 People of the internet, welcome to modern day debate. Tonight we are debating the ethics of abortion. We have Kay Fellows and Javier crossing swords with Brenton Lengel and Josh. Going first tonight is Brenton Lengel and Josh. So I will turn it over to Brenton and Josh for their 10 minute opening statement to split between each other. So digital people, the floor is all yours for your 10 minutes. And I will start the clock at your first word. All right, very happy to be here. Very happy to be speaking to Kay again. Kay, for those of you who don't follow her on Twitter, I do, everybody should. She's absolutely wonderful. So I'm anticipating a fun discussion. Stop hitting on a man. Well, you'd have to take that up with my wife. If you knock her up, no abortion. All right, so to begin, throughout my, and by the way, so Josh is going to be ceding his time to me since he wanted to more get into the bantery stuff. But Josh is also on the Faker Terrians podcast. Definitely check that out. And if you guys don't know me, my name is Brenton Lengel. I am the Ringo Award nominated Comet creator of Snow White Zombie Apocalypse and Darudi Shadow of the People, which just got my first graphic novel funded. So to begin, throughout my entire life, one of the largest and most hot button issues that has been talked about is abortion. The act of doctors taking action to prevent a pregnancy from continuing to develop. It was one of the first political issues that I remember being cognizant of after overhearing a discussion between my mother and someone on the phone. I think one of the reasons why this topic is so hotly debated and of course exploited by politicians and advertisers for clicks, clout and votes is because we as humans have an innate tendency to protect the youngest members of our species. If anything is hardwired by nature and into our moral and ethical intuition, it is the protection of children. As a parent, I understand this all too well, but as someone who pays attention, what I also understand is that clever and immoral people often use this to manipulate us. The frequent refrain of think of the children is the fascist's favorite go-to move. So we need to be very careful when we approach this issue. Emotions often cloud judgment and if anything clouds judgment more than runaway feelings, it is in-group loyalty and tribalism. As this particular wedge issue is utilized by one of the most infamous gangs of fools, thieves and murderers ever to walk this planet's surface and by that I'm referring to the Republican Party, we have to be incredibly careful in how we engage with this thorny and ethical question. Most of us would quite rightly say that all things being equal if push comes to shove it is better or more ethical that an adult be injured or die instead of a child. And since a fetus grows from a clump of cells to a living, breathing baby over the course of nine months, many assume that a fetus is simply a very young, very small child. So you can see the argument, this is a baby, we as humans have a moral duty to protect it. Now, this is intuitive and easy to understand. However, like many intuitive and easy to understand concepts, it is very, very wrong. The thalamus, which is the part of our brain that is responsible for cognition, experience, memory and consciousness itself does not develop until at least 26 weeks, six and a half months into the pregnancy. And the thalamus cannot actually function until a few weeks later after the beginning of the third trimester. An argument you often hear from pro-choice people is that a fetus is to a baby, what an acorn is to a tree. Well, I'm sorry my fellow pro-choicers, this is a terrible argument and you are 100% wrong. Because without a sufficiently developed thalamus, a fetus is more directly comparable to an acorn or a tree than to a living, breathing human baby or adult. Now, a lack it's made about the Catholic church's official position on this issue, life begins at conception. This is because due to the fallacy of the beard, it is difficult to find a point where the fetus goes from a fetus to a person who should be granted all the rights, privileges and responsibilities that we all enjoy. Essentially, because we can never determine the exact point where enough grains of sand make a pile or the sufficient growth of facial hair becomes a beard, many just automatically divert to conception. But at conception, the fetus has no ability to feel anything, not pain, not pleasure, it has no consciousness and in this respect, there's very little difference between it and any other living but inanimate matter. So if we're going to try to find a point at which a fetus becomes a person, it would seem to me that starting around 28 weeks would be a much more accurate benchmark for assigning rights and personhood than conception. However, I don't feel this argument will be particularly convincing to those who already have had their minds made up for them by the leaders of their communities and the talking heads on the television. We are talking in the abstract. So even though I don't think that a fetus can rightly be considered a person until at least 28 weeks, we are missing something very big. And this is because the main character of our story up till now has been the fetus. And like men have been doing since time immemorial, we are forgetting the humanity of the woman. You see, being pro-life isn't simply that position. If pro-life people are serious about what they believe and what they want, they must necessarily agree that what they are really arguing for is government-enforced pregnancy. As in the pro-life movement's political goal is not to preserve life, at least not for most of them. This doesn't actually apply to Kay. Their goal is to empower police to violently force at gunpoint an unwilling woman to remain pregnant against her will. Essentially what they want to do is to apply to a fetus a right that no other human has, which is the right to use somebody else's body against their will. This is usually compared to forced organ donation and usually centers around the kidney. As in whether or not it would be ethical for the government to force someone to donate a kidney to one of the 10,000 people a year who die for want of one. So it would seem to me that if you're the kind of person like myself who doesn't trust the government, it's intensely strange that one would allow the state to use its violence to violate another person's rights in this manner. If you're someone who thinks, for instance, that the government is inferior to private charity, it seems incredibly inconsistent to assume that the government would be effective at preventing abortions. Now, people will sometimes say that the government is good, but only when it is defending people's lives, but we know this isn't true. The government is really bad at defending people's lives. The state cannot protect us from terrorists. It can't protect us from mass shooters. It certainly doesn't protect us from the many children that's constantly bombing. The point is, if you want to give that power to police, you will have terrible outcomes for doctors, for women and especially for anyone involved because we have seen over these past few years that police are often brutal, stupid, and quite frankly evil. And that is how a lot of them interact with the public. So anytime that you have a law that people won't obey, be that prohibition, the war on drugs, and if the Republicans are correct banning guns across the country, that is a bad law. And obviously we have seen that prohibition does not work. But to bring this back around because we're talking really big here, I kind of want to share something personally. There's a reason I wanted to have this debate tonight. And that is because I'm a husband and a father and I would like my son to have a little brother or sister one day. Now, the problem here is, is that my wife is a high risk pregnancy. She has a chronic illness and as a result, my son was actually born six weeks premature. Now, anytime she winds up getting pregnant, this is a severe threat to her life and limb. And in turn, what we're dealing with now, specifically because the Republicans are going to force Roe v. Wade on the, ending Roe v. Wade on the country, which by the way, doesn't want to end it. The majority of people are pro Roe v. Wades, just the Republicans that don't like it. What's happening now is we are actually sitting there having a conversation, can we actually have another child? Is it right to take that big of a risk? Since oftentimes the medical things that she needs to receive in order to possibly live and to prevent me from losing my wife and my son from losing his mother, are very likely to be denied to her very soon. Pregnancy is incredibly dangerous, far more dangerous than getting an abortion. And the fact is, is that we have seen in countries like Poland and Ireland, when... Molta. Yeah, Molta, thank you. When... Got a lot of money left. Thank you. When abortion is criminalized, what happens is women die. Even if you have a supposition to say, okay, well, in a medical emergency, then obviously we can allow it. But the problem is that when the government phrases it like that, and they have in this most recent, in several of the recent laws of law in Texas, what happens is, is that doctors are reluctant to treat because they are afraid they could be charged with manslaughter or murder. And they wind up holding off unnecessary care, and this leads to the mother dying time and time again. The fact is, is that abortion is a necessary medical procedure that needs to be available for people like my wife. And the fact is, is that when we talk about all of this, we have to stop thinking of the people who get these abortions as being people who simply want them because they are being irresponsible. That is not the fact. 60% of people who get abortions are parents. But on top of that, I really feel like the idea of someone who uses abortion, specifically as birth control, or simply just decides to abort for one reason or another, these people aren't real. Or if they are real, it probably shouldn't be parents. And I definitely wouldn't want to be their child. So- Just gonna say one thing, Brent, we've actually gone over time, but the amount of rambling you do, you're like Joe Biden here, you should run for president 2024. Thank you, I probably will, except I'm an anarchist. I'll be your VP, I'll be your VP. So the point is, as I was saying, we really need to preserve this. It's very important to me, it's very important to my family, it's very important to every woman that I know. And so, that's why I am pro-choice. Thank you. All right, thank you so much, Brenton. And thank you so much, Josh, for your 10 minute opening statement. And we will go ahead and take it over. I'm just like one sentence, man. You don't need to bang me for anything. We really appreciate it. You literally told me you'd cede your time to me. It was a great sentence, yeah. So- I'm trying to build on the jokes there, come on. Yeah. Just want to let everybody know that we will have a 45 minute open discussion after we have our opening statements from the anti-abortion side. And then a 20 minute closing section and then a 30 minute Q&A. So please, if you have a question or comment for the debaters, shoot it into the live chat, tag me at modern day debate. Super Chess will go to the top of the list and please keep it civil, insults will not be read. And with that, we will go ahead and take it over. You've got to read the insults, especially if it's against me. Except for the ones against Josh. Yeah, thank you very much. So listen everyone, if you want to insult anyone, this guy here. Unless they break TOS or our hate speech, in which case you will be banned. Yeah, obviously don't use like racist words against me. Just say it looks like Sonic the Hedgehog. He does. There you go. Here we go. So at your first word, Javier or Kay, would you like to go first? Ladies first. I actually don't have an opening statement. I prefer whenever discussing abortion that we kind of get right into the conversation. So if Javier has any opening statement that he would like to give before we go into open discussion, that's fine. Yes, I didn't have an opening statement myself, but after listening to Brenton's opening statement, I feel as if it is my duty as an American citizen to respond. My name is Javier Javier. I host the Javier Javier Show on YouTube, Politics, Religion and Culture. And I am pro-life. And before I get started, I want to say that I will not insult anyone. I will not insult you because you have a difference of an opinion than I do, or you come to a different conclusion based on the facts and evidence that you viewed. I will not call you out of your name. I will not call you a fascist. I will not call you anything because I believe that we are all humans on this earth trying to figure out what the hell is going on. So with that being said, I want to point out that while it was personal that he brought up the fact that his wife is someone who is at high risk of actually risking her life by having a baby, most abortions are not on the behalf of that reason. Most abortions actually are due to convenience. Only 1% to 0.5% of people who are actually having abortions for rape, incest or because their life is in danger out of all the people who have abortions. Not only is that the fact, the government has a duty and an entitlement to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now, earlier, my opponent said that life doesn't begin at inception, but according to Princeton University, life begins at fertilization. And I looked into this heavily and most people, if you can't agree that life begins at fertilization, most scientists have not settled the fact on when life does begin. So I like to err on the side of caution. If we do not know when life begins, then I think it is our duty to err on the side of caution and not take a risk by destroying that life by convenience in most cases of an abortion. Not only do I think that it is a case, most of the people on the pro-choice side will make arguments such as, well, how are you going to force a woman to be pregnant? Last time I checked, women got pregnant due to sexual activity. And in most cases, like we already discussed, most women get abortions due to convenience, not out of fear of life or rape or incest. So sorry, that doesn't work. Nobody forced her to get pregnant. She, knowing the risk in most cases, laid down with someone and sorry, pregnancy happens due to the fact of sexual intercourse. Sorry for my explicit language. So I know some people can be sensitive to that, but I'll also point out the fact. I also point out the fact that if life begins at fertilization or we do not know when life begins, then I think it is very much the business of the government to decide whether they're going to protect that life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. In the Declaration of Independence, our founders clearly spelled out the fact that the governments are instituted amongst men to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not only that, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to those ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to institute a new government. Now, with that being said, if we do not know when life begins or we do not know exactly what the government's role is in protecting life, we should err on the side of caution. If the government cannot protect the life of the unborn child, which all evidence seems to point in the fact that either life begins at fertilization or we do