Phil 103--Liz Harman on abortion

[@BishopBarron]

That is perhaps the stupidest argument ever made in the public forum. That this lady is a professor of anything is an indictment of our entire educational establishment.

[@rachelgillott7738]

Love your candor! The use of the word "contingent" in the argument reminded me of the "Mysteries of God" series. Glad when I saw that you had weighed in.

[@Yoshgunn]

You should do a video response to this when you get a chance! The argument may seem unworthy of a reply... but if it's a common belief, then it needs to be addressed.

[@PeterSiroki]

Bishop Robert Barron I feel dumber after listening to her arguments.

[@JenifleurLynn]

I feel for this woman because she seems like someone who is honestly trying to reconcile the reality of abortion with her moral compass - she seems like a well-meaning person who must resort to mental gymnastics to rationalize it. As a woman I totally get it - but abortion is really that horrible, total, final - it is totally unforgiving - gives no room for second chances where the young life is concerned. It attempts to negate the value of another human being as well as the woman as a mother based on some extraneous view of the supposed value of the fetus/baby. I feel for her - I know if I had ever had an abortion I would hate babies and men and be pretty much unhinged.

[@SteichenFamily]

So shooting this professor and killing her would be immoral if she had a future, but if we shoot her then she no longer has a future, so then it's totally fine. Got it.

[@NHD]

This is nuts. I get to decide whether or not another human being gets to have moral status? This is the language of slavery.

[@jbot91]

It's evil, deciding life and death based on its convenience to you. You could justify the holocaust with the same logic.

[@christianbasdeo5029]

So true!

[@Matthew-gl2kf]

Then her explanation when asked if that's circular reasoning comes out something like, "It's not that you deciding makes it moral, it's that if you hadn't not decided to refrain from refusing to do something immoral by not making the decision in the first place, you wouldn't have not done the thing that isn't immorally moral by doing that thing itself." etc etc Then their faces at 4:08 bahaha... The idea that students are forced to take this person seriously is an affront to education itself.

[@jarheadzader]

And genocide.

[@ronsfi]

Exactly!

[@akiratokyodesu6266]

James looks like he's trying really hard not to say what he's really thinking.

[@Astinsan]

I know exactly what James is thinking here.. why did we ok this talk?

[@GraceAlone614]

@@Astinsan the shear will power to express how he's feeling through only facial expressions is truly a skill. I wish James Franco would get into the debating scene more. He seems like he'd do pretty good.

[@twatmunro]

@@Astinsan -- The only thing he's thinking is: 'She's too old and too fat. No way am I banging her.'

[@nightrider3067]

This woman is a professor at Princeton...just think about that.

[@bobbytaylor6363]

Why are you saying that as a point? Just curious.

[@nightrider3067]

Robert Taylor Because she has the logic and reasoning of a potato.....shes an idiot.Yet she teaches at a prestigious college.

[@irishstew2133]

No way

Its hard to, but its necessary. She's, like, really smart and, like, a rigorous scholar and everything. All the girls, like, looove her...so,so much. And she talks? Like everything is a question? So she must be...like, smart? Jesusfuckingchrist man...I'm at a, like, total loss here....

[@Liv-hk7zi]

Well fuck. We're all doomed

[@thestonecutters6177]

this lady convinces james franco to become pro life

[@Gr13fM4ch1n3]

JF was not having it lmao

[@chriswolfe351]

I never thought I'd hear Predestination used as an argument in favor of abortion before.

[@adjiar]

Hahaha, you're right! Libtards will use and defend whatever argument is "favorable" to their point of view, even if they have to outright reject it to argue something else.

[@AKHUNTERX]

Many on the left are determinists so it’s not too surprising

[@seg162]

Secular Calvinism, folks.

[@BenjaminWirtz]

That's what I thought too, at least that's what i thought once I was able to unjumble everything.

[@Mattchew2232]

Well, if it's a Calvinistic Predestination, it wouldn't change several states based on the mother's whim.

[@npatterson11]

What is happening at Princeton University??

[@jimmyadams4764]

Nepotism. Her father is also a professor at Princeton, that's the only reason she even got in.

[@joem3082]

You're too fucking stupid dude. She has a lot of published papers. But of course, her father's also forcing people to do that as well. What on earth do you even know about philosophy besides retarded pop culture conceptions?

[@chrimony]

@Putaque: With the kind of arguments she gave in this video, I'm sure those were "top notch" papers she published.

