I think it should be obvious which side of the fence I'm on. I'm curious as to how these forums will react. I can make a few guesses... Try watching the video first eh?
Watched a bit, stopped because it's basically just a video strawmanning pro-abortion arguments in order to get views. Nothing new to see here. I'd like to introduce the idea of Principle of Charity: https://effectiviology.com/principle-of-charity/ "Simply put, the principle of charity is the idea that when criticizing someone’s argument, you should criticize the best possible interpretation of that argument. In the following article you will learn about this principle more in depth, and see some helpful guidelines for implementing it in practice." It's something I am trying to work on myself.
the wrong side again? the one that increases the chance of health problems in women? the one where people have to go to a different country for healthcare? the one where refugees and poor people ( those who need help the most) won't be able to get it? (not getting into it right now but the anti-abortion/religious also having to lie to women about facts about health and other things is pretty shady isn't it @SireofSuns ? in your opinion why do the religion inspired groups have to lie about facts about history and biology so much?)
The anti-abortion argument is still a thing...odd... I have't watched the video, and can't watch it as i'm at work but based on the comments, what is the issue here? often times when I see someone against something as simple as this, the government is often trying to force some other minor law in through the amendment that is terrible, then when people argue against the smaller usually terrible part of the change, they hide behind the bigger one saying your a sexist/racist for going against the amendment. Is something like that going on here?