not know. Then if the government is not protecting that life, then the government is not serving its role. Now, as far as the fetus goes, that is just a development stage of human life. And the reason I say that is because many pro-choice advocates will argue a woman's body, a woman's choice. But technically, it's not a woman's body. And the reason that it's not a woman's body is because of the fact that a baby has its own genetic DNA. Not only that, but it also shares DNA with the father as well, equally with the mother. But we would not consider that baby to be a part of the father. So will we then make the argument that fathers should be able to abort their babies? You would not make that argument. And it's clear that that baby is not a part of the father's body, even though it shares half of its genetic code. Now, I'll also point out and I'll wrap it up here. All right? Okay. Take a deep breath, take a deep breath, take a deep breath. Another argument that the pro-lifers, I mean the pro-choice makes is that, well, women are living in poverty or women are suffering or they might not be in a good condition financially to have a kid and to bring that child up into this world and that child might grow up in poverty or whatever the case may be. But we have countless amount of evidence that shows that over the decades, people's standard of living have constantly been rising and rising and rising above. And not only that, compared to, especially in America, the standard of living is much higher than most developed countries in the world. So if that is the case, you cannot guarantee that just because a child is born into poverty, that that child will somehow remain in poverty or that mother will live through poverty, when we know that people get themselves out of poverty all the time and what we consider to be poor in America isn't necessarily what we meant by poor 50, 60, 70 or 100 years ago. There are poor people with food in their fridge. More food in their fridge than people who work middle class jobs due to social programs and welfare and things of that sort. Poor people have cars, poor people have cell phones and I just think that it's bad taste to say that because somebody is poor, they cannot raise a child. My mom has seven kids, seven, and she did it all living in poverty. And here I stand before you, a convicted felon of four felonies who got out after serving five years in prison to have my own YouTube channel to work a full-time job and be a productive member of society. So I'm sorry, but pro-choice people just cannot predict the future. And I'm not willing to gamble on life just because some people might presume that that child will live in poverty. I'll lend the floor. That is the end of my opening statement. All right, K. Do you have anything you wanna say? Can I quickly come back to have the air for one sec? Before you do that, let me just go ahead and say, let me just do my little spiel real quick. Okay, wanna let you know folks, especially if it's your first time joining us on modern-day debate that we are a neutral platform hosting debates on science, religion, and politics. And we want you to feel welcome no matter what walk of life you're from. And if you have a question for one of tonight's debaters, fire into your live chat, be sure to tag me at modern-day debate, super chats go to the top of the list. And we want you to keep it civil, attack the argument, not the person. Insults will not be read except for at Josh, unless they're hate speech or violin to us. Our invaluable moderators are working tirelessly to elevate the conversation. So please show them, the debaters, and each other the respect that they deserve by not attacking hurling insults and attacks each other. Our guests are linked to the description below, whether you're listening on YouTube or via the podcast. So please, if you like what you're hearing, check out their links. There will be a after-show linked in the description below also, so check out that on my channel. So we will continue the conversation afterwards. And hit the subscribe button. We have plenty more debates coming your way. If you like what you're hearing, you don't wanna miss those. And with that, we will kick it into the 45-minute open discussion at your first word, gentle peeps. The floor is all yours. The first word I would say is, this guy needs to be like one of those commentators at a horse track, because he speaks really fast. The second thing I was gonna say to Javier, like I was gonna pick up the, well, two things. Number one, I appreciate that you say that the argument about when life starts or, you know, is it conception? Is it six weeks? Is it the heartbeat? Is it brain activity? There is no sort of consensus. And I agree with you. I agree with you. You know, I'm just gonna say as well, Kay and Javier, I'm not here to shout you down. I'm here to listen. I'm interested to see what you guys have got to say. So the second thing I would say about poverty argument, look, that is a real issue. Do we, I think, is it 800,000 abortions that are in America every year? Am I correcting that? So the second round, I'm not close to that. Yeah, something close to that. I think what I have here is in 2019, I guess this is the last time they reported to the CDC, it was roughly around 6,000 to 6,898 abortions in 2019 were reported. Not everybody is required to report to the CDC. So those numbers could actually be higher. I think from my own knowledge, it was around about 800. That's what I saw. And look, I'm gonna say off the bat, I don't want people to go out and get abortions. I think abortion, it's a very, very difficult thing to do. So when a woman has to go through an abortion, obviously the mental strain, the father may want to have the baby, et cetera, et cetera. It's a very, very difficult situation. But the poverty issue, it's a real issue. So are we actually saying that to, let's just say 800,000, 25% of people in America get an abortion because of social economic reasons. I would be probably more respecting of the pro-life argument if we addressed those issues at the core. If we had said, rather than say we're gonna ban abortion, let's address the issues why they're having abortions. So these people, for example, I'm just gonna look at this 25% for now. We can't afford to have a baby. If we could address those reasons why they can't afford to have a baby, so they can afford to have a baby, can we not do that? From my understanding, we've had social welfare programs for decades in America. I wouldn't say they're not working. I'm actually a welfare baby, and it worked pretty fine. I think it depends on certain factors. You were a four-time convicted felon. Yes, I am. So I'm just saying that didn't work out fine then. You had a very bad outcome, at least in an earlier part of your life. Are we gonna make the argument that because people in life make bad decisions and mistakes that they therefore don't deserve to live? No, I'm making the argument that poverty does have negative impacts on the people. Everything has negative impacts. No, no, no, but poverty especially. In this climate as well in America, one of the biggest reasons that people go out and shoot people, poverty. No, that's... And well, it is. And I'm pro-gun, by the way, you know, so... Okay, me as well. Kay, do you wanna jump in here? I don't wanna... Well, I just, I kinda wanna address Josh's point because we need to clarify that the pro-life movement as a whole is not restricted to the GOP or Republicans. I for one... No, I'm just, I'm not saying that anybody said that. I just think... Britain said it in his opening statement. No, I did not. You said Republicans. No, he did bring up Republicans and I kind of wanna echo what Brendan said. As a progressive that is also pro-life, I really, really struggle every single day, especially the news cycle since the draft leaks with the GOP and with Republicans that are drafting these bills, that are having these discussions because overwhelmingly you see that, especially male politicians that are involved in these conversations about the legality of abortion in their states are incredibly ignorant on this issue. And then we've seen it time and time again and it's not anything new. It's been happening all the way back in the 60s before Roe v. Wade was even a thing. But to address Josh's argument more specifically is that we have 21 million registered pro-life Democrats right now. There are people that are pro-life and are actively advocating for what you're saying. We do wanna strengthen our social programs. We do wanna help women. We wanna address these underlying issues so that women don't feel the need to have abortions in the first place. I mean, if you look at the statistics as to why women are having abortions, these are situations, these are issues that we could very, very easily combat. And then women no longer feel the need to have those abortions in the first place. And then we're addressing more like a 30% statistic of the abortion rate instead of a 100% statistic of the abortion rate under this one broad umbrella, which with Brenton's argument is the broad umbrella of what about women who need these abortions to save their life? What about the women that are having high-risk pregnancies and as a woman that has gone through two high-risk pregnancies, I understand that and I empathize so much with that. And I think that it is an important conversation that we need to be having, especially now going forward with the likelihood that Roe v. Wade is going to be overturned and that power is going to go back into the hands of these overwhelmingly ignorant politicians. It's incredibly important that we keep these conversations going so that these politicians that are legislating this understand our position. And the position is that women that are having high-risk pregnancies need to be given access to whatever care that they need in order to not die. And this has always been the official position of the pro-life movement and we do need to do a better job advocating for it and continuing to advocate for it as we go forward in these legal conversations in individual states. So Kay, if I could come back on that. So what about the issue of poverty? What would be your response and your solution to that? Well, there's no one solution to poverty because a lot of things cause poverty. Give me a couple, give me a couple. I think that number one, we need to strengthen our welfare system. Right now it is incredibly broken. It doesn't function the way that it was meant to function. People that need to be on it can't get on it because there are people on it that shouldn't be on it. And as somebody that has been on welfare in the past, I was raising two kids in the very, very early years on welfare, it is incredibly frustrating dealing with the welfare system because it is incredibly broken. And we need to be dedicating more time and effort and energy into making sure that that functions the right way so that specifically women, this is who the system was designed for. People that are in these impoverished situations that need help, that need assistance to feed their families can do so. That is just one stepping stone. Having a better welfare system would be a huge help. Having access to low cost or even free childcare is make or break for a lot of parents, single and homes that have two-parent households. Whenever you're living in poverty, majority of the time you're gonna have a two-parent or single-parent household where all of the adults in the household work. These parents need to have access to quality, low cost or even free childcare. And that's just two things that we can do. If I could just quickly interject once more. Sorry guys, I'm kind of like taking over the show here. Just mute me if I'm going on too much. I agree with you. I agree with you, Kay. I think those are the solid points that you made, but should we not sort these things out first before Roe V. Ape, Roe V. Wade, they've been trying to sort this thing out for a long time. Well, if you vote for me in 2024, I'll sort everything out. I'll punch Mitch McConnell in the head. I mean, what he's saying is, is not that they need to sort out the abortion issue, that we need to solve the problem of poverty. Good luck. Because if we simply make it prohibited, what's gonna happen is they're still gonna have the abortions. It will just be more unsafe. Rich people get abortions as well. It's not just exclusive to poverty. Now, can I finish? Can I finish now? I know me and Kay are on the same team, but I kind of disagree a little bit here, right? I think that what people don't necessarily talk about is strengthening our communities and strengthening our families. There are a couple of things that you can do to actually increase your chances of not living in poverty, like graduating high school, waiting till you're married to have kids. There are certain things that statistics and data and studies have shown works to lift people up out of poverty. But what we never talk about is family structures. We never talk about empowering the communities and the families to stay together and incentives for families to stay together. Most of these social welfare programs actually don't kick in if you are in a stable family environment. If you have a mom and a dad who both have an income, you don't get really get government assistance. And what that does is- That's because the income exceeds the benchmark for it. It doesn't have anything to do with it having a mom and a dad. It has to do with having two adults that are working and they make too much money to still be on welfare. Yeah, but I'm not saying that this is the majority of cases, but I'm very familiar with families who gain the system by a man and a woman not staying together because that woman wants to keep her welfare benefits. And I've seen it many times. That's horrifying and tragic. Like the thing is, is what we should do is make sure they have the benefits much more easily as opposed to take them away and then also forbid a necessary medical procedure. Okay, what's the plan to eventually get these people off of the welfare program? Because I hear a lot of talk about expanding the welfare program, but we have lifetime welfare recipients who live their whole lifestyle on welfare and their kids grew up in welfare. But nobody ever focuses on how do we get them to eventually get off of the welfare program. And there has to be some kind of structure and limitations put there to incentivize them to get off of that program. Well, hang on. So first off, why do we need to incentivize them to get off welfare? Because it's good for a person to rise up through out of poverty. Don't you want people out of poverty? Hang on. That's your opinion that it's good for somebody to rise up and work. But the fact of the matter is, is that if we don't necessarily need the work done that they would otherwise do, if we don't need another fry cook or whatever, because usually when they come out of welfare, they're taking very low-end jobs that don't pay well at all, I don't see the point of making people work if they don't want to work and we don't need the work done. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't know how to respond to that. I just want to actually see your point there, Javier, actually. I'm gonna throw you a bonus that we say in the United Kingdom. Yeah, look, there should be a path that we obviously want to get these people into work and we want them producing things to the workforce. For example, in America, I just come back from America, actually, in Seattle. I hope you don't feel like it. I'm sorry. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. This country is a tire fire. Hey, listen, have you ever been to Jillingham and fucking Kent? It's shit, okay? So I'll take Seattle all day long. But you know, like, for example, the infrastructure is crumbling all over America. There's a perfectly good workforce there that we can get people building bridges, upgrading the roads, et cetera, et cetera. And you know, so of course, you were making the point there, Brent, about sort of like jobs that are not really necessary, but there's loads of jobs out there that are necessary. Yeah, and I would agree 100% if there was some sort of public works program. I'm here with Javier on this. If we were to train these people so they could rebuild the bridges or, you know, rebuild the infrastructure or build new infrastructure, that would be a good thing. But they can't because in a lot of people's minds, these people just, they can't help themselves. For the life of me. That's true, I don't believe. I'm not saying that people inherently say that, but a lot of times the rhetoric insinuates it that, well, just like he said, well, do jobs that they might not want to do or that we don't need them to do, right? And I mean, are we arguing that a more skilled population isn't better for the country? I mean. No, a more skilled population is absolutely better for the country. Yeah, the issue is that wages are set by supply and demand. So for instance, we're essentially running on like a hamster wheel here. If, say, if everybody who works at McDonald's went and learned coding, because the Democrats have been very big on learn coding, they stole the Papa John slogan. They spawned like a million fucking Java engineers and I worked infrastructure engineer, fuck Java. Yeah, so if they all learn coding, then coders will get paid what people who work at McDonald's get paid, because wages don't have anything at all to do with how much money you make for the company. They don't have anything to do with how vital the work is. It's simply how many people can we get to do the job at the lowest possible level? So I think that like any kind of solution, assuming that we want to train people and get them working on public works projects, repairing our infrastructure, I think that's wonderful and it would be a great way for them to bring money into their communities and they may not get as many abortions at that point. But I think that like we need to specifically address poverty and we need to address it in a way that makes sense and is smart, as opposed to these quick slops, slipshod suggestions. Let me ask you a question, Brent. Is it justifiable for a mother who's living in dirt poverty and she has a two-year-old and she can't afford to take care of that two-year-old? Then is it justified to then kill the two-year-old so that she can rise up out of poverty? So when we talk about abortion, you could agree that we do not know when life begins. You could, would you... I think I'm the only one that heartily disagrees on this point. I just have to say something to Kaz quickly. Can you just put Yaviyar over to the outside? Yeah, I should clarify. Because you said in your opening statement, and I didn't respond because I couldn't right there, that I had said that life begins at 26 weeks or 28 weeks or whatever. That's not what I said. I said personhood begins at 26 weeks and 20... Because of the development of the thalamus. Once the fetus has the thalamus in place and once the body essentially has had time to acclimate to it, that's when consciousness starts. That's when it can feel pain. That's when it begins to move towards the ability to make memories. That's not actually true. That's not actually true. And studies actually show as much later than that when we can detect when humans start to develop consciousness and develop and have memories and things of that. So it's actually around five years old. Well, hang on, there's still consciousness before five years. Okay, but we don't fully understand consciousness. You would agree with that, right? Scientists have not figured out consciousness yet. We do understand that without the thalamus, you cannot feel pain. You cannot have experiences. You cannot make memories. You are not conscious in any way. You're closer to, as I said, like a tree. So if a person in a coma cannot have experience and cannot feel pain or anything of that sort, you are saying it's justifiable to just kill them. I mean, it wouldn't be justifiable to just kill them. I would be in favor of if their families believe that they would not want to live this way and therefore want to pull the plug. That's totally fine. But I don't think someone outside of the family has a right to make that decision. I would not, for instance, empower the state to run around and start pulling plugs because that would be horrifying. So yeah, I think that when it comes to someone who either is very old or gets into a accident that removes their ability to be conscious and you're at essentially brain death, but their body's being kept alive by machines, I would want to die if I was in that position. But there are people who wake out of comas. Like, I mean, if a person were, like I said, there's this inherent belief that we can somehow determine the future of a life or exactly when this person is valuable versus when they're not. We don't understand consciousness. We don't know exactly how it works and what makes consciousness conscious. And we're taking a lot of shots in the dark here when we say a child at 16 weeks or a fetus at 16 weeks or whatever may not necessarily be conscious. Well, I'm taking a lot of socks that you should have. Shots in the dark. Shots in the dark. Shots in the dark. Shots in the dark. I get what you're saying that it isn't unknown, but it is not an unknown that the child, like they physically cannot be conscious without the thalamus. And the thalamus, again, it develops at 26 weeks and it takes at least another two to begin to develop. If people want to see this, have a study that I brought up specifically on this because I want to make sure that this was the case. You know, at any point, like life is a process. So at any point in that process, we can say life begins here or life begins here or whatever in just the same way you could say, well, the baby started when the grandparents met each other because it's one long continuous process. Yeah, exactly. It's ridiculous. But you can't really know. Because the baby doesn't have its own genetic code at that point. The baby doesn't have it. Wait, what does the genetic code have to do with it? That makes it a distinct human. Once you develop your own genetic code, you are a distinct human. You have your own DNA sequence. I would say that you, okay. So perhaps a distinct organism. But again, like... Brent, Brent, Brent, just quickly. I just love the fact that we were talking about like producing more codes, sorry, coders in America. And the genetic code, you could see like three people in the background going, oh, if this happens, that happens. Yeah. Like you could say it's a distinct organism and we could agree with you on that, but that wouldn't necessarily convey political personhood because that's really what we're talking about. But that's not what the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence speaks of. It says life. It doesn't say consciousness. It doesn't say when the Faluness develops. It says life. So let me ask you something. It doesn't say when life starts. Yeah. Yes, and we can't agree. So why not err on the side of caution? Because erring on the side of caution is arbitrary. You could err on the side of caution in any situation. If I could just interject really quickly. Crack off. Okay, just for clarification, if you open up in any embryology textbook, I actually have a couple. I wish I had gotten them off of my shelf beforehand. There is a 96% consensus among embryologists that life begins at the moment of fertilization. At the moment of fertilization, a brand new living organism comes into existence and depending on the species of the two creatures that created it, that is what describes what kind of organization it is. So first off, Kay, I'm sorry to interrupt you there. They are talking about life beginning at conception in the sense that this particular process that they have subjectively decided to look at begins there. But you could just as subjectively decide to look at any other point in the process. It seems intuitive that life begins there. I will definitely, and I will even say life begins at conception because in that sense, yes, life in the sense that you mean it does begin at that point, you know, when the sperm meets the end. And you would agree it's a human life as well, right? Yes, but it is not a person. And that's very, very important. But there's nothing in the law that distinguishes between person and life. It says life, life. Well, hang on, the Constitution, like the Declaration of Independence says life, liberty and happiness. That's not a law. That's just like a vision statement. But it does say that that is the government's fundamental role and that's why we develop the government. So it speaks to wars. We didn't, no, we didn't develop the government. I think you developed the government because my country came marauding in and tried to tax you actually. Well, no, we were you in the harbor. And yeah, yeah, I've never fucking forgiven you for that. Yeah, the state has this mythology about itself that people built it willingly and, you know, that it serves this important function for for all of us. This is not true. The state is essentially in every country, especially countries in Europe. I know Hilditch will agree with me. It's whatever group of bandits happened to be the best at being bandits. And gradually they got built up to nobility and kings. And now here we are with Vladimir. But that's a that's a reduction of the argument. The argument isn't that, oh, we built the government, like from scratch for these reasons. What I'm saying is these were the arguments laid out towards the British government, Monarchy, from my founders on why we were breaking away from the from the British Empire. Why should I didn't care about that? Like, yeah, like, for instance, they took out the thing that Thomas Jefferson wanted and he had a whole section denouncing slave trade as cruel and inhumane. So like, why should we specifically say that because the Declaration of Independence If I wake up tomorrow, because of this other law, I'm pretty sure you like living in a country where murder is illegal. Wait, which country is murder illegal? Sorry. No, what I'm saying is protecting life. You would have a problem if your government didn't respond, if I went and murdered my neighbor. You would have a problem with that. If the government... Which country is murder legal? No, what I'm saying is you would have an argument to say what use of a government? Why do we have a government if they can't even stop people from murdering other people? You agree, that's a fundamental aspect of having a government. That's my opening statement because they can't. They can't protect us from mass shooters. They can't protect us from terrorists. When we empower the military to go abroad, they more often wind up blowing up civilians and empowering Blackwater to go on massacres. So why would I, yeah. Yeah, but would you wanna live in a country where the government didn't have a vested interest in protecting life? I mean, I would like to live in a country where there is no government whatsoever and no military and no police. Me too. I am completely against laws. Like that's what an anarchist is. You say that, Halia, but I would probably say that the country in which I live in, does all those things in which you said. Yeah, so. Yeah, I mean, I would like to live in a country where I know if somebody murders their neighbor, they're gonna be consequences. So you can't just go around. If you just moved out next door, man, you can move in, you can move in. You know, again, money in mind in high school was killed and buried in a field somewhere. We never found anybody who ever got away with it. Yeah, there's a misconception here. Yeah, yeah, of course we care about life. Of course we care about life, right? We just have a disagreement when life actually begins and you said it in your opening statement as well. I think personally, you also don't know when life begins. Clearly Kay has said conception is when life begins, but I have a feeling that you're not too sure. Well, I made the statement. I know that Princeton University, their research claims that life begins in federalization. But I must come up with you. I'm not asking you to come to the university, I'm asking you. Yeah, because there was disagreement amongst scientists and people who studied this, I'm willing to err on the side that I can't say for certain with a hundred percent certainty that life begins in federalization. But what I will say is I err on the side of caution. Yeah, here's the question. Okay, so here's my one second, Brent. Here's my question again. When do you think life begins? I reserve judgment. I don't have the information to make up. Are you pleading to shift on me? I mean, I'm being honest. I mean, honest. I don't deal in beliefs. There are things I know, things I don't know and the rest is up for until we figure it out. And I'm just honest about it. I'm going to take you to court be the next like Amber Heard fucking Johnny Depp trial. Yeah, you and me like standing up there. Yeah, I'm going to answer the question. Okay, so we could say that it is airing on the side of caution to agree that the fetus begins at conception and therefore it should be granted full legal personhood. There's more evidence for that than we don't know. I mean, no, there's not any evidence for that because science cannot say, they can only tell us what a thing is. It cannot tell us about that thing. But they can tell you if it's a life form or not. I mean, yes, but again, there's a lot of different. Well, not always also with viruses and stuff, but there's a lot of different life forms that are not granted personhood. Animals are not granted personhood. Trees are not granted personhood. I don't go to jail if I go cut down a tree. So, you know, this is a political question and what you were saying in essence is that you are so certain that you're airing on this side of caution that you are willing to empower a police officer, the same kind of people that choked out Michael Brown, or no, I'm sorry, shot Michael Brown. Like these exact same people to come in there and force a woman who does not want to be pregnant to remain pregnant. No, no, that's not what I'm saying. I wouldn't make the argument that police officers should force women to have a baby. What I'm saying is I think there should be laws saying that doctors can't perform abortions. That's a totally different argument. Now, no, you're saying you know, stop this, break the law. Who comes knocking on their door, the police. Yeah, so it's the same thing. You want to punish doctors who do it with. If you're gonna talk about legislation, of course the police are involved. Okay, let me ask you a question. Let me ask you a question. If we not regulate doctors at all. Yeah, we regulate doctors all the time. There are procedures and surgeries and all kind of stuff that the government says that doctors can't perform and medicines that they can't prescribe you. Let's not act like the government doesn't have an interest in the medical profession at all and what you can do with your body. Now, the second thing I would also