Answering Destiny’s Post-Debate Abortion Questions

  Рет қаралды 106,795

The Counsel of Trent

The Counsel of Trent

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 2 000
@2121Rampage
@2121Rampage Жыл бұрын
Laura Horn's husband is a fantastic representative for Catholicism
@kingmarlin5043
@kingmarlin5043 Жыл бұрын
True, I love Laura Horn's husband
@radscorpion8
@radscorpion8 Жыл бұрын
As Laura Horn's husband, I disagree and would rather be a representative for new age spirituality
@doow11
@doow11 Жыл бұрын
Who knew Laura Horn's husband was such a great debater too?
@mdg6117
@mdg6117 Жыл бұрын
😂😂😂
@geisbell12
@geisbell12 Жыл бұрын
Laura Horn is married?
@samuelsaad1663
@samuelsaad1663 Жыл бұрын
Pro-life physician here! I disagree with the FDA statements claiming that morning-after pills do not prevent implantation. I'd invite you to read the articles published by Peck and Kahlenborn in the Linacre Quarterly.
@johnnotrealname8168
@johnnotrealname8168 Жыл бұрын
This one: ( www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4313438/pdf/lnq-82-18.pdf )?
@PogFrogy1210
@PogFrogy1210 3 ай бұрын
should the morning afterpill be banned?
@samuelsaad1663
@samuelsaad1663 3 ай бұрын
@@PogFrogy1210 I think so
@vtaylor21
@vtaylor21 Жыл бұрын
The beauty of having something recorded and giving evidence of what really happened.
@davidmcpike8359
@davidmcpike8359 Жыл бұрын
The beauty of monologue, where you're free to put yourself in the most favorable light and you don't have to be accountable to anyone in your claims and interpretations regarding "what really happened."
@Dialogos1989
@Dialogos1989 Жыл бұрын
Now if only we had that for the Bible…
@jacklaurentius6130
@jacklaurentius6130 Жыл бұрын
@@Dialogos1989you know the rules in regards to evidence: written down? -> religion? -> false. Written down? -> not religion?-> true.
@Dialogos1989
@Dialogos1989 Жыл бұрын
@@jacklaurentius6130 if you made a point the it is lost on me
@bxdonny
@bxdonny Жыл бұрын
@@jacklaurentius6130can you give an example of when we blindly Believe something just because it’s written down besides religion
@concernedcitizen2350
@concernedcitizen2350 Жыл бұрын
Trent, I gotta express my gratitude to you. I think you’re a great representation of Catholics. I strayed from the church for many years but recently have gone back to confession. I’ve been watching your videos a lot lately and I feel like you have answered a lot of questions that I had doubts on. Keep up the great work!
@aprilla9112
@aprilla9112 Жыл бұрын
When you say ‘ power given to him’, is the ‘him’, the priest?
@MrDoobysm
@MrDoobysm 10 ай бұрын
One cannot earn their way to heaven through “good works”. All humans are dead in their transgressions. Salvation by grace through the belief in the resurrection of the bodily Jesus Christ is the only way to redeem your soul for eternity. No human being has the power to earn gods grace through works.
@shmeebs387
@shmeebs387 Жыл бұрын
This is Destiny's debate style. Whereas Trent uses hypotheticals to better understand his opponent's position, Destiny uses them to try to imply contradictions in his opponent's position by getting them to argue against themselves with an analogous hypothetical. But all you have to do is point out the error in his analogies. For example, in the first example Destiny is conflating an obligation to do something with a prohibition against doing something. Those aren't analogous actions.
@siennamargeaux8413
@siennamargeaux8413 Жыл бұрын
"Destiny uses them to imply contradictions" Spot on. And may I also add that he uses them as a sort of gotcha to show that his interlocutor is being insincere or is driven by emotions or self-interest unlike himself, Mr. Pure Reason. Notice his body language when he thinks he's found a contradiction in his opponent - he talks even faster and wriggles his body in excitement.
@TravisHi_YT
@TravisHi_YT Жыл бұрын
Even worse, he's conflating a random homunculus of cells and saying that you have the same obligation to care for that as you do a human. Destiny is comparing apples to oranges, all Trent had to say was "Sure, take care of the clump of cells until it turns into a baby". It was a lazy analogy by Destiny, but Trent unfortunately fell into that trap.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
Isn’t the anti-abortion argument doing the conflating? Seems to me they are the ones saying that the homunculus of cells is indeed a child and should have the same rights as a born human. Otherwise why the opposition to abortion. I could be missing the point tho ✌️
@shmeebs387
@shmeebs387 Жыл бұрын
@@alexstoyanoff7434 The anti-abortion side recognizes that the opposition sees them as two different things and argues that they are the same. Destiny in this example pretends that the two very different concepts are the same and hopes nobody picks up the clear dichotomy.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
Ahh, gotcha. I did miss the point haha. Thanks for the clarification
@kevindelcid3430
@kevindelcid3430 Жыл бұрын
Trent's professionalism is pure class.
@thenazarenecatholic
@thenazarenecatholic Жыл бұрын
“That thing.” Can’t even use the term “zygote” or “embryo”
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
‘Thing’ = good replacement when the participants’ usage of various terms can turn the convo into a semantic sh*t-show
@redvelvet9215
@redvelvet9215 Жыл бұрын
@@alexstoyanoff7434how is factual terminology “semantics” ?
@bruise_willis
@bruise_willis 8 ай бұрын
@redvelvet nah he's right. Sometimes having middle ground on neutral terms for the sake of keeping discussion on track is useful
@TR13400
@TR13400 7 ай бұрын
​@bruise_willis Yes because you have to pretend something that is alive is not alive or these people will freak out.
@IvyCatholic
@IvyCatholic Жыл бұрын
When Destiny rants about the logic/irrefutability of empirical reality, I'm reminded of the Chesterton quote: "Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all.”
@jonathansoko1085
@jonathansoko1085 Жыл бұрын
Destiny is the definition of a Wikipedia scholar
@IvyCatholic
@IvyCatholic Жыл бұрын
@@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices I could give you one (e.g. "Reality is that which exists.") but you wouldn't be satisfied because it is the classic case of an endless questioning... The "why" hole or the "define" hole goes on and on for the skeptic. At some point you have to rest on certain self-evident axioms. I'm hoping to read some Alisdair McIntyre in the coming year to learn more on this tho!
@BalthasarCarduelis
@BalthasarCarduelis Жыл бұрын
​@@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices in YOUR own words, Define IN Define YOUR Define OWN Define WORDS Define DEFINE Define REALITY Define 👆 Define 🤔 Define " Define .
@arvid_music
@arvid_music Жыл бұрын
@@BalthasarCarduelis Define Define
@colincyzon3627
@colincyzon3627 Жыл бұрын
​@BalthasarCarduelis The subjective can never be infallible. He trusts many wiser groups of people to base his answer to the question of reality on.
@kristennewcomer5193
@kristennewcomer5193 5 ай бұрын
Not a Catholic, but as a pro-life Christian, Trent Horn is one of the best pro-life debaters ever! Much appreciation for him and his ministry.
@TheCounselofTrent
@TheCounselofTrent 5 ай бұрын
Thank you for this comment! -Vanessa
@gilcostello3316
@gilcostello3316 Жыл бұрын
6 nueurosurgeons tried to convince me to pull the plug on my sister because she was in a permanent vegetative state. I refused. And she regained consciousness. And she thanked me for saving her life. Seems in her vegetative state she heard her ex plotting to have the plug pulled, and my sister knowing I was fighting her ex and the doctors to save her life.
@byletheisner5006
@byletheisner5006 Жыл бұрын
It does not surprise me that he is now an ex
@deeplyhidden4880
@deeplyhidden4880 Жыл бұрын
Great Job!
@lucascesar029
@lucascesar029 Жыл бұрын
God bless you!
@Kamfrenchie
@Kamfrenchie Жыл бұрын
That's amazing ! I'm very happy for both of you !
@TiJacQc18
@TiJacQc18 Жыл бұрын
Wow! What you did is fantastic! Good on you and I hope she's doing okay!
@CarlosMoreno-id8gi
@CarlosMoreno-id8gi Жыл бұрын
Destiny's whole "he's catholic so he cant change his opinion" argument can be applied to anyone that holds any view. Like Destiny cant change his opinion on politics because the community he created and participates in will disown him and there goes his streaming income and social status.
@oneofthosepeople2101
@oneofthosepeople2101 Жыл бұрын
100%
@roundtabledetails3307
@roundtabledetails3307 Жыл бұрын
You obviously don't know who you're talking about 😅🤣😂
@CarlosMoreno-id8gi
@CarlosMoreno-id8gi Жыл бұрын
@@roundtabledetails3307 I know Destiny has changed his opinion in the past. That's kinda my point. People can change their opinion even if they have a lot to lose. So, destiny bringing up the fact that trent can't possibly change his opinion because he's catholic comes off as silly because he himself (destiny) has changed his opinion on stuff despite having a lot to lose. If what destiny says is true then why doesnt he hold the same opinions he had like 10 years ago?
@andreaabate4193
@andreaabate4193 Жыл бұрын
It's not his fault, but he's ignorant of how much dissent exists in the Church. Most homilies are watered down. Most Catholics have been poorly catechised. So, even if we were to blindly follow the Pope, most Catholics would not know what those teachings are. Also, I don't know any Catholic families who would shun their family members. Some religions may require that, but it's not really a thing in Catholic circles. (I mean, I'm sure there are some jerk families out there, but it's not encouraged by the church. I've never seen it happen. It's usually to keep the dissenter around so we can try to influx back to where they should be. )
@grumpycrumbles7360
@grumpycrumbles7360 Жыл бұрын
​@@andreaabate4193Very well said! I have heard and personally know of people who left Islam and became Christian (some Catholic) and the consequences they had to face were tremendous! All of them have been abandoned by their family many have had physical fights with family members and even death threats! Some have received official letters from their home country (Iran for example) that if they return they will immediately thrown in prison. Not to mention that according to Islam people who leave the religion should be killed. So yeah, Catholics and Christians in general I would say are very tolerant to family members/friends changing their believes. Of course there are exceptions but the vast majority will behave like that.
@1stdebunker
@1stdebunker Жыл бұрын
Orthodox Christian here. Just read a comment saying Trent is the best pro-life apologist in the whole world, and I have to agree. Keep it up Trent, you're leading with professionalism ☦️❤️
@josephmoya5098
@josephmoya5098 Жыл бұрын
I find it interesting that Desinty argues that a person needs to be of sound mind in order to accept suicide, but doesn't consider the shock of learning on one's impending death and the pain which may be involved with it to be something that would affect one's ability to think rationally.
@jpears1367
@jpears1367 Жыл бұрын
I thought the same thing - there’s a definite question to how that affects how we think of informed consent and informed choice - an idealized rational and objectively informed choice made in a sterile, emotion and coercion free context. And that question is also involved in the abortion debate (and even the penalty discussion Destiny brought up), since many women will say they chose abortion based on fear and circumstantial coercion (feeling like they have no other choice).
@josephmoya5098
@josephmoya5098 Жыл бұрын
@@jpears1367 Really good point on abortion. The church has always recognized limited culpability to women who choose to commit abortion. Early in the church, if one murdered, they were excommunicated until their deathbed, but if one committed abortion as a mother, she was only excommunicated for a maximum of seven years, up to the discernment of the local bishop. If she was seriously coerced, she may not have been excommunicated at all. But those who actively supplied abortifacients were excommunicated for life.
@michaelt5030
@michaelt5030 Жыл бұрын
That's a good point. There's a quote from a psychologist out there that goes something like: "Humanity is not a rational species, but a rationalizing one."
@johnnotrealname8168
@johnnotrealname8168 Жыл бұрын
@@josephmoya5098 Less culpability perhaps but not none. It is true that prosecuting women has always been unpalatable to juries hence why Doctors were targeted (Hence why roe v. wade was more pro-doctor than pro-woman. Ruth Bader Ginsberg herself said that.). I personally find it difficult to accept that a woman has limited culpability given that she is the primary agent for an abortion (Barring coercion and threats.).
@lbfather
@lbfather Жыл бұрын
He’s looking to categorize every moral situation in empirical terms which is something we’re not even close to being able to do yet.
