6 months ago
@98nafets To make them Christian.
atheistram 6 months ago
How utterly dim.
Every "intellectual" needs their tinpot cult to milk for a fat government salary while pretending to loath the government that makes their cult possible.
thomaserossi 6 months ago
This video is a travesty. I know quite a few religious people in the United States and none of them support a theocracy or hope for a holy war. They don't want to control other people. They only wish for the freedom to live their beliefs without persecution. It is intellectually dishonest to interview someone with extreme views and then pass it off as the general belief system of whatever group one dislikes. Sadly, this tactic has become increasingly popular with both the left and the right.
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang This video clearly outlines and demonstrates the militant wing of the Christian religion. For every one of these wing nuts, there's 10 that would stand by while someone was being murdered in the name of Gods Law.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
@kokopelli314 Your supposition sounds somewhat biased, especially considering your failure to account for the many cowardly secularists who stand by while millions of infants are murdered in the name of women's rights. Whenever you point a finger...
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang Thank you for supporting my point. We're talking about human nature here.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
@kokopelli314 Silly me. You made your non-biased position so clear from the beginning with your pejorative labeling, how could I have missed it?! (I hope you sense my sarcasm because it's pretty thick.)
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang Yes, I'm quite biased towards reason and non-violence.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
@kokopelli314 Oh, and you've shown it with your witty retort! (Again, that's sarcasm.)
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang Sarcasm is not an argument. Neither are personal attacks.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
@kokopelli314 Neither are generalizations and opinions, even self-serving ones.
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang Its not my opinion, it's my observation that there are many militant evangelical bible-believing Christians who would love to see the prophecy of the book of revelation happen, including all the death and destruction.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
@kokopelli314 Actually, I was referring to your self-perception of being biased towards reason. But, since you brought it up, your "observation" of Christians is a subjective and fear-based opinion. Again, you're applying the traits of a very small subgroup of extremists to a much larger group. That is neither fair nor reasonable.
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang I'm not applying the traits of the militant wing of militant evangelical bible-believing christians to the entire group. I'm just writing about people that I know and what I've observed from living in a community heavily influenced by evangelical Christianity. The fact is that many of them have memorized a doomsday script from the bible.
kokopelli314 6 months ago
@kokopelli314 Your limited experience has skewed your perspective of Christians. First of all, there are many different sects (Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, Mormons, etc., etc.) of Christians so it is impossible to fairly use one as a template for the others. Second, we all have several influences in our lives, so even within one group you will find that individuals react differently to a situation. Blanket statements, even those based on our own observations, are neither fair nor reasonable.
spudmustang 6 months ago
@spudmustang Frankly sir, you know nothing of my experience. I'm just saying that militant evangelical bible-believing christians constitute a death cult, bent on global annihilation and that moral certitude is a form of psychosis.
kokopelli314 6 months ago 2
@kokopelli314 I don't need to know your experience because you stated it yourself. And I'm just saying that your fear-based assumptions and generalizations make you about as rational as the militant Christian "death cult" that you condemn. Check your own Kool-Aid, sir, before you accuse others of being delusional.
spudmustang 6 months ago
Chomsky doesn't really say anything too outrageous here. And I certainly don't see the particularly anti-religious viewpoint you're all reacting to. Chomsky rightly points out that Christians are capable of hypocrisy, and any sober Christian would tell you the same. I think, especially given his own worldview, Chomsky's view of religion and the religious is very well-mannered and fair, here and elsewhere.
xjtbarnesx 6 months ago
I'm confused. Does the phrase 'Jesus ate the shit off the cock of moses after being fucked by him' count as blasphemy?
dave474c 7 months ago
I like Noam a lot and agree with virtually every thing he says but was somewhat taken aback by his comment on the "miserly" US foreign aid. Is this true? I mean, foreign aid is one of Rush Limbaugh's and Bill O'Reilly's biggest beefs. Even Bill Buckley harped on that one, and in fact I think even Noam would agree that US foreign aid is a significant component of US imperialist policy. Possibly European nations' foreign aid comes with fewer strings...
IClausius 7 months ago
What a dickhead!!!!
MrSoundofsilence 7 months ago
I hate when people just fucking look at retards like that guy in this video, and make their judgements about Christianity from his stupidity. 99% of Christians aren't insane like that guy... i.e. ME.
ejvols4 7 months ago
@ejvols4 can u pls quote some source for ur 99% claim?
jrswordfish1 7 months ago
@ejvols4 I do agree with you there. You can always find some complete moron to represent unfairly a group of people. This is true on every issue.
capt251978 7 months ago
@ejvols4 You have a level of insanity. Its not always defined by 'murderous thoughts'. Delusionary thoughts count too.
dave474c 7 months ago
hmmm so he should take most christian denominations seriously since most help so many children and mothers all around the world. His argument is mostly a strawman against the facelss christian or pro-lifer. Once they state they do help children then it turns into that they do not help children the way the pro choice person wants them to support children. So the pro life person cannot win.
MrBlackhaw 7 months ago
"femi-nazi!"
hahahahahaahah
that dood is a moron
I had to point that out
TheAlijun1 7 months ago
He denigrates Christians for supposedly saying (by not focusing on providing them with minimal healthcare or necessities), "Let the children die,...". And yet he is DEFENDING abortion! What an incredibly intelligent but clueless hypocrite he is.
