Untitled Document

[00:00:00] I'm sure you're familiar with JJ [00:00:01] Thompson's argument about abortion, the [00:00:03] violinist. [00:00:04] >> Um, [00:00:05] >> I correct. [00:00:06] >> Um, okay. So, I want to propose like a [00:00:08] slightly different take on that, maybe a [00:00:09] variation. [00:00:10] >> So, if there's there's a a mother and a [00:00:12] daughter, um, the daughter can be a [00:00:14] teenager, 20, whatever. Um, and let's [00:00:16] say this daughter has some uh some kind [00:00:19] of condition or organ failure or [00:00:21] something where she needs a body part [00:00:24] from her mom, like a kidney transplant, [00:00:25] and only her mom is capable of giving [00:00:27] her that that kidney transplant. she's [00:00:30] the only person uh for DNA reasons or [00:00:32] something. Um do you think that mom [00:00:34] should be required legally by the [00:00:36] government to give her kidney in order [00:00:39] to keep the daughter alive otherwise the [00:00:41] daughter died? [00:00:41] >> It's not an anag analogous situation. [00:00:44] >> So why is it not analogous? [00:00:46] >> Well, first of all, because pregnancy [00:00:47] only lasts 9 months and you don't lose a [00:00:49] kidney. [00:00:50] >> Okay, so let's say okay, [00:00:52] >> you realize when you're you have a baby, [00:00:53] you don't lose a kidney. [00:00:54] >> Okay, so the mother has to give up her [00:00:55] kidney for 9 months and then she gets it [00:00:57] back. [00:00:57] >> How does that work? Do I it doesn't [00:00:59] matter [00:00:59] >> that's why it's not anal an analogous I [00:01:01] >> I understand but if okay let's say the [00:01:03] mother [00:01:03] >> so come up with an example that is [00:01:06] >> okay the mother has to be hooked up into [00:01:08] the daughter's bloodstream for nine [00:01:09] months [00:01:09] >> use use a real example not something [00:01:11] theoretical [00:01:12] >> I I don't understand like what what part [00:01:15] I understand it's theoretical but what [00:01:16] part of this analogy is not analogous [00:01:18] >> because it doesn't happen [00:01:20] >> I mean of course it doesn't happen but [00:01:21] why [00:01:22] >> of course then why are we talking about [00:01:23] it [00:01:24] >> because it's an analogy it's analogies [00:01:26] don't happen that's the point kind of [00:01:28] analogies. [00:01:28] >> Well, some analogies actually do happen. [00:01:30] >> So, can you think of one that would be [00:01:31] rooted in reality? [00:01:34] >> An abortion. But, okay. Okay. [00:01:36] >> Let's say like [00:01:37] >> I think the reason you're trying to [00:01:38] avoid this is because you realize that [00:01:40] the government [00:01:41] >> But let let's flip this hypothetical [00:01:42] around. Okay. Let's say that you had a a [00:01:46] killer dis like a very awful disease for [00:01:49] nine months, a killer disease. [00:01:51] >> And if you took a magical pill, because [00:01:53] we're going to use hypotheticals, that [00:01:55] could kill somebody randomly around the [00:01:57] world, would you do it? [00:01:59] >> I would not do it. No. But okay. [00:02:01] >> So, you would let the other person live? [00:02:04] >> I would. But okay. The the difference [00:02:06] here is that [00:02:07] >> that's you're pro-life. [00:02:09] >> No, I'm Okay. Here's here's my [00:02:11] distinction I wanted to make, though. [00:02:16] I think I think there's a very there's a [00:02:18] very important distinction to be made [00:02:20] between thinking that abortions are good [00:02:22] versus thinking that women should have [00:02:24] the choice to have an abortion, right? [00:02:26] Because in in our scenario, the mother [00:02:27] daughter, you can argue that the right [00:02:30] thing to do, the thing you would want to [00:02:31] do or the thing that I would want [00:02:32] someone to do is to donate the kidney [00:02:34] and save the daughter. But I think [00:02:36] there's kind of an instinct that for the [00:02:38] mother some sort of autonomy, bodily [00:02:40] autonomy perhaps is stands in the way [00:02:44] and basically says the government cannot [00:02:46] enforce her to do that even if it's the [00:02:47] thing that we would feel is right for [00:02:48] her to do. So what what about that [00:02:51] situation is [00:02:52] >> is it is it the mother's DNA? [00:02:55] >> What do you mean? [00:02:56] >> It's the baby in her her DNA. [00:02:58] >> Well, in my first analogy, I guess. [00:03:00] Yeah. But like like [00:03:02] >> but it's a separate human being, right? [00:03:04] So every human being should have [00:03:06] separate protected universal rights. [00:03:09] >> Every human. [00:03:09] >> Okay. If if the daughter does does the [00:03:11] mother have the protected universal [00:03:13] right to not have her kidney taken to go [00:03:15] to the daughter, right, in this in this [00:03:17] scenario, [00:03:18] >> I thought we were over that one, but so [00:03:20] I'm trying I'm trying to get to at least [00:03:22] some semblance of landing the plane [00:03:24] here. [00:03:24] >> Yeah. [00:03:26] >> When when a woman is pregnant, there's [00:03:28] two sets of DNA, [00:03:30] >> mother baby. Okay. If the mother [00:03:32] terminates that baby abortion, then she [00:03:36] is basically saying, "My DNA matters [00:03:38] more than this other human being's DNA." [00:03:40] >> Don't you think a human a human who is [00:03:42] physically like entangled with another [00:03:44] human has the right purely on bodily [00:03:46] autonomy to do that? If someone else