@bingus2464
@bingus2464 Жыл бұрын
The topic of suicide exposes the greatest weakness of the liberal world view. When I say liberal I mean it in the classical sense of the word. That consent is the "be all end all" of any decision a person makes prevents them from saying anything is wrong, even suicide, if all parties involved are participating willingly
@Forester-
@Forester- Жыл бұрын
Even worse when the conversation inevitably turns to what children and young adults can consent to.
@calebsmith7179
@calebsmith7179 Жыл бұрын
There's nothing wrong with wanting to die with dignity. You wanting to force someone to stay alive because of your selfish reasons is the messed up part.
@bingus2464
@bingus2464 Жыл бұрын
@calebsmith7179 killing yourself isn't dying with dignity, you've also missed my point
@calebsmith7179
@calebsmith7179 Жыл бұрын
@@bingus2464 it wasn't much of a point. Being able to end your own life on your own terms, fit's the definition of dignity pretty well.
@crusaderACR
@crusaderACR Жыл бұрын
​@@calebsmith7179It's not. I'm really sorry, it sounds like you're going through hard times. Suicide is never the answer. It's a shameful escape. Again, please reconsider. There's no glory in self-inflicted murder.
@Bonifatus
@Bonifatus Жыл бұрын
Destiny seems to have conflated not getting the answers/reactions he wanted with Trent refusing to answer the questions... Either way, this is a good video to clarify any misconceptions
@integratedfrost435
@integratedfrost435 Жыл бұрын
If this is true, then Trent treated the hypothetical with the amnesiac toddler in a similar vein - Destiny's answer was essentially that he does not have an answer, rather than he was refusing to engage.
@Bonifatus
@Bonifatus Жыл бұрын
@@integratedfrost435 I would argue that the difference is that Destiny claimed that Trent *didn’t* answer the hypotheticals and he did, at least in this subset of examples. Similarly, Destiny claimed that he answered all of Trent’s hypotheticals and the amnesiac infant one he clearly didn’t. That’s not even necessarily a knock against Destiny, I think it’s a good thing generally in a public dialogue not to give a half-baked answer when you don’t have one ready and Trent acknowledges that he was responsible for pressing him harder if he wanted a definitive answer, but, out of this subset, every one of Trent’s alleged refusals to answer the hypotheticals began with a clear answer, it just wasn’t the incriminating answer Destiny thought the hypothetical required.
@mnmmnm925
@mnmmnm925 Жыл бұрын
Destiny has developed poor habits because he has only ever engaged in low quality internet debates. That's why you see him accusing Trent of not answering his questions in response to Trent giving precise/technical answers. Another poor habit is when Trent used thought experiments to draw out the absurdities of Destiny's views and then Destiny kept objecting and calling it "intuition pumping" (as if that's necessarily a bad thing), being totally ignorant of the fact that appealing to intuition is standard conduct among professional ethicists.
@TruFox1
@TruFox1 Жыл бұрын
I think Destiny's frustrations come from the fact that Trent won't discuss why he values the unborn as less than born humans. In this video Trent points out that he doesn't think a women should be punished as harshly for having an abortion as murdering her 1 year old. He using the example of marital rape explaining that some rape isn't as bad as other rape, just like some murder isn't as bad as other murder. That's fine, but the discussion would be around why murdering unborn humans is less bad than murdering born ones. That discussion never happens which is why Destiny says Trent refuses to engage. It's the same case with the other examples. The abortion discussion is about when a being should be granted moral consideration to the point where an abortion shouldn't be permitted. Destiny states that this moral consideration would happen when consciousness begins. Trent says it's at conception, but when he's challenged on it, it seems to be the case that Trent doesn't value a one week old fetus the same as a born child. It's okay to have this position and still be pro-life, but you have to own it if you don't want to appear to be refusing to engage in hypotheticals.
@Bonifatus
@Bonifatus Жыл бұрын
@@TruFox1 I think you've misstated Trent's position in the video and perhaps this is the same disconnect Destiny has -- Trent doesn't say that the murder of an unborn child *should* be punished any less. He acknowledges that a government *could* choose to punish it as being less severe and that that was a political decision not wholly inconsistent with his premise that all human life has inherent value and should be preserved. Destiny seems to want a bright line rule, but what I understood Trent to be arguing is that it's the same as a judge who might decide that a man who embezzled millions of dollars and spends it on drugs deserves a harsher sentence than another man who embezzles the same amount in order to put his children through college. In many jurisdictions second degree murder can carry a sentence anywhere from 20 years to life -- we already define some murders as being worse than others and ask judges or juries to make that determination on a regular basis. Maybe a jurisdiction decides that they want to prevent abortion, but they don't want to chase poor single mothers who were pressured by family or society into it so instead they chase after abortionists. That's a case where the penalty for the mother may be nothing, but you could charge the provider or prescriber of the abortion/abortificant with the murder. Arguing that there is some political flexibility in how we handle murders of a certain class doesn't necessarily mean that we think the person murdered had more or less value and that's what Trent is driving at when he talks about the 5 week old, 5 year old, and 95 year old example around 36 minutes. Ideally, none of these people should be killed, their lives are all immeasurably valuable, but somebody who kills the 95 year old in an attempt to alleviate their pain isn't necessarily acting with malice. The same with the person who gets an abortion -- They may not be acting with malice towards the unborn child, but out of a fear or from societal pressure. If Trent had told Destiny, "In my ideal world all women who got an abortion would be prosecuted for murder", Destiny could have used that soundbite to make Trent sound insane and callous and cold. But that ideal world might be a world where abortion is unthinkable, and that's a world that's far different than the one we live in now. So Trent confined his answer to what he would advise in the current world and that's necessarily a very complicated and nuanced question.
@TonyKeeh
@TonyKeeh Жыл бұрын
Sometimes, I feel, you dont need to overcomplicate your answers, Trent. For example, for the "charging the woman with murder who took an abortion pill" question, you could have said: "If the woman fully knew she was killing/taking the life of a human person, then she should be charged with murder." Then you could go into all the complexities of the issue. Most times, I think it's better to start general, then get specific, or you risk looking like you're obfuscating.
@jacobfrye996
@jacobfrye996 Жыл бұрын
Yeah, Destiny is really good at not overcomplicating answers (IMO). Trent should have just said that it should be prosecuted as murder, if there is enough evidence (beyond a reasonable doubt). Every single other mitigating factor that he listed applies to normal killing as well. Just bite the bullet, it really makes it look like he is running away from the point
@jacobfrye996
@jacobfrye996 Жыл бұрын
He might have been afraid of being clipped, though. But Destiny is usually pretty good at not taking people THAT out of context
@TonyKeeh
@TonyKeeh Жыл бұрын
@@jacobfrye996 Agreed, but I wouldn't even consider it biting the bullet. It looks better to state your position clearly and confidently (with minimal qualifications). And then explain as needed.
@TonyKeeh
@TonyKeeh Жыл бұрын
@@jacobfrye996 I think either of our statements are fine and aren't that clippable even. Either way, if he doesn't answer it clearly, he gets clipped "evading" the question.
@hermeticascetic
@hermeticascetic Жыл бұрын
the problem is then you have to prove intent.
@shredder_s_0733
@shredder_s_0733 Жыл бұрын
Trent, this is one of my favorite response videos you’ve made. The clarifications and context you add post-debate really highlight the differences between pro-life and pro-choice positions. In truth, it seems that Destiny’s hypotheticals were more of an attempt to prove objective morality wrong, and that’s why I believe his arguments ultimately fail.
@MarianMetanoia
@MarianMetanoia Жыл бұрын
I see everyone saying that Destiny matches the energy of his debate partners, but nowhere do I see Trent interrupting Destiny mid-thought. Destiny constantly cuts Trent off as Trent tries to answer questions.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
Yeah, Trent must have really been struggling to answer the questions, so then it was good that Destiny was there to remind him what the question actually was, rather than the tangent Trent was leading down.
@josephpark2919
@josephpark2919 5 ай бұрын
​@@usucdikbrother u must've blown in from stupidville.
@usucdik
@usucdik 5 ай бұрын
@@josephpark2919 Wow dude, those feelings really did a number to my facts.
@josephpark2919
@josephpark2919 5 ай бұрын
@@usucdik what facts? 💀 dawg ur hallucinations aren't facts
@usucdik
@usucdik 5 ай бұрын
@@josephpark2919 yeah sorry, your guy just didn't do as well as you think, so you're white knighting him for nothing.
@Klaug13
@Klaug13 Жыл бұрын
When I took my criminal law class, my professor regularly said, “the answer is ‘it depends!’” So yes, Trent. You were right, the way we treat killing/murder does depend at times.
@boliussa
@boliussa Жыл бұрын
your professor was useless. "it depends" doesn't say anything unless expanded upon.
@amazin7006
@amazin7006 Жыл бұрын
Nobody cares about how you treat the murder, the question is IF it is murder at all. Destiny says no because it is a not conscious human, Trent says yes because it is human. This is the fundamental argument and Trent does not address it at all in this video, and he strawman's Destiny at the end of this video.
@adamkramer9080
@adamkramer9080 Жыл бұрын
I love getting these replies and follow ups
@HawkOni
@HawkOni Жыл бұрын
It seems by “you didn’t provide an answer” Destiny means “you didn’t provide the simplistic answer I wanted to complex moral questions.” Then again, Destiny does not appear to have a developed and complex ethical compass, so we can’t expect him to understand nuance and shades of grey
@oneofthosepeople2101
@oneofthosepeople2101 Жыл бұрын
So we’ll said. Destiny is just trying to win points in a game he is playing. The cognitive dissonant possibilities are literally endless when you have no moral compass.
@idoporges9215
@idoporges9215 Жыл бұрын
i agree with destiny, and actually Trent hasnt even responded in the video either. the first point for example: we are not obligated to enact extreme measures of medicine on 64 cells, but as medicine becomes cheaper and more accesible that would actually mean we need to save every zygote, and maybe every egg even. in this video Trent just runs away from that by denying the notion it will be easier in this future hypothetical, even going into specifics on how vegetative states are complex in the present
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
It's obvious how Trent was repeatedly trying to change the scenarios at the onset to get to an area he was more comfortable discussing and giving his opinions on. Destiny rarely tried to change anything, he mostly clarified or scrutinized the logic of the hypothetical, especially when it's something patently absurd like "well what if you lost every single memory and started over like a newborn???"
@oneofthosepeople2101
@oneofthosepeople2101 Жыл бұрын
@@usucdik are you serious?! Do you not know about serious head trauma? My uncle fell off a roof and had to be permanently hospitalized because he can’t function past an infants age.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
@@oneofthosepeople2101 ok... and so what? That's not at all related to any topics here. And the fact that you brought it up alone shows you don't understand what they're talking about.
@davidjohnson5557
@davidjohnson5557 Жыл бұрын
As a Destiny fan, I really hope you two have another debate or even just a discussion around virtues and ethics. You are definitely one of the more well versed people he has debated this past year. The debate itself and your follows videos are great content!
@MarcusGreen-y7g
@MarcusGreen-y7g Жыл бұрын
Destiny loses majority of debates
@kahner93
@kahner93 Жыл бұрын
​@@MarcusGreen-y7gKeep huffing that copium my dude
@MarcusGreen-y7g
@MarcusGreen-y7g Жыл бұрын
@@kahner93 it’s true
@crashtestdummy2337
@crashtestdummy2337 Жыл бұрын
​​@@kahner93 unfortunately, as a Destiny fan. It's very true. His performance was not great He conceeded the debate the moment Trent had Destiny follow his own logic to conclude that abortion is wrong because of hypotheticals about those in vegetative states. Therefore, the motion is adopted. Abortion is wrong.