[@devinhager8943]

Leftist philosophy that is destroying open minded conversations on all view points

[@chartreux1532]

+Nicholas Patterson I'm not from Princeton but studied history at a prestigious swiss university and work in history and with archives since a long time. What you see with Princeton is that it became political and universities are not supposed to become political. I met a historian who studied at Oxford in the UK and apparently at Oxford you don't cross-check archival sources but only use studies, sources or documents that support your narrative of the topic in history you write about and apparently nobody at Oxford has a problem with that. I assume the same thing is happening at Princeton as you can see here with Liz Harman. Things that have no place at university when talking or writing about a topic - Your personal emotions - Your comfortzone - Letting your political opinion and ideology influence your work - Cherrypicking and/or ignoring documentary evidence just because you don't like it politically or emotionally - Stubborness - The belief that being at a university and studied something for several years gives you a higher status when talking about the topic with someone who didn't study it, because if you don't leave the points mentioned above out of your studies, research and writing, then you're just as reliable as someone who didn't study it. Sadly it looks like in the UK and more and more at certain US universities, being emotional influenced, not crosschecking with documentary evidence etc. is becoming "okay". People like this don't have a place at universities. As historian i feel responsible for everything i write, publish or talk publically about. Because i know that if i leave certain info out because of my personal opinion or let my emotions influence my work, then the work i'd do would be dangerous and useless. Because most people on earth read that someone studied this and that and wrote a book or talked in public or the media about it. So they immediately trust that person. So when universities allow people like her to carry the name of their university, then the university starts to become less reliable and loses it's prestige, which is something Harvard and Princeton seem to let happen to them the past 2 years.

[@NathanicusSmith]

I don't know whether to like or dislike this video. I disagree with her circular reasoning, but this whole thing getting caught on video is amazing.

[@DuncanEscNJ]

You should only dislike a video if you dislike the intention of the channel uploading it, even if it was well made. The point of up voting is it helps spread the video and helps the channel. Downvoting, to an extent, does the opposite. If you like that something was caught on tape, or needed to be shared, even if it's a horrible thing (a good example would be the news covering a natural disaster, the thing is bad but it's important for people to know about) then you should up vote. If something else is some of your favorite content but the uploader stole it from another channel or something, then you should downvote.

[@agsilverradio2225]

Same.

[@agsilverradio2225]

@@DuncanEscNJ Thanks for the advice.

[@loki-of-asgard7877]

James Francos facial expressions is the only thing that makes it worth while

[@madmischiefstudio8331]

Even James Franco is like what the fuck are you talking about

[@Broxine]

mitchell mueller, why didnt they destroy her then and there? Why were they "licking her arse" so to speak, and act all friendly??? Wtf?

[@Kpub44]

I'm Pro-life after this stupid argument that makes no sense. You just said a fetus has moral status once it has a future and then you say that gives you the right to take that future away...

[@nimnim314]

It's dangerous for the millions of human lives being murdered for the sake of eugenics.

[@merrittpalmer4349]

Ray Rivera "Don't take a side, its dangerous" the same could be said about murder, rape, theft, etc. Also, you're a moron.

[@StMichealdefendus]

Welcome to the logical truth filled side! We have less crazies ;-)

[@jordanbadland8907]

so because it's a delicate topic you aren't supposed to have convictions? Bruh? You one of Liz Harmon's students?

[@jordanbadland8907]

So you can not be against something like abortion until someone says you can?

[@JamesPDoan]

I prefer the original Looney Tunes.

[@ATHIP1995]

So killing is permitted because the killer decided to kill. Cool. Princeton Everybody

[@oznuraycil311]

The sadistic and criminal way of thinking. No empathy and compassion. She is scary.

[@robertsmarsh8824]

James Franco trying not to laugh at the absurdity of her contradicting argument deserves an Oscar.

[@athena6653]

man it's people like this that made me leave the pro-choice side and become pro-life. she's actually being serious, like she thinks this actually makes sense

[@eidos1975]

Well said. I think she thinks she's got a good argument. Hers is the quality of argument you get from a student taking their first philosophy course.

[@hydrakchew4121]

So wait wait wait, you choose to deny women to decide for their body and their future, because you didn't like what some other people has to say about the moral status of a fetus? Wow

[@thenovice3602]

Hydrak Chew Women can decide their own future? While ending the future of an unborn baby? Claiming that it’s a woman’s body? Even though it’s not her body being aborted?

[@hydrakchew4121]

The unborn child it's inside her, if the woman decides to starve to death, it's her choice, the unborn child depends on the woman to live, it's her propriety not the government's, the rights of the fetus are not higher than the women rights to decide if she wants to create life or not, no third parties should have a say in it

[@jessefordmusic9775]

Yes the mother can starve herself to death if she wants. Not much you can do about that. But doctors don't starve their patients to death and if they did they would certainly lose their license and probably be jailed. It doesn't matter who's "property" (I believe that's the word you were going for there. Correct me if I'm wrong) the fetus is. It is a form of life. And since you believe the fetus is dependent on the mother to LIVE; we can agree on this. Except your last argument is in direct contradiction with that presupposition. What you're saying is that since the fetus is dependent on the woman to live; she has the right to take it's life? I think that's just plain wrong. It also doesn't make any sense. Baby's also depend on their parents to live, so should we start allowing babies to be killed as well? And for your final point, we are not talking about the decision to create life. Because what do you do when you decide that you want to create life? You have sex. Letting a fetus live is not the decision to create life. It is the decision to allow a life that has already begun to continue to exist. I'll tackle your first comment as well. Having a fetus inside you is not a coincidence. It doesn't just happen. There are things that need to happen first in order for the fetus to develop. Obviously what I'm getting at is sex. If you either do not think about the possible consequences of sex or choose to ignore them and say "fuck it" that is 100 percent on you. It was YOUR decision. So maybe you didn't decide to create a life but you partook in the process to create one. And now there is another life separate from the mother's. You (I don't know if you're a girl, I'm not talking specifically about you) need to accept the consequences of your actions. Both the mother and the father actually. And you can't argue that it's your body so it's your decision because it is no longer just your body. There's no arguing that.