is [00:03:48] reliant, plugged into my body, do I not [00:03:50] have the right to disconnect that and [00:03:52] retain? [00:03:52] >> No. No. You do not have the right to [00:03:54] starve another human being of nutrients [00:03:56] that would kill them. If you woke up [00:03:57] right if you woke up tomorrow and [00:03:58] someone was plugged into you relying on [00:04:00] >> that's not going to happen. Use a real [00:04:01] example. [00:04:02] >> You're not you're not you're not [00:04:03] addressing the the root the root issue [00:04:05] here. [00:04:05] >> The root the root issue is to be [00:04:07] philosophically consistent. A woman or a [00:04:09] man especially a woman in pregnancy does [00:04:11] not have a right to terminate another [00:04:13] human being regardless if it's in their [00:04:15] uterero in their nursery or whether it's [00:04:18] in their car. If someone if someone [00:04:19] comes up to you and is trying to cause [00:04:21] you bodily harm, like trying to, I don't [00:04:24] know, not kill you, but trying to attack [00:04:25] you and cause you harm, do you have the [00:04:27] right to defend yourself? [00:04:28] >> Well, hold on. [00:04:29] >> Hold on a second. Are you saying that a [00:04:30] baby's an invader in a woman's uterus? [00:04:33] >> I mean, in a way, it is, right? What [00:04:35] >> the the baby if Okay, let's say. [00:04:38] >> So, wait, the is the baby breaking and [00:04:40] entering [00:04:41] >> in an instance in an instance of in an [00:04:43] instance of [00:04:44] >> That's less than that's less than half [00:04:45] of 1% of all the cases. So, pro-life in [00:04:48] all the cases, but let me just say, [00:04:50] let's say that we allow abortion and [00:04:52] should we then outlaw abortion for all [00:04:54] the other cases? [00:04:55] >> I I don't think so. [00:04:56] >> Okay. So, then we're not going to talk [00:04:57] about because you're using it as an [00:04:59] externality to try to So, let's now talk [00:05:01] about the other 99.9% of the cases, [00:05:03] right? I'm down. [00:05:04] >> So, now let's [00:05:06] >> but just to be clear, in the 99.9% of [00:05:09] the cases, how did that baby appear? Did [00:05:12] it just knock? I want to come in [00:05:13] breaking and entering. How did the [00:05:15] >> probably accidentally? [00:05:17] >> Hold on. Accidentally. What do you mean? [00:05:18] Like that's like catching COVID. You [00:05:20] didn't like I mean what what did the [00:05:22] woman do to get the baby there? [00:05:24] >> Probably had sex. [00:05:25] >> Yes. So she made a decision and she take [00:05:27] responsibility for your orgasms, right? [00:05:29] >> Okay. But but if you if you I think [00:05:32] there's there's a distinction between [00:05:34] there's a distinction between if you're [00:05:36] trying to have sex protected or on [00:05:38] >> it doesn't matter doesn't matter what [00:05:40] your intent is. The action has a [00:05:41] consequence. Well, if you Okay, if you [00:05:43] get on a plane and the plane crashes, [00:05:45] can we say that you consented to die in [00:05:47] a plane crash because that was your [00:05:49] intent? [00:05:50] >> Well, actually, anyone who gets on a [00:05:51] plane knows that when you play certain [00:05:52] games, you could win certain prizes. So, [00:05:55] >> so, okay, there's a there's [00:05:57] >> But is it your fault? No, it's probably [00:05:58] the pilot's fault or the DEI person [00:06:00] running the air traffic controls fault, [00:06:02] whatever. But the more more concretely [00:06:06] or more realistically, do you agree with [00:06:08] the principle that people should take [00:06:09] responsibility for their actions? Of [00:06:11] course you do. [00:06:12] Generally yes. But I think in in [00:06:15] >> generally except of course when it [00:06:17] involves sex of course people should [00:06:19] take responsibility for their actions. [00:06:20] But in the in the scenario where your [00:06:22] body is being uh uh like used by another [00:06:27] entity. Your body [00:06:28] >> your argument would have a lot of merit [00:06:30] if babies just appeared. If all of a [00:06:32] sudden like a woman woke up in case of a [00:06:34] baby [00:06:34] >> that's we we decided that we're going to [00:06:36] put that aside because [00:06:36] >> you think you think in cases of abortion [00:06:38] should be allowed. [00:06:39] >> Of course. Do you know why you do? Cuz [00:06:41] I've seen a clip of you. [00:06:42] >> I I do not. No, of course. I'm sorry. [00:06:43] They should not be allowed. I'll tell [00:06:45] you why. I have two ultrasounds in front [00:06:46] of me. One is a baby conceived and one [00:06:48] is a baby with a loving family. Which [00:06:50] one is which? [00:06:51] >> There's no distinction. [00:06:52] >> Exactly. Because they're both human [00:06:53] beings. [00:06:53] >> There is a distinction between the [00:06:55] mother. [00:06:55] >> The the method of conception does not [00:06:58] give you more rights or less rights. [00:07:00] Somebody somebody in this auditorium [00:07:02] Hold on. Somebody in this auditorium was [00:07:04] conceived in Who is it? [00:07:06] >> I I don't understand. [00:07:07] >> You don't know because they're a human [00:07:08] being. Just as My point is precisely [00:07:10] human rights are universal. [00:07:11] >> Conception doesn't matter and the human [00:07:12] rights of the mother are also universal. [00:07:14] The bodily autonomy if you're going to [00:07:16] say [00:07:18] >> then come on [00:07:20] >> that right there. [00:07:25] >> Thank