say is just because you might make the argument, well, if a woman can't get an abortion, she might find other means of doing so and it might put her life at risk or whatever. Okay, but do I care about somebody going across the street to murder somebody? If they get murdered in the process, if you're murdering that life inside of you, why should I care about the murderer? First off, I don't think you believe that this is actually murder. And in fact, I would say that most people, 99% of the pro-life movement does not believe that it's murder. They think they do, but they don't. And the reason why is when you're sitting here right now having an argument like on modern day debate about the ethics of this. If the government was killing, you know, there's been more abortions in this country than eight holocausts. So if you say like, oh, I need to pass this little law to deal with literal octo-Hitler, you don't believe that it's murder. You don't like it, but you don't believe that it's murder. Now there are a lot of people who believe it's murder. Define murder for me. Define murder for me. Define murder for me. Illegal killing of a human. Is that a human life inside of a woman? Yes, but again, it is not granted personhood. No, actually, I'm the legal. I can't do no better than that. I can't do no better than that. I'll throw your bone. Okay, all right, so because I actually quite like you. You seem like a really nice guy. I like y'all too. Yeah, thanks buddy. You've got a point there and I'll tell you why. So in the UK, even if someone is one week pregnant, if you were to kill that person on the street, you would be charged with double homicide. In America as well. Oh, okay, oh, fuck me. Here we go. I'm just, for the life of me, look. I'm not. I'm not. Yeah, I don't, look, I know a lot of people say, well, men are trying to control women. I don't necessarily get into all that. Brent, when you're opening the statement, you said that you wanted to get away from emotions and deal with the facts. You wanted to deal with evidence and things of that sort, right? I'm following the evidence. I'm following the facts. And for the life of me, I just can't see how we justify pro-choice. I'm trying my hardest, but I just can't see how you're justifying this based on the conversation that we're having. Well, I can justify it. I can justify it quite easily. So like, I was actually waiting to bring this point up. But the majority of Europe has decided, if you look at Germany, France, Italy, 12 weeks is the cutoff point. After 12 weeks, you can't get an abortion. There seems to be some sort of common trend. It differs in a few other countries. For example, in the United Kingdom, Netherlands and Sweden, it's 24 weeks, not 12, sorry, I almost said 14, I don't know why. But the majority of Europe said, right, 12 weeks after that, we consider it a human being. Would you think, both of you, Kay and Javier, how the fuck do I say the name? Javier, Javier, Javier, okay, you're right. Do you think that's a fair cutoff point? Like Kay was saying, she believes that fertilization is the beginning of life. So I doubt that she would accept that. But what about you? Me personally, I'm not willing to grant that. And... Well, don't tell the Germans. For example, like Britain said earlier about personhood. He uses the word personhood. But like, we have no instances of people dehumanizing other people and considering them less than people to justify horrific acts. It's called pseudo-espaciation. It's why you don't wanna be dropping racial slurs left and right. Soldiers do it to make it easier to kill the enemy. So yeah, I know what you're talking about here. The thing is, is that again, I believe that a fetus is life. It is a lot. I believe that it is human life. I do not believe that it is a political person. We have a very specific definition for this. And the reason why I do that is not because I have some kind of bizarre hatred of fetuses. The reason I do that is, is that what you're doing is you are weighing the right to autonomy and honestly, the right to life of the woman against the fetus. No, I'm not. She did that when she had sex. She did that. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Hang on. But it takes to the tango. And he did that as well. She and he did that as well. I'm not letting men off the hook here. So what is this? You're gonna saddle some people with a revenge, baby? No, it's not revenge. It's life. It's natural. It's what happens when two people get together. It's not revenge. Hang on. So again, what I'm talking about here, her actually having engaged in sex doesn't change the fact that what you're doing again is you're taking two individuals and you are placing them against each other and only one we can rule with like legally. It's not possible to balance them exactly equally. If we take no action, we take the fetus's side. If we take action, we take the mother's side. If we decide to revoke the right to do it politically. Or both of them get to live. Both of them get to live. Well, one, we don't know that. But also two. And like those cases are very rare. They're not the majority of cases of abortion. If we wanna discuss that, we can. No, I'm not talking about that. I'm saying, so first off, and you talked about this at the beginning, 60% of abortions are done by women who have already had kids, usually more than one kid. And the reason they are getting the abortion is they cannot afford yet another one, especially if they're a single mom. Because you can't give enough care to that. This goes back to what I was saying about poverty. But also I just wanna quickly say one thing. So we're talking about pregnancy and abortion and everything. And we've got 11 minutes left, 12 minutes left. And there are three blokes. Yeah, NK. And there's four old K. The only person that can get fucking pregnant is sat there and hasn't had a word. So why don't you have a word, K? I apologize, K. No, I've kind of taken a step back from this part of the conversation because as a pro-life activist, I actively choose to avoid having the philosophical conversation of personhood. Just not something that I ever engage in. I do that intentionally because my stance is killing human beings equals bad. And I am very much like that across the spectrum. I don't think that we should be killing human beings for any reason in any situation. You understand that's a philosophical position. One second, Brent. It's interesting you bring that up, K. Because the only time I ever hear about an argument of personhood is in the United States of America. We don't have these arguments in Europe. What is personhood? It's basically we argue, and we're quite shit at arguing, but we try anyway, when does life begin? And there's not a consensus in the scientific community. There's some people who say heartbeat, brainwave, some people say 24 weeks. It's constantly evolving. I agree with you on that. It's... I like that you brought up that over by where you're from, there is a kind of consensus of, okay, 12 weeks is the cutoff point. We have that consensus. Well, in most of Europe, yeah. Most of Europe is like 12 weeks no more past that. And we are of that consensus here in the United States too. Statistics show that a majority of people do support limiting abortion to the first trimester. And I found it interesting that you brought that up because in Brenton's opening statement, he brought up the fact that majority of our population also supports Roe versus Wade. These two statistics are actually directly conflicting with each other because Roe versus Wade actually makes it impossible for states to do this. And so what we're facing here in the United States is a huge ignorance and misinformation problem. A lot of people don't know what Roe v. Wade actually is. It's very true. Yeah, and it's sad. And I think the government exploits this specifically for votes and for power and cloud. Yeah, that's kind of where I was going with it. We have this huge misinformation problem that has actually started all the way back in the 80s whenever the Republican Party realized that they could capitalize votes whenever they ran on a pro-life platform. And it has become a increasingly hot button issue ever since then. And so we have this political divide that is driving misinformation and ignorance on both sides, both the pro-life and the pro-choice side from politicians and members of the media that are just trying to use this as a polarization tactic to divide people. And then you have people like me who is, I'm pro-life. I'm also a leftist. I'm very, very progressive in all of my other views except for that of abortion. That keeps me on more towards the right side of the political spectrum here in the United States. So whenever having discussions with people like Josh that don't live in the United States, it makes this conversation, it kind of moves the goalposts a little bit because what we argue here in the US is different than how we argue abortion on a worldwide scale. And the issues that we face a lot of the time whenever arguing abortion here in the United States is the significant amount of misinformation that we have to work our way through before we can even have a conversation about it. I totally agree with you. A lot of the stuff I see that, for example, I had the misfortune of turning on the television when I was in Seattle when Fox News- Oh, you poor bastard. Yeah, and Fox News was like, they're fucking ripping baby's limbs apart as if it was like some sort of like Balrog from Lord the Rings. It just walked into a hospital and he just stuffed his arm up some fucking poor woman's vagina and just ripped this baby the pieces. Like that clearly doesn't fucking happen, right? Like, so we have to be serious about this. And I think it, I agree with you, Kay. We have to tell the truth. The truth of the matter is, a lot of people will bring up things like late term abortions. Statistically, they really don't happen. They really don't. They don't. So that's not what the argument's about. The argument is clearly about, is it a life at conception? That's, so let's just stick to the facts, but also, I would say- I would say, Josh, just a clear thing up. The argument isn't, is it alive at conception? The argument is, is it a form of human life that we feel comfortable empowering the state to punish the woman who is currently hosting it, you know, and put her in jail and or killer? Or do that to doctors? Well, let me- I guess I'm coming from the European perspective here, which is we've always tried to argue when does life begin? So when is something real? When is it human? That's what we've always argued in Europe. And you know, obviously we have many different countries in Europe. We won't talk about France. Fuck France. I had to get my jab in at France, sorry. But, you know, like typically it's like, when does life begin? Like, is it 12 weeks? You know, is it six weeks? Malta says it's a conception, but they're extremely Catholic. So you could understand that. Poland, as you quite rightly pointed out before, K says conception as well. The United Kingdom says 20 weeks. France says 12, you know, there's differing opinions all over the place, but I think that is really where the argument is. It's not about ripping limbs apart. It's when can we consider this thing that's growing in the womb to be a human being? And when that is a human being, when is it due the rights that it's due by law? So I think that's where the argument revolves. And I often find it fascinating that, you know, we solved this argument many decades ago in Europe. Well, except for the Maltese, they're still fucking arguing about it because they're wankers. But we solved this argument. So there is no sort of like protest for pro-life, pro-abortion or anything going on in say London or Berlin or Paris. It seems to be in America. You just, you can't crack where- That's what we do, we argue. The middle line is. That's what we do, we argue. Yeah, it's definitely not unique to the abortion issue. That's for sure. Yeah. I know that for sure too. I would like to say this. A lot of times people on the left side of the fence will say they're all about democracy and they wanna preserve democracy. And they'll say that the Republicans or conservatives are trying to stifle democracy or whatever the case may be, right? I don't consider myself a Republican. I am a conservative and I don't think all conservatives think the same and I don't think all conservatives are a part of the Republican party. I'm an independent myself, right? So what I would say is, if you're for democracy, all Roe v. Wade does is kick back the abortion issue to the states and it allows people in their own states to decide for themselves in what state they wanna live in and how they wanna decide on that issue. But you don't want democracy in that situation. You want the Supreme Court, which is not a constitutional law or passed by Congress to decide on abortion. You want the Supreme Court to decide for the whole country on what we should accept and shouldn't accept, even though we can all agree that this is still not settled and we still are having a massive debate about when life begins and things like that. Yeah, but you would probably agree, for example, I've got to hit back on that. So are you pro-gun? Cause I'm pro-gun. Yeah, I'm pro-gun. Right, so let's just say, let me just pick a state at random. I'm just having a look at the US map. All right, Utah, fuck it. We'll go with that one. Let's say Utah just decided to ban guns and the Supreme Court steps in and upholds the Second Amendment. That would be a good thing, right? Yeah, that's a constitutional right. Of course. But abortion isn't a constitutional, right? No, hang on. The decision made by the Supreme Court back in 70... It wasn't necessarily... Yeah. So, Javi, let me ask you something. We'll go back to that Utah. So, because what if, for instance, Utah decided to ban guns and then Utah passed a law that says we will put anyone in jail who goes to another state to buy a gun? And there are a lot of those bills right now being written trying to be passed. Yeah, but that surpasses the law of the land, which is the Constitution. You can't write a law in a state that imposes on a federal constitutional law. Yeah, but you kind of... So, you couldn't be able to do that from the very beginning. You were insinuating that you didn't like federal law. You're in violation of a fundamental right. It hasn't happened yet, but currently, if we're talking about... Because of the method that we have created for interpreting the Constitution, as we are speaking right now, the Constitution does say that abortion is legal, that it cannot be abridged by the Constitution. What does it say that in the Constitution? The reason, they made the decision based upon the right to privacy, I believe that's the 14th Amendment. The essentially the idea behind it was, was that it's the same reason why, for instance, soldiers cannot go in and check up on what you're doing to make sure you're not a criminal without due process of law. So similarly, the state cannot go in without due process of law and make sure that a woman who is pregnant remains pregnant. Yeah, but the state can determine whether a doctor can perform an abortion. That's not a right to privacy, for example. The state already does this. We already agreed that the state decides what doctors can and can't do all the time. This is, when Roe v. Wade was decided, it was decided on faulty logic, and even if you're pro-life, or pro-choice. Again, I don't think the logic is faulty, because if they overturn Roe