[@blueRusCamel]

Really? This is your argument for making an abortion? Dear philosophy, what happened to you?

[@fatrunner04]

Lady philosophy is fine and well, modern "philosophers" just tend to ignore her.

[@boyertb]

This lady has a BA in philosophy from Harvard, and a philosophy PhD from MIT, and spews ridiculous crap like that?

[@detectiveharris8772]

This seems like the type of person that only studied just to pass the tests and didn't actually try to learn the material.

[@irmagedden]

and the way she presents her argument, like a spacey undergrad. I work in philosophy and this woman embarrasses me.

[@marktrenkle]

All you have to do is pass. You don't have to be a genius.

[@seg162]

From the sound of it, she has a BS.

[@aoeu256]

Maybe she is pro-life and being illogical to get you to disbelieve in abortion?

[@1000bookstoread]

The looks on their faces lol

[@christophekeating21]

They have similar looks in their other videos

[@atonewiththedust]

So what's her consensus on a failed abortion?

[@WillemLawyer]

Exactly. Don't forget Josiah Presley and Sarah Smith. Go tell these people that they have no future and no rights since their parents chose to abort them, then come talk to me.

[@tessa7413]

100% of *successful* abortions result in the death of the preborn baby/babies.

[@DrakeFellwing]

Yes a freak occurrence is somehow bad logic -eyeroll-

[@stevenglansburg856]

She’s lucky to be alive. She should be thankful.

[@bobbytaylor6363]

Don't put words into somebodies mouth and then take that as fact.

[@Door2Wonderland]

This woman is all kinds of crazy

[@eidos1975]

+Steven R, Well, good point. The money would be in her possession if she had a good enough getaway plan, etc., and so that would make such theft ok. Only if she got caught would it not be ok. Plain as day.

[@mrchuckmorris]

Steven R Lol yeah, it's like saying that since the bank won't have any money if it gets robbed, it loses its cash value. And since robbing something with no cash value isn't a felony, she can rob the bank without committing a felony. It goes beyond "The ends justify the means"... it's "The ends *enable* the means."

[@eidos1975]

+Kelsey Oertwich I don't think she's crazy. The argument is crazy, requiring a totally implausible account of how things have the moral status they have, but there's no reason to think *she* is crazy. I rarely psychologize people, myself, but since I've addressed her argument in another post, and I think there aren't many other reasonable explanations for her advocating this view, I'll go ahead and do it: I take it that she, like many pro-abortion folk, takes abortion to be a righteous cause, and is so beholden to it, she is willing to hold a hopelessly implausible view if she needs to. Calling people crazy, however, is a tactic of the Left when they disagree with something (look at the history of the USSR, for instance). It's some people's way of dismissing those who disagree with them without explaining why. For what it's worth, I say it's better that we not mimic that behavior, rise above it, and give our reasons for disagreement.

[@inthewilderness6964]

Phil 103--Liz Harman on "Being a Moron"

[@Strikerage]

Franco's look throughout the entire video expressed more logic than anything she said since opening her mouth. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@zzevonplant]

Having miscarried a child, this makes me even more sick, furious, and disgusted than it already would have. She's basically saying that my baby, and millions of others like her just didn't matter and had ZERO moral value and that's infuriating. And all the babies that have been aborted had moral value too. Every single one of them.

[@thelasttimeitried]

You may think that's what I'm saying, but you're just not looking at it closely enough. But don't look too closely at it, because that really is what I'm saying.

[@void_4871]

thelasttimeitried basically

[@alexkrakowski8597]

crux of argument, if the woman wants you, then you're life, if she doesn't you were never a human being. Didn't know woman could play god...

[@coldsuncrowfeet]

alex krakowski you sound like a virgin

[@bobbytaylor6363]

It's not playing god.

[@JQHNDi]

@@bobbytaylor6363 thats exactly what it is. When did the woman decide get to decide who has value? Only God does that, that fetus (small child) was made in the image of God, GOD decided the value, a rejection of that is the rejection of Gods supreme designation in desire of your own. You have attempted to usurp Gods authority of your own. You have tried to take the position of God; hence, playing God.

[@bobbytaylor6363]

@@JQHNDi you're a moron if that's your argument

[@JQHNDi]

@@bobbytaylor6363 Refute it then, genius.

[@87glassrose]

I would love to see that woman talk to a room full of women that have had still births or miscarriages who all desperately wanted those children. I doubt she'd survive.

[@toemas_mcgee]

James Franco's face says it all, "Even I'm not high enough for this."

[@NicolasAntonioJimenez]

James Franco's facial expressions through this convoluted rationalizing are priceless.

[@lindav1189]

is she trying to convince us or herself?

[@MungeParty]

Both but mostly us.

[@VueiyVisarelli]

Princeton, huh? How the mighty have fallen... "Claiming to be wise, they have become fools." --Romans 1:22

[@Chazzie13]

Wow, she must be so relieved that her philosophical views also exactly match the democratic party's views on abortion. Damn that's lucky, imagine if it had turned out otherwise!