you. [00:07:26] >> Like I said like I said there's [00:07:29] >> being being pro-choice is not [00:07:31] necessarily being pro-abortion. It's [00:07:33] just pro the right. [00:07:34] >> Should I again this this might sound [00:07:36] awfully elementary or pedantic. Yes. But [00:07:38] do I have a right to murder you? [00:07:41] >> No, because that would infringe my [00:07:42] bodily autonomy. [00:07:43] >> Bingo. So then why? No, time out. Why [00:07:45] does a mom then have a right to be able [00:07:48] to murder the being in her temporary? [00:07:50] >> That being in her is infringing upon her [00:07:52] bodily if I was infringing on your [00:07:53] bodily autonomy. You could murder me. If [00:07:55] I came up and tried to attack you, you [00:07:57] could murder me. [00:07:57] >> How could you possibly infringing on [00:07:59] bodily autonomy? Because the baby's [00:08:02] there for 9 months getting nutrients [00:08:03] from the mother. [00:08:04] >> Yeah. and and like when they're birth [00:08:06] they rip a hole in the mother and cause [00:08:09] like there's a ton of side consequences [00:08:10] that could come out of that. There's all [00:08:12] of these like it it it is reliant on the [00:08:15] mother's body. So it's biologically [00:08:17] >> let me just say I'll grant you all of [00:08:18] this. So therefore eliminate the life [00:08:22] >> I'm saying [00:08:22] >> which which definitionally infringes on [00:08:25] that human's rights [00:08:27] >> because okay the the the bodily autonomy [00:08:31] of the fetus does not p like does not [00:08:34] trump the bodily autonomy of the mother [00:08:37] they're both human beings. [00:08:38] >> Yes. But the fetus is already infringing [00:08:39] upon autonomy of the mother. [00:08:41] >> What species is the fetus? [00:08:42] >> It's a human. I I so call it a human, [00:08:45] not a fetus. Don't use dehumanizing [00:08:46] language to try to make it seem like [00:08:47] it's a clump of cells cuz it's easier to [00:08:49] murder things you cannot see, right? [00:08:50] It's easier to eliminate things you [00:08:52] cannot witness. So they use words like [00:08:54] fetus, not you. [00:08:55] >> So the the baby, [00:08:56] >> were you a human being when you were a [00:08:57] fetus? [00:08:58] >> I was a Yes. [00:09:00] >> Okay, great. So therefore therefore, if [00:09:02] it's a human being, shouldn't it get [00:09:03] human rights? The same as you and I. [00:09:04] Just because it's smaller, just because [00:09:06] it can't talk like us, doesn't it [00:09:07] deserve human rights? [00:09:08] >> It it does as long as it's not [00:09:09] infringing upon another human's rights. [00:09:11] Just hold on. Time out. Just like the [00:09:13] case you [00:09:13] >> is my six-month-old who demands food all [00:09:16] the time and can't hunt and gather [00:09:19] infringing on my rights and my income [00:09:21] because it needs food all the time. [00:09:22] >> No, cuz it's not hooked up into your [00:09:23] body. [00:09:24] >> Hold on. No, no, hold on. It's in my [00:09:25] home. If I don't feed my child, I will [00:09:28] go to jail for intentional child [00:09:30] starvation. I will get locked up by CPS. [00:09:33] So, how is it any different to have a [00:09:35] six-month-old under my custody, which is [00:09:37] infringing on my income, infringing on [00:09:39] my rights, infringing on my sleep, [00:09:42] infringing on a lot of different things [00:09:43] as a father. How is it any different [00:09:46] than the nine months up to umbilical [00:09:47] cord? By the way, how many people in [00:09:49] this audience are currently having their [00:09:50] tuition paid for by their parents? [00:09:52] They're infringing on their parents' [00:09:54] income. [00:09:54] >> Okay. [00:09:55] >> How is it any different actually? [00:09:57] Because you you don't think that there [00:10:00] is a difference between the baby after [00:10:03] it's born versus the baby what's the [00:10:05] difference while okay because while it [00:10:06] it is in uterero while the woman is [00:10:08] pregnant it can cause the woman physical [00:10:11] harm it is life-threatening there are a [00:10:13] ton of cases where it can it can cause [00:10:16] all kinds of things to happen and it is [00:10:17] physically hooked up into your body it [00:10:19] incapacitates you to some extent [00:10:21] pregnant [00:10:21] >> wow I just I encourage you you have such [00:10:23] like a low you have ju just so we are [00:10:26] clear that babies can infect moms with [00:10:29] terrible diseases. Like babies are like [00:10:31] disease mongerers by the time that [00:10:33] they're age one. No, but here's the [00:10:35] point is that there are risks at every [00:10:37] point of human development. There are [00:10:39] risks when the baby is 2 weeks old. [00:10:40] There's a risk when they're 16 years old [00:10:42] and they start driving. Then there are [00:10:43] risks to all of humanity. [00:10:44] >> But you don't think you don't think [00:10:46] there's a fundamental difference when [00:10:48] they're physically connected into your [00:10:49] into your into your [00:10:51] >> But let's play this out. If if the idea [00:10:54] of somebody being physically connected [00:10:56] right now there are tens of thousands of [00:10:58] babies right now in what is called NICU. [00:11:00] It's a neonatal intensive care unit. [00:11:02] They're 26 27 28 weeks. They cannot [00:11:05] breathe on their own. They have [00:11:06] contraptions and machines all around. [00:11:08] And it's extremely