v. Wade, we're gonna be dealing with like a big brother situation almost immediately, because essentially the argument against Roe v. Wade advanced by, I believe it was Ileto, like that specifically says that people, that the right to privacy does not exist because the Constitution doesn't say right to privacy. Let me ask you a question. If we have this, we're gonna lose the right to privacy. Let me ask you a question. When the government banning certain medical procedures that doctors can perform, is that a violation of privacy? I mean, it would be in the case of Roe v. Wade, but. I'm talking about any medical procedure that the government is directly getting involved between a patient and her doctor or his doctor saying you can't get a certain medical procedure. Would you agree that that's a violation of privacy? Because abortion is considered a medical procedure. There's a point there, you know, like if a doctor decides to like, I don't know if euthanasia is legal or not. It's faulty logic. It's faulty logic. You wouldn't say that with any other medical procedure. I see K there like going, yeah, I've seen one or two people, but you know. But Brad, you wouldn't say that with any other medical procedure. You would not say they didn't let the doctor do this surgery, so therefore, that's a violation of privacy. You wouldn't say that. Okay, so first off, I might say that. It depends on the specific procedure. Why does it depend on a procedure? Should it matter? That's privacy between a patient and a doctor. You don't want to approach regulations with a blunt instrument, and that's what happens when you try. Okay, so the government has the right to evade between a doctor and a patient. No, I would argue that probably the line is like, if you look at procedures that are currently illegal in the United States, the line, I mean, at least, you know, I'm not a big believer that the government gives two shits about preserving the life of American citizens, but. You went into the fucking war with Iraq. Yeah, like they go through the motions of saying this procedure is banned because it's killing human beings. It's killing people. People are dying in this procedure. It's not safe. Therefore, it's not legal for you to perform these procedures in the United States. Now, this kind of goes back to your argument because you argue the point of personhood, but for the majority of pro-life people, we are of the position life begins at fertilization that is a human being killing human beings is wrong. Therefore, a procedure that directly and intentionally ends the life of a human being should be banned in the United States and that doctors should not be protected under the right for privacy. Okay, so, Kate, can I ask you one thing? Sorry, it's one second, Brent. Well, guys, we're at the end of our open discussion section, so we do need to move on to our closing statements. If you guys want to keep doing that or we can keep doing that and forego the closing. What the fuck about closing statements? Let's keep going. This is good. How much time we got before I go to close the statements? 20 minutes. Let's keep it going. Keep going, yeah. I'm just gonna ask Kate, because Kate is in the... She's been very polite this whole time. Do you know what, actually? I'm 20 minutes back on the clock. Before I ask my question, I am gonna just say to Kate and Javier, you know, this has been a really, really good debate and I'm glad that we aren't just trying to murder each other from this green. Yeah. Okay, calm down, Kaz. I'm pro-life. I'm pro-life. So is there any situation whatsoever that you would allow abortion? So let's say for the case of rape or incest, would you allow an abortion for that? No, there's a reason I ask. There's a reason I ask. Yeah, yeah. Calm the kids. I'll be straightforward. I am what they cancel an ethical life at FIST. So I am, no exception, anti-abortion activist. I am of the position that just because a human being is conceived in a horrible and awful way rape is a terrible violation of someone's body and i am not i'm okay with that obviously i'm a survivor of sexual assault myself but because that human being was created out of an act of violence does not justify an act of violence against that human being that had nothing to do with the original act of violence okay number number number one uh i appreciate your honesty and i appreciate your consistency because a lot of people you know uh that they claim to be pro-life that's where they would sort of go off the way but oh yeah the abortion's okay then where you know they always say that life is precious and it begins at conception except this where you seem to be fair enough i disagree with you but i appreciate your i appreciate your consistency you know so i think consistency is key here uh what about you hubby are how about if i am i gonna drill into your mind and catch you out uh one exception if the mother's life is in danger and that's my exception other than that even rape and incest i don't believe that the child is guilty for the sins of the parent and the moment you start to make life dependent on the circumstances of other people then you can apply that across the board in many different situations and we don't want to live in our world okay again like i said i appreciate your consistency on the matter of course i disagree with you but um i appreciate you it's actually not consistent though yeah well i've actually you said you believe in an exception but for the life of the mother um which is great i i agree if we are going to ban this we should probably have that exception um the problem is is that just all of the problems that exist with rape and incest exist with the life of the mother so that baby is still a person as you see it and so if the mother is capable of delivering it you would necessarily have to say well we have to force this woman to die if the mother that's really that that's really what we're talking about again here if the woman doesn't want to have the baby and the woman does not want to die and we have a good idea that the woman um it will die if she has this baby you know that changes that this is this is essentially forcing a woman to die at gun point and now i'm not saying that that thing is common but the fact that the logic that you that you've employed here i'm confused directly contradicts that i'm confused explain that to me again because i i'm i'm maybe i'm hearing you wrong say it again for me okay if the baby like imagine the baby is able to be delivered so the baby will live but the mother will die okay so if you go with uh saying that it's okay to have abortions um if the baby if the mother will die you are then necessarily you have to agree that you are murdering that baby and that means of course of course yeah so why are you saying that you're murder why are you okay with murdering the baby if the if the woman doesn't want to die and why and if you change your position on that are you then okay with forcing someone to do something they know is going to kill them that they don't want to do at gunpoint we cannot equate a healthy woman giving birth to a healthy child as the same as a woman going to die if she gives birth to that child but again it doesn't affect the child so like k said in the case of like rape and incest it's not the child's fault similarly it's not the child's fault that the mother is going to die it's not the jews fault that hitler wants to kill him but we gotta kill hitler to stop him from killing the jews right so it changes wow someone on the right right what i'm saying is when you have to make a decision between life two lives you have to make a value decision right you could let hitler live but he's going to kill jews and there are going to be jews that die and the cause of you not murdering this man so you have to make a value judgment here's a question for you would you abort out of hitler would i i mean would you abort yeah would you abort out of hitler if you know i wouldn't unless i had a hundred percent certainty that hitler will turn out the way he is and i'm not into predicting the future okay so it's something that you it bombed out chip shops and like one of the best chip shops in all of england got fucked up of course i'd fucking abort him i want that chip but here's the question though if hitler was putting a different family in a different circumstance you don't know if hitler would have turned out to be the hitler we know so you cannot make a hang on hitler couldn't be put in a different family to a different circumstance like there that's not what he said if i would abort hitler that means i'm in control and i have some control over the circumstances of hitler's upbringing or whatever because i'm there what i'm saying is when you have to choose between hitler's life and the lives of jews you have to make a value judgment that's the same thing with the mother and a baby both you both can't live one has to live one has to die then we have to place a value judgment on that it's not the same thing if both can live well hang on you're describing this dispassionately it's not simply that one can live and one can die it's that you through the state are forcing the woman to die against her will now you're doing that you're shifting you're shifting the goalpost here we're talking about you and i interject here gentlemen because like we're we've only got nine minutes left this hypothetical that you guys are arguing over is actually kind of pointless because in the case where the baby will live with 100 surgery then you're talking about post viability and in the cases of post viability what we've referred to as late term abortions delivery is statistically safer late term abortions take place over a two to four day time period is a long process it is a very very taxing on the woman's body and it can be incredibly dangerous so whenever discussing this specific scenario if the baby can absolutely live there's not a scenario where we have to say well you have to pick between the two right now yeah yeah but i mean there is there actually is a scenario where you where you have that problem and that's where for instance like we've got nexotopic pregnancy there's a number of times that either the baby is going to come out dead essentially like with a malformed head or something or that the uh the baby will kill the mother like if you have an ectopic uh not an ectopic ectopic or tubal tubal pregnancy tubal pregnancy yeah i mean something that is discussed a lot especially right now because there are a lot of people that are like you know if they ban abortion how are we going to take care of our ectopic pregnancies and i think that is incredibly important to put on record that ectopic pregnancy removal is not an abortion and not a single pro-life law i mean it literally is an abortion like it is called an abortion by the doctors that perform it it is called like they call it in but that's not how people use it in it's not how it's not how it started in medical like it's not like she had an abortion like no she had um it's a very very specific word for the surgery to remove an ectopic pregnancy um and under pro-life legislation and this is why people have had to go back in and rewrite legislation before it's passed into law to put this specifically word for word in anti-abortion legislation even though it's not necessary to do so that if you are performing to remove an ectopic pregnancy it is perfectly legal under this new anti-abortion law it is wanted to specify that for the audience well hang on there's not just one law and they're just overturning rovey weight and the states can decide and some states may agree that the ectopic pregnancies are okay um another big issue is uh and and sephaly and that was what i talked about early yeah when the baby is born terminally ill um like its brain is underdeveloped or it has like a partial skull or something and a lot of these laws that have been written specifically like they they're do not make an exception for encephaly they don't make an exception for ectopic pregnancy and you know you just said these are politicians that don't know anything about it well firstly in the situation of encephaly um it would be instead of having an abortion they would do early delivery the woman would go through labor and birth that child alive they would be giving palpative care um that's horrifying well it's no more or less horrifying stabbing the child in the heart with the docks and then watching them go into cardiac arrest for several hours before they die yeah who does that who does that okay nobody's like how late her abortions are performed for for fetal abnormality and then michael mayers comes out of his future mind stab it in life that's how they're performed josh i'm telling you i i i think it i think it is far cooler i think it is far cooler to force a woman to go through that experience um then to abort the baby now if aborting the baby is a messy procedure and i agree kind of with josh on this but i don't think it's michael mayers um well no i wasn't trying to pay it that way but for these specific situations where there is a fetal abnormality and they know 100 that that child is not going to survive long after birth um in these cases typically they are at a stage where the process of having the abortion is the baby gets injected through the abdomen of the woman into the amniotic sac um with the joxen and they go into cardiac arrest they can this can take hours to days um this is why late-term abortions take a number of days to happen you have to wait for the baby to die um and then she has to go through the process of labor anyway that's how they deliver the baby she has to go through the laboring and deliver process either way the only difference is that in one scenario she's birthing a living baby that can be given palliative care if she wants to have personal time with the child she can or they can take the child to another room to have a nurse care for them okay but what what's happening here you are describing the fact that like in one scenario this woman has a choice and she wants to you know meet the baby and live with it there are women that don't want to do that and there and i would say it was is much much kinder to allow their will to be made here especially in a case where the baby is not going to live either way like again the idea of using state power against a woman to do that is horrifying yeah well yes and the idea of this entire scenario is horrifying you know there this is a situation where overwhelmingly these are wanted children these aren't these aren't pregnancies that a mother didn't want and she carried it for seven eight nine months and then just decided i've changed my mind yeah exactly these are overwhelmingly wanted pregnancies that unfortunately something went wrong so then why why do we have to use the state to force it to happen a certain way if the woman doesn't want it if she wants it fine you know and again these are wanted bram would you agree that refusing somebody's service is not the same thing it's forcing somebody to do something depends okay like if i go into mcdonald's and i order a burger and they refuse to sell me a burger are they forcing me first place yeah good question right if they are they forcing me not to enjoy a burger so with regard to something like that the example that i normally go to is not mcdonald's it would be you are hanging off a cliff by a rope and someone has the other end and they say give me your wallet or i drop you is that person coercing it uh they're they're withholding services let me ask you a question though did that person jump over the