Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

[Asclepias]

What does that have to do with what I said? You must be taking lessons from Shapiro.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? You made the claim that you have to breathe on your own to establish sentience. I propose a scenario that happens in hospitals today in which a newborn is unable to breathe on his own. It's very simple, is that baby any more or less sentient than his twin brother who isn't on a ventilator, and is it legal to cut him to pieces with a saw?

If you're withdrawing your contention, just say so.

That wasnt the only thing I said which would mean you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Thats why I said you were taking debating lessons from Shapiro. Its a weak tactic to deflect or pretend you didnt notice thats not the only thing I said.

Far be it from me to place words in your keyboard, so this is the quote to which I was responding: "In order to have established sentience you do have to demonstrate the ability to breath on your own. Otherwise you would be dead unless someone or something breathed for you."

Now, care to deal with what I gave you? I recognize stalling tactics. We can deal with the other two points you raised, but you weren't in that part, so I didn't either.

I dont deal with deflections. Once I saw you were deflecting I shut your weak sauce deflection tactic down.

It's a direct answer to your contention. Like I said, I recognize tactics, and I'm seeing lame ones in you. Very sad. I've seen this before. Someone makes a bold statement, then when presented with a vulnerability in it, suddenly starts yelling, "deflection", "irrelevant", anything BUT dealing with what they said. I also noticed a distinct lack of strong liberal debaters from you. Google not responding quick enough?

I didnt ask you a question so it couldnt have been an answer. It was simply your lame attempt to deflect. When you decide you want to address all of my requirments since they come together as a package let me know. Until then I have to write you off as a serious debater. If you want respect learn to formulate your questions correctly. See Crusaders question for an example.

Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

 

[hadit]

Thanks, Captain Obvious. When talking about how a person would hypothetically fare in a face to face argument with another person, what else do you have?

In this case, I've seen Shapiro think on his feet and heard his answers. I've also seen the fear he inspired in the average modern liberal, especially in places where they're supposed to be learning, but who would rather destroy their own environment then be exposed to differing thoughts. You haven't named anyone you think would be a formidable opponent, so there's nothing BUT opinion that can be formed at this juncture. Again, stating the obvious.

I just stated the kid he was debating would have beaten him if he had simply said established sentience instead of potential sentience. Shapiro is weak so there is no need to bring out anyone thats actually formidable.

So no one then. Okay, good to know. See, here's the thing. You don't know what Shapiro would have said to that, so your argument is moot.

The kid is someone. If he wasnt then there would be no thread right? What do you think Shapiro would have said? If you can come up with a coherent response to that then I would show you that your argument is moot.

I'm not Shapiro, so I'm not going to even guess what he would have said. That's really the whole point, isn't it? You think changing that one word would have confounded him, obviously the kid thought his question would do the same thing. It didn't. I'm fairly confident that had you posed your exact question to Shapiro, he would have had a good answer, but unlike you, I don't read minds without permission.

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

If for some reason I were to debate him I would never make the opening statement like the kid did.

If for some reason it got that far to the point where I said the kid would have won the debate by changing his wording I again ask what is it you think Shapiro would have been able to say to regain the upper hand?

Why do you want me to put words in Shapiro's mouth? I can only say what I would say in response to the question, and I'm already doing that here with you, so why repeat myself?

Now, if you are so superior to Shapiro, and he is such a resounding success, why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

 

[Asclepias]

I just stated the kid he was debating would have beaten him if he had simply said established sentience instead of potential sentience. Shapiro is weak so there is no need to bring out anyone thats actually formidable.

So no one then. Okay, good to know. See, here's the thing. You don't know what Shapiro would have said to that, so your argument is moot.

The kid is someone. If he wasnt then there would be no thread right? What do you think Shapiro would have said? If you can come up with a coherent response to that then I would show you that your argument is moot.

I'm not Shapiro, so I'm not going to even guess what he would have said. That's really the whole point, isn't it? You think changing that one word would have confounded him, obviously the kid thought his question would do the same thing. It didn't. I'm fairly confident that had you posed your exact question to Shapiro, he would have had a good answer, but unlike you, I don't read minds without permission.