expensive. Hold on. [00:11:11] It's extremely expensive for the [00:11:12] parents. They have to go hundreds of [00:11:13] thousands of dollars into debt. Do they [00:11:15] have a right to say, you know what, that [00:11:17] baby in NICU, it's going to cost us 300 [00:11:19] grand as all these machines. Do they [00:11:21] have a right to pull the plug on that [00:11:22] baby? Do you think [00:11:23] >> Answer the question? [00:11:24] >> I don't think so. But do you think [00:11:25] >> Well, how is it any different than what [00:11:26] it's in your [00:11:27] >> because it's not bodily autonomy? Do you [00:11:28] think they they would have a right to go [00:11:30] pull someone random off the street and [00:11:31] hook up the baby into that person's [00:11:33] bloodstream because the baby would die [00:11:34] otherwise if the niku machine doesn't [00:11:36] exist? [00:11:37] >> What what what do you think if Okay, if [00:11:41] the niku machine didn't exist and you [00:11:42] had to pull a random person off the [00:11:44] street to save that baby's life. [00:11:45] >> Again, none of that is like even [00:11:47] remotely relevant. You're judging this [00:11:49] because you understand that the [00:11:50] >> the answer is no because it's not [00:11:51] applicable what I'm saying. But again, I [00:11:54] you in some ways you're overthinking it, [00:11:56] in some ways you're underthinking it. [00:11:58] Let me just kind of end with this that [00:12:00] human development at its very core [00:12:03] irrefutably starts at conception. I [00:12:06] believe human life and human development [00:12:07] start the same. You can have your own [00:12:08] thoughts on that, but human development, [00:12:10] our process, human beings start when our [00:12:12] deoxyorbucid [00:12:14] as a zygote attaches the to the uterine [00:12:16] wall. That is when life begins like [00:12:18] irrefutably. [00:12:19] >> I'm not arguing that. I never I never [00:12:21] want [00:12:21] >> but allow me to finish and then then [00:12:22] we'll get to the next question. [00:12:23] Therefore, at every step of the process [00:12:26] of development, you have the same human [00:12:28] rights as when you're 18 or 30 or 40. [00:12:31] And the most fundamental of all those [00:12:33] rights is life. And if we cannot defend [00:12:36] your life right, then what good are we [00:12:37] defending all of your other rights? [00:12:38] Final point. [00:12:39] >> So, so I still think I I really don't [00:12:43] think it would hurt you to answer the [00:12:44] original analogy. I think you see where [00:12:45] it would go that the the you you can't [00:12:49] infringe upon someone's bodily autonomy [00:12:51] in order to save someone else's life. Do [00:12:53] you agree with that? Like [00:12:54] >> Well, hold on. Time out. Just so we are [00:12:56] clear, we infringe on people's bodily [00:12:58] autonomy all the time. Want me to give [00:13:00] you an example? [00:13:01] >> We drafted men into World War II to go [00:13:03] fight for this nation. That infringed on [00:13:05] their bodily autonomy. We told them that [00:13:07] your time is not your own. Your passion [00:13:09] is not your own. You must go run onto [00:13:11] Normandy Beach. Would you agree that is [00:13:13] an infringement on bodily autonomy? [00:13:15] >> It is. But the government has the right [00:13:16] to do that for the to uphold the nation, [00:13:18] right? There's a difference. [00:13:19] >> Saving babies upholds the nation, my [00:13:21] friend, all the time. [00:13:22] >> No, in the same way in the same way as [00:13:25] fighting a war. [00:13:26] >> Yeah. Even more so. In fact, reducing [00:13:30] abortions by a million a year would be [00:13:32] an enrichment of our society. We might [00:13:34] find the next Einstein, the next Nicola [00:13:36] Tesla. We might have the next Michael [00:13:38] Jordan that is being aborted every day. [00:13:39] the government the government's I think [00:13:42] the the government's the the [00:13:43] government's right to be able to do that [00:13:45] I think needs to be justified by some [00:13:48] reason that it affects the government it [00:13:51] doesn't affect the government to [00:13:52] terminate a baby in pregnancy [00:13:55] >> like you don't think you don't think a [00:13:57] million abortions a year affects anybody [00:14:00] >> I'm not saying it affects nobody but I'm [00:14:01] saying in in the same way you're saying [00:14:03] it affects people in the same way that [00:14:05] the government not being able to have an [00:14:06] army does like I think there's a [00:14:07] difference [00:14:07] >> I would actually think it's even bigger [00:14:09] moral crisis than not being able to [00:14:11] enlist an army. Moral crisis [00:14:13] >> if you are massacring a million of your [00:14:15] own people every year. That's a bigger [00:14:18] problem than being able to properly [00:14:19] staff the Marine Corps. [00:14:20] >> You're you're okay. So you think we're [00:14:22] mastering the people, but we also are [00:14:24] forcing women. [00:14:25] >> No, but to go to just to go back to your [00:14:27] analogy just so we're clear, the [00:14:28] government does infringe on bodily [00:14:30] autonomy in times of national crisis. [00:14:32] >> Yes. And therefore, again, I even reject [00:14:35] >> what is the national crisis that results [00:14:36] >> murder a million a year. That's a [00:14:38] crisis. Okay. [00:14:40] What [00:14:41] >> if if if I told you that a million [00:14:42] people are murdered a year blanket, you [00:14:45] would