cliff themselves and tie the rope themselves and put them in that situation they jump over the cliff they're holding him yeah what are they tied what are they tied a rope and jumped over the cliff the rope pops and the guy grabs it so hang on i gotta say something if someone was hanging me by the legs and i'm over the cliff and then he jumped down and killed himself i'd be fucking happy because i could get out of it right yeah but like who put who put you in a circumstance that changes the the context around it doesn't change the context of coercion it absolutely can't in in either case if you have been brought into an elaborate trap where they trick you into like falling out onto this thing or if you just happen to be out there and the guy is holding the line we may feel differently about the guy but in both cases he is coercing and robbing you know yeah but but in the case of abortion when a woman has laid down and had sex with no one the risk then she put herself in that circumstance in the first place so it changes it all it does no it does because you didn't want to revenge baby it's not a revenge baby what i'm saying is context matters maybe anybody not in the way that you think you're trying to make it seem as if the state forced semen into this woman and forced her to get pregnant kept her against her will and forced her to have a baby that's not the way it works so what i'm saying is is that the state is threatening to kidnap her or the doctor put them in a cage at gunpoint since our police you know use guns and presumably if they resist they could be shot so yeah the state's forcing that now it doesn't matter how she got into that situation one way or another in much the same way it wouldn't matter like let's say that i agree with k and i and life begins at conception no no um uh no wiggle room no um you know if then i say like um shoot let's say i agree with k and let's say that uh you all should put you on the other side there friend i lost my yeah look i can hold my phone and i'll be right over here yeah but you just quickly i just want to say no no i gotta get some revenge baby revenge baby that sounds fucking hilarious i'm acting like you know just being pissed off of your ex-girlfriend and she goes i know i don't want no i slept with you i slept with your best friend and you go yeah well you've got the next 18 years you little fucking bastard what we live what we live in a society now where people are treating babies and children as a clump of sales uh revenge baby like the way we speak about our spring in our future is it's creating an environment where families are broken that's called begging the question it's a fallacy you are assuming the answer in the premise of the question that's what the pro that's what the pro choice argument is completely what if this happens what if that happens no dude i'm okay the argument the specific argument that you are that you are um declaiming there is a circular argument you have to decide that it is a baby and it is like has personhood before you can then go through the line of logic so it's circular i don't have to prove personhood i only have to prove life human life and we've already established that you do have to prove personhood but whatever even if it's based on what is that a legal standard i mean if you want to make abortion illegal obviously it's a legal standard no it's not all we have a legal standard is life that's what we have that's that's law that's no no it's literally not okay so so you live in the country where it's okay to murder somebody and get away with it and the state has no interest in it because taking a life apparently is not a legal circumstance personhood is a legal circumstance that we extend the specific members of the species that essentially says that these people are our citizens or are humans and therefore deserving of a certain amount of rights that the state owes something to them that is not simply so do you give more do you give more life do you get more value on a dog than uh human fetus um yes sorry a dog did you say a dog a dog a cat or i would not murder a dog it to protect a fetus but a dog is not a dog doesn't have personhood it's not a it's not a person in the sense that we speak of personhood a dog isn't yeah a dog does not have legal personhood in the same sense that a human so you would you would modify a certain amount of personhood in the sense that it is illegal for instance to torture a dog what kind of dog though yeah all right is it a german shepherd because yes if it's a chihuahua they fuck off so what i was trying to say earlier um with regard to this the so if let's assume i agree with k and i i say that life begins uh at conception no no um uh there's there's no way to get out of it it just begins at conception um then how that life began doesn't matter it doesn't matter if the person was uh coerced it doesn't matter if the person was um acting uh irresponsibly these are decisions that we can make specifically about the person who undergoes the procedure but they have no bearing on whether or not the procedure is ethical or should be legal or not because again we're dealing with life here not petty grievances where we think like oh well she shouldn't have sex now she's getting what she deserves i mean you was like the air and k have a quick rejoinder to that and then let's go to q and a yeah k i'll let you have the last word you can talk about what you need it's been sat there for the entire time listen to these three i have very much enjoyed listening to y'all's conversation um i understand you know as a pro-life activist i've been doing pro-life activism for eight years and i understand that this is an incredibly controversial and complex topic and i think that people on both sides of the aisle tend to oversimplify it and the arguments that are made in regards to being for abortion and being against abortion and we really need to have more conversations about the complexity of the situation women that are put no pregnancy is the same and pregnancy is an incredibly complex thing to go through um and as someone who does see it as two human beings being involved in a less than ideal circumstance whenever it's a pregnancy that is not wanted um and we should be doing our best to preserve both lives until it is no longer possible for us to do so and that is my official position on the situation and i understand that whenever it comes to legislating something like that it can be incredibly complicated and i do think that is a very very important that pro-life activists are vocal in their local communities and in their states as these bills are being passed into law to make sure that we do have protections in place so that women can access life-saving medical care that we make sure that these politicians are not trying to outlaw removing ectopic pregnancies and um you know i have seen those conversations taking place and i am very very hopeful that the effort of pro-life activists is going to play out majorly whenever it comes to having conversations about this legislation um but okay okay did me and brent change your minds at all no i want to say one thing nobody changes their minds based on one conversation i just want to say something real quick okay all right go ahead harvey real quick real quick i just want to say that based on facts and logic and everything we talked about here i think the only way to justify a pro uh pro choice argument is a utilitarian argument it basically says yes we understand that is human life but so what kill it that's the only way i can justify based on the conversation that we've had we've agreed that we don't know what life begins we agree that it is human life we we've agreed on so many different things but yet for some reason we still we go to a certain arguments as if the government has no interest in protecting life it's not a law so i really think that overall if you look at this conversation and how it progress you will see that most of the major points are in in support of being pro life yeah okay let's go ahead and go to the q and a okay from late night h back for 499 says all murderers have the have to first lower the value of a human being to justify killing it we have a choice choice to abstain choice to use conception contraception and this is this is the problem though because you know when abortion is outlawed people lose access to contraceptives a lot of times as well and there are people many people who are on the pro life side that also want us to lose access to these things you know it's really important to also like abortion in the united states was legal before the quickening up until 1860 there were some laws regulating it in like massachusetts in 1821 but it was 1860 when it was passed it was passed because in 1850 women started agitating for the right to vote now i'm sure that there are plenty of pro life activists like k who you know have you know you actually believe this and you're fighting for what you believe in and i i could you know i can respect that but but the fact is is that so many more of them especially the ones that are in actual positions of power don't actually care about the life at all what they want to do is exercise power over women for one reason or other that is so false that is so nothing is absolute there is of course there's people out there that are just trying to exercise what they believe in you know like over women of course how but how will he go about proving that is he a mind reader can he determine who is real and who is just trying to control women you can you can determine by looking at their actions and seeing if the actions are consistent with someone who cares about life or if they're okay well let me let me point something out you know conservatives conservatives actually do more for adoption uh conservatives actually do more when it comes to uh giving and to fundraising yeah that's because they're religious regardless of the point you can't say they don't care about life when they do it more than the people who claim to be i'm saying i'm saying a lot of the people especially the ones in positions of power don't actually care about life what what they care about is exercising power over women why why why okay look look i i just want to say i would have to i would have to explain revolution versus reaction to you that's wrong can we can we drop can we drop this statement that says that pro life pro choice doesn't care about life clearly we fucking do like i've spoken to Javier and i've spoken to K and they seem like they you know again i agree with you but you obviously care about life and the same thing is returned to me Javier i'm pro i'm pro choice and when you say that i don't care about life well i i do care about life that's why i work at the local homeless shelter in my own country because i do actually give a shit about life you know i'm just saying i'm just saying that if you make a pro choice argument then we have to be honest and say it's a utilitarian argument i'm for i'm for women having the right to choose because of the outcomes that it might provide if a woman can have an abortion let's move on let's move on from from bezos anti-bullying agency for uh ten dollars from some other country if abortion is to be legal can we agree that the people that cause the pregnancy should have to pay for it rather than tax payers like in australia i have to pay for other people's pleasure sure sure does anyone disagree can we move on to next like okay next one a moral panic for five dollars says studies show analysts confirm experts agree please don't bring math into a moral argument is pregnancy a personal issue or a community issue please don't bring mathematics into what the hell is all you say that again i don't bring nothing to anything because i'm really bad at it i can answer the second question uh whether it's a personal uh issue or a community issue i guess that's what they say right um i'll say this uh we didn't even get into this but as far as population wise in america we for like the past 50 years we're not reproducing as uh as much to replace the workforce in america not only that um for some reason that we haven't figured out why but men's sperm count is uh getting lower and lower and lower as time goes on and we're still trying to understand why so as far as a population states in america i'm talking about studies i'm just oh you ain't even in america from a social perspective and a community perspective i think abortion matters because it has an effect on everybody and the communities in which we live okay i just want to pick something up just quickly before we go next question you said don't bring mathematics into it you can see like in some like planned parenthood there was this guy just doing times tables and like oh put them times tables down before i knock you out like you know yeah so by the way they know what's calling causing the fall in sperm count it's chemical exposures okay well it's pollution okay uh yeah you might be right like i said last time i looked they they said they didn't know but you could be right well it may have been that whatever you saw was old and you know this is yeah it's possible came out uh just last year oh 499 from coffee mom says can you can you please explain how you're not giving a fetus special rights when no one can be forced to let anyone else use any part of their body i know i that that argument or that question look um it's not a special right um that's just like saying if you said gay um gay rights as far as to get married right well somebody could make the argument well a gay person can marry a heterosexual person they have the right to get married then you would say well they got a special right to marry a homosexual person right like it wouldn't make sense like of course we see that as a right because it's a life form we're not arguing that they have a extra right to live off someone we have the argument that they have the extra right to they have the right to live you're arguing though you were specifically arguing it's very much the same as if you argued that a person who needs a kidney to live and the only person doesn't want to give them their kidney the police can come in and force them to cut the kidney out no that only if the person that needs a kidney only needs a kidney because the person we need the kidney from took their kidney or forced them to because nobody's nobody forces a woman to become pregnant most of the time but the woman made decisions that led to her pregnancy you keep ignoring that fact and making the same as she just walking down the street these women are not married they're not married they're not version married they just don't pop up pregnant and you're taking away agency by saying they're forcing this she did that to herself okay so first off she didn't do it to herself there are two people involved in this but she opened her legs she allowed him to put is that not how sex works me i've had sex loads of times we're all adults we're all adults let's move on i can see i can see k in the background just rolling around he's going these fucking men okay from soda cabin for ten dollars it's not about your petty ideas about when someone should have sex or not i didn't say when somebody should have sex i like that was the result of getting gentlemen we both shut the fuck up for one second gentlemen let's go to the next question shall we shall we go to the next question soda cabin for ten dollars is right it's like a bunch of seagulls on the fucking coast is person is person a useful category might sound metaphysical unless we just mean who is given legal and ethical