@ultimateyagerman
@ultimateyagerman 11 ай бұрын
​@@kahner93lol lowtestiny doesnt win debates, dude is an overglorified troll
@youtubeKathy
@youtubeKathy Жыл бұрын
The 64 cell thing: if those don't die, that means that they have entered a phase called senescence which is a sign its not viable. I think you are right on, it is the same as a person in a state of eminent death. You are also correct, as a cancer researcher, it actually makes more logistical sense to cryopreserve than go through the efforts of caring for it in a Petri dish. I'm not sure you really could keep it alive that long? Has anyone actually done this? Senescence is due to some type of DNA damage, causing cell growth cycle arrest. So the embryo is not capable of dividing and progressing in growth, even if it was implanted in a uterus. My gut tells me, having done pronuclear injections on mice in the past, where we harvested blastocysts from one mouse, for injection into another, that the blastocysts not used, would eventually shrivel and die. The wouldn't remain viable. The the 64 cells state, aka, blastocyst, a viable embryo would be ready to implant into the uterus, in order to continue development. I think you would do with the embryo in a dish, the same as the ethical thing to do with all of the current cryopreserved embryos. If you were too thaw all of those cryopreserved embryos, they would be at the same state as the cell in a dish that Destiny uses in his example. I think you are more educated on the science here than he is. Another way to look at it, should we thaw all the current cryopreserved embryos and just maintain them in tissue culture dishes? or just keep them frozen until they can be implanted in utero. From a researchers perspective, your cells are safer in cryopreservation if you are not ready to use them for something.
@kinghoodofmousekind2906
@kinghoodofmousekind2906 Жыл бұрын
That's a lot of great info here in your comment.Cheers!
@Crusader-George
@Crusader-George Жыл бұрын
Thank you! That's a lot to digest in my mind 😁 Overall I agree with you, destiny is the very definition of a Wikipedia scholar
@michaelmbogori
@michaelmbogori Жыл бұрын
Destiny would just respond it's supposed to be a hypothetical
@matthewedwards8576
@matthewedwards8576 Жыл бұрын
To your question, should we just thaw them and maintain them in tissue culture, probably not as they are being stored for implantation at a later date which is a better environment for them than culture and they are likely to survive longer if implanted. I think destiny’s question is, as a hypothetical, more if for some reason it’s not possible for it to implant, it will die but we should try and keep it alive for as long as possible as it is a human being. And if destiny had all the knowledge of what you said, his answer would probably be, granting that it is a human being, would be to cryopreserve it until you can figure out how to get it to implant, or develop in an artificial womb which would be invented in the future. From his hypothetical I also got the feeling that he was viewing the 64 celled organism as just being sedentary, not growing/dividing anymore. It stays at 64 cells. And he was saying that if it just stayed in that state, you would be obligated to care for it even if it didn’t develop any further for as long as you could.
@TheEdzy25
@TheEdzy25 Жыл бұрын
It seemed like destiny was intimidated by trent in his knowledge and debating skills.
@mnmmnm925
@mnmmnm925 Жыл бұрын
In one of the post-debate reviews, Destiny said he was shocked and started to feel nervous when it was revealed that Trent has 3 master's degrees (philosophy, theology, and bioethics).
@truthiz2805
@truthiz2805 Жыл бұрын
@@mnmmnm925 He felt nervous at start, but once it began, he felt extremely comfortable for the whole debate. He said that as well.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
Nah, this is backwards. Destiny was worried when he heard of Trent's degrees and education background, but then quickly realized it didn't matter at all and he was getting similarly terrible talking points that all pro-lifers eventually get around to making.
@mnmmnm925
@mnmmnm925 Жыл бұрын
@@usucdik Trent did not make any terrible points.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
@@mnmmnm925 Haha.... sure bud, if you say so. But just remember, God is watching.
@ajamusic7322
@ajamusic7322 Жыл бұрын
Watching the debate, I found Destiny often wanted to slowly provoke Trent to get short-fused and visually frustrated to trip up and look bad, which is his style. It's because Trent didnt bite when those attempts happened that the discussion remained overall civil and respectful and worked in Trents favor more than Destiny's.
@bookishbrendan8875
@bookishbrendan8875 Жыл бұрын
To be fair, I think both sides did a bit of that. Trent was suspiciously sly in his continuous reframing of certain terms in *his own questions* to Destiny that could be interpreted as trying to rhetorically catch Destiny is an ethical conundrum. That said, I’m on Trent’s side of the aisle. I just think these sorts of tactics are generally done in bad faith, and the debate should have been over the underlying worldviews and not the consequences of each interlocutor’s position on abortion.
@coldpotatoes9687
@coldpotatoes9687 Жыл бұрын
I mean trent asked destiny some INSANE questions right off at the start of the debate for optics. While trent had brought them ahead of time destiny didn't because he didn't realize he was going to do an optics play like this. So saying destiny was trying to provoke while trent is asking questions like cp and birthing sex dolls is a little biased. Every side has insane hypotheticals if you dig enough but some are better faith then others. Destiny just bit the bullet while trent tried to obfuscate his answers.
@ajamusic7322
@ajamusic7322 Жыл бұрын
@@coldpotatoes9687 I think what you bring up constitutes more as Trent provoking Destiny's position and arguments, whereas the the occasional scoffing and laughing from Destiny is more attempting to provoke Trent on an emotional reactive level than his arguments and position. He could easily do without and still say the same words to provoke the argument and position Trent presents.
@KoffyGG
@KoffyGG Жыл бұрын
Trent started like that from the very beggining and Destiny matched him when he realized Trent was just going for optic W's and not willing to engage with him at all.
@afilthywarlockmain1447
@afilthywarlockmain1447 Жыл бұрын
The term “optic” used in any respect towards this debate, is an absolute cop-out. If the “framing” makes Destiny sound insane so easily, maybe it’s that he’s presenting insane ideas? I’m amazed so many can’t even consider that.
@MarianMetanoia
@MarianMetanoia Жыл бұрын
Trent, you did us all proud in the debate. After watching your review of Destiny’s debate with Lila and Kristan, I honestly prayed that you’d get the opportunity to sit down with him and offer a stronger argument for the pro-life position. I had no idea that prayer would be answered so soon! It’s amazing seeing your channel grow by tens of thousands of subscribers in mere days, and it’s seriously overdue. You consistently put out excellent content, and I’m so happy that more people are seeing it. Keep doing what you do because you’re setting the world ablaze.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
His arguments were mostly the same, just with less screeching.
@okay43342
@okay43342 Жыл бұрын
As someone who has had a miscarriage some level of concern, as in an investigation, would humanize the child lost and may lead to more data on what causes miscarriages and make miscarriages less likely to happen - I'd like that. I think that the level of the investigation though would logically differ compared to a born child just based on the higher rate of natural miscarriages - in that case would not cause unnecessary stress of the couple who is grieving or be as intense as an investigation of a child dying at 5 years. It's like an elderly person dying at 98, there is not as much of an investigation as a 5 year old child because, like in a miscarriage, chances are it was a natural death.
@susand3668
@susand3668 Жыл бұрын
Dear @okay43342, I agree that I was very dissatisfied with the lack of interest in the reasons for my own 2 miscarriages.
@brendonhill
@brendonhill Жыл бұрын
Make it an optional investigation broached as find out what happened not as the mother is guilty and we're going to catch you as a criminal
@susand3668
@susand3668 Жыл бұрын
Dear@@brendonhill, I think that is what Trent said. My own loss through miscarriage was not considered worthy of a medical investigation to see why I miscarried and to attempt to prevent same. Nor was the miscarriage of @okay43342 . It would have been nice if our children's deaths had been honored by some show of concern as to the reasons for our losses.
@repentantrevenant9776
@repentantrevenant9776 Жыл бұрын
Excellent point
@harleydavidson4247
@harleydavidson4247 Жыл бұрын
Deliberately killing a baby at ANY age should be treated as murder. We have the obligation to protect human life.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
I think everyone agrees with that. You seem to be missing the entire point of the convo, which is when do we consider the fetus a ‘baby’
@harleydavidson4247
@harleydavidson4247 Жыл бұрын
@@alexstoyanoff7434 no, Destiny was trying to say that a 64 cell baby being aborted should be considered murder. Why not? We have the duty to protect human life.
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
@@alexstoyanoff7434 Everyone doesn't agree with that, which is why pro-lifers never argue for the protection of pre-fetal or pre-embryonic life, and why Trent was completely unwilling to accept that even the cells in the petri dish are obligated to be protected under risk of murder charges.
@matthewjohnston1400
@matthewjohnston1400 7 ай бұрын
We have an obligation to not kill.
@Nahnah111
@Nahnah111 3 ай бұрын
​@@LoudWaffle I've heard a lot of arguments for the protection of the pre-fetal. This concept can be seen in many pro-life people's opposition towards IVF (creating a zygote and then implanting it at the embryonic stage or destroying it because it doesn't meet certain genetic criteria) and opposition of plan b (which prevents a blastocyst from implanting). Lots of people oppose both of those things and agree that it's murder even at those stages. Also, 96% to 97% of biologist agree that life begins at conception. Sure, that's not ALL of them, but it's the overwhelming majority. Any fetal development textbook you open will say life begins at conception. Any IVF clinic will also agree that life begins once fertilization occurs.
@buckarooben7635
@buckarooben7635 Жыл бұрын
I hope Destiny sees this video and y’all can engage in further discussions in the future
@KaosSakana
@KaosSakana Жыл бұрын
Or....we could stop giving disgusting people like Destiny any advertising or platforming. Far better option, since he rarely has any genuine or constructive points to give against anyone who isn't far left (where the counter arguments write themselves.)
@PikaPro16
@PikaPro16 Жыл бұрын
​@@KaosSakanawait you're attacking him here, explain why he's disgusting?
@KaosSakana
@KaosSakana Жыл бұрын
@@PikaPro16 I'm being hyperbolic, but the fact that he's just always a prick regardless of the situation is annoying. And I think he doesn't hold himself to all the standards he holds other people to.
@voss9352
@voss9352 Жыл бұрын
@@KaosSakana isnt destiny a lot more popular than trent horn? he wouldnt be the one giving a platform
@marvelator8303
@marvelator8303 Жыл бұрын
It annoys me to no end when people like Matt Dillahunty or Pinecreek Doug demand that you answer incredibly loaded or complicated questions with "yes" or "no", and any kind of qualification or nuance is you "refusing to answer the question". It's a really low-brow move to reach for, and I was really disappointed to see Destiny engaging in it. I understand when people feel that an answer is inadequate or unhelpful because it is overflowing with endless qualifications, but Desitny claimed that you *didnt answer at all* and that's clearly and demonstrably untrue.
@lordfarquaad8601
@lordfarquaad8601 Жыл бұрын
To quote the philosopher Hetfield, "Arrogance and ignorance go hand-in-HEEEYYYAANNNNNNDAH!"
@johnnotrealname8168
@johnnotrealname8168 Жыл бұрын
@@lordfarquaad8601 It is pronounced H-ee-yun-Day.
@Reloading20
@Reloading20 Жыл бұрын
He's not. He expects a clear answer. See how he answers trents questions. He'll give a straightforward yes, no, it depends on these unknown factors answer, then dive deeper into the nuance of the issue or push back. Trent avoid answering the question entirely. This is made even more obvious when on the post debate therapy session he had with a friendly face, he directly answered the question because he knew he would get no push back there. It's a really low brow move to reach for and pissed me off after watching an hour of this "debate" to see such a lack of good faith appear.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
Nah, this is a bad take. Trent was squirming very badly on basic hypotheticals. It was weird. The only thing "incredibly loaded" was how the stuff Destiny brought up was basically a direct result of the beliefs Trent pushes and if it were made into law. Just look at how it had already affected women who can't even remove an unviable fetus because of the goofy anti-abortion laws made by religious fascists trying to dictate how people can live.
@jamie7880
@jamie7880 Жыл бұрын
@@Reloading20 I think it's very unfair to talk of Trent supposedly not answering the question as a "lack of good faith", when this was exactly what Destiny exhibited throughout a good portion of the debate. Also, seeing that you're so confident in your ability to judge a person's intentions, you're probably aware that answering impromptu questions in a debate vs when you've had a while to think about it may explain his different answers?
@dqnamo
@dqnamo Жыл бұрын
I know the comments here are going to be pretty anti-destiny but disagreements aside I think both of you are good faith and would love to see more conversations in the future.
@FuddlyDud
@FuddlyDud Жыл бұрын
This needs to be pinned to guide further comments. :)
@michaelspeyrer1264
@michaelspeyrer1264 Жыл бұрын
being incapbable of saying rape isn't an objective moral evil and universal moral norm is not ooperating in good faith. This blue haired lunatic was condesending and used ridiculous arguments.
@lordberossus2545
@lordberossus2545 Жыл бұрын
@@michaelspeyrer1264 You realise people aren't wrong because you dislike their answers yes?