[@_Logican_]

She only made me hate abortion even more. Good job

[@BaleshNTP]

Does not compute.

[@tcirello426]

It must be easy to pass this lady's class so long as you can make an argument like a 5 year old

[@addledhead]

It would be easy to pass if you were simply willing to abandon all logic, dignity, and reason in order to parrot her views.

[@juan-patriciahidalgo2812]

A five year old would be much more logical than this lady.

[@timpoisneat]

You can tell by the way her voice shakes that she is denying not only her conscience but logic itself

[@addledhead]

It's almost like halfway through she realizes that she's about to destroy her own argument but is too far in to back out

[@mark7166]

Yes, I was thinking exactly that as well.

[@PhilipReber]

Francos face is literally the greatest thing I have ever seen. Haha. No one followed her logic.

[@commesargehy9164]

im not convinced.........

[@Ldj8395jebr4]

Mary Kate WHY YOU NO GUEST STAR ON FULLER HOUSE??

[@commesargehy9164]

becuase its shitty

[@wallaceja09]

Ray Rivera, so it would seem that the choice is to be either a "fanatic" who has a basis for objective truth outside of their own opinion, or to be a non "fanatic" who has no basis for any objective truth whatsoever outside of their own opinion (or collective opinion). Doesn't seem like a great choice, unless some of those "fanatics" have a good religion.

[@BrunoRall]

Mary Kate cause abortion is wrong everytime..

[@WillemLawyer]

Neither am I. This has to be one of the most ridiculous 'arguments' for abortion that I have ever heard, and I've pretty much heard them all and come up with counterclaims for all of them.

[@SKgyebaek]

After watching this video I have come to the conclusion that the woman has indeed got a hollow skull

[@Broxine]

ROKMC Rec. but she is a professor... what does that say about her? 😄

[@imfromthemagnoliastatemiss2244]

Broxine so ? Most of em are dumb thats whats wrong with are youth

[@jimijamesjowitt]

That maybe abortion is good if people like her mother had one. She actually makes abortion look good. Imagine you had a kid like that!!

[@Teej_0]

James Franco's face when he finds out its a circle

[@blackstangt]

Her hesitation shows that she knows the idea that a fetus has no moral status because of a future decision to kill it is circular logic and nonsense. What if the law made the mother choose not to kill it, would it then have moral status? She also brings up that a fetus is not part of our moral community because it has no morals. Neither does a newborn. Killing a newborn is immoral. A fetus may not be a fully grown human, but killing anything without reason is wrong. A mother does have a right to choose, as a birth is much more dangerous to her than an abortion. She should make the decision quickly however, as that difference in safety is diminished over time, and her necessity in the survival of a fetus sharply drops at 5 months. Once she is not needed for the survival of the fetus, removing it alive or dead has little impact upon her and is no longer her choice morally speaking.

[@darrendandridge9115]

She made the best argument against abortion I've ever seen.

[@seanhellems1956]

So in other words, the child's moral status is not an intrinsic objective thing. It's relative to the mother's will. According to her argument, that would be true in the womb and not outside the womb only because in the womb the child is not conscious/sentient and therefore does not have a will of its own. There's a problem with that argument, which I sum up in a discussion I am having elsewhere: "...Your argument is that consciousness defines us as beings who are worthy of a level of moral consideration. If that's the case, then you're arguing for veganism. I would say that pigs are probably more conscious/sentient than infants and Children in the womb..yet it's ok to kill and eat them. So, no. Consciousness literally is not the standard. Furthermore, if you're arguing that consciousness /sentience is the standard, then that would mean that abortion should be allowed until around 5 months. According to research that is when the child has its first actual non-preprogrammed conscious experience. Though, perhaps you're arguing that consciousness marks the point which **humans** begin to have moral significance, aside from any vegan framework. However, then the question becomes, why not consciousness as a moral marker, **categorically, for all beings?** You must be placing a higher value on humanity itself, which then makes using consciousness as the standard an arbitrary standard, unless applied to all creatures. Therefore, if you're placing higher value on humanity, it must **by necessity** be rooted in something other than consciousness..and my question is, "what is that?" Scientifically, human life begins at fertilization. Scientifically, the child in the womb is alive. Scientifically, whether or not it is conscious is irrelevant since as a human being in that stage of development, normal healthy development does not include consciousness. However, that doesn't change the fact that the being has a fundamental will (biologically) to live and be conscious--otherwise it would not be working towards that milestone as a healthy end. Why is that? Because it has a conscious personal **nature** as a human being." So it would seem that based on her position, it would be ok to kill infants because developmentally, they don't have a conscious will for some time. It would also be ok to kill many of the most severely mentally disabled. I'm also confused how one can argue that a fetus' value is based on what the mother does--that it isn't a person with moral status unless the mother wants it--and not realize that she is arguing essentially for the foundations of slavery. Unfortunately, regardless of how unsound her arguments are, they are sound relative to our current law, which allows abortion, but if the mother wants to keep the child, the child is considered a person with rights and should be protected from harm from the mother (other than killing) as well as those who attack the mother.

[@etme1000]

Sean hellems Nice summary.