say, "Boy, that's a big problem." [00:14:46] In fact, we used to call that the [00:14:48] Holocaust. [00:14:50] >> Okay. [00:14:50] >> Yeah. Okay. [00:14:51] >> In fact, right? I mean, you would say, [00:14:53] so just so we're clear, Holocaust went [00:14:54] for about six to seven years. Six to [00:14:56] seven million people died. We remember a [00:14:58] lot about the Holocaust. [00:14:58] >> It was was the Holocaust a crisis? [00:15:00] >> Yes, it was a crisis. [00:15:01] >> So, how is abortion not a crisis? [00:15:03] Because the [00:15:03] >> Because the is there smaller human [00:15:05] beings? [00:15:06] >> The unborn the the the babies the [00:15:08] fetuses. [00:15:09] >> Hold on. You said baby. Therefore, it's [00:15:11] murder. [00:15:11] >> It's a baby. It's a baby. Whatever you [00:15:12] want to call it. I still think if Okay. [00:15:15] >> Whatever you want to call it. Okay. [00:15:16] >> I think the big distinction here is that [00:15:18] that baby, that child is still [00:15:20] infringing upon someone else's body, [00:15:22] using their body. And I think the owner [00:15:24] of that body should decide. [00:15:25] >> And I I might even grant you that. The [00:15:27] point being is that throughout history [00:15:29] we are able to sometimes say that in [00:15:31] order for life, liberty, the pursuit of [00:15:33] happiness, defeating the Nazis in World [00:15:35] War II, there is a greater good. And I [00:15:37] will say that what is the greater good? [00:15:39] That those that are being massacred in [00:15:40] the womb can have life because life is [00:15:42] good and it's the first of all human [00:15:43] rights. And that's the last question. [00:15:45] Are you glad you weren't aborted? [00:15:47] >> Of course, I'm glad. [00:15:48] >> Then why wouldn't you want to give that [00:15:49] gift to millions of other people? [00:15:51] >> Do you want to give the gift? What about [00:15:52] there? There's mothers [00:15:55] there. There are mothers that die in [00:15:57] medical situations all the time. [00:15:58] >> That that is a red herring. No one wants [00:16:00] those mothers to die. But it is a fact [00:16:02] that if we outlawed abortion, 99% of [00:16:04] them all of a sudden we'd have a 990,000 [00:16:07] increase in our population every year [00:16:08] and we'd have an much more life and [00:16:11] >> those children would would be raised in [00:16:12] houses. [00:16:13] >> See, that is a cynical view. You know, [00:16:15] there's over two million people on the [00:16:16] adoption waiting list every year and [00:16:18] there are a million abortions. We have [00:16:19] twice as many people that want to adopt [00:16:21] than actually abort in this country. [00:16:23] There's no such thing as an unwanted [00:16:25] child. And I refuse to to live under the [00:16:28] bigotry of low expectations where we can [00:16:31] justify, oh, they're going to have a bad [00:16:34] life or they're going to grow up in a [00:16:35] crimeridden neighborhood. I'm sorry. I [00:16:37] know you don't mean it. That's how you [00:16:39] get to eugenics. If you start to all of [00:16:41] a sudden say that their life is going to [00:16:43] be terrible, therefore we can eliminate [00:16:45] them. Therefore, that's not the point I [00:16:47] was making. [00:16:47] >> That is exactly the point you were [00:16:48] making. I'm started with the bodily [00:16:50] autonomy thing and I [00:16:51] >> eventually you interjected [00:16:53] >> you granted for a moment there. You [00:16:54] granted for a moment the thing about [00:16:56] >> No, I said if I were to grant you the [00:16:57] bodily autonomy, it doesn't even bear [00:16:59] out that at times the government can [00:17:02] actually take possession of your your [00:17:03] bodily autonomy. [00:17:04] >> When did when did Roie Wade start? Like [00:17:06] 60s, right? From the 1960s 70 [00:17:09] >> 70 something. Okay. From then until [00:17:11] until now until Trump banned abortion. [00:17:13] What national crisis has arisen? Has [00:17:15] there been like a national crisis? [00:17:17] because all of these babies have been [00:17:18] aborted. Like [00:17:19] >> 55 million souls that never had a chance [00:17:22] to live. That's a beyond a national [00:17:24] crisis. [00:17:25] >> our our we didn't lack scientists or [00:17:28] politicians because of unborn babies. [00:17:30] >> How do you know? [00:17:31] >> I mean we like I there was [00:17:33] >> so you know all 55 million identities [00:17:35] and what they could have achieved and [00:17:36] their dreams. What I mean at some point [00:17:38] you have to take a step back and say boy [00:17:41] when 55 million people never had a [00:17:42] chance at life that's kind of dark. What [00:17:44] does that say for a society? 