DouglasJBender 7 months ago
Chomsky's point about being equally concerned for children's suffering worldwide really applies to everyone not just within the anti abortion movement. The 'christian' man in this video does not represent all Christians or Christianity. This is propaganda using Chomsky as the bait .In the end both sides are arguing the case for death be it abortion or execution, and the Eugenists are laughing at both of their malleable perceptions of morality..
utubegirlx 7 months ago
Noam and the makers of the following mockumentary are fools in assuming that a great number of people against abortion are also miserly, ignorant, supporters of genocide. He takes a small sampling of the media-sensationalized kooks and applies it across the board to everyone who doesn't match his political take on the subject. Never mind the huge amount of religious-based charities actually practicing "Do Unto Others". You want hypocrisy - Google "Noam Chomsky Tax Shelter"
adminwrh 7 months ago
@adminwrh "He takes a small sampling of the media-sensationalized kooks and applies it across the board to everyone who doesn't match his political take"
Utter bullshit.
"Never mind the huge amount of religious-based charities actually practicing "Do Unto Others""
Not important.
"You want hypocrisy - Google "Noam Chomsky Tax Shelter""
You don't understand economics.
censortube09 7 months ago
@censortube09 Man, you wasted all of your allotted text space saying nothing more than "nyunn-uhhh". Noam would be ashamed.
adminwrh 7 months ago
@censortube09 from my experience the person who says 'u dont understand economics' doesnt know sh*t!
jrswordfish1 7 months ago
@jrswordfish1 I'm sorry, I had no idea I was talking to a 'free thinker'. I guess I don't understand economics after all..
censortube09 7 months ago
4:00
a reasonable and very balanced person... rofl
munkdo3 8 months ago
"MURDERS DESERVE DEATH"? Don't you mean "murderers"?
TiniNormi 8 months ago
It's so funny to hear a man who calls for mass execution calling other people "feminazis".
Irony bypass!
jerrygreg2 8 months ago
Im not exactly the most religious person but these extremists kind of give religious people a bad rap. There are tons of good religious people who are concerned with family and community and giving back and serving humanity by volunteering their money and time but you never see those people in the media. All you see is the extremists and fundamentalists. I'm sure a lot of religious people are pro life but it wouldn't even enter their head to kill a doctor performing abortions.
RPShredow 8 months ago
I'm not impressed by "lefty" folks who are shocked about these Christian whackos. Stop whining and start fighting back.
thenewmiLONNIEum 9 months ago
Religion has got to be the most evil thing that exists! It gets people killed and is used to control people.
pvtkjoe117 9 months ago
It's interesting to see Chomsky talk about social issues like abortion.
JesusTheNonTheist 9 months ago
I think that abortion in the U.S. should be law. The we could get rid of Americans totally.
biggingeryeti 9 months ago
@IrishEddieOHara That was done once. It's called the dark ages.
biggingeryeti 9 months ago 12
"Pre-born? You're good! Pre-school? You're f@cked!"
- George Carlin (on "Pro-Lifers")
OuTofJoY 9 months ago
"Anyone who blasphemes our god should be executed. It says so in the bible."
Fucking lunatic.
jessemaurais 9 months ago
The fallacy in his argument lies at 1:53 when he says our country...the United States of America...is wealthy. Trillions of dollars in debt is not wealthy. We do not have money to afford this man's plan. Our government just recently nearly declared itself bankrupt. Listen to the little details in his argument and you will find more fallacies.
theanonymousretard 9 months ago
@theanonymousretard Dude. America is the wealthiest country in the world, in absolute numbers. And many of the measures available to help others live are very cheap. American far-right conservatives and fundy Christians care about life only in the abstract. They don't give a shit about people from birth to age capable-of-doing-military-service.
Pomme843 9 months ago
@theanonymousretard Umm then why do CEO's and hedge fund managers have billions of dollars? Cause they control the government and basically gave themselves a bailout after they collapsed the economy and then have themselves bonuses and pay raises. I bet one of these CEO's salary and bonuses could feed, provide drinking water and some basic medicine and save thousands of lives of people in third world countries.
"The system is designed to enrich the wealthy and let the poor suffer."
RPShredow 9 months ago
@theanonymousretard I'm sure you will find tons of fallacies of what Chomsky says if you don't actually listen to what he says and hear what you want to hear.
RPShredow 9 months ago 5
And the many women who have died from perfectly legal abortions, are they better off than if they went through with their pregnancies?
TempusFugit101 9 months ago
@TempusFugit101 women die from pregnancies too, we should outlaw pregnancy and watch how well that works.
RPShredow 9 months ago
@RPShredow I couldn't believe anybody was stupid enough to make the comment you just did. Guess I was wrong.
TempusFugit101 9 months ago
@TempusFugit101 Call me stupid but don't say why. good stuff.
You can't prevent people from dying from whatever so what you said is stupid. I'll make an analogy. People die from crossing the street. All society can do, like Chomsky said, is try to educate people, like by teaching them to look both ways before crossing but people will still die from crossing the street. J walking laws and enforcing them might reduced the rate some but people would still die.
RPShredow 9 months ago
@TempusFugit101 It seems like you people want to completely removed the problem where that is impossible for just about anything, "Oh we don't like abortion, lets get rid of the abortion clinics." No, you attack a problem at its source, like removing the need for abortion through what Chomsky said, giving women proper education, opportunities and medical care and family planning. You reduced the number of abortions by reducing the need for abortions.
RPShredow 9 months ago
@TempusFugit101 Women are going to get abortions wither they are legal or not, only difference is if they are legal they will get it done by a trained professional with proper methods instead of back alley ones where they are way more at risk to die. I'm guessing you didn't actually listen to the video because that is exactly what chomsky said.
RPShredow 9 months ago
@TempusFugit101 That is such a god damn stupid comment, tobacco kills tons of people every year and its perfectly legal, Would people be better off if they didn't smoke at all? Yes! but people will still fucking smoke.
And women will still get abortions wither they are legal or not.
RPShredow 9 months ago
Abort Noam Chomsky.
TempusFugit101 9 months ago