[@fragwagon]

Well said Sean. Yes she sounds like a lunatic, but she summed up the law right there. Crazy times.

[@emmanuelibus]

So I guess it makes it OK for someone to abort Liz Harman when she's drunk, asleep, and unconscious? #FACEPALM

[@mrich21087]

Great reasoning. All these arguments are assuming that "morals" exist/matter though. Why debate this if there is no scientific proof that morals exist? All products of time and chance are all equal. Kick a rock or kill a baby (or cluster of cells), but one isn't any more significant than the other as the cold gears of this purely mechanical universe turn. Unless there is an external, eternal, and all powerful being to author and enforce a cosmic moral law all these arguments are meaningless.

[@shalomoneal]

mrich21087 I think you know that what you wrote isn't true.

[@princepis]

I love how even the editor of this video inserted two circling arrows at 3:07 as if to indicate that her whole argument is circular

[@HardKnocksForge]

Why would anyone want to take away the 'moral status' of James Franco?

[@Tesla_Death_Ray]

This is confusing. Surely you can't use abortion as a reason it won't have a future when concluding that a lack of future permits abortion. Because that's the debate in the first place. She didn't provide an answer to why her argument is not circular, she just repeated herself and added "so it's not the same" as if it was addressed.

[@jcb3393]

She basically described a time travel paradox (without the "coolness factor" of time travel) and used it as justification for murder.

[@Tesla_Death_Ray]

Im strongly pro choice so i dislike seeing the position argued so poorly.

[@JenifleurLynn]

But how would you defend it? The fetus has no choice - male or female - so "pro-choice" is a misnomer. So would it be "I'm the mom so I have the right to say if baby lives or dies" . . . because carrying the baby to term is not convenient for me right now OR even worse - I am being pressured by my boss, boyfriend, husband, parents to KILL my child - the is no happy scenario here. There is no liberation - no solid justification. Women and their children are treated like crap through abortion - the real liberation is respecting yourself and your body enough to NOT put it into the hands of a man who most likely does NOT love you - but is only fulfilling his basest natural inclination to have sex. So, you may think this woman's argument is poor - the REAL arguments are tragic and cause for extreme concern and do not convince a person with a healthy sense of justice, compassion, and human worth.

[@Tesla_Death_Ray]

And there's the circular anti-abortion argument of the form: (1) Killing people is wrong, (2) Abortion kills a person, (3) Therefore, abortion is wrong. Either it is an equivocation on the meaning of person if you're thick, or it is begging the question by assuming the identity of the meaning of person in the first and second premises.

[@JenifleurLynn]

Not sure what you mean by "thick" - do mean "dense", slow-minded"? In any case - in negating the intrinsic value of any human life you are, therefore, pulling the rug out from under the value of all. Your value as a human, my value as a human - the old lady who lives in the nursing home - everyone's. A person's value is NOT based on someone else's opinion (which is really all it is). And your argument sounds a bit like mental gymnastics as well. Where did you learn that - in some totally hypothetical college course - totally removed from reality of what a human being is? Perhaps explain your position clearer and don't resort to the lofty yet empty phraseology of the totally insulated professor who has tenure who presented this to you.

[@timhatch27]

In hindsight. I'm glad I survived the abortion advice of my mother's doctor. Thank You Jesus for saving me.

[@WillemLawyer]

This is utter nonsense. What I’m hearing from her argument is that Fetuses only have any status based on whether or not they are going to become humans, and what the intentions of the mother are. “Among early fetuses there are two very different kinds of beings. So, James, when you were an early fetus, and Eliot, when you were an early fetus, all of us I think we already did have moral status then. But we had moral status in virtue of our futures. And future of fact that we were beginnings stages of persons. But some early fetuses will die in early pregnancy due to abortion or miscarriage. And in my view, that is a very different kind of entity. That’s something that doesn’t have a future as a person and it doesn’t have moral status.” First of all, this is a very circular argument that basically goes like this: A baby only has value if it has a future. When you abort a baby it has no future. Therefore, because if you abort a baby, it has no future since you aborted it, so abortion is fine. That’s like the height of circular logic, and is just nonsensical. Second of all, placing value upon a person based on their potential future and using that to justify killing them is just horrifying and bizarre. Would it be justified for me to kill you because after I kill you, you have no future? I mean, just think about that for a second, because that’s what this argument is saying. It’s the whole “If my Mom had aborted me, I wouldn’t be around to care.” argument, just in a more nonsensical way. If I murder you, you won’t be around to care either. That doesn't make it ok. Third, there are serious logical and ethical problems with standards of personhood that don’t grant personhood and related rights solely on the basis of being a human being, and such standards run the risk of being abused to dehumanize inconvenient groups. Giving personhood and the rights of a person to anyone based on the personal unsupported opinions of individuals is a route that we really don’t want to go down. Fourth, it is factually incorrect to say that those who have been aborted have no future. Here, I would like to introduce you to some victims of abortion. Josiah Presley: Josiah, a young teen, is a strong pro-life and children’s rights advocate, born with a deformed arm due to the failed abortion. He is staunchly supports babies right to life, and believes that unwanted children should be put up for adoption rather than killed. To quote one of his statements on the subject, “Trust me, they will be adopted. My adopted family has twelve children, ten of which were adopted! They will be adopted! If we would stop funding the stuff to do abortions and put it towards making adoption fees lower, many would adopt because many who want to adopt can’t afford the high adoption fees and therefore can’t adopt.” I personally can’t wait to see what this young man has ahead of him in his life, he has a lot of determination. Melissa Ohden: Victim of an attempted saline abortion, Melissa Ohden survived the Abortion and went on to become a social worker in the fields of substance abuse, child welfare, mental health, domestic violence and sexual assault, she is a public public speaker, pro-life advocate, has founded several non-profit support organizations, and has had two children with her husband. None of that would have happened if she had died from the attempted abortion. Gianna Jessen: Gianna is a disability and pro-life activist, and has been a strong advocate for born alive legislation and protection against late term abortions, especially on the grounds of fetal disability, all while dealing with cerebral palsy. Quite impressive. Sarah Smith: Sarah’s mother, Betty, had a successful abortion, however, neither she nor the the abortionist realized she was carrying twins. As a result, one of the twins, Sarah, survived the abortion with only bilateral, congenital dislocated hips and many other physical handicaps. It hasn't stopped her from pursuing her medical studies, though, or from speaking out wherever she can for the right to life. She has forgiven her parents for trying to abort her, along with the abortionist who killed her twin brother and who almost killed her. She says she often thinks of her brother, Andrew James, whom nobody can replace. Go tell these people that they have no future and no rights since their parents chose to abort them, then come talk to me.