@dqnamo
@dqnamo Жыл бұрын
@@michaelspeyrer1264 I can understand why you see it that way but is having a disagreement on morality and ethics mean that person is bad faith? How would you ever have a conversation or debate around ethics when as soon as they disagree you label them as bad faith?
@FuddlyDud
@FuddlyDud Жыл бұрын
@@michaelspeyrer1264 And what are we called to do when someone does not recognize evil? We operate out of graciousness and faithfulness to God. This entails still operating with kindness and in good faith, or else we will inevitably fall into self righteous judgment. :/
@slow9573
@slow9573 Жыл бұрын
I think you did a great job. I was an atheist before converting to catholicism long ago, and while I don't have the smarts to really explain in short form on youtube comments what I mean by this, I just know that people like Destiny (which was someone both myself and my wife were like) can be insufferably arrogant in their ignorance. People with your profound patience and aptitude for diving into opposing arguments are a gift to all mankind. I could not do what you do. Thank you. And frankly I am happy that Destiny is capable of debate as opposed to the screeching political arguments of the typical pro-abortionist, I just wish he were more polite.
@cheeseman0125
@cheeseman0125 Жыл бұрын
Destiny was expecting basic "yes/no" bullet biting when the issues were clearly more complicated
@adaa1078
@adaa1078 Жыл бұрын
He never said he wanted yes/no, but Trent was clearly dodging some questions
@TheMadman911xx
@TheMadman911xx Жыл бұрын
@@adaa1078 Would you agree that Destiny's assertion that Trent didn't answer his questions is false?
@TheRedRaven_
@TheRedRaven_ Жыл бұрын
@@adaa1078 No, he did mention a few times “tit for tat”, that it’s a “yes or no” answer. He was asking questions that don’t qualify without further context.
@mnmmnm925
@mnmmnm925 Жыл бұрын
@@adaa1078 Trent answered all of Destiny's questions. He even demonstrated so in the clips. If not, please give us a timestamp in which he didn't. Anyway, here is the real issue: Destiny asked a question that he thinks requires an incriminating answer, Trent gives a precise/technical answer that sidesteps the trap, and then Destiny accuses Trent of "not answering the question" because his question failed to illustrate the point he was aiming for.
@adaa1078
@adaa1078 Жыл бұрын
@@mnmmnm925 Just re watch when Destiny asked him about the investigation of few weeks old fetus and the suicide of the older person. If after re watching that you still dont see how Trent was dodging there is nothing we can talk about. Even it showed how Trent was in bad faith when he accused Destiny of not answering his hypthethicals even though he checked off every question on his paper
@nock_5
@nock_5 Жыл бұрын
He was very happy with that point about the miscarriage investigation. Im glad you cought that miscarriages are far more likely to occur than death at young ages. Without evidence of foul play we would not go digging into peoples lives at a traumatic time
@jacobfrye996
@jacobfrye996 Жыл бұрын
It always feels like miscarriages are taken too lightly though. If young kids were dying all of the time, up to 20% of them, then we would be SUPER involved in reducing that number. No one seems to care whatsoever about the really early miscarriages. It seems like unless the mother has developed a connection to the fetus, then no one really cares Destiny's point is pretty overblown, but he is right that it seems like if we really cared about what was being miscarried, we would do WAY more to prevent them
@maryangelica5319
@maryangelica5319 Жыл бұрын
@@jacobfrye996, so Before modern medicine the mortality rate of born infants was also astoundingly high (something like 10% ), and centuries ago laws against infanticide (which was very common) were not often enforced because then you'd have to investigate so many deaths. It was not uncommon for a family where a woman gave birth seven + times to see only two or three of her children survive until adulthood. Resultantly, people were somewhat more callous or less distraught with the death of an infant (even if they would mourn that death), because it was so common. Nowadays the death of an infant in the first world is a very unusual thing, so we treat such deaths with extra attention. But this is only possible because of modern medicine and to some extent social services (like orphanages and whatnot). And it took centuries to establish the shift towards protection of infants. You had to set up an entire structure of orphanages( which had its own issues), baby boxes, etc. to convince women in desperate conditions not to kill their infants even in culturally Christianized lands, and combine that with medicinal technology to provide care to infants with immediate needs (formula alone probably has saved thousands, for instance). Miscarriages today are quite common (15-20%) , but this is similar to how infant deaths were quite common in the past. And what was experienced over the course of centuries leading to the near elimination of infant deaths, we are only starting to address with miscarriages now. Our current attitudes actually make sense to me, because they are similar to attitudes held in the past towards born infants. But hopefully we can move in the direction in favor of the unborn's survival 🙂
@jacobfrye996
@jacobfrye996 Жыл бұрын
​@@maryangelica5319 That is really interesting, I didn't realize that people were so callous to infanticide in the past. I knew that child survival rates were pretty rough, I didn't really think about how that would affect public perception and somewhat morality I guess I really truly feel that there is nothing to protect as a 64 cell organism. The only thing we value is the potentiality of that life, and that value is usually weighted by how close it is to being born, and the attachment of the mother and others. That seems to map on to how we feel about miscarriages pretty well - my understanding is that people only usually grieve later miscarriages (second and third trimesters), where they had expectations of the fetus. Expectations isn't a great word, but you know what I mean :) Or maybe at the end of the day, we are not logical beings, but just the products of our evolution. We like things that look like us, or are cute, until we have a good enough reason not to I got bored, and looked up a study called "Risk factors for miscarriage from a prevention perspective: a nationwide follow-up study", and it shows a couple interesting things: Risk factor by category - (if risk factor is 2, you have twice the risk of miscarriage due to just that one factor) age of 40+: 3.72 exercising more than 300 minutes per week: 3.3 4+ drinks of alcohol per week: 2.81 >8 cups of coffee per day (HOLY COW): 2.2 daily lifting heavy burdens: little to no effect occupational status: little to no effect smoking 11+ cigarettes per day: REDUCED RISK (0.98, but still funny) Obesity: 0.15 (not as much as I would have expected honestly) Working night shift: 1.3 previously diagnosed genital disease: little to no effect The looked at the possibility of preventing miscarriage, if people were to follow these findings, and found that if all pregnancies were of people aged 25-29, no alcohol was consumed, they only worked day shifts, then 25% of miscarriages would be prevented. Not as high a number as I expected tbh. That really just means that most pregnancies are occurring under pretty good circumstances. In most of the large risk factor categories, heavy drinking and smoking and exercise were rare
@johnnotrealname8168
@johnnotrealname8168 Жыл бұрын
@@jacobfrye996 It is conceivable that a woman could be prosecuted for miscarriages, based on how they treated their body and thus the baby (Just as one does with drugs or alcohol.) but as you point out the connection is near impossible to prove and the knowledge is basically non-existent.
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
The investigations into the miscarriages would be what determines whether there is evidence of foul play. Just like it would be the case for any other mysterious death of a full human being with appropriate rights who died while under the exclusive care of another human being.
@Numenorean921
@Numenorean921 Жыл бұрын
"misremembers" is Trents gentlemanly way of saying he lied
@mock358
@mock358 Жыл бұрын
how bad faith of you
@kingmarlin5043
@kingmarlin5043 Жыл бұрын
@@mock358 "Trent never answered my hypotheticals" Trent proceeds to show where in the debate he answered these hypotheticals. "Bro so bad faith"
@FuddlyDud
@FuddlyDud Жыл бұрын
@@kingmarlin5043 Destiny is relying on memory and not rewatching the debate. This lines up with misremembering, not intentionally lying. :/
@kingmarlin5043
@kingmarlin5043 Жыл бұрын
@@FuddlyDud Fair enough
@stevendouglas3781
@stevendouglas3781 Жыл бұрын
@@FuddlyDudthat doesn’t matter. There is no excuse in getting something wrong that you participated in and was filmed.
@jhoughjr1
@jhoughjr1 Жыл бұрын
"lobotomies dont make you unconscious" that explains a LOT.
@WhiteRhino.
@WhiteRhino. Жыл бұрын
You're implying they do?
@ironymatt
@ironymatt Жыл бұрын
No, it implies - strongly - Destiny's moral bankruptcy
@pajamaninja2157
@pajamaninja2157 Жыл бұрын
"but my fist do"
@flavioa2252
@flavioa2252 Жыл бұрын
@@WhiteRhino.destroying the PFC effectively erases your personhood
@sirm6127
@sirm6127 Жыл бұрын
What? Mental impairment and unconsciousness (or a lack of consciousness) are different. How is that statement morally significant I don't understand.
@gsp3428
@gsp3428 Жыл бұрын
I personally believe Trent is the best pro life spokesperson in the whole world. Trent is an absolute genius with his ability to anologize and just instantly respond to any argument the other side puts up. I will give Destiny his credit, he put up better fight than almost anyone could but still his views are just arbritrary and evil in many ways. This like most issues is more about personal ideology rather than the pursuit of what is good and right.
@suckit4669
@suckit4669 Жыл бұрын
Nah, I'm better.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
If this is the best, then the movement truly is dead and the topic is over.
@suckit4669
@suckit4669 Жыл бұрын
@@usucdik I really hope Destiny isn't the best either, Destiny's arguments seems so easy to counter.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
@@suckit4669 Yet Trent struggled and you have nothing else to say on the matter. It's just over and done with. Science has advanced since the bible was written thousands of years ago, so we don't need superstitious nonsense, and we've learn quite a bit since when the Egyptians assumed that grey matter was just useless head filling or that thoughts originated from the heart.
@suckit4669
@suckit4669 Жыл бұрын
@@usucdik Good that I don't believe in the bible then, isn't it? I'm really glad that people like you don't run the country, making assumptions over ones position because of your insane bias, I would really love to know how science proves your position buddy, go ahead. When does a human life start becoming something we ought to protect? Why does it become something we ought to protect at that point? Do all that without being really inconsistent.
@jaydisberger1014
@jaydisberger1014 Жыл бұрын
I am pro-life through and through, and I am a massive Trent fan. I think the claim that Trent did not answer the hypotheticals carried weight in the live debate. If you look back at Destiny's answers to Trent's hypothetical, the answers were closer to a plane and simple yes or no followed by pushback or exploration of the hypothetical. This made Destiny's position appear to be more firmly established even if the answer given was a horrific conclusion resulting in self-evident wrong. The hypotheticals presented to Trent were often given more discussion and pushback before the answer was implied or directly stated. Trent did a good job rephrasing responses to prevent the response from looking unjustly absurd, but the order and complexity of the response did lend strength to Destiny in the debate. When Destiny claimed live that Trent did not answer his hypotheticals, I more or less felt that was a successful tactic to counter Trent's answers that were not directly clear. I have listened to this debate twice The second time around, Trent came across as stronger in his answers because I was looking for them. Even if immediate pushback to develop a response or a question is a good way to guard against your opponent's tactic to make your position appear absurd, the simpler answers followed with clarifications would make arguments clearer and improve the perception of who is winning live.
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
Unfortunately in debates (or life in general tbh) we don't rely on so-called "self-evident" wrongs/rights. So I agree Destiny came out better in this debate, only so long as the audience is non-biased.
@Elizeus99
@Elizeus99 Жыл бұрын
I've been following Destiny for over a year now and he is a master at optics. Even if he's clearly wrong in a debate he still comes out looking like he won. Luckly, beating people like him is very simple, follow the evidence and stick with the truth. Trent did a good example by using the data on criminal investigations on miscarriges and infant deaths.
@Reloading20
@Reloading20 Жыл бұрын
Exactly, a lot of people here are just rooting for "their guy" and missing the big picture. Destiny took clear positions, even when trent was positing questions in a bad faith manner to make him look bad. He would answer and then push back. Trent refused to clearly answer, filibustering for as long as he could, which is not only bad optics but also just rude given the person he was talking to spent over an hour not doing any of that to him. I would say hopefully Trent would learn from this and do better next time, but clearly he's still in denial.
@amazin7006
@amazin7006 Жыл бұрын
​@@Elizeus99The point of the argument wasn't criminal investigations, it was about morality. Investigations have nothing to do with morality. Trent lost the moral argument, having human genetics does not make you worthy of consideration. Destiny was correct in that it is human consciousness.