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

If for some reason I were to debate him I would never make the opening statement like the kid did.

If for some reason it got that far to the point where I said the kid would have won the debate by changing his wording I again ask what is it you think Shapiro would have been able to say to regain the upper hand?

Why do you want me to put words in Shapiro's mouth? I can only say what I would say in response to the question, and I'm already doing that here with you, so why repeat myself?

Now, if you are so superior to Shapiro, and he is such a resounding success, why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

Because you claimed that Shapiro would have come up with something else. If so what would he have come up with?

Who told you I havent made a huge name for myself?

 

[hadit]

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? You made the claim that you have to breathe on your own to establish sentience. I propose a scenario that happens in hospitals today in which a newborn is unable to breathe on his own. It's very simple, is that baby any more or less sentient than his twin brother who isn't on a ventilator, and is it legal to cut him to pieces with a saw?

If you're withdrawing your contention, just say so.

That wasnt the only thing I said which would mean you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Thats why I said you were taking debating lessons from Shapiro. Its a weak tactic to deflect or pretend you didnt notice thats not the only thing I said.

Far be it from me to place words in your keyboard, so this is the quote to which I was responding: "In order to have established sentience you do have to demonstrate the ability to breath on your own. Otherwise you would be dead unless someone or something breathed for you."

Now, care to deal with what I gave you? I recognize stalling tactics. We can deal with the other two points you raised, but you weren't in that part, so I didn't either.

I dont deal with deflections. Once I saw you were deflecting I shut your weak sauce deflection tactic down.

It's a direct answer to your contention. Like I said, I recognize tactics, and I'm seeing lame ones in you. Very sad. I've seen this before. Someone makes a bold statement, then when presented with a vulnerability in it, suddenly starts yelling, "deflection", "irrelevant", anything BUT dealing with what they said. I also noticed a distinct lack of strong liberal debaters from you. Google not responding quick enough?

I didnt ask you a question so it couldnt have been an answer. It was simply your lame attempt to deflect. When you decide you want to address all of my requirments since they come together as a package let me know. Until then I have to write you off as a serious debater. If you want respect learn to formulate your questions correctly. See Crusaders question for an example.

Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

Have you not heard? You can answer a challenge. You can answer an assertion. You don't have to have a question in order to have an answer. "The Lakers have no answer to Steph Curry" is a valid statement without a question.

Post number 46. Start there. You were the one who focused on the breathing, so I showed you the vulnerability in that. Seriously, I don't think you're actually reading what I write. And I still don't see any list of liberal debaters.

 

[hadit]

So no one then. Okay, good to know. See, here's the thing. You don't know what Shapiro would have said to that, so your argument is moot.

The kid is someone. If he wasnt then there would be no thread right? What do you think Shapiro would have said? If you can come up with a coherent response to that then I would show you that your argument is moot.

I'm not Shapiro, so I'm not going to even guess what he would have said. That's really the whole point, isn't it? You think changing that one word would have confounded him, obviously the kid thought his question would do the same thing. It didn't. I'm fairly confident that had you posed your exact question to Shapiro, he would have had a good answer, but unlike you, I don't read minds without permission.

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

If for some reason I were to debate him I would never make the opening statement like the kid did.

If for some reason it got that far to the point where I said the kid would have won the debate by changing his wording I again ask what is it you think Shapiro would have been able to say to regain the upper hand?

Why do you want me to put words in Shapiro's mouth? I can only say what I would say in response to the question, and I'm already doing that here with you, so why repeat myself?

Now, if you are so superior to Shapiro, and he is such a resounding success, why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

Because you claimed that Shapiro would have come up with something else. If so what would he have come up with?

Who told you I havent made a huge name for myself?

1. I've said multiple times I don't know because I'm not him. Need to hear it again?
2. Because if you really did make a huge name for yourself in political debates, you'd never risk the things you say on here impacting your professional life, to say nothing of not having the time to post as much as you do.