55 55 [00:17:47] million I I don't know if all of them [00:17:48] wanted to have an abortion but [00:17:50] >> millions millions of women didn't want [00:17:53] to be pregnant and were forced to [00:17:55] continue being pregnant against their [00:17:56] will like that affected their [00:17:58] >> physical we're going in circles but [00:18:00] outside of if you don't want to get [00:18:02] pregnant then save yourself for marriage [00:18:04] and stop having so much sex with [00:18:05] everybody certainly do not murder babies [00:18:08] as an excuse for your gratuitous sex [00:18:10] >> I'm currently agnostic like normatively [00:18:12] I'm leaning towards pro-choice and the [00:18:13] virtue of the fact that I take it that [00:18:15] proife views um ultimately fail in [00:18:17] accounting for like relative relevant [00:18:18] data um being like the facts of the [00:18:20] conversation like biological [00:18:21] philosophical and identity information [00:18:23] and I'm not convinced that identity is [00:18:25] reductible down to the physical [00:18:26] properties or the organism I think we [00:18:28] are our mind [00:18:30] >> are we just a mind [00:18:32] >> what do you mean [00:18:33] >> you tell me you're making the contention [00:18:36] >> I I think our I think our identity is [00:18:38] down to our mind yes [00:18:39] >> just consciousness or the mind you had [00:18:41] to explain what you mean [00:18:42] >> yeah the mind is just going to be like [00:18:43] sentience [00:18:44] >> okay So what's your contention? [00:18:46] >> Uh I I think uh they fail because like I [00:18:48] I don't think that the being like one is [00:18:50] at conception is the same being that [00:18:52] they are now. And I don't mean that like [00:18:53] descriptively. Um I take it that you are [00:18:56] like your mind and before a certain week [00:18:57] in justation there was no mind or [00:18:59] sentience. Right. And thus no person [00:19:01] just physical properties and that would [00:19:03] eventually be informed by that said [00:19:05] mind. [00:19:06] >> Okay. Yeah. I'm I'm not totally [00:19:08] following what you're saying because [00:19:09] you're using the word mind which is not [00:19:10] usually a word. [00:19:11] >> Yeah. I just said that that like mind is [00:19:12] like sentience like having human [00:19:15] So, so what what is your contention [00:19:16] then? That you're not persuaded by [00:19:18] >> Yeah. I'm not persuaded by pro-life [00:19:20] views that we are reductable down to our [00:19:22] our organism. [00:19:23] >> Okay. Yeah. So, an 85year-old in an old [00:19:25] person's home that has Alzheimer's, are [00:19:27] they less of a human than you? [00:19:29] >> I didn't say that they were less of a [00:19:30] human for having Alzheimer's. [00:19:31] >> Answer the question because they have [00:19:32] >> Yeah. So, so people with Alzheimer's [00:19:34] still have the the capacity for [00:19:36] subjective experience. I wouldn't say [00:19:37] >> they can't remember. They can't remember [00:19:38] anything. [00:19:38] >> Um memory isn't isn't sentience. No, [00:19:41] >> it's a part of sentience, isn't it? [00:19:43] >> Yeah. It's not going to be the I'm not [00:19:44] going to say that the full capacity for [00:19:46] sentience is going to be like what [00:19:47] grants them that like moral [00:19:48] consideration. I'm I'm I'm telling you [00:19:50] that any level of sentience, which is [00:19:51] why I hold a cautionary principle, but [00:19:53] like at any level of sentience is going [00:19:55] to grant them moral consideration. [00:19:56] >> When when does human development begin? [00:19:58] >> What do you mean? Human life. [00:20:00] >> Human development. [00:20:01] >> It's going to be at conception. Yeah. [00:20:03] >> That's human life. [00:20:04] >> Yeah. Human life begins at conception. [00:20:05] I'm not contending that. [00:20:06] >> No. No. Got it. So then shouldn't our [00:20:08] laws then protect the first possible [00:20:10] moment of human development? [00:20:11] >> Why should they? Well, because it's a [00:20:13] human life. [00:20:15] >> That's begging it. The question. [00:20:16] >> Well, no, it's actually not. [00:20:17] >> No, you're just telling me what the [00:20:18] human is. So, you're not telling me like [00:20:20] why they should deserve [00:20:21] >> like Oh, so like why murder is bad? [00:20:22] Like, do we need to do that? [00:20:24] >> You're going to have to explain as to [00:20:25] why like abortion is going to be the [00:20:26] unjustified unaliving. You're just [00:20:28] You're just telling me that it's in [00:20:29] because murder is inherently [00:20:30] unjustified. You're just telling me that [00:20:32] it's inherently unjustified. You're [00:20:33] going to need to tell me why it's [00:20:34] unjustified. [00:20:35] >> Well, I I personally I think murder is [00:20:36] wrong is pretty intuitive, right? Yeah, [00:20:38] it's intuitive, but you're going to need [00:20:39] to tell me why abortion fits within that [00:20:41] unjust category. [00:20:42] >> Okay. Because you're your own unique [00:20:43] deoxyribboucleic acid at the time of [00:20:45] conception. [00:20:46] >> DNA. [00:20:47] >> Yes. DNA. Thank you. Yes. When you [00:20:50] attached to the uterine wall and the [00:20:52] moment at that time, your life began [00:20:54] when your DNA was formed. Absent [00:20:56] intervention, you then form into a fully [00:21:00] developed adult. And you do not have a [00:21:04] right to interrupt the development of [00:21:06] another human being. You do not have a [00:21:08] right to interrupt a six-month-old or a [00:21:10] six-year-old from growing or [00:21:12] flourishing. You do not have a right to [00:21:13] be able to do that. That is a basic [00:21:16] self-evident moral principle that just [00:21:19] because you are larger or just because [00:21:21] you're older, you're able to interrupt [00:21:23] another human being from growing. [00:21:25] >> Yeah, I didn't say any of that, but [00:21:27] sure. Um, so do you think that [00:21:29] >> Okay. Well, what I don't really know [00:21:30] what you did say actually. [00:21:32] >> Uh, that's okay. [00:21:33] >> Do you? [00:21:34] >> Yeah. [00:21:34] >> So, what what what did you say? [00:21:36] >> Yeah. So I said that we're reducible to [00:21:37] our reducible to our mind. Our