@Charlezard1985
@Charlezard1985 Жыл бұрын
@@Elizeus99 What are you talking about?! This is a DEBATE on Abortion. By definition there is no "evidence" or "truth" to follow/stick to. If there was, there would be nothing to debate. One side's entire case is based on the moment consciousness forms (which is one of the most obscure and difficult topics to form a theory on let alone a "fact") and the others entire argument of abortion is based on the feeling that everyone has the same innate morals bestowed unto them. How can an innate/divine morality be based in evidence and fact? lol These are just two "opinions" tied to their own understanding of the world.
@Kelconk
@Kelconk Жыл бұрын
I'm not a theist and I'm not a convinced atheist either, so I have very little bias on that front. I've noticed that nearly all of the various atheist debaters I've seen are full of arrogance and scorn, particularly when they make comments post-debate. They always treat their opponent with mockery and contempt, always a lot of contempt. There are exceptions, like Joe Schmid from Majesty of Reason. This is something that radically puts me off, particularly when I often see the said opponent being respectful and measured in their response. It also makes me question if it is their worldview that makes them this way, which would be a rather damning feature of atheism.
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
I don't feel like Destiny displayed this arrogance and scorn you're talking about (I'm assuming you're implying that he did).
@Kelconk
@Kelconk Жыл бұрын
@@LoudWaffle He did in his own review of the debate. That's how I perceived it, at least.
@dtphenom
@dtphenom Жыл бұрын
I am always reminded of the Dunning Krueger effect. Those who are often the most arrogant are the ones who know the least.
@thefance4708
@thefance4708 Жыл бұрын
​@@dtphenom that's not how Dunning Krueger works though. The conclusion drawn from that study is that people _overestimate_ their competence, not that competence varies _inversely_ with self-perception. the relation is still monotonically positive.
@odonnell1218
@odonnell1218 Жыл бұрын
I love how in these hypotheticals you did what one of my professors called a “push to the principle.” I’ve used this tactic a lot and just like what Destiny did, he tried to bring it back to a certain set of details rather than engage the principle of the argument.
@TravisHi_YT
@TravisHi_YT Жыл бұрын
Yep, that's why he has an infinite set of hypotheticals to trot out because he doesn't want to get caught out defending absurd positions he posits
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
It's funny because I felt that was what Destiny was doing the whole time to Trent.
@lordberossus2545
@lordberossus2545 Жыл бұрын
@@TravisHi_YT People have lots of hypotheticals when they are used to trying to get people to understand their position.
@jonathansoko1085
@jonathansoko1085 Жыл бұрын
Destiny is king of all the pseudo intellectuals. With Trent, he was not able to confuse him with word salad. He's not used to losing that badly
@marfin4325
@marfin4325 Жыл бұрын
How is a pseudo intellectual a slight? Destiny doesn't have college degrees in any of these topics, he just does research on his own time. Also, got any arguments against anything Destiny said? No? Then I guess Destiny didn't lose that badly
@doctoreggman21
@doctoreggman21 Жыл бұрын
@@marfin4325 Yeah, his entire position is arbitrary, he never gave any justification for why “human conscious experience“ matters more than any other animal, besides just saying “it’s human.”
@SpiritofAloha11
@SpiritofAloha11 Жыл бұрын
He let that slip when he whined about moral superiority -- a guy who claims he doesn't believe in objective morality.
@michaelspeyrer1264
@michaelspeyrer1264 Жыл бұрын
He absoutely is the king of word salad.
@lordberossus2545
@lordberossus2545 Жыл бұрын
@@doctoreggman21 You have that backwards. The rhetoric of "its human" is the position of prolifers. Life = human = person = consciousness = soul.
@catkat740
@catkat740 Жыл бұрын
Some advice for @Counsel of Trent: I think sometimes when you answer something with an analogy the person you’re debating doesn’t follow your analogy perfectly and therefore doesn’t get your answer(or even misses it completely in this case). You’re a very intelligent person and there are of course people who will follow your logic but perhaps a better strategy might be to answer the question flat out and then give the analogy, explaining exactly how it correlates. I know hindsight is 20/20 but I think the “keeping someone alive” versus “purposely causing their death” is a huge distinction in the pro-life position which the other side often conflates with their hypotheticals. Anyway you did an amazing job!!
@josephmoya5098
@josephmoya5098 Жыл бұрын
Destiny wanted to get you in a Catch22. He needed you to provide a simple answer to a silly question to show you were as ridiculous as him, because he straight up admitted that you can have fetal sex dolls from his viewpoint. He embraced the insanity, while you tried to give nuance. That was frustrating. This kind of behaviour is exactly why I was hesitant to listen to a debate between you and Destiny. You are an honest man who has the intelligence to recognize nuance. Destiny is an internet personality who thrives off simplifying this opponent's thoughts and getting them to say something outlandish. You are looking for philosophy in a debate, nuance and thought and intellectual honesty. Destiny, while honest in his thoughts, is naive, silly, and uneducated, and is in debates for the blood-sport of the internet. This whole "he didn't answer my questions" charade is just his defense for how silly he ended up looking.
@TheRedRaven_
@TheRedRaven_ Жыл бұрын
Nailed it.
@tuav
@tuav Жыл бұрын
Good analysis
@shmeebs387
@shmeebs387 Жыл бұрын
That's his debate style. He's always trying to make it look like his opponent is arguing against themselves by positing hypothetical and then claiming it is analogous whatever the topic of the debate is. But all you have to do to defeat this tactic is to point out the flaw in Destiny's analogy. It's how many of these Twitch streamer debate bros argue. To them, it's more about trying to point out contradictions in your opponent's arguments than it is laying out a convincing argument for your own position. They figure it's easier to prove your opponent wrong than it is to prove yourself right.
@raiden000
@raiden000 Жыл бұрын
Trent asked Destiny a ridiculous hypothetical and Destiny obliged. Destiny asks Trent an equally insane hypothetical and Trent dodges. In what world is that a fair situation? There is absolutely no way Destiny would be on board with making brainless human sex dolls any more than Trent would be on board with caring for microscopic miscarried human beings, they are both hypotheticals, they aren't real. Abortion is a very difficult topic that requires very difficult questions be asked, and when one side is open about answering them but the other side isn't, that is an automatic bad sign from the side dodging the questions. Destiny simplifies things because that's how you get to the bottom of something, you have to dig down to the core of the issue before you can even think about solving it in a productive way.
@shmeebs387
@shmeebs387 Жыл бұрын
@@raiden000 The difference is in how they use hypotheticals. Trent uses them to understand Destiny's position. He's testing the extremes of Destiny's position to understand what exactly Destiny believes. Destiny uses hypotheticals to try to get Trent to fall into some kind of contradiction in his reasoning.
@TheSovereignYT
@TheSovereignYT Жыл бұрын
Destiny in all debates, from Fuentes to Vincent James, has a tendency to "misremember" or straight lie about what happened. Especially when he loses
@KoffyGG
@KoffyGG Жыл бұрын
Cap.
@TheSovereignYT
@TheSovereignYT Жыл бұрын
@@KoffyGG nah it's real
@KoffyGG
@KoffyGG Жыл бұрын
@@TheSovereignYT How does he "misremember" what happened when he literally discusses it while watching the actual recording?
@TheSovereignYT
@TheSovereignYT Жыл бұрын
@@KoffyGG Perfect example of him covering his ass in the fresh and fit debate saying he wasn't looking at his chat and discord on his phone because he knows nothing of Foreign policy We can see it on screen it being discord. And yet he lies. We also have photos of him online on mobile discord during the time of the debate
@KoffyGG
@KoffyGG Жыл бұрын
@@TheSovereignYT Dude bans people from his chats in real time during live appearances lmao. He even looks up shit on the spot so he could've just done that isntead of looking for the info on Discord?
@angelfebus1732
@angelfebus1732 Жыл бұрын
Everyone should always do these follow up videos after debating anyone. Most people who argue as well as most spectators almost always remember they exchange through how they FELT about it. This type of video highlights the reality of an exchange. Excellent!
@taylordl28
@taylordl28 Жыл бұрын
This is better than the actual debate. It's like the debate helped filter down the arguments and now you can address the key points in a more prudent manner. That last quote is particularly devastating... probably the best most concise answer I've ever seen on the subject.
@alexarae211286
@alexarae211286 Жыл бұрын
I think I found another flaw in Destiny’s view: He accuses the pro-lifer of “forcing” the woman to gestate and give birth to “that thing.” (He believes the fetus does not gain personhood until he/she gains consciousness) He says the fact that the fetus is not conscious yet means that it should not gain personhood status (with human rights). He even says that if you were able to stop the fetus from ever experiencing consciousness, you could use the body for whatever purposes you like. Yet, if a woman plans to continue the pregnancy, even though the fetus has not yet gained consciousness Destiny would say she should be held morally responsibly for drinking excessively or doing drugs while pregnant - only if she plans to keep the child. Hmmm. He is inconsistent on whether or not the future matters to present decisions. Future implications don't matter if you don’t want the child, but they do matter if you do want the child. If the “person” does not yet exist, why should the pregnant woman be held responsible for how she treats her body? Destiny would have to say because she is carrying a “future person” so long as she is going to keep the fetus. Destiny maintains that his view is founded on the idea that personhood = consciousness, but his inconsistency reveals that it’s really founded on whether or not the child is wanted.
@Bfyobrian12
@Bfyobrian12 Жыл бұрын
I think you are confused on the term “wanted” as Destiny uses it. If the mother wants to carry the fetus to term, but plans on putting it up for adoption, Destiny would still say it is wrong to cause fetal alcohol syndrome to that fetus even though the mother does not “want” to keep the infant and she just wants to carry it to term. It would be wrong to intentionally drink alcohol, put the fetus on the path of having defects, and then continue to let the fetus come into existence as a person even if the mother never sees the infant again. But it would not be wrong to drink alcohol, start the fetus down the path of developing defects, and then terminate the fetus at 19 weeks.
@seeenoooh
@seeenoooh Жыл бұрын
As a non-Christian I also wish to thank you for your excellent defense of unborn children against the evil of abortion.
@benjaminhancock9014
@benjaminhancock9014 Жыл бұрын
We can know the past and we can change the future however we can never change the past nor can we know the future. When Trent proposes a situation that would require Destiny change the past Destiny does not think it can be reasonably answered (understandable). However when Destiny proposes a scenario that would require Trent to know the future he is surprises that Trent can't simply answer it. If a hypotheticals is going to hold weight as an argument it must at least not be fundamentally impossible. The question of "what would you do if you knew X was going to happen in the future" is irrelevant because we make our judgments based on the information we have and we can never know with certainty what will happen in the future.
@davidmcpike8359
@davidmcpike8359 Жыл бұрын
Since memory is fallible (and all knowledge liable to being hermeneutically complicated), neither can we know the past with certainty, so your argument is not sound. But regardless, we can think about something that we can recognize is impossible, and still give a reasonable answer about it. E.g.: "If you were a woman do you think you would be more likely to have a uterus?" "But I'm not a woman and I can't possibly become one so I can't reasonably answer that." REally now?
@benjaminhancock9014
@benjaminhancock9014 Жыл бұрын
@@davidmcpike8359 It is true that we can not always know the past with certainty but that does not invalidate the idea that we can know the past at all. unless you are trying to make the argument that it is impossible to know anything which is a pretty shakey foundation to build any argument on. In regards to your analogy it is quike different to the ones given in the descution. In your analogy you are asking if I was a woman would I have the characteristics of a woman... well yes if I were a woman I would have a uterus. Just because I am not a women and it would be impossible for me to become one does not mean I cant know what characteristics a woman has, My ability to be a women is not tied to the information I have about female anatomy. This is fundamentally different than asking someone how they would react in a situation with different degrees of knowledge, because my ability to know the future is directly tied to my desition making.
@davidmcpike8359
@davidmcpike8359 Жыл бұрын
@@benjaminhancock9014 You completely misunderstood what I was getting at. Certainly I'm not arguing for total skepticism. My point was rather that just as we can know certain things about the past with good enough certainty, we can also know things about the future. We might be wrong about the future, but the same applies to the past (not to mention the present!). And regardless, I don't need certain knowledge in any tense in order to be able to give an intelligent analysis of a hypothetical. That's straight nonsense and the past/future dichotomy is a pure red herring.
@benjaminhancock9014
@benjaminhancock9014 Жыл бұрын
@@davidmcpike8359 Please elaborate on your notion that the past/future dichotomy is a pure red herring. Are you saying that there is no such thing as past and future?