 

[Asclepias]

That wasnt the only thing I said which would mean you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Thats why I said you were taking debating lessons from Shapiro. Its a weak tactic to deflect or pretend you didnt notice thats not the only thing I said.

Far be it from me to place words in your keyboard, so this is the quote to which I was responding: "In order to have established sentience you do have to demonstrate the ability to breath on your own. Otherwise you would be dead unless someone or something breathed for you."

Now, care to deal with what I gave you? I recognize stalling tactics. We can deal with the other two points you raised, but you weren't in that part, so I didn't either.

I dont deal with deflections. Once I saw you were deflecting I shut your weak sauce deflection tactic down.

It's a direct answer to your contention. Like I said, I recognize tactics, and I'm seeing lame ones in you. Very sad. I've seen this before. Someone makes a bold statement, then when presented with a vulnerability in it, suddenly starts yelling, "deflection", "irrelevant", anything BUT dealing with what they said. I also noticed a distinct lack of strong liberal debaters from you. Google not responding quick enough?

I didnt ask you a question so it couldnt have been an answer. It was simply your lame attempt to deflect. When you decide you want to address all of my requirments since they come together as a package let me know. Until then I have to write you off as a serious debater. If you want respect learn to formulate your questions correctly. See Crusaders question for an example.

Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

Post number 46. Start there. You were the one who focused on the breathing, so I showed you the vulnerability in that. Seriously, I don't think you're actually reading what I write. And I still don't see any list of liberal debaters.

I already answered that post. You only showed me that you were deflecting or you have terrible reading comprehension. Thats pretty much where your argument went off the road and had a 11 car pile up.

 

[sparky]

If the kid had simply said established sentience Shapiro would have lost the debate

Good one

and just what would establish 'life' ?

maybe the religmo's here can tell us when the soul enters the body?

or better yet, for the sake of the hopelessly terminal w/out HC proxy's .....when it's left....?

etta>>>

~S~

 

[Asclepias]

The kid is someone. If he wasnt then there would be no thread right? What do you think Shapiro would have said? If you can come up with a coherent response to that then I would show you that your argument is moot.

I'm not Shapiro, so I'm not going to even guess what he would have said. That's really the whole point, isn't it? You think changing that one word would have confounded him, obviously the kid thought his question would do the same thing. It didn't. I'm fairly confident that had you posed your exact question to Shapiro, he would have had a good answer, but unlike you, I don't read minds without permission.

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

If for some reason I were to debate him I would never make the opening statement like the kid did.

If for some reason it got that far to the point where I said the kid would have won the debate by changing his wording I again ask what is it you think Shapiro would have been able to say to regain the upper hand?

Why do you want me to put words in Shapiro's mouth? I can only say what I would say in response to the question, and I'm already doing that here with you, so why repeat myself?

Now, if you are so superior to Shapiro, and he is such a resounding success, why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

Because you claimed that Shapiro would have come up with something else. If so what would he have come up with?

Who told you I havent made a huge name for myself?

1. I've said multiple times I don't know because I'm not him. Need to hear it again?
2. Because if you really did make a huge name for yourself in political debates, you'd never risk the things you say on here impacting your professional life, to say nothing of not having the time to post as much as you do.

If you dont know why did you claim he would have an answer?

No one on here has any clue who I am except 3 trusted people for starters and working for yourself has its benefits.

 

[sparky]

No one on here has any clue who I am except 3 trusted people for starters and working for yourself has its benefits.

does it really matter? I'm more interested in what you got, not who you are

~S~

 

[hadit]

I'm not Shapiro, so I'm not going to even guess what he would have said. That's really the whole point, isn't it? You think changing that one word would have confounded him, obviously the kid thought his question would do the same thing. It didn't. I'm fairly confident that had you posed your exact question to Shapiro, he would have had a good answer, but unlike you, I don't read minds without permission.

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

If for some reason I were to debate him I would never make the opening statement like the kid did.

If for some reason it got that far to the point where I said the kid would have won the debate by changing his wording I again ask what is it you think Shapiro would have been able to say to regain the upper hand?