[@laurin1438]

William Lawyer daaaannggg...you are very gifted, I hope you work or are pursuing something related to theology, philosophy, or psychology!

[@WillemLawyer]

Thank you for your compliment Anna Laurin, I'm considering perusing a degree in engineering once I complete highschool, but I have been told that I should consider philosophy.

[@WillemLawyer]

Every successful abortion kills a child. Not every abortion is successful.

[@gorgor6978]

You cannot survive abortion, as abortion is the ending of one's pregnancy, you don't survive death because you don't die from your wounds, do you? Death occurs only as an absolute and not a variable. We make the distinction in medicine too, so it would be only incorrect to say that you can survive abortion. You can only use those terms figuratively, which, in this case, doesn't help much. We make the distinction in Law as well, an attempt to kill someone is not the same as murdering someone, although the latter is preceded by the first. You do not survive murder, to flip words like that and drive them into nonsense is wildly incorrect. Although this argument does not relates to your main point at all, it is a flaw in logic and a failure of words.

[@ToyKingWonder]

I love it when Franco and Eliot make these hilarious satirical short films that make fun of people, and they play it totally straight. Awesome! Wait a minute.....

[@mdlee52]

This woman possesses a PhD. Amazing.....

[@1likestoplaymusic]

So..other people get to decide "who" has moral status and who doesn't.....?

[@Ashkanman]

Angela Michelle Ross well the whole point was that there is no "who" to begin with

[@Charliechorizo]

This is why you should not go to university. You end up heavily in debt, and extremely stupid.

[@WillemLawyer]

Exactly. You have to be college educated to be this stupid.

[@eidos1975]

+Steve True "there [sic] minds made up for them"? Her argument is so unsound, it should win a prize. Perhaps it should win the James Franco and His Buddy Eliot Charitable Incredulity award. One who thinks her argument is any good frankly has no business criticizing people for being wary of attending her classes, or attending the university in general. Their skepticism is perfectly reasonable. That said, we shouldn't go so far as saying this is reflective of all university education anywhere. There are still places to get a good university education, and when it is a good one, there is great value in such a thing.

[@WillemLawyer]

I nominate her argument for the circular argument of the year award.

[@schouvler25]

Well depends what classes you take for your humanities credits...

[@Neterosan28]

slavmart what about a cheap community college?

[@O8080808O]

Translation: You've got moral status if (and when) your mother feels like it. You lack moral status if (and when) your mother feels like it. Therefore, Moral status is managed by the mother's feelings. A similar narcissistic, elastic definition of moral status is popular among death row inmates.

[@Claire5020GEN]

As a woman, the fact that I would have the power and privilege to grant value or worthlessness to a vulnerable living being is repugnant, repulsive, and absurd.

[@Crackpot_Astronaut]

I saw someone call this "Schrodinger's Fetus" and I lost it 😆

[@Nerdfeliz]

This woman is insane. Whatever happened to her brain?!?!

[@Nerdfeliz]

How can she talk about murdering babies with a huge psychopatic smile on her face? What the actual heck.

[@red_edj]

Carlos Dyonisio it was aborted!!

[@nadiyakaralash7878]

Carlos Dyonisio it was aborted. Her brain does not have moral status unfortunately

[@johnmadigan7083]

Surely, this is satire...

[@randomfools808]

Negative.

[@scratch57]

your car is not your car after I stole it from you on thursday, because my intent was to take it, therefore you would not have had it after thursday anyway, so you have no moral claim to it after thursday.

[@olabashanda]

Being a Mom is a Superpower that conveys not needing to have moral responsibility! Nice!!!! [hunamity silently screams and weeps]

[@MalePositive]

Human life does not derive its intrinsic value from the thought processes inside a woman's head!