protections maybe we should be practically pro-choice this is something i wanted to ask you about actually right so because like i've never understood this concept of personhood okay and and have a year i'm sure you you may agree with me on this like what's what's personhood as i said like in the europe it's always been about like when someone is now deemed a human being right so like you're in k you would understand this very well you've had two kids i had to look at your profile i wasn't creeping by the way but i just had to look who the fuck you were but but you know like you know so we would say that after 12 weeks in mainland europe or you know in the uk it's 20 like this person is now human being personhood sounds like a kind of like a philosophical argument do you guys agree with that it sounds like it absolutely is it's arbitrary it's arbitrary yeah it's just um okay personhood essentially in like sociological uh and legal um understandings of the term is when we consider a particular human organism to be um worthy of rights and responsibilities and these things can be extended or stripped from people by the rest of society a good example would be for instance um you know it is illegal first up to make someone a slave but the united states government can strip them of that particular piece of personhood and imprison them in a like an actual penitentiary and force them to do work against their will it literally can make them a slave and it actually says in the and i believe the bill of rights that you know this is they that they are slaves so it's it's a designate it's a philosophical and legal designation as opposed to um i would guess a material fact there is what who is and is not a person is always just a matter of opinion and power which i don't yeah i don't personally think taking a route of personhood it gets us very far and i just i would wish to avoid it because it's up for interpretation and as long as we can it's it's important because we need to we need to understand like it's separate from life particularly because there's a lot of situations where someone is alive but not a person for instance death row inmate going to be uh yeah going to be executed so uh if you don't mind cats i've actually got a a comment here from my family member who just messaged me on uh facebook messengers so get that up i'm super chat through josh yeah i know hang on so it basically says i you know you're doing really well but you're still a cunt yeah you should just get a shirt that says that well i tried anybody want to second that notion does anyone want to call me i come just do it now no man trust me i've seen worse unless reassuring so marty mad scientist for five dollars canadian says only for k the rest of you well i read it be illegal for women to engage in dangerous activities while pregnant no no no there is um there is a divide between intentional killing and what happens accidentally now i argue that obviously a fetus is a human being and so i see pregnancy as it is a situation involving two equally valuable equally valid equally deserving of protection human beings um but we also have to recognize that this situation is taking place inside the woman's body and while that's so i have to ask so so you're saying like if a eight-month-old eight-month pregnant woman went motocross racing you'd be cool with that i think that there should be that we already have these laws should it be illegal no but we already have laws in place like when pregnant women cannot drink they cannot smoke you are you're going to get in trouble with child protective services if you are doing drugs drinking smoking while you're pregnant now we should absolutely be i think that's more of like a societal thing you know societal shame does go a long way especially for mothers if you are if you're seeing a eight-month pregnant woman doing like motocrossing i would expect that the average person is going to go up to her and be like what are you doing you're putting yourself at extreme risk not to mention the life of your baby this is also this is really key to understand because under a lot of the laws that states are passing or already have passed women who get in car accidents and miscarry as a result could be charged with manslaughter and in fact um that not exactly that situation but a very similar situation wound up happening in texas recently where the cops literally came like grabbed the woman we're getting ready to charge her because she had miscarried and that they had decided that you know and brenton you don't you're not for that brenton you you're against charging extra for harming a pregnant woman uh again i don't know what i'm saying is is that the the cops literally went and grabbed the woman who had miscarried and tried to charge her like with manslaughter and arrest her that happened just like a couple weeks ago that's yeah um if a woman is driving let's say 10 miles over the speed limit we've all gone 10 miles over the speed limit i assume and she gets into a car left you know that there is a direct line of logic you will see and people will probably wind up prosecuting it as manslaughter you know i think that's why it's important to always go back to and this is why i go back to with pro-life activists being you know aggressive and vocal whenever this legislation is being written because as you will have noticed all of the pro-life bills that have been passed into law thus far haven't passed until they have civil and legal protections for pregnant people this has always been the official stance of the pro-life movement all the way back in the 60s before roe v weight was even a thing having protections for the pregnant person so this is the focus is not on the the woman and we have cases like what happened in texas it's happened before even all of these anti-abortion bills even started passing into law we had isolated cases of women being arrested and being prosecuted for miscarriage is unfortunately something that happens um pro-lifers are very very vocal about these situations and how they don't support it and this isn't this isn't okay okay so my return question on that if you don't mind okay is how would you combat that because the state is going to enforce laws you know so let's just say tomorrow texas says if you have a miscarriage you're going to jail i understand it's a hypothetical but but how would you address that i think that you know as as broken as our current legal system is um this is actually 1776 was a mistake um so one thing the one time that this actually plays in our favor is the fact that politicians number one goal is getting reelected and the reality is is that the majority of the pro-life movement this is actually what divides pro-life activists from what we call abolitionists is the fact that we do not support passing pro-life legislation that does not have these legal and civil protections written into it and so whenever you're having these bills presented and we have had quite a few bills presented that did not have these legal protections or actively stated that they were going to charge women with murder or manslaughter if they obtained abortions you have these bills always always always always being kicked back and like you need to fix it or you're not we're not supporting it pro-lifers have thankfully been very very vocal whenever these bills are presented like no this isn't okay this isn't what we support and if you're going to try to pass this bill we are we are pulling support from you and given that majority yeah and thankfully the majority of the republican base is pro-life these are pro-life people and these are the people that you need the support of in order to get reelected well I think I have to I have to really honestly say you two in terms of the pro-life argument like I've got a lot of respect for both of you because you know you're constantly consistent in what you're in what you're saying and also me and Brent for example when we bring up things like that about legislation you know what would you do here you're constantly looking at safeguards I appreciate that I think that's a good thing and this is a really really good platform because I think personally us four together clearly two separate there's a platform here that we can actually communicate on and I think one of the worst things in politics in today is that we can't have this kind of conversation where you know where we have a difference difference in opinion and you know I think social media is one of the the biggest problems for this where people shout each other down and stuff like that but you know like there's clearly something that we can we can talk about it we can communicate and we can come to a middle ground so I'm just going to say before I know that we're in the 12 minutes left to go then I actually appreciate you know what your stance is I don't agree with it of course but but I appreciate your stance and I appreciate the fact that you're willing to come to a to the table and sit down and say here's our argument what can we do about it yeah okay and I would I would appreciate I'm sorry Javi why don't you go first oh I know that question was only for K and we all started well I didn't talk but everybody had a piece I know he's trying to get the questions but if you go ahead and he can get back to me I was just gonna say I would be much more comfortable with the pro-life laws even though I disagree with them if they were being written by people like K people who are you know K-2024 yeah everybody 2024 I'm not a fan of liberal democracy but I'll tell you what I definitely would vote for UK the uh I'm not open up to run yet how old are you I'm 27 oh wait so hang on wait when can you run for president of the US president you gotta be 38 40 I'm gonna give you a bit of advice all right let's let's go to the next question from Mr. monster for five dollars we gotta after party we gotta after party y'all y'all gotta let him get to the question the people that pay all right mr. monster for five dollars says the fetus does not have a bodily autonomy if it cannot live outside the womb before it's ready for birth that's correct yeah okay bezos is anti-bullying agency for five dollars uh says uh for hilditch they crush the fetus's skull pry the limbs off the torso and then vacuum the rest out they literally do this okay listen okay who what was this guy's name bezos is anti-bullying bezos jeff bezos they're gonna docks you bezos okay number one mr. jeff bezos go run fucking amazon i don't want to talk to you number two do you think this is fucking lord of the rings or something calm your fucking tits okay are you fucking having a laugh of course he don't fucking they don't literally just rip it out of the fucking vagina and slam it on the ground and then they get a sledgehammer or something like that you're fucking mad get over yourself i'll say this um i've seen some disturbing footage about abortions but at the time that i saw it i wasn't able to verify it but i know it freaked me out enough to know that i didn't want to see that type of stuff so i can't necessarily weigh in on exactly how every procedure is done or whatever the case may be if you're ever interested i can walk you through all of them i'd rather not i don't want to have nightmares all right five dollars from five dollars from sunflower says prentin what if we impose the fifty dollar fine for elective abortions it wouldn't be a felony but you'd just be fine fifty dollars for purely elective abortions thoughts how would you um so how would you go about like deciding if they're elective abortions or not like obviously people who go into having abortion like they're doing it for a number of different reasons uh and i can't i i honestly i don't see someone going in and having abortion after abortion because they just want to use it as uh birth control or just for for no reason like maybe there's one person doing that but i guarantee you she shouldn't be a mother um so like i would say there's already a fine in the fact that you have to pay for the medical procedure so like it's not like they're just handing these things out for free particularly not in the united states great all right uh from mango tea says for two ninety nine javier won the debate single-handedly uh k help k k k you you're good with the legal aspect of it really really good i appreciate it did this guy have to pay him like to to say that he can all right from pseudonym for two dollars says why men so proceed be tasks why not private no politics i don't know what this means pseudonym i'm sorry i asked you what you were saying some of these people are barely literate i have no idea all right from soda cabbage for ten dollars is human and human being the same emphasis on being is being experimental or a metaphysical okay i'm just checking in yeah experiential or metaphysical soul okay right so first of all that sounds like like something like an episode out of the x files is human and human being the same emphasis on being is being experiential or metaphysical soul given at conception making pro-life religious should we legislate religion there you go no yeah no we should not legislate religion but um so what's happening when we're talking about like uh human human being personhood the we are our language is not developed enough to give us a different word for all these different terms so what we're having to do is mix and match um we we that that's how language works it's an abstract it's a system of symbols and signs and so it can be a little difficult to talk around things that we we don't have a word for in our culture so that that's why people are getting kind of tripped up so there's no big philosophical problem there it's just uh confusion and um usually this devolves into playing word games i second that all right from pseudonym for two dollars says at kate what about the movie sparta the troll ruin look this is this is one thing i love about america where you can just whisk something into something completely irrelevant he was like yeah well your your pro choice well sorry uh pro life right so so what about that guy when he was up from moffley what the fuck about from moffley are you okay have you been having too much fucking crack mate like are you all right you know it's the the movie um so 300 is better because they actually changed something really stupid that frank miller had put in because like the the the troll guy showed up in the comic yeah he it's comics man i'm gonna talk about it the troll guy shows up in the 300 and is just like hey i want to fight with you and liana is like no you're just not good enough in the movie they were like well you can do something else just not it because you can't get your shield high enough but like yeah it's so basically the the movie is slightly smarter than the comic right from from big buckin empire for 499 says k is my hero keep it up girl what about me people can you not spend some can you not spend some money on me no no love for either of you okay for sunflower says uh for a member for 10 months says dem's in office don't care about choice either no yeah they definitely don't they're horrible politicians don't give a shit about anything yeah right exactly okay so brenton anarchist and i don't know if you look this person that just said this comment i don't know if you've realized but if you actually listen to my voice i'm not actually american so i can't vote the democrats are absolute garbage they don't care about life they only care about themselves josh is australian people so uh don't forget to like good night my night yeah for 1 99 says if you shoot a woman in the womb