Why do you want me to put words in Shapiro's mouth? I can only say what I would say in response to the question, and I'm already doing that here with you, so why repeat myself?

Now, if you are so superior to Shapiro, and he is such a resounding success, why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

Because you claimed that Shapiro would have come up with something else. If so what would he have come up with?

Who told you I havent made a huge name for myself?

1. I've said multiple times I don't know because I'm not him. Need to hear it again?
2. Because if you really did make a huge name for yourself in political debates, you'd never risk the things you say on here impacting your professional life, to say nothing of not having the time to post as much as you do.

If you dont know why did you claim he would have an answer?

No one on here has any clue who I am except 3 trusted people for starters and working for yourself has its benefits.

If I recall correctly, I said I'm sure he would have a good answer and why, so I won't repeat myself. It's all in the thread and easily found. Personally, I really don't care what name you've made for yourself, but it seems unlikely that a big name liberal political debater would waste time on a mere debater board, risking an incautious statement finding its way into your professional career. Either way, why don't you engage Shapiro, if you're so certain you could confound him? And don't pretend it's because he's so beneath you, because you already blew that opportunity by being so interested in this thread.

 

[hadit]

Far be it from me to place words in your keyboard, so this is the quote to which I was responding: "In order to have established sentience you do have to demonstrate the ability to breath on your own. Otherwise you would be dead unless someone or something breathed for you."

Now, care to deal with what I gave you? I recognize stalling tactics. We can deal with the other two points you raised, but you weren't in that part, so I didn't either.

I dont deal with deflections. Once I saw you were deflecting I shut your weak sauce deflection tactic down.

It's a direct answer to your contention. Like I said, I recognize tactics, and I'm seeing lame ones in you. Very sad. I've seen this before. Someone makes a bold statement, then when presented with a vulnerability in it, suddenly starts yelling, "deflection", "irrelevant", anything BUT dealing with what they said. I also noticed a distinct lack of strong liberal debaters from you. Google not responding quick enough?

I didnt ask you a question so it couldnt have been an answer. It was simply your lame attempt to deflect. When you decide you want to address all of my requirments since they come together as a package let me know. Until then I have to write you off as a serious debater. If you want respect learn to formulate your questions correctly. See Crusaders question for an example.

Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

Post number 46. Start there. You were the one who focused on the breathing, so I showed you the vulnerability in that. Seriously, I don't think you're actually reading what I write. And I still don't see any list of liberal debaters.

I already answered that post. You only showed me that you were deflecting or you have terrible reading comprehension. Thats pretty much where your argument went off the road and had a 11 car pile up.

Interesting. I answer all three of your assertions, you insisted on taking about one, I showed you the vulnerability in that one, then you whined that you DIDN'T want to talk about just one, so I reminded you that I dealt with all of them at once, but you don't like that. Apparently, you don't like dealing with the fly in your ointment, as you are conspicuously silent on the baby put on a ventilator until he can breathe on his own. You were steadfast that you have to demonstrate that you can breathe on your own to establish sentience, yet won't answer if it is legal to cut a baby on a ventilator in NICU to pieces with a saw. We know it's legal to do it mere moments before the baby is born.

Do we have that about right?

 

[Asclepias]

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

If for some reason I were to debate him I would never make the opening statement like the kid did.

If for some reason it got that far to the point where I said the kid would have won the debate by changing his wording I again ask what is it you think Shapiro would have been able to say to regain the upper hand?

Why do you want me to put words in Shapiro's mouth? I can only say what I would say in response to the question, and I'm already doing that here with you, so why repeat myself?

Now, if you are so superior to Shapiro, and he is such a resounding success, why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

Because you claimed that Shapiro would have come up with something else. If so what would he have come up with?

Who told you I havent made a huge name for myself?

1. I've said multiple times I don't know because I'm not him. Need to hear it again?
2. Because if you really did make a huge name for yourself in political debates, you'd never risk the things you say on here impacting your professional life, to say nothing of not having the time to post as much as you do.

If you dont know why did you claim he would have an answer?

No one on here has any clue who I am except 3 trusted people for starters and working for yourself has its benefits.