mind is [00:21:39] what makes our identity. And I said my [00:21:41] contention was that we are not um [00:21:43] reducible to this like organism. [00:21:45] >> All right. Yeah. Again, so we have [00:21:46] clarity but not agreement. We believe [00:21:48] you're more than just consciousness. We [00:21:49] believe a human being is in in its [00:21:51] essence valuable because it is a human [00:21:53] being. This deduces back [00:21:55] >> what do you mean by being? [00:21:57] >> Um what do I mean by a human being? [00:22:00] >> Yeah. [00:22:00] >> A homo sapien. [00:22:02] >> Okay. Sure. I I was asking simply [00:22:04] because some people denounce being to be [00:22:06] personhood. That's all I'm asking. Okay. [00:22:08] Um but sure. So are you are you familiar [00:22:10] with a partial molar pregnancy? [00:22:12] >> A partial molar pregnancy? [00:22:15] >> Yes. [00:22:15] >> Not not not [00:22:16] >> Okay. A partial molar pregnancy is where [00:22:18] one egg drops and two sperm go in and [00:22:20] it's going to basically um create this [00:22:23] like ball of fat, but it's still going [00:22:24] to be human, alive, and obviously of the [00:22:27] human species. Should the mother be [00:22:28] obligated to carry that partial [00:22:30] pregnancy? [00:22:31] >> I don't know enough about that. [00:22:33] Okay. [00:22:34] >> So, I can get back to you on that one. [00:22:36] >> Okay. Sure. Um, do you think what what [00:22:38] do you like value? Do you value it being [00:22:40] like a human being? [00:22:41] >> Just being a human being. [00:22:43] >> Human beings inherently are valuable. [00:22:45] >> Yeah. Why are they inherently valuable? [00:22:46] >> Well, you want my religious definition [00:22:48] or do you want my biological one? [00:22:50] >> Um, either one's fine. [00:22:51] >> Okay. Well, I believe every human being [00:22:53] is made in the image of God and [00:22:55] therefore it's uniquely designed and [00:22:56] crafted and created. [00:23:00] And since every human being is made in [00:23:02] the image of God, we do not have the [00:23:05] authority morally to destroy another [00:23:08] being that bears the image of the [00:23:10] creator. [00:23:11] >> Okay. Sure. Yeah. So I the idea I I [00:23:14] believe that that God grounds this [00:23:16] intrinsic value in a in a fetus I don't [00:23:18] think satisfies that. [00:23:20] >> Yeah. [00:23:20] >> Yeah. I I'm using them colloquially. I'm [00:23:22] not using them to dehumanize. I'll use [00:23:23] child, baby, whatever. Um because [00:23:25] intrinsic value is I I is also expected [00:23:28] under like the atheistic like [00:23:30] hypothesis. So I don't know what kind of [00:23:34] argument you're making here because [00:23:35] unfortunately like God itself is just [00:23:37] not going to ground that a fetus is [00:23:38] inherently valuable. [00:23:40] >> Okay. You asked for my scriptural [00:23:42] analysis but okay [00:23:44] >> contention with it. [00:23:45] >> Let's just it is grounded under atheism [00:23:47] too. [00:23:48] >> Right. So therefore okay if you would [00:23:49] agree that your life is valuable my life [00:23:51] is valuable. Yeah. I I believe we're [00:23:54] valuable because of our sentience. Yeah. [00:23:55] Sure. [00:23:55] >> Okay. Yeah. So, we disagree. So, but if [00:23:57] a being is going to get sentience in a [00:24:00] couple of weeks, shouldn't you allow [00:24:02] that being to continue to develop [00:24:04] >> um after it's born? [00:24:06] >> No, no, no. In utero. [00:24:08] >> In utero. No. I don't find it to be [00:24:10] morally considerable before sentience. [00:24:12] >> Oh, got it. So, you can eliminate [00:24:13] anything even though it's growing [00:24:14] towards sentience. [00:24:15] >> Yeah. So, are you are you making like a [00:24:17] potential argument? [00:24:18] >> Well, I'm just making a rather rational [00:24:20] one just so we are clear. Just you know [00:24:22] when a baby is born your mental [00:24:24] faculties of a baby are not completely [00:24:26] sentient. Like for example when a baby [00:24:28] is five days old they're only awake like [00:24:30] two hours a day. They can't speak. They [00:24:32] cannot really reason. And sensience is [00:24:35] like a it's like barely there for a one [00:24:38] week old or a two week old. In fact a [00:24:40] brain is not fully developed until a boy [00:24:42] is 30 years old. [00:24:44] >> So what I'm saying is that a growth the [00:24:46] growth of the human being continues all [00:24:47] throughout this process. allow if you [00:24:50] allow that process to go uninterrupted. [00:24:52] The abortionist argument is that we are [00:24:55] going to interfere with that development [00:24:58] because of some convenient it's too hard [00:25:01] to raise the human being. [00:25:03] >> Okay. Yeah. So, yeah. So, I I think [00:25:06] you're like making this like it has the [00:25:07] potential to actualize sentience. Sure. [00:25:09] Um but also like if it's going to gain [00:25:11] sentience in three weeks, I just said [00:25:12] no. Um it's not going to be morally [00:25:14] considerable to, you know, um not be [00:25:16] unalived or killed. Sorry. Um but uh [00:25:19] yeah so I kind of forgot one point that [00:25:23] you made. What was it? Um [00:25:26] >> so just so we are clear. [00:25:28] >> Um [00:25:28] >> like humans are bodies and minds. [00:25:30] >> Yes. So we are more than just [00:25:32] >> I I remember the point that you made [00:25:33] about the the baby. Um yeah. So uh we [00:25:35] gain sentience in the womb. Are you [00:25:37] aware of that? [00:25:38] >> Yeah. Around 8 week 9 to 10 weeks brain [00:25:41] waves are [00:25:41] >> detected for 9 to 10 weeks. [00:25:43] >> Brain waves. [00:25:44] >> Brain waves. Yeah. Brain. [00:25:45] >> Yeah. Okay. You got to like you're a [00:25:46] little snarky. You got to like calm it [00:25:48] down a little. Okay. [00:25:48] >> Yes. Okay. Cool. [00:25:49] >> Yeah. [00:25:50] >> So around around 9 to 10 weeks, brain [00:25:52] waves are detected. A baby can respond [00:25:54] to a mother's voice around 27 weeks. [00:25:57] Around 20 weeks, we have some [00:25:59] understanding that a baby's cognitive [00:26:01] ability is being formed. These are [00:26:03] approximations. [00:26:04] >> Yeah. What is the argument that brain [00:26:06] waves um are sentient? [00:26:09] >> What is the We actually don't know. [00:26:11] We're inferring it. [00:26:12] >> Yeah. So sentience is going to be the [00:26:13] subjective experience where you can have [00:26:15] interest, desires, and motivations. I [00:26:16] find it that Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. [00:26:18] >> How do you How do you know a newborn has [00:26:20] interest, desires, and motivations? [00:26:21] >> Yeah. So, I find it that they have the [00:26:23] subjective experience. And I said it can [00:26:25] include things like interest, desires, [00:26:26] which is going to include people like [00:26:27] you or me. And we have interest, [00:26:29] desires, and motivations. Yeah. So, I [00:26:30] also find it that they're going to have [00:26:31] a subjective human experience at uh at [00:26:35] um I'd say within the second trimester. [00:26:38] I don't hold 20 to 24 weeks or after [00:26:40] that. I I hold a 12week cautionary [00:26:42] stance because we [00:26:44] >> Let's just do this. Let's just Let's do [00:26:46] this all the way. You want to go all the [00:26:48] way on this? Let's do it. What proof do [00:26:49] you have that anyone is sentient? [00:26:51] >> Yes. So, we have proof that they're [00:26:53] sentient on the basis of their [00:26:54] phalomocortical [00:26:56] faith claim [00:26:56] >> and their conjunctions with their [00:26:58] cerebrum. [00:26:59] >> It's a faith claim. [00:27:00] >> Are you going to make an argument for [00:27:01] that? [00:27:01] >> Yes. Definitionally, you don't know that [00:27:03] anybody else is sension except yourself. [00:27:05] >> How? [00:27:05] >> Because you cannot prove consciousness. [00:27:07] We don't know where consciousness exists [00:27:08] in the brain. [00:27:09] >> How don't we know? [00:27:10] >> We can't. We don't know where it is. You [00:27:11] can't see somebody else. [00:27:12] >> Are you going to expand on why we don't [00:27:13] know? [00:27:14] >> Yeah. Again, I'm getting there. Like, [00:27:16] did they teach you to talk like this at [00:27:18] University of Illinois? Like, you're [00:27:20] paying for this? Like, [00:27:22] like geez. [00:27:25] Again, I I want to get to the other [00:27:27] questions, but like, yes, this is called [00:27:29] the consciousness paradox. You do not [00:27:31] know if anybody else actually has [00:27:33] consciousness except yourself. Everybody [00:27:35] else could be an illusion. It could be a [00:27:37] mirage. It could be a projection of [00:27:39] artificial intelligence. We sentience is [00:27:42] by definition a faith claim. We can [00:27:44] guess it. We can infer it. You cannot [00:27:46] measure it. And you cannot see it. [00:27:49] >> Yeah, sure. I'm going to make the claim [00:27:51] on the basis of like it [00:27:53] >> uh I didn't agree. I was just saying [00:27:54] okay, sure. Um but anyways, so I'm going [00:27:57] to make the claim on the basis of [00:27:58] empirical data that we have [00:27:59] phalomocortical connections that work in [00:28:01] conjunction with our cerebrum that is [00:28:03] going to allow us to have thoughts, [00:28:05] desires, and motivations and have the [00:28:06] human subjective experience. um which [00:28:09] those the mind um sentience is what [00:28:12] makes us able to have complex [00:28:14] intelligence and higher rationale as [00:28:16] humans. [00:28:17] >> Right? Again, so all of that you could [00:28:19] detect the effects of consciousness. You [00:28:22] cannot actually see consciousness [00:28:23] itself. [00:28:24] >> Uh does seeing consciousness matter? We [00:28:27] see it in their like neurological [00:28:29] structures and mechanisms. [00:28:30] >> Again, you see the effects of it. We can [00:28:31] keep on going in circles. I of course I [00:28:33] believe sensience exists. You cannot [00:28:36] measure it. You cannot see it because [00:28:38] you cannot you have there is no there is [00:28:40] no objective proof that somebody else is [00:28:42] sensient except yourself. You can just [00:28:44] look at the effects of it. But that's [00:28:45] fine. Again, we just disagree. We as [00:28:47] prolifers believe that in the essence of [00:28:49] a human being is your value and your [00:28:51] worth. If a human being is at one week [00:28:54] or 10 weeks or 12 weeks, the process of [00:28:56] development starts at conception and [00:28:58] goes all the way through. Higher [00:29:00] faculties, higher rationality is an [00:29:02] added bonus alongside the growth curve [00:29:05] of what it means to be a human being. [00:29:06] And you do not become more human because [00:29:08] your IQ is higher or less human or if [00:29:11] you have Down syndrome. The spectrum [00:29:12] does not work that way. You're equally [00:29:14] human all the way