charge with murder um double homicide and i don't think anybody will argue that shouldn't be the case and i think well actually something interesting they tried to propose a bill i i knew somebody um personally they proposed a bill that would make this law i believe it was in colorado a number of years ago and the uh pro choice uh i don't know if it was pro-choice america if it was narrow um like openly and verbally opposed the bill because it granted a level of personhood to the fetus yeah okay so one thing i'll say to you have the uh actually uh you know over the course of this debate you know we were talking about double homicide i'm gonna give you another bone here i've given you quite a few bones so yeah i'm like a i'm like a dog over here i'm just just stack them over in the corner over there but you know like you're absolutely right because in the united kingdom for example like three big sense of your pregnancy if someone walked up and killed you then you're gonna get charged with double homicide so mark read is our last question oh he's gonna cut me off okay fair enough but yeah go on go on let people know go on go ahead go ahead go ahead oh yeah so what what we're saying is is it's clearly like defined by law that they would be saying that you know that embryo or whatever would be becoming a life so i'm gonna throw you that bone again i disagree but i mean yeah i would say how crazy would it be if a guy murders a pregnant woman for the pro choice people to show up and be like it's not a baby it's like a clump of sales he shouldn't be a double-merced we would never see that right and of course yeah and because inherently it actually it actually happened in the town town over for me where a pregnant lady and she was only about six weeks in right so that's well under the 24 weeks so you can get an abortion she was stabbed and killed horrible situation and you know she was not she he was charged with double homicide because we we understand that you know she wanted to go through the pregnancy therefore that thing would have become a person i i get that i get that and i'm with you and i i think that's a very good point that you made there you know and actually one of the one of the things that i've had in this conversation today is when you brought that up and we had that conversation that's actually made me think twice that i'm not going to change the opposition of the field yeah brand is probably like he's the worst partner ever me and me and hilditch have been since like 2014 i'm probably the strongest partner he's ever had on it on a day would you say so brand does the strongest partner i've ever had well i'm no because that all right from what's it gets it for 499 it says 1776 was a mistake brits don't get to tell us what to do anymore we already settled that disagreement my guy let it go okay you see this little middle finger here swivel your little colonial bastard and from 199 for what it gets it says so women can kill my baby against my will what what i'm talking about in cases of abortion where the father doesn't want the abortion to take place but the woman goes to the abortion anyway i thought this is going to be like some sort of mashed shooter going out like some woman with a fucking baby in her stomach yeah it's the woman's body she's got to be the one that makes the ultimate decision on that that would be incredibly tragic if it happened you know and the father didn't want the baby but you know the the father isn't going to have his body occupied by this by the baby he's not going to be able to carry it so i think we just have to side with the woman on that i did my best to address that point whereas like a baby is made up of half the father's DNA but we wouldn't consider it to be his body technically yes the baby is growing inside the mother and that technically makes it different but at the same time definitely makes it different like it definitely more than difference yeah it definitely makes a difference but at the same time i don't agree that that is the woman's body the baby is not the woman's body it just happens to be inhabiting the woman's body you know i would agree with you the baby is not the woman's the woman's body it is just inhabiting you're totally right on that um you know my issue again is when the when we weigh the rights of the woman against the rights of the fetus and the woman is unwilling i just don't think it's a good idea to send the police after her or the doctors all right from sky scion before 99 says i really hope the pro life side didn't take the fouchie ouchie they publicly admit they contain aborted baby cells stay or get right so the fouchie what the fouchie out the covid vaccine are we really making are we really having this discussion honestly no no we're not gonna we're not gonna have this discussion k because i don't know what this guy's problem is but he was just like he was like babies fucking covid they are not aborted fetal cells in vaccines people there are not aborted fetal cells in vaccines i i bet this guy just like he thinks that like there's this hospital's out there in like fucking kentucky and there's this guy this is giant syringe just coming in and he's like he's like oh i'm gonna put you with the covid vaccine oh you've had a miscarriage sorry about that there there is a bit of a conversation i'll draw a pearl out of this there's a bit of a smart conversation to be had around like the topic of like forced vaccines versus forced pregnancy and you know if you look back you know just 100 200 years the anti-vaxxers were all on the left um and the united states did impose force you're giving people ammunition well as somebody that grew up in the anti-vaxx community i will actually argue that the majority of the anti-vaxx community was liberal to left up until the covid vaccine yeah and i got a question bray uh uh this is a question from let me uh i love these extra super chats that are coming from bean bang he said havia ask britain if me can get pregnant good timing this is going back to the time i debated uh so there was a guy that i debated who was a performance artist uh you know kind of a professional cable news clown and um he was trying to say like can men get pregnant and i was pointing to for instance like there was a i think like a 50 year old man in england who had a functional womb and went into waterfall yeah now i i don't know if that guy can carry the the baby but he could have according to the doctors at least if it had if somehow sperm had met an egg in that womb he could have become pregnant i just don't know if he could have carried all right uh i noticed yes men can get pregnant everybody needs to move on and find another talking point exactly it's okay i really i i we will go down a whole rabbit hole but i'm more than likely i'm willing to come on and have a discussion about whether men can get pregnant or not because i don't think men can get pregnant but i'm not important i'll tell you something that yeah every single time i go to the pub on that saturday i'll wake up and i think i'm pregnant all right five dollars five dollars from mark reid says would the anti-abortion side accept abortion if an artificial womb existed that we could raise the fetus in would the pro side recommend this um i can't speak on that because we actually do have the very very very early primitive stages of having external wombs um this is something that we may actually see take place in our life i think they've already i think they've already grown uh our fetus outside of the womb they have but we're still in the very very primitive stages but this is something that could happen in our lifetime now in regards to the question is kind of ill phrased and i bet they're going on the dictionary definition of abortion which is just to end a pregnancy um terminating the life of the fetus would be it would be essentially eliminated in the case of having external wombs now i have debated abortion supporters that have argued that abortion should still be legal and an option even if there are external wombs so that's a conversation that we're probably going to see more of as the technology advances yeah yeah i would say come back on that just come back on that k like you know of course i'm all about like presenting people with more options okay so the more options for me as someone who's uh i guess a market anarchist in a way a libertarian the more options that you have as a person the better okay so but i understand what you're saying and as technology increases and bearing in mind i just want to say now i i didn't get a chance to say this the entire podcast i don't like abortion i think we should do things to reduce abortion abortion is not some sort of funny thing like you know i don't wake up in the morning after i've been to a maids in the united game and then walk down to my local calf and have a full english breakfast and go chaps do you want to go have an abortion today okay that's not how it works like abortion is a serious serious problem and we should look at ways at reducing it i would argue if if they found a way to grow the fetus outside of the womb if by removing it from the mother and placing it somewhere else where it can grow fully i think that we would have an obligation in my opinion that it's either that or go through the pregnancy i don't think that you should be able to get an abortion if there's a valuable option especially if you can grow that fetus outside of the womb yeah but i'm against i've seen this many many times myself i i'm simply against the state mandating this sort of stuff and i understand that may be a contradiction to what you believe in but you know like when the state does things typically it goes bad right so me that's why me and brent are on this side because i think as i said before you know i i'd prefer there was no abortion it was zero abortions every year i prefer that you know but that's we don't live in that kind of world i agree with you i think the government is horrible at a lot of things right i'm not for a big government type thing but i i still think that little rectangle and i'm gonna have to put it right there yeah i think the government is horrible but i still think the government has certain obligations and that's where i fall in absolutely i agree with you but i don't think that the obligation you know intruding into someone's personal life is the way forward but they but i mean they already do it would you be against would you be for that doesn't mean it's i'm saying would you be for the government getting out of the medical industry all together they can't ban any procedures they can't ban any medicines would you be for that because ultimately that's what we're saying when we say that we're not for the government being involved you see what's on the wall right here oh i'm asking i'm asking you but uh but i get you first of all like in the united kingdom so we have the nhs you've probably heard of the nhs the nhs is a delegated body it makes its decisions itself so the government actually yes of course has certain laws that sort of filter down into the nhs but the nhs are the people that say this is a legal procedure this is not you know so forth and so on are they the people that ban all of the good food that we have here in america because that's too unhealthy the nhs no no that's a different department of ministry yeah but um yeah i'll just say josh you know honestly the the the dick move for britain to conquer like the whole world in search of spices and not use any of them yeah i know like uh i always get that on every single podcast you you've got all these spices you got shit food yeah you guys ready to wrap it up yeah yeah i can wrap it up this has been fun we should give like a little five to a second you know wrap up for each other and everybody i think so you can put yourselves and stuff like that i think that'd be good yeah i think that's it why don't you start javi all right i'm javier javier make sure you say it twice i'm the host and the creator of the javier javier show on youtube that's jav ir not h okay and you can find me there so please come over subscribe and enjoy the conversations that i'm having thank you so much thank you javi okay friends oh sorry so yeah okay i'm k fellows you can find me under my name on pretty much every social media platform um you should also follow my ethical life organization that we just started back in november of last year super excited about it um we're called protecting life through ethical accountability you can find us at plea justice on all social media platforms thank you uh brenton yeah so uh i'm brenton lengel you can find me on youtube um i just searched my name i'm the only one in the world um and i talked about politics art uh philosophy buddhism i've also got my comics out uh snow white zombie apocalypse whose first trade is still available uh we're going to be printing it very soon and uh dirudi shadow of the people which is what this uh background behind me comes from about anarchist boine of intera dirudi um yeah and and definitely check out k she's awesome i follow her everybody should no one should ever follow hill ditch for any reason and stay very far away from the faker terry's podcast i'm neutral what the fuck well i don't know how to start here because this little fucking wanker over here just gave a good stab but uh yeah my name is josh hillrich i'm on the faker terry's podcast i've actually forgotten the url but you can go onto facebook and look up faker terry's that's our page uh i'm on there every two weeks so if you like what i have to say i suspect you don't then you can hop on over and have a look brent was on there one time but by the way i just want to say one thing brent you're a fucking absolute cunt i'm putting off the entire fucking podcast and then you fucking drew me like that at the end right but anyway uh that's what she gets brent interrupting my uh opening statement i interrupted it once three times oh i'm gonna rewatch it yeah but yeah no no you you're more than welcome to come and watch my uh well me and the other guys podcast uh if you want to come on the show just send me a message on facebook my name is josh hillrich there's not many of us so i'm the one with the uh max turner profile picture send me a message we'll bring you on yeah check out faker terry's it's a very fun podcast um and yeah i was on once thank you very much held it okay we'll take you on as well if you want and i am cas and i'm the guest moderator on uh this channel today thank you guys and uh we're gonna have a after show on my channel today i believe a couple of you guys did say that you wanted to pop on at least for a little bit yeah i'll pop off appreciate that thank you for sending the link i'd be happy to be already in the chat i got a little bit yeah so uh come pop over to my channel guys after this is over and uh we'll continue the discussion there uh other than that i want to thank the moderators in the chat thank you to james for creating this platform for all of us to share our ideas thank you to the audience for uh you know tuning in for sharing your questions and uh concerns thank you to everybody sent super chats and elevated the conversation thank you to the debaters you are the lifeblood of the show you make everything happen uh like the video if you loved it share if you want to spread it and subscribe as we have many more debates coming your way our speakers are linked in the description in the description below check them out do it now have a great night to everybody and remember keep sifting out the reasonable from the unreasonable good night peace peace boys