If I recall correctly, I said I'm sure he would have a good answer and why, so I won't repeat myself. It's all in the thread and easily found. Personally, I really don't care what name you've made for yourself, but it seems unlikely that a big name liberal political debater would waste time on a mere debater board, risking an incautious statement finding its way into your professional career. Either way, why don't you engage Shapiro, if you're so certain you could confound him? And don't pretend it's because he's so beneath you, because you already blew that opportunity by being so interested in this thread.

You must care very much. For no discernible reason at all you asked this question....

"why aren't you out there making a huge name for yourself?

I already told you why I wouldnt waste my time. Shapiro is weak sauce.

 

[Asclepias]

I dont deal with deflections. Once I saw you were deflecting I shut your weak sauce deflection tactic down.

It's a direct answer to your contention. Like I said, I recognize tactics, and I'm seeing lame ones in you. Very sad. I've seen this before. Someone makes a bold statement, then when presented with a vulnerability in it, suddenly starts yelling, "deflection", "irrelevant", anything BUT dealing with what they said. I also noticed a distinct lack of strong liberal debaters from you. Google not responding quick enough?

I didnt ask you a question so it couldnt have been an answer. It was simply your lame attempt to deflect. When you decide you want to address all of my requirments since they come together as a package let me know. Until then I have to write you off as a serious debater. If you want respect learn to formulate your questions correctly. See Crusaders question for an example.

Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

Post number 46. Start there. You were the one who focused on the breathing, so I showed you the vulnerability in that. Seriously, I don't think you're actually reading what I write. And I still don't see any list of liberal debaters.

I already answered that post. You only showed me that you were deflecting or you have terrible reading comprehension. Thats pretty much where your argument went off the road and had a 11 car pile up.

Interesting. I answer all three of your assertions, you insisted on taking about one, I showed you the vulnerability in that one, then you whined that you DIDN'T want to talk about just one, so I reminded you that I dealt with all of them at once, but you don't like that. Apparently, you don't like dealing with the fly in your ointment, as you are conspicuously silent on the baby put on a ventilator until he can breathe on his own. You were steadfast that you have to demonstrate that you can breathe on your own to establish sentience, yet won't answer if it is legal to cut a baby on a ventilator in NICU to pieces with a saw. We know it's legal to do it mere moments before the baby is born.

Do we have that about right?

See? This is why I cant take you seriously. When you feel like youre losing you start lying or deflecting.

 

[hadit]

It's a direct answer to your contention. Like I said, I recognize tactics, and I'm seeing lame ones in you. Very sad. I've seen this before. Someone makes a bold statement, then when presented with a vulnerability in it, suddenly starts yelling, "deflection", "irrelevant", anything BUT dealing with what they said. I also noticed a distinct lack of strong liberal debaters from you. Google not responding quick enough?

I didnt ask you a question so it couldnt have been an answer. It was simply your lame attempt to deflect. When you decide you want to address all of my requirments since they come together as a package let me know. Until then I have to write you off as a serious debater. If you want respect learn to formulate your questions correctly. See Crusaders question for an example.

Ben Shapiro Leaves Student Speechless After Asking Why A Fetus Is A Human Life

Post number 46. Start there. You were the one who focused on the breathing, so I showed you the vulnerability in that. Seriously, I don't think you're actually reading what I write. And I still don't see any list of liberal debaters.

I already answered that post. You only showed me that you were deflecting or you have terrible reading comprehension. Thats pretty much where your argument went off the road and had a 11 car pile up.

Interesting. I answer all three of your assertions, you insisted on taking about one, I showed you the vulnerability in that one, then you whined that you DIDN'T want to talk about just one, so I reminded you that I dealt with all of them at once, but you don't like that. Apparently, you don't like dealing with the fly in your ointment, as you are conspicuously silent on the baby put on a ventilator until he can breathe on his own. You were steadfast that you have to demonstrate that you can breathe on your own to establish sentience, yet won't answer if it is legal to cut a baby on a ventilator in NICU to pieces with a saw. We know it's legal to do it mere moments before the baby is born.