[@nickj5451]

"But it's not that aborting you would have been wrong." What a statement! What a thing to say to someone! Wow!

[@louisjones1036]

James Franco's faces in response to her comments (delusions) has me over here dying. So freaking funny haha

[@scratch57]

she's never had to defend these ideas to anyone more capable than James.

[@PositivelyPixelated]

Best comedy short I've seen in a long time. 10/10

[@Jonas_æ]

There's something really funny in watching James Franco's reaction to this insane argument xD You can see him go through confusion, to disbelief, to judgment and then 'mhm yeah ok buddy'.

[@FritoBoy30]

Want to know what it looks like when someonen is calling BS with their eyes? Well, you just watched it.

[@richardkray7482]

I'm so proud to be pro life.

[@OscarSanchez-nk3uw]

God bless Franco's eyebrows in this video lol.

[@dancortes8806]

She's lucky to be in a position to have never been aborted, otherwise her argument on a fetus lacking moral status would never have any moral status...

[@alyzza87]

James was polite enough to try and clarify her argument but by the end he was like "SEE YA!" xD

[@wonderingwanderer3605]

Franco's face kills me. XD And I love how her argument is completely circular, and as she is presenting it, the little rotating arrows pop up on the screen. XD

[@Kira-Nerys]

So what class does she teach, exactly? Advanced Mental Gymnastics?

[@MSL209]

James's reactions = my thoughts exactly. 😂 😂 😂

[@ggonzalez435]

Ok so all thats missing is Bill Nye the "science guy" to defend this stance...now that would be something!

[@nataliewehden4227]

So hypothetically.... if a pregnant woman is murdered. The killer could be charged with 2 murders. But what if she had an abortion booked. Could he only be charged with 1 murder?

[@EggShen905]

Princeton sure hires 'em stupid nowadays. She just did the pro-life cause a great service.

[@paragon7554]

So there are two kinds of beings: those with moral status and those without... So I think what this professor is saying, is that it's more likely the unborn fetus will be a being with moral status than the mother who would abort it. Then we should save the baby, and after it's born we abort the mother? Philosophy is fun! Thanks James and Eliot!

[@AnaxofRhodes]

Homeschooling. We're homeschooling.

[@karlgrab5476]

This is why free speech is so important. Speaking freely provides clarity on a person's intentions or the merits (or lack thereof) of one's ideology.

[@Jordan-ml9ff]

yes, because we all gained so much knowledge from this conversation lol

[@seandegan5755]

The professor's face at 4:09 is priceless. He seems exhausted just listening.

[@omfgfrinkomfg]

Trying to create a moral loophole isn't the way to justify a point... You can't defend abortion with moral arguments. It's impossible, except on the rare rape case. Individualism and personal liberty are, in my opinion, the only concepts with which you can defend abortion. I find amusing to see her try tho...

[@annabelee22]

I don't think that's the point of what she's saying. What you're saying is about killing a person who, because they were born, has moral status. She is saying that those who were never planned to be born did not have moral status and therefore were not people. Whether or not you were born determines your moral status.

[@omfgfrinkomfg]

Zahra Q What I meant when I said that the moral argument is not compaptible with abortion is not that personal liberty is not a good moral point. It is rather that is is difficult to make a moral point valid regarding the woman which wishes to abort. You see, in my opinion, (as a realist) for a decision to be moral, the ammount of "good" caused by the decision must surpass the ammount of "good" caused by not taking the decision. Thereby the woman must be in such a situation where the troubles caused to the woman by the child equates the entire life of a human being. And it can be, but not a lot of situations. Especially in comfortable societies such as ours where the state cares for the child if the family rejects it.

[@TVsBen]

Everyone has the "rape case" but is that baby less of a human? Can we really argue that one life should end because another life violated someone else? What did the baby do wrong?

[@TheViolalove]

TV's Ben I know rape victims. They live the rest of their lives with the fear and shame. Imagine growing the offspring of your rapist for 9 months and then having to relive your rape as you birth that child. If you are a man you have no idea, but as a woman having had two wanted children, I cannot imagine going through with it after a violent rape. Perspective matters.

[@TVsBen]

tell me what the baby did wrong. Adopt it out. Don't do something else wrong just because you were wronged.

[@debmills356]

What?!?!?! Just found this series. I wondered if James Franco was doing a secret signal at minute 4:21 - like "is this for real?!" or something. Anyway, praise GOD I had moral status. My mom wouldn't have even had this discussion inside her own head. You have sex, you get pregnant, you figure out a way to love and care for this baby. So thankful for my Mom and the era in which I was born (imperfect as it was).

[@phliptoutcool]

No wonder the large majority of kids coming out of colleges are so screwed up.

[@JDG.RealEstate]

I love their faces. They are like, "what the fuck are we hearing?"

[@patrickkugel5191]

I love James Franco's facial reaction hahahaha! (I feel you bruh!)

[@AreaFortyTwo]

Why do all these types of women have the same unbearable voices?

[@DylanGlass]

Worst Argument I've Ever Heard...

[@timbim5505]

Affirmative action at its finest.