@davidmcpike8359
@davidmcpike8359 Жыл бұрын
​@@benjaminhancock9014 Certainly not saying that. Your initial claim: "We can know the past and we can change the future however we can never change the past nor can we know the future." This is four claims actually. 1) "We can know the past." True. 2) "We can change the future." False: The future doesn't (now) exist, so it can't (now) be the subject of change, just as the past doesn't (now) exist, and cannot (now) be the subject of change. 3) "We can never change the past." True, but ignores the fact that our knowledge of the past is often uncertain, so our knowledge of the past can change. 4) "We cannot know the future." False: just as we have (partial and fallible) knowledge of the past, we have a large degree of (partial and fallible) knowledge of the future. But all this is actually an irrelevant red herring, because our ability to respond to hypotheticals or counter-factuals is based on our knowledge of general principles (universals, concepts), not on our knowledge of particular tensed (past, present, or future) propositions.
@AttackDog0500
@AttackDog0500 Жыл бұрын
Destiny appeared to be upset that Trent didn't reciprocate his extremely blunt and simple answers to the questions Trent asked. Trent did answer the questions Destiny asked but he was more nuanced and didn't feel the need to reciprocate Destiny's bluntness.
@mrmr2488
@mrmr2488 Жыл бұрын
Anyone time someone responds with nuance or any amount of detail, Destiny immediately accuses them of ranting/gish galloping/droning on, etc.. It’s what he does. Total bad faith technique
@lordberossus2545
@lordberossus2545 Жыл бұрын
You know you can do them both at the same time? There's a long answer and a short answer, give me the short first, and if its my turn to talk I'll let you get your long explanation in the end
@mrmr2488
@mrmr2488 Жыл бұрын
@@lordberossus2545 Or just have an attention span longer than a goldfish. It’s odd how I can listen and full comprehend everything he is saying in detail but somehow destiny can’t follow, checks out and calls it all ranting and looping.
@rickyc46
@rickyc46 Жыл бұрын
Gotta appreciate that person who wrote that last comment and made your job explaining here easier
@joeterp5615
@joeterp5615 Жыл бұрын
Trent did an excellent job. It’s really a shame that Destiny choose to mischaracterize Trent’s replies as being non-responsive. This wasn’t the case at all.
@ravissary79
@ravissary79 Жыл бұрын
Actively wrestling with the application of a morally powerful topic in real time when presented with tangential hypotheticals that stretch the boundaries of definitions... that's not being evasive its taking a topic seriously.
@joeterp5615
@joeterp5615 Жыл бұрын
@@ravissary79 You articulated that amazingly well. 👍
@roycampbell586
@roycampbell586 Жыл бұрын
I'm not destiny so I can't speak for him but I believe his response to the toddler memory question is difficult because memory and identity are core to destiny's definition of personhood. He doesn't refuse to answer, he states that he literally does not know how to answer because he hasn't yet figured out the edges of identity relating to memory. It's why he mentions the star trek thing afterwards, because that's another scenario where relating to personhood that he hasn't yet figured out the answer to. That being said it's kind of neat to see the post-debate back and forth. Not a whole lot of longterm ongoing discussions in his orbit right now so this is a interesting arc to follow Edit: Watching further I think you're misunderstanding the point about suicide. Again, can't speak for destiny, but his position is about whether or not the person is of sound mind. If someone has gone through a traumatic event and wants to be euthanized but we know that the lifetime happiness of people who go through that event can be quite high, then that likely indicates the person is of unsound mind currently and should be disallowed from euthanasia until they are able to make an informed decision. The data destiny is referencing is about self-reported happiness. Don't know the exact study but he's been mentioning that data for months back when he still streamed factorio. The data isn't about "reasonable treatment", the data is studies that survey and collect self-reported mental health data about people with various conditions. The institutions which are presenting euthanasia as a treatment option are not doing so on the same basis that destiny is, and so his position on euthanasia isn't reliant on whether or not instutions will allow euthanasia.
@jandupreez4880
@jandupreez4880 Жыл бұрын
Seconded
@tuav
@tuav Жыл бұрын
The reason why he refused to answer is because he (falsely) assumes a view of personal identity that's known as psychological continuity. Trent's hypothetical showed how inadequate that philosophical view of personal identity is. Imo, Destiny's view of personhood isn't really based on consciousness primarily but on the psychological continuity of humans. Two decisive rebuttals to this view is the circular objection and the copy objection which Trent did bring up the second one but Destiny just ignored it.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
@@tuav It doesn't show that. The scenario is way too far-fetched to seriously consider. It's basically scifi nonsense.
@YoujustgotJ1NXED
@YoujustgotJ1NXED Жыл бұрын
Great fan of your work, Trent. I enjoy your books and your appearances on Catholic Answers; This debate was the first time I saw what I thought was a bit of frustration from you but you always respond with logic and reason while maintaining your composure. You've been a great role model for me, and a large part of finding my faith can be traced back to you. I wanted to thank you for all the work you do.
@johnsix.51-69
@johnsix.51-69 Жыл бұрын
This culture of death is sad. From abortion to suicide.
@MarinaDiane
@MarinaDiane Жыл бұрын
always fascinating to see the convoluted ways people will try to justify the intentional poisoning, starving, suctioning, or dismembering of millions of innocent human beings across the world every year via abortion. thank you Trent for engaging in these conversations.
@lordberossus2545
@lordberossus2545 Жыл бұрын
Strangely your comment reminded me how hungry I am
@abaddon2148
@abaddon2148 Жыл бұрын
that's metal asf🔥🔥🔥
@roundtabledetails3307
@roundtabledetails3307 Жыл бұрын
can I get a medium raw fetus thanks? 🥩
@greengandalf9116
@greengandalf9116 Жыл бұрын
always fascinating to see the convoluted ways people will try to justify forcing women to go through pregnancy for an organism that has fewer human cells than a cheek swab.
@byletheisner5006
@byletheisner5006 Жыл бұрын
​@@greengandalf9116Always fascinating to see what kind of sophistry you could come up with
@vtaylor21
@vtaylor21 Жыл бұрын
My two issues with Destiny are his biological argument and how he defines personhood based on performance. He asked Trent about the continuity between sperm and a zygote. That is factually incorrect. Sperm is a cell produced by a male; a zygote is a developmental stage of a living organism. A zygote has its own DNA. Sperm carries the DNA of the male that produces it. Destiny's view of personhood is on the performance of consciousness instead of having innate characteristics. Trent showed that when he asked about animals. Destiny wanted to separate animal consciousness from human consciousness. However, a babies conscious experience is not performing on the level of a fully developed human. Animals' consciousness performs at a higher level. Yet, Destiny doesn't want to call animals persons. That is the downside of his argument. He refuses to say it is okay to kill a baby when his argument shows he doesn't view them as persons.
@LtDeadeye
@LtDeadeye Жыл бұрын
Regarding continuity, I think he meant that in light of contingency. As in the sperm and egg are both necessarily logically and chronologically prior and so deserve protection. Regarding personhood, I think he defines it as human consciousness.
@zebo6162
@zebo6162 Жыл бұрын
So in other words, he mashes performance with “kind” typology (e.g. humankind) together and doesn’t use the two consistently. Either he thinks killing most animals is wrong (if personhood is merely a level of “consciousness”) or he is okay with killing mentally handicapped people (if personhood is “level of consciousness” + “human”)
@tajanisc
@tajanisc Жыл бұрын
​@@LtDeadeyeYes but both of those arguments can be bounced back to him with a simple, "Why?"
@vtaylor21
@vtaylor21 Жыл бұрын
@@LtDeadeye Sperm and egg are not organisms. They are cells of an organism. Cells are the building blocks of a multicellular organism. A cell in a multicellular organism is not an organism unless that cell can develop into an organism (i.e., a zygote). Since sperm and egg are not organisms, they are not persons. Therefore, they don't need equal protection. That is like saying a heart needs equal protection because it can be used to transplant into another body. Destiny defined personhood as human consciousness. However, his definition is based on performing human consciousness based on what he said in the debate. He said consciousness starts around 20-24 weeks. That is performance. By his logic, babies are not persons because their level of consciousness is not at the level of a fully developed human and is lower than an animal consciousness.
@jpears1367
@jpears1367 Жыл бұрын
@@LtDeadeye If Destiny meant continuity via contingency, then I think you just explained it better than he did. He just sounded biologically confused. And you could be right - I’ve heard others make that sort of contingency argument before. I still think it’s biologically flawed, but it makes more sense if you’re right here.
@johnthetenor
@johnthetenor Жыл бұрын
Hey bae grab my go-cup we’re about to embark on a Trentventure
@Slayerformayor1983
@Slayerformayor1983 Жыл бұрын
Why would destiny think Trent checking off his questions in order to ensure that he ASKED them implies in any way that destiny provided a sufficient answer?
@Fierology
@Fierology Жыл бұрын
Some observations: Hypotheticals can be vehicles for straw men. Answering simply to such hypotheticals allows the straw man to continue. If the goal of the person raising the hypothetical question is to establish a straw man then their purpose is frustrated by an answer that blocks it. This is in turn emotionally frustrating and yields: "You're not answering my hypotheticals." In a sense the nuanced response is a rejection of the presented hypothetical and a proposal of a more honest version. At this point is this the same or a different hypothetical? That depends on who you ask. We could be even more charitable and suppose that they are so ignorant of the opposing position that they don't realize how much of straw man they are presenting. That may not be the case for Destiny, but arrogance and blindness are bedfellows.
@raymk
@raymk Жыл бұрын
33:00 This is why Trent is the best role model for a debater. Destiny throws _insults_ at him, and Trent manages to control his emotion while explaining his position.
@unspoken7704
@unspoken7704 Жыл бұрын
Trents moral grandstanding and attempts to shame Destiny was pathetic.
@raymk
@raymk Жыл бұрын
@@unspoken7704 like what you're doing right now? To progress a good faith dialogue, I see no reason to call your opponent "pathetic".
@truthiz2805
@truthiz2805 Жыл бұрын
@@raymk Trent did make many moral argument in order to make so optic wins (that are irrelevant to truth). He also brought a damn book. I don't think destiny came even close to that level of arrogance.
@unspoken7704
@unspoken7704 Жыл бұрын
@@raymk my point proven then? Ok
@davidmcpike8359
@davidmcpike8359 Жыл бұрын
"It's simple" is not an insult. And Stephen was right: It is simple. Murder is murder. And that's why Trent squirmed and waffled in trying to weasel his way out of a straightforward answer.
@CameronOttello
@CameronOttello Жыл бұрын
"Dangerous" to "compel people to live." So dangerous they live, and don't die.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
I think it’s more about taking someone’s autonomy away vs it being dangerous that someone is still alive. Just my opinion tho
@CameronOttello
@CameronOttello Жыл бұрын
@@alexstoyanoff7434 certainly! I'm pointing out the hyperbole in the language. People seem to be missing the asymmetry here. In one situation you risk people living longer than they want to, in the other you risk them being dead before they want to. This are not equal concerns. Everyone dies, so everyone eventually gets that.
@BoardCertified
@BoardCertified Жыл бұрын
Awesome work as always!
@landomt8138
@landomt8138 Жыл бұрын
It seems like Destiny was just a debate kid in high school, but doesn’t have enough real-world knowledge or experience to have fruitful discussions. He will just endlessly try to create a “gotcha moment” based on semantics rather than the actual argument. A moment when the listeners could see Destiny’s view for what it truly is was when Trent said, “So, the weirdest thing about my view is that we might start caring about human beings too much.” It effectively encapsulated what Destiny was saying. He would have so many words and deflections to get away from the real points that all it took was Trent asking a question to bring it to light.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
I think the response to that would be: a) should the fetus be considered a person at that point and b) where does the concern for the mother factor in if she is being forced by the state to carry a pregnancy she doesn’t want
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
Your assumptions on his past (for the sake of a cheap insult) are incorrect, I wonder what else you have incorrectly concluded about him?
@xMXWLx
@xMXWLx Жыл бұрын
he isnt misremembering, he is purposely painting the debate a certain way to look better in front of his audience. its for his fans.
@doctoreggman21
@doctoreggman21 Жыл бұрын
Destiny hardly deserves this level of charity, he has way too much unearned arrogance.