Do we have that about right?

See? This is why I cant take you seriously. When you feel like youre losing you start lying or deflecting.

This is really sad, because I thought you were better than that. Instead, you can't deal with the vulnerability I exposed in your argument, so now you want to deflect onto anything else you can think of. Too bad.

Let me know when you want to deal with reality.

 

[easyt65]

First I would have never lowered myself to debating him. It would be like me debating a kid. (Kinda like he did right?)

Translation:
' I would never have embarrassed myself like this student did.'



That's ok - Shapiro doesn't mind debating childish snowflakes....

 

[easyt65]

STUDENT:
“I just wanted to know why exactly do you think a first-trimester fetus has moral value?” the unidentified student asked.

SHAPIRO:
“A first trimester fetus has moral value because whether you consider it a potential human life or a full-on human life, it has more value than just a cluster of cells. If left to its natural processes, it will grow into a baby.”

"So the real question is where are you gonna draw the line? Are you gonna draw the line at the heartbeat? Because it’s very hard to draw the line at the heartbeat. There are people who are adults who are alive because of a pacemaker and they need some sort of outside force generating their heartbeat.”

"Are you going to do it based on brain function? OK, well what about people who are in a coma? Should we just kill them?”

"The problem is that whenever you draw any line other than the inception of the child, you end up drawing a false line that can be applied to people who are adults. So either human life has intrinsic value or it doesn’t.”


SHAPIRO:
“We both agree that adult human life has intrinsic value — can we start from that premise?”

STUDENT:
I believe that sentience (the capacity to feel and perceive, or to reason morally) is what gives something moral value, not necessarily being a human alone”


SHAPIRO:
“OK, so when you’re asleep, can I stab you?”

STUDENT:
“I’m still considered sentient when I’m asleep,”


SHAPIRO:
“OK, if you are in a coma from which you may awake, can I stab you?”

STUDENT:
“Well, then, uhh, no - That’s still potential sentience."


SHAPIRO:
"I agree it is potential sentience. You know what else is potential sentience? Being a fetus”


The student should thank Mr. Shapiro for the FREE EDUCATION / LESSON!

Watch: Student asks Ben Shapiro why a fetus is human life — his answer leaves student speechless

If the kid had simply said established sentience Shapiro would have lost the debate. And this was a kid? Big whoop. Shapiro should be embarrassed.

Why do some leftist extremists claim a baby is not a human being / a baby until out of the womb if not to justify barbaric late term abortions?

Obama once argued that a baby outside the womb that had survived a failed abortion attempt should be allowed to be 'terminated' because that was the original intent of the mother...

 

[Asclepias]

STUDENT:
“I just wanted to know why exactly do you think a first-trimester fetus has moral value?” the unidentified student asked.

SHAPIRO:
“A first trimester fetus has moral value because whether you consider it a potential human life or a full-on human life, it has more value than just a cluster of cells. If left to its natural processes, it will grow into a baby.”

"So the real question is where are you gonna draw the line? Are you gonna draw the line at the heartbeat? Because it’s very hard to draw the line at the heartbeat. There are people who are adults who are alive because of a pacemaker and they need some sort of outside force generating their heartbeat.”

"Are you going to do it based on brain function? OK, well what about people who are in a coma? Should we just kill them?”

"The problem is that whenever you draw any line other than the inception of the child, you end up drawing a false line that can be applied to people who are adults. So either human life has intrinsic value or it doesn’t.”


SHAPIRO:
“We both agree that adult human life has intrinsic value — can we start from that premise?”

STUDENT:
I believe that sentience (the capacity to feel and perceive, or to reason morally) is what gives something moral value, not necessarily being a human alone”


SHAPIRO:
“OK, so when you’re asleep, can I stab you?”

STUDENT:
“I’m still considered sentient when I’m asleep,”


SHAPIRO:
“OK, if you are in a coma from which you may awake, can I stab you?”

STUDENT:
“Well, then, uhh, no - That’s still potential sentience."


SHAPIRO:
"I