[@MayonR]

The moral status of a fetus is that it is innocent and depends on adults to protect it. It is defenseless so the duty should be to protect it rather than to murder it.

[@ghr8184]

James Franco looks like he was told the wrong time for the interview, overslept, did a hit of acid, and then got a text from a producer going, "Where are you, man!?" and he went, "Oh, crap!" and now 100%+ of his mental energy is going in to keeping his eyes open/not letting on that he's tripping mad balls.

[@KarenZappavignaHoogland]

Students pay to take courses taught by this woman?

[@christophekeating21]

When people say, "why do we need God for morality?" This is why.

[@miggs80]

Abortion is wrong and it is murder. That's a fact not an opinion. Mothers who have nothing or are in bad situations make it work all the time. If you aborted your child you're simply selfish and didn't want the inconvenience and yes you murdered your own child.

[@waldoman7]

If I abort a 5 day old fetus, then I have not murdered my child, I have killed a non-sentient lifeform, just like we do whenever we step on an ant, or eat steak, or take anti-biotics. Is it selfish to take anti-biotics? That is my opinion. It is not a fact. At least I know the difference.

[@marktrenkle]

To me abortion is like walking by a birds nest, seeing eggs, then smashing them. Sure, the mini-bird doesn't feel any pain or know what it's going to miss out on, but it's also a dick move to deprive them of future life. Perhaps a more apt analogy is eating the eggs out of survival rather than simply smashing them, but it's still morally wrong even if it produces the best outcome for the person who's eating the egg.

[@waldoman7]

before a fetus has a neuron, it is indisputably the same as a virus or animal. I will agree that the laws currently standing in the U.S. are contradictory.

[@eaunan]

Waldoman7 - no sense convincing you your pontificating contains errors - so this comment writes to all others reading your words: neurons first begin forming from the moment of conception. Millions form within the first 16 days and then (according to Fetal Development: Baby's Nervous System and Brain - First Trimester: Baby Starts Moving): "...A mere 16 days after conception, your fetus's neural plate forms (think of it as the foundation of your baby's brain and spinal cord). It grows longer and folds onto itself, until that fold morphs into a groove, and that groove turns into a tube - the neural tube. Once the neural tube closes, at around week 6 or week 7 of pregnancy, it curves and bulges into three sections, commonly known as the forebrain, midbrain and hindbrain. Just to the rear of the hindbrain sits the part that will soon turn into your baby's spinal cord. Soon, these areas bubble into those five different regions of the brain that we're most familiar with: the cerebrum, cerebellum, brain stem, pituitary gland and the hypothalamus. Of course, all of these fetal brain areas need more time to be fully up and running! At the same time, special neural cells form and migrate throughout the embryo to form the very beginnings of nerves. Your baby's nervous system is made up of millions upon millions of neurons; each of these microscopic cells have itty-bitty branches coming off of them so that they can connect and communicate with each other. With this comes baby's first synapses, which essentially means baby's neurons can communicate and create early fetal movements...like curling into (you guessed it!) the fetal position..." ALL of this development is done, from conception through birth, to development, to puberty, to adulthood, old age, and death within the human being...the mother provides nourishment and shelter in the womb, and outside the mother and father provide this until such a time as the person can care directly for themselves mentally, physically, emotionally, and economically. A virus does not ever have the potential to live outside its host and an animal has no potential for consciousness - both of these potentials are present at conception of a human child - just as the first neuron of "millions upon millions" available for further development at 16 days begins at conception.

[@miggs80]

waldoman7 Of course it would be murdering your child because that 5 day old fetus is a life in the making.

[@blueberyice]

"Im pro choice but this makes no sense" It makes no sense bc being okay with aborting a child is in fact senseless, delusional, selfish, and abominable. This terrible argument just reveals that

[@jenvandrak]

I dont know why are you disliking this video, it brings insight into what the guest beleives. If you disagree with the guest thats not the channels fault.

[@markrodriguez1168]

I'm just glad that my mom didn't abort me. I love you mom!!!

[@kartik9892]

If she did, you wouldn't exist to mourn you getting aborted.

[@daveysw]

And she's a professor at Princeton? I am in mourning for our country.

[@andrewofaiur]

She perfectly addresses her entire argument in the form "Abortion is permissible because you had the abortion", literally what she was saying in the first three minutes and then realizes what she is saying makes no sense so she tries to give two justifications and says the SAME THING again for both of her justifications. The future endows the moral status but the future is decided by the intention and the consequent action of the mother so it goes back to saying abortion is permissible because you had the abortion. This woman is a professor of philosophy at Princeton University's center for human values. Let that sink in.

[@lionturtle3479]

Anyone know where the clip of this is that shows Franco's reaction in slow motion?

[@BarzOnTheWindow1]

Hmmmm ... I live 35 minutes from Princeton. Have to find this woman, and try to buy some POT FROM HER ... must be AMAZING

[@thomasjj1976]

According to wikipedia: Elizabeth Harman is an American philosopher and Laurance S. Rockefeller Professor of Philosophy at Princeton University. She is known for her expertise on ethics, specifically on ethics of abortion. Harman's father was Gilbert Harman, professor of philosophy. Harman's mother was Lucy Harman, a psychotherapist at Princeton.