Poking Holes In Caller's "Pro-Abortion Stance"

[@joed9305]

Honestly, if my parents had aborted me, I wouldn't have cared. I wasn't self aware yet.

[@AdmiralBison]

Also in that sense NO one in history had any choice if they were to be born or not.

[@xtianhunter]

My mother says in jest, that she wished she aborted me ..and i can she her point 😂

[@Germanchu92]

Tracie Harris makes a great case for this. If an adult human being requires my body to stay alive and I decide to not participate in the situation (even if I originally agreed and change my mind after a few months), my body autonomy has preference, even if the adult human being dies. We don't force anybody to donate a kidney to a terminal person even if the procedure was safe. Objectively, it's better for the overall situation having 2 people alive, but we can't just violate body autonomy. These talks are about giving a fetus certain rights that other humans don't have by removing rights from other humans are just strangely phrased, but they are not that complicated to boil down.

[@qa377]

Heck, you can't even force someone to donate a kidney to their own child if they're compatible, and you can't force someone to keep their child on life support (or remove them) either.

[@Montaq_]

I thought Goku was the one with ultra instinct but Gohan is the dodging master.

[@thechozopandash]

mans unlocked his Beast form

[@kasocool2812]

Mr piccolo would be proud

[@DreadedDave]

Piccolo would disagree lol

[@BigRalphSmith]

Incubator slavery is a far greater tragedy than ending a pregnancy.

[@rmelzhim6033]

I think we can void the whole argument by stating there's no way of perfectly assessing and predicting the risk of pregnancy. Even in the most developed and advanced countries women still die from unexpected complications and things going wrong. If someone is afraid of dying and even 0.1% is too much of a risk for them, they should be allowed to accept that, as we know people DO actually die.

[@ednamsgiraffe]

It’s clear he wanted to enforce his conclusion but had given zero thought to why that conclusion should be made, what that conclusion would require and entail to execute, or whether or not it’s actually consistent with other views he may hold on similar topics. “You must agree to my position first, it’s for someone else to figure out how to make it work.” His constant insistence that “if you are a human secularist you must conclude X if you hold Y position” was false. He was attempting to whitewash his conclusion to give that impression, but all he did was paint over the holes, he didn’t fix them. Human secularists do base many of their evaluations on harm, but they also hold to bodily autonomy. Fetuses dont have ensure rights to life even up to birth. I mean viability is determined around 22 weeks and seriously complications during childbirth can result in the death of both the baby and the one pregnant. There are myriad factors around why pregnancy can and has massively affected the lives of those involved. His snide “well you could have been aborted” was also bs. No, if I was aborted, I wouldn’t be on the podcast listening to you. I wouldn’t be, it would be someone else. That’s it.

[@LOwens-xf8yo]

Child birth is brutal! And still too often deadly! Forcing woman to go through childbirth against their will is plain savage! When the alternative is safer than Tylenol, that’s inhumane.

[@ARoll925]

Gohan is a misogynist looking to justify his misogyny

[@IRGeamer]

Baseless assertions for the purpose of de-legitimizing or de-humanizing the opposition and falsely propping up your narrative... Not even once... Not even to prove a point... Not even to support the moral side… Unless you don’t care at all about being part of the problem and confirming to the wilfully ignorant that they are justified in dismissing anything they don’t like as “fake news”. "If you hate something, don't you do it too.” - Eddie Vedder "Not for You"

[@solly119119]

The fumbling around and "what is harm" the hosts engaged in is why we need to demand forced-birthers prove person-hood. They need to provide their unassailable evidence a fetus is the same thing as a one-week-old baby. We can make both person-hood and autonomy arguments. We shouldn't let them off the hook by not challenging them when they claim the former.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

What is playing a game of semantics going to solve?

[@solly119119]

@@vladtheemailer3223 How is challenging someone to prove what they claim is true semantics? They're the ones constantly screaming "abortion is murder!" Don't you think they should be able to back that up with, you know, evidence?

[@vladtheemailer3223]

@solly119119 No, instead of arguing whether or not an unborn child is alive, a person, or a human ask, how is it murder? I have yet for someone to explain how it is. Murder is a legal term. Colloquially, it's an opinion.

[@solly119119]

@@vladtheemailer3223 Vlad, we're on the same page! If a fetus is the same as an individual already born into the world then it's a person. And obviously that's where the legal term of "murder" comes into play. But the end result is this: they cannot prove a fetus is a person, and therefore they cannot prove abortion is murder.