@NlneLives210
@NlneLives210 Жыл бұрын
I been watching him for years but Trent pushed me towards pro life .
@Chordus_Gaius
@Chordus_Gaius Жыл бұрын
It's always good to be charitable with people. Not because someone might be superior to the other, but because we Christians are ought to be charitable.
@doctoreggman21
@doctoreggman21 Жыл бұрын
@@Chordus_Gaius I agree, and it’s very difficult to want to be charitable to people like this
@Chordus_Gaius
@Chordus_Gaius Жыл бұрын
@@doctoreggman21 It is indeed a very difficult process.
@carnivalwholesale9809
@carnivalwholesale9809 Жыл бұрын
​@@NlneLives210Trent Horn is a horrible Catholic apologists
@shadowsteppah
@shadowsteppah Жыл бұрын
Destiny, disingenuous in his post debate stream? I dont believe it! 🤡
@TerrySilverhand
@TerrySilverhand Жыл бұрын
100% it's a discernible pattern that makes me wonder why anybody bothers to take him seriously.
@haza123b4
@haza123b4 Жыл бұрын
@@TerrySilverhand *How are you able to see this when so many others aren't?*
@TerrySilverhand
@TerrySilverhand Жыл бұрын
@@haza123b4 been watching this level of discourse since the 2015-2018 days of Killstreams, Warski, TRS crap... And in fairness to Destiny It's not just him, it's that entire Alt Right/Alt Lite/libertarian/leftist/Liberation Front/Antifa style of Internet "Gotcha" debating. It's why you see some people in the comments on the Whatever Podcast saying "that was a boring debate"
@holysmoke3201
@holysmoke3201 Жыл бұрын
TBH, Destiny reminds me of psychopaths who are able to defend their atrocities with crystal clear rationalization with zero empathy and lack of respect for the sanctity of life.
@ambevil
@ambevil Жыл бұрын
That last comment really was brilliant. Watching this reminded me so much of all the fascinating conversations that took place on university campus regarding hot topic issues between Catholics, Protestants, Atheists, and Agnostics, and how you can really be surprised by the intelligence of some side listeners who just bring up great points you never thought of. Love this sort of thing. Great analysis!
@anthraxcrab2222
@anthraxcrab2222 Жыл бұрын
Destiny fan here, honestly this is been one of the most refreshing debate opponents we’ve had in a while. I love the back-and-forth and I hope you guys do more convos in the future. Subbed ❤❤❤
@tenaciousdfan9
@tenaciousdfan9 Жыл бұрын
I think some of the problems with these types of debates with hypotheticals is that they're often meant to bring to light the principles behind one's reasoning, but sometimes the opponent gets stuck on the practicalities or nuances of the hypothetical instead of clarifying the principles or value hierarchy operating in the background. Now admittedly sometimes the devil is in the details and the wording of the hypothetical. So i think that to many people an act of getting stuck in the details or untangling the wording/framing of a hypothetical is percieved as avoiding to put your principles/value hierarchy or lack thereof on display.
@willberthepig
@willberthepig Жыл бұрын
It seems like Destiny is after gotchas rather than just simple honesty/understanding
@Zosso-1618
@Zosso-1618 Жыл бұрын
Destiny was looking for sledgehammer answers to question that couldn’t be answered like that. It’s his mistake to ask questions that can’t give him the sort of answers he’s looking for, not your mistake in wanting to give answers that unfold.
@TheRedRaven_
@TheRedRaven_ Жыл бұрын
Agree, he’s wanting yes/no answers but most of Destinys questions/hypotheticals are too outlandish for a simple “yes/no” response. His whacky hypotheticals need answers that take his position a step back into reality.
@usucdik
@usucdik Жыл бұрын
This is weak when a lot of the question were the OPENERS that Trent should have had easy times answering, but even then he struggled to come up with a concise response. If your question is asking "should we give personhood to [this thing right here]?" and your reaction is "but what about these other things, what if [this thing] is really not [this thing] at all?" - it's weird and evasive, and you rightfully look bad. It's one thing to clarify the scenario, it's another to desperately try to change it at the start so then you're not really answering it at all.
@xan9224
@xan9224 2 ай бұрын
The logical distinction between investigating miscarriages and child murder lies in the difference between normative and empirical laws. Destiny is incapable of making distinctions between these two in every debate I've seen him in, so i guess it makes sense he can't see it here
@michaelmbogori
@michaelmbogori Жыл бұрын
Great video. I was longing for your analysis in this format (without a host). You have hit all the core areas that needed fleshing out. Good job. Few people can now disagree (after watching the debate and this response) that the prolife position is the most logical. Fewer can even put it better than that commenter on Destiny's channel
@babylonsfall7
@babylonsfall7 Жыл бұрын
The 64 cell human embryo in the dish isn’t able to continue to grow as it would in the womb. The embryo should never have been extracted or created from the parent. I would argue that the embryo should be preserved until a willing host is found. This would be the consistent pro-life position and has no issue that I can see. One would need to show how it is an issue or contradiction.
@stevendouglas3781
@stevendouglas3781 Жыл бұрын
It was a mistake engaging with any of these hypotheticals. Every single woman knows abortion is killing a growing baby.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
Where’d you get your ‘professor x-style’ tech from? I’d like to be able to read minds as well
@stevendouglas3781
@stevendouglas3781 Жыл бұрын
@@alexstoyanoff7434 every woman who gets an abortion does so because she doesn’t want the baby (that she knows exists) to be born. If she didn’t there would be no reason to get an abortion. Stop being a clown.
@EdieMoreno1824
@EdieMoreno1824 Жыл бұрын
I’m a police officer in a major city. There is absolutely a police investigation every time an infant or even every time anyone under 18 dies. Trent simply doesn’t understand the standards for law enforcement across the nation. Almost felt like Trent was trying to weasel out of the question the first time I watched. Although I’ll give Trent some grace, I would call it a police investigation not criminal investigation. I would even call it an extensive high level police investigation compared to other criminal investigations. The reason I call it police instead of criminal investigation is because we will investigate regardless of signs of foul play or criminal indication. Trent is simply uninformed in this area. Edit: Just as an example to show how extensive those investigations can be, a robbery investigation may take five officers over the course of an hour on scene investigating the incident (these are all approximations). However, a police investigation of an infant or child under the age of 18 who has died for any reason could average ten officers conducting a 5-10 hour investigation on scene. This investigation will most likely have sergeants, lieutenants, crime scene specialists, and homicide detectives responding to the scene. I want to give Trent grace here because most people are uninformed with the process and procedures of my field of work, but destiny is more correct in his understanding of this process.
@FuddlyDud
@FuddlyDud Жыл бұрын
What about investigating an elderly person dying in care of their adult children? I’d assume the standard would still be reasonable suspicion would still be required since the chance of natural death being high, as it is with early miscarriages. Let me know if you think it’s analogous! :)
@EdieMoreno1824
@EdieMoreno1824 Жыл бұрын
@@FuddlyDud we would look for signs of foul play or trauma. Without that indication it’s perhaps a one hour investigation only needing a couple officers to maintain. Much different from a investigation of an individual under 18. Like I said, there can be no signs of foul play or trauma for a child death, but it will still trigger an extensive investigation. I work for one of the largest cities in the country so this standard may vary department to department, but I assume many other large cities will be similar.
@deiniolbythynnwr926
@deiniolbythynnwr926 Жыл бұрын
You must not have been a very good police officer if you miss the point that hard.
@EdieMoreno1824
@EdieMoreno1824 Жыл бұрын
@@deiniolbythynnwr926I’m not saying he’s right or wrong or commenting on any other aspect of the debate. I’m simply stating he is incorrect and uninformed on the police procedures from the example given. It would be better if he stated he didn’t know what type of police response is triggered in these type of incidents.
@danc2531
@danc2531 Жыл бұрын
Technically, Destiny’s position is that after 20 weeks a human is a person. Does Justice System typically do those types of investigations for miscarriages at 20 weeks? Trent’s reply, to me, was attempting to get at the hypocrisy of Destiny’s own position in that regard. It was going really fast. Trent went on further with other examples in order to solidify this.
@mrbigglezworth42
@mrbigglezworth42 5 ай бұрын
Given Destiny's recent outburst related to an attempted Presidential candidate removal (KZbin won't let me use the correct wording for it) I think it's fair to say that Destiny was being disingenuous from the start.
@TheCounselofTrent
@TheCounselofTrent 5 ай бұрын
Interesting analysis! -Vanessa
@elanorbarr2593
@elanorbarr2593 Жыл бұрын
I thought at the time, during the Live debate and again now watching this video, that Destiny’s hypotheticals were more of a means to trap you into a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer that would expose the ProLife position as ridiculous or irrational. This is probably why he reacted so badly when you wouldn’t give him a one word answer. You answered all very well Trent. Keep up the good work.
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
That's the purpose of all hypotheticals, so show the extremes that have ramifications for the "core" argument being discussed. If your answer to the hypothetical is a 'yes' or 'no' that makes your position look ridiculous or irrational... then it's a ridiculous and irrational position. That being said of course, I don't recall Destiny reacting poorly to any of Trent's answers, he fully understands that giving elaborate answers to expand upon or challenge parts of hypotheticals is perfectly reasonable.
@geisbell12
@geisbell12 Жыл бұрын
Well done, Trent. I think the difference in both tone, and the factual inconsistencies with his response, compared to yours, says a lot. I thought you did a phenomenal job of laying out the logical reasons for the pro-life stance and not relying on the “religion” argument that many secular commentators use to discredit it. The fact that he had to bring that up in his response leads me to believe you appropriately took a part his arguments and he needed to fall back on a very tired defense. At the end of the day, this is about saving lives.
@alikhorrami9761
@alikhorrami9761 Жыл бұрын
Even though I disagree with your position almost 100%, I still respect you and people like you who engage in the conversation in a respectful and logical manner, not gonna lie for the first time a pro life debate point made me rethink my position, I wish both sides engaged in this conversation about abortion like that debate
@bethanyjohnson8001
@bethanyjohnson8001 Жыл бұрын
I will pray for you. Hopefully you continue to examine the best arguments the prolife side has to offer and be willing to re-evaluate your position on abortion. I have been fortunate enough to always be surrounded by those who affirm human dignity from conception to natural death and so have always been against the deliberate killing of a human being in utero.
@alikhorrami9761
@alikhorrami9761 Жыл бұрын
@@bethanyjohnson8001 I appreciate your kindness, I think the pro life movement has a long way to go for people like me. I think it's really really hard to define what life, human, and a person is. As soon as I get to know what exactly a human is, I think I'll start to have concrete position on abortion. I really don't mean to offend you by stating this, saying it with utmost respect
@dreamdrgn6803
@dreamdrgn6803 Жыл бұрын
@@alikhorrami9761 You're a cool guy
@simeonwaia
@simeonwaia Жыл бұрын
A good question to ask yourself is "Why respect anyone at all?"
@TravisHi_YT
@TravisHi_YT Жыл бұрын
@@alikhorrami9761 start with Destiny's hypothetical about the petridish, then extrapolate it to modern neonatal care. It's possible in the future that artificial wombs could carry fertilized eggs until full gestation. Just because it's "a clump of cells bro" doesn't make it any less human than you or me.
@lucidlocomotive2014
@lucidlocomotive2014 Жыл бұрын
I don’t think he refused to answer the hypothetical, his answer was just “I don’t know”
@kevinthompson507
@kevinthompson507 9 ай бұрын
I feel like a lot of what I’m seeing is Trent debating the morality of abortion and Destiny debating the practicality of anti-abortion laws. Whether we can or cannot do an autopsy on a 10-week unborn person would not change the morality of any decision to end that child’s life.
@gombosandrei
@gombosandrei Жыл бұрын
I'm not religious at all but I watched your debate with Destiny so when KZbin recommends your channel it's an instant subscribe.
@Vtorch
@Vtorch Жыл бұрын
Destiny wasn't misremembering. I think this was his attempt to try and save face. He was beaten badly ...... and HE KNEW IT!!!!
@roundtabledetails3307
@roundtabledetails3307 Жыл бұрын
lol good one
@adaa1078
@adaa1078 Жыл бұрын
Yeah thats why Trent had to do a post debate video to answer questions he wasnt able in the debate
@roundtabledetails3307
@roundtabledetails3307 Жыл бұрын
@@adaa1078 Actually true
@danielpascoe4287
@danielpascoe4287 Жыл бұрын
Lol destiny got smoked and his fans can't handle it, nor can he. You can tell he was intimidated by Trent and his hypotheticals made no sense. Sure he made some good points, but overall Trent had him against the ropes the entire debate.
@Vtorch
@Vtorch Жыл бұрын
@@adaa1078 No. Trent was responding to Destiny's post debate video. Read the title of the video.
@trueblessing5096
@trueblessing5096 Жыл бұрын
a debate on whether human infants should be killed or not...and we say ancients were barbaric
@WilsonAcres
@WilsonAcres Жыл бұрын
I love being pro-life and I love Trent articulating every single point so I can add it to my understanding
@voss9352
@voss9352 Жыл бұрын
you guys both performed amazingly in the debate, i hope you guys could have a part 2 some day
@AndreaAfeaki
@AndreaAfeaki Ай бұрын
I subscribed after watching this debate. You're intellect is way above my head and to be honest, I couldn't even keep up with most of the arguments presented but there's something about how you remain cordial that I admire. Especially when you're defending our position as Catholics from good common sense and brainpower. I'm more of a heart-set Catholic, I love our faith without being able to explain it. So thank you for the work you do!
@chrisshanahan8113
@chrisshanahan8113 Жыл бұрын
The extraordinary care vs ordinary care might be a good angle for explaining the sacraments. One might be able to be saved by a simple act God's will (thief on the cross, believers' baptism, etc.) , but that would be extraordinary. The ordinary means of salvation and perseverence in grace that the sacraments achieve should be the basis on which we operate rather than the extraordinary means that we shouldn't take for granted.
@IWasOnceAFetus
@IWasOnceAFetus Жыл бұрын
The problem with Destiny seems to be the same problem with other average abortion defenders. They can't comprehend any response that's outside of their own given options for their scenarios.
@lordberossus2545
@lordberossus2545 Жыл бұрын
Imagining myself as having an objective standard that gives me superiority over others is absolutely something I can comprehend. It's just not something I do.
@pariahcovers7769
@pariahcovers7769 Жыл бұрын
Maybe I haven’t watched enough to really understand Destiny’s argument, but isn’t the question “Would you keep a person in a persistent vegetative state alive?” a concession that they are not dead? I would have thought his argument would be that since they cannot wake up they are essentially dead. Weird to phrase any form of intervention as “keeping them alive” but idk.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
I think the point Steve is bringing up is that to him ‘brain death’ is the marker of the death of the person. So while we can obviously keep the body functioning ‘perpetually’ with various forms of life-support, to him that person has died already. So while the body can be kept ‘alive’, Steve is essentially trying to tease out when Trent considers a person to be truly dead. Steve considers that person in a PVS to be dead (thus no harm in removing support), but obviously others have a varied opinion about that
@pariahcovers7769
@pariahcovers7769 Жыл бұрын
⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@alexstoyanoff7434yeah. But I mean that’s kind of my point. I find it hard to believe that he truly believes his own definition of life and death when his language regarding PVS suggests otherwise. For example saying “they are going to be in a persistent vegetative state for the rest of their lives” and calling them persons suggests that he doesn’t see them as simple corpses with pulses. Maybe his language was to mirror Trent’s perspective, but it seems pretty clear that he does not truly believe that a person in a PVS is equivalent to a dead person, whereas if he actually believed life and death turned on brain activity he would see them as equivalent.
@alexstoyanoff7434
@alexstoyanoff7434 Жыл бұрын
I def understand the confusion, took me a few listenings of Steve to wade thru the semantics of it all. I think you hit the nail on the head when talking about the language being used to mirror Trent’s perspective. I can’t speak for steve, but methinks he would view a PVS state and a ‘traditionally’ dead human as equivalent in that regard
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
They are alive, but biological life isn't the point here. Otherwise you get a lump of human cells in a petri dish that has all human rights, because that is literally in every sense of the terms, "human life." Destiny recognizes that at all stages, even before conception, the parts of the baby (including sperm and egg when separate) are "human life," but his contention is that this does not afford them rights and moral consideration. Exact same as if my toe gets cut off, it's objectively still human life (and can be reattached before dying) but is not an independent human being, nor is it due any moral weight. Hence, saying a vegetative person is alive has absolutely no bearing on his argument, it's a simple fact of the matter.
@MandoTGR
@MandoTGR Жыл бұрын
What if someone is in a coma, has no consciousness and no pain? Does it follow that "it" connected to devices has no right to life? What if someone is old with dementia, or mentally ill to the point where they can't communicate and have no self-awareness? If mentally retarded, elderly and comatose people do not function as human beings, does that mean they are not human beings? Here we have to ask ourselves - is this theory, even in an improved version, ethical? Unfortunately, today there is more and more tendency and good will to euthanize dysfunctional people and children in Europe, and this only shows that at the base of everything there is one definition of a human being that allows us to voluntarily decide who is human and who is not, which throughout history our Western civilizations (Nazi Germany, American slavery) proved to be an ideological recipe for mass crimes. If the biological criterion is not enough, then everything is allowed, then any theory about the humanity of beings can be a potential tool for the destruction of human life and human freedom, and if we cannot protect human life, then how will we protect human freedom?This is the problem with destinys the psychological criteria by which we determine whether something is a person or not.
@hrvad
@hrvad Жыл бұрын
35:20 Rape committed against a stranger is different and worse compared to marital rape. Stranger violence can much easier turn to murder. This is part of the psychological damage done. Also, if the statistics from domestic violence carries over to rape the most likely situation is that the couple are already mutually violent, and they've been doing it for a while. Erin Pizzey established this late 60s when she made the first crisis center for women. This isn't widely known, and Pizzey also got credible bomb threats and had to flee the UK, and angry feminists did kill her dog. So there's that.
@dukeofdenver
@dukeofdenver Жыл бұрын
So much Destiny hate in the comments, wow. For the Left, I think he is as reasonable and good faith as you can possibly get. He gets abrasive sometimes but that's about it. I hope Trent and him collaborate more in the future.
@kingmarlin5043
@kingmarlin5043 Жыл бұрын
It's the beginning of Destiny's conversation/reversion arc.
@TheRedRaven_
@TheRedRaven_ Жыл бұрын
Well if you’re a bad faith actor then you’re a bad faith actor. You don’t have an issue with the post debate video by Destiny? He was basically lying about what was said in the debate. Why did he have to misrepresent what was already recorded? I enjoyed him on the podcast but that post debate video was petty.
@LoudWaffle
@LoudWaffle Жыл бұрын
@@kingmarlin5043 People said that 5 years ago. You're going to have to eventually accept that he isn't coming over to any sectarian "side."
@Vic2point0
@Vic2point0 Жыл бұрын
The investigation question is bizarre. The level of investigation has *always* depended on age. If your newborn baby dies with no apparent cause, they're more likely to do a minimum level of investigation (after all, SIDS is a thing). But if your 9-year old dies with no apparent cause, it will be a very different story! Likewise, if an unborn baby dies, it's not likely to warrant much if any investigation (after all, miscarriage is even more a thing).
@jandupreez4880
@jandupreez4880 Жыл бұрын
I think this kinda proves the point, there isn't a investigation because we as a society value the miscarriage less than a born child... that is a pro choice point you are making.
@Vic2point0
@Vic2point0 Жыл бұрын
@@jandupreez4880 Not at all. It doesn't imply we value the miscarried person less than the born person, any more than it implies we value the newborn baby more than the 9-year old. These are considerations about what is more/less likely to be due to an actual crime, not who is more or less valued.
@faithofamustardseed8198
@faithofamustardseed8198 Жыл бұрын
@@jandupreez4880It seems to me that it is more about commonality. It’s quite uncommon for a healthy 9 year old to suddenly die, markedly more common for a healthy newborn to suddenly die, and much much more common for a presumedly healthy fetus to miscarry in the first trimester.
@jandupreez4880
@jandupreez4880 Жыл бұрын
@@faithofamustardseed8198 exactly! You agree then? I feel alot of our debate around this is because our medical treatment and understanding of healthy pregnancies has gotten so much better. Back in the day alot more miscarriages happened and infants died if this is the way things were designed why is it wrong for us to help the scales tip one way or the other?
@faithofamustardseed8198
@faithofamustardseed8198 Жыл бұрын
@@jandupreez4880 I’m not exactly sure what you mean in that comment, but I have some opinions on the current rates of illness and miscarriage in our society. I am of the opinion, after studying nutrition and reading "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" by Weston A Price, that we are making things much worse year-by-year for everyone. Pregnancies have increasing numbers of interventions, with more and more babies being born pre-term and ending up in the NICU. While it is an incredible blessing to have the ability to care for these infants, the way we tell pregnant women to care for themselves and their children is directly contributing to this growing problem. I watch the OB's that I used to go to instruct their patients to eat plenty of carbs for energy, avoid fatty foods, avoid butter and red meats and so many other things. They said to eat plenty of grains, fruits, and vegetables, fruit juices, nuts, etc. At the same time they emphasized that it doesn’t matter what you eat, because baby will always get what they need (which is just absurd and defies all logic). The women who follow their advice end up with gestational diabetes, need c-sections, deliver pre-term, have tiny, weak babies with disabilities, struggle to breastfeed, and are often deficient in many nutrients. It is a tragedy that could easily be avoided with proper, nutrient dense eating. These guidelines are woven into every level of our society, such as advertising, pharmaceuticals, SNAP/WIC/EBT, school lunches, the food pyramid, etc. Might seem kinda random, but to me it is an issue that is at the root of most of our problems today. The issues of obesity, chronic illness, learning disabilities, mental health problems, autoimmune diseases, dental malformations, and so much more, can all be traced to nutrition (though toxicity also plays a big role). Women are scared to get pregnant due partly to lifestyle reasons, but also because complications are so common with both mother and baby. I really think this needs to be addressed in order for us to fix our country. Sorry for the random monologue, just a bit passionate about this specific subject
@raymk
@raymk Жыл бұрын
After watching Destiny reviewing himself, it is obvious he debates people only for the fun of tearing down his opponents, not for seeking the truth. All he talks about is how brilliant his hypothetical questions are, rather than trying to understand the other's position.
@yalechuk6714
@yalechuk6714 Жыл бұрын
Doesn't believe anything he just wants to be Said to be smart.
@lumpystilskin5367
@lumpystilskin5367 Жыл бұрын
I mean he bases his definition of woman to a chair 🤣
@KuwaywayLogic
@KuwaywayLogic 3 ай бұрын
Gotta commend your patience Trent, destiny is a victim of the shapiro tactic of talking loud and fast to win the debate, I hate this trend in modern debates and online arguments, I appreciate your careful, precise, and meticulous responses
@amberjulia123
@amberjulia123 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for this! You delved more deeply into some of the things that I felt were skimmed over in the debate. ❤
When Church Turns Into a Cult
19:49
Shaneen Megji
Рет қаралды 64 М.
Michael Erquitt - The AI Threat Landscape
43:43
Security Journey
Рет қаралды 45
It’s all not real
00:15
V.A. show / Магика
Рет қаралды 20 МЛН
coco在求救? #小丑 #天使 #shorts
00:29
好人小丑
Рет қаралды 120 МЛН
Dreams - Living Divine Mercy (EWTN) Ep. 175 w/ Fr. Chris Alar, MIC
27:37
Highlights from the Whatever Abortion Debate
54:15
The Counsel of Trent
Рет қаралды 108 М.
2025 Physical Therapy Private Practice Predictions Revealed!
29:55
MEG Business Management
Рет қаралды 75
Catholic Mass Today | Daily TV Mass, Thursday January 16, 2025
29:05
Christian Indoctrination in Homeschooling
1:09:37
matt bernstein
Рет қаралды 198 М.
When Mormon Missionaries Came to My House
17:57
Brian Holdsworth
Рет қаралды 89 М.
“Satan loves Catholicism” (REBUTTED)
50:04
The Counsel of Trent
Рет қаралды 186 М.
Dr. Brant Pitre Blows Your Mind on Mary
1:03:18
Matthew Leonard
Рет қаралды 344 М.
"7 False Catholic Teachings" (REBUTTED)
29:03
The Counsel of Trent
Рет қаралды 294 М.