[@solly119119]

​@@vladtheemailer3223If a fetus is the same as an individual person born into the world, then clearly the legal term of murder applies. That's the whole point of asking them to prove person-hood, so it is not a question of semantics. It's a question of them falsely claiming person-hood is "true".

[@Mosz]

Following the callers logic of what causes more harm, all life is full of harm, the only moral thing is to ban birth.

[@TheLightlock]

I really don't know what he thinks he's achieving with the human organism bit. a human is an organism by definition, it's like he's saying a truck car

[@davidszeremi1786]

He must have run into someone who said "being isn't scientific" so now he's using goofy words to confuse the issue.

[@qa377]

By this caller's definition, doing most things would be causing somebody harm. You eat that sandwich? You've removed someone else's possibility of eating it, you did harm. Etc etc

[@aidenmartin6674]

He keeps on trying to force the conclusion of his argument before he makes his argument “I believe that secular humanists believe the foundation of my claims. You are secular humanists therefore you agree with my argument”

[@karmehed]

"Set the question of bodily autonomy aside", excuse me? That is genuinely the only question that should matter. If we can't come up with a reason why it is ok to ignore a womans bodily autonomy the discussion is over. And I find it interesting that he wants to talk about not doing harm to a human organism but completely ignores the one actual human BEING in this equation. There will be harn done to her, and forcing her to go through with that is inhumane.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

Who gets to decide when and where morality is applied?

[@karmehed]

@@vladtheemailer3223 morality should always apply, and it is immoral to force someone to carry a child to term of they don't want to.

[@vladtheemailer3223]

@karmehed What makes it immoral, and who gets to decide? Is it moral to terminate a fetus, and who gets to decide? I'm prochoice but, I would really like someone to explain why a discussion about morality is off limits regarding this topic?

[@the_Hermanoid]

The title of the novel is "Johnny Got His Gun." (Past tense.) By Dalton Trumbo.

[@benjaminmadrigalperez9010]

I wonder if he cares about the harm that's done to the mother by don't letting her abort????

[@j2davaugn]

Why do so many dudes call to talk about what women should do?

[@2l84me8]

The caller is Gohan who is infamous for having called this show as well as the atheist experience for years to weakly attempt to justify his pro birth position. You can recognize him by his boring voice and weak talking points.

[@antimatter2380]

Is breaking someone's ribs without consent harm? Humanists would say yes. Would breaking someone's ribs without consent in the process of preforming CPR harm? Humanists would say yes but its a justified harm because the heart attack is more harmful. So, intent and outcomes are where the morals lie. Not some hardline definition.

[@markastoforoff7838]

Let's pretend for a second a woman in a state that only allows 6 weeks in which to get an abortion but doesn't find out until the 7th or 8th week, forcing her to go along with the pregnancy against her wishes is doing severe harm to her if you ask me. As a man my opinion of abortion is that when I become pregnant, then and only then will I be able to decide for all other people whether or not they should be able to get an abortion and under what stipulations. Until then I prefer to leave that decision up to the woman.

[@JBee887]

"I took a genetics class" No, no you didn't Gohan!!

[@giaimeporcu8463]

Quoting metallica to prove a philosophical point... fire

[@Childfree334]

I'm so glad I had my uterus removed and will never have to worry about pregnancy. Giving birth to future oppressors or future hand maidens was not on my life's goal list. I have escaped 90% of life's problems by not having kids. 😊

[@youtubestudiosucks978]

Couldnt you just each your kids to not be an a-hole that wants to remove a womens right to choose instead? The opressors give birth to more and more kids who think the same, we got to defeat that number. I'll be the step-dad, dont let us be outnumbered, last time that happened they burned unbelievers at the stake and i dont want to go back to those times

[@Goldenhawk583]

And you escaped the profound joy and love aswell. If you want children or not is up to you, but children are not little monsters, some of us love ours more than life itself. Think before speaking?

[@benjaminmadrigalperez9010]

Not yet. Sadly there has been cases of "pregnancies" without uterus. Very, very slight, but still is a posibility.

[@benjaminmadrigalperez9010]

​@@Goldenhawk583she is not talking about You. Think before speakig????

[@Goldenhawk583]

@@benjaminmadrigalperez9010 she is clearly saying that children are bound to turn out horrible, and that shes really lucky to not have to bother with any. Again, her choice to have children or not , not judging that part, but not all children turn out to be monsters, most dont. So yes, callling children in general a horrific thing one is best being without.. is thoughtless at best, mean at worst, I dont think it was meant in a mean way, but that is how it came out.

[@dalecs47]

A question I keep asking, so far never a reply: Any of you men who favor laws restricting a woman's right to choose, how do you feel about laws that restrict YOUR right to have a gun? It seems as though moral choices are always easier when made by those who do not have to pay for it.

[@craigbradford4850]

This is so extremely silly. Skin is a human organism. He doesn’t mean EVERY organism. He means fetus, but he doesn’t want to say it like that cause he knows it doesn’t have traction. Everyone is not a stakeholder. That’s silly. If everyone is a stakeholder in this conversation then everyone is a stakeholder in EVERY conversation. Then no one is a stakeholder. These definitional arguments are a complete time waster. Gohan is a complete time waster. He doesn’t know what a secular humanist is, yet he tries to frame his argument from that point.

[@qa377]

By his definition you shouldn't ever remove a parasitic twin then, even if it'll kill the twin that could actually survive.

[@arnoldfossman1701]

Today my dermatologist removed a clump of cells from my thigh, was that immoral?

[@arby796]

Have to say this is probably his least annoying call that I have seen yet. Good on Gohan for some growth in his ability to communicate.

[@fireroastedfire]

"Human Organism" fits none of his stances... By definition, a "human organism" is a full functional human and its complex set of 11 organ systems, medically. Even breaking the words apart to "Human" as a discriptor of "relating to humans" and "organism" meaning "complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole", until a certain point no fetus fits either full definition.

[@qa377]

How is the caller's stance "pro" abrtn?

[@labspeciman7402]

I'm not pro abortion I am pro birth control. There is no simple reason for that. Now, I will not tell a woman what she cannot do on the subject. It does not harm me and it may be a life saving event. Or the fetus would have a horrific life. Women that I have known who had abortions are not happy about it. Its difficult. Don't make it worse.

[@SawBlade11]

What a world we live in that they can’t say women who get pregnant 😂 have to say people

[@bazingaburg8264]

Because cis-women aren't the only baby-oven owners, genius.

[@SawBlade11]

@@bazingaburg8264 lol women give birth regardless of if you think you are a man or not

[@SawBlade11]

Y’all lost this one

[@Jeremy-xu3yu]

Repent of your sins. Believe in Jesus Christ for salvation and become a new person in this life. John 3:16, Luke 13:3, 1 Peter 1:23 KJV

[@albaniahenry-franklin2829]

Why are you so angry? Stop denying His existence and find peace and salvation in the loving embrace of the one TRUE living God Bathala! Find peace in the knowledge that Bathala's paradise will be yours in the afterlife.

[@imwelshjesus]

@@albaniahenry-franklin2829 Why can't you live a normal life without a magical invisible entity - intellectual childhood abuse?

[@imwelshjesus]

Repent of your lies and become a normal rational human. Adults 101.

[@Ghalaghor_McAllistor]

Do you think that slavery is wonderful? *Leviticus 25:44-45 KJV* Both thy bondmen (archaic for male slaves), and thy bondmaids (archaic for female slaves), which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. This bible verse tells you that it's okay to buy slaves from other nations as well as foreigners who live among you. Do you think that slavery is moral? If no, then why didn't your god simply say "Thou shalt not own humans like property"?

[@Ghalaghor_McAllistor]

There were young women and girls kept as war trophies by your god's "chosen" people. *Numbers 31:9 KJV* And the children of Israel *took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones,* and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. *Exodus 21:2 KJV* If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. *Non-Hebrew "servants" were kept for life instead of freeing them.* And since when can you *BUY servants instead of hiring* them? Why doesn't *Leviticus 25:44-45 KJV* talk about servants and instead mentions bondmen/bondmaids (archaic for slaves)? In which reality are servants your money as if they belong to you like property? *Exodus 21:20-21 KJV* And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: *for he is his money.* Why should servants fear their employ- er, I mean master? *Ephesians 6:5 KJV* "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, *with fear and trembling,* in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;" Why should servants fear god if he is loving and good? *Colossians 3:22-4:1 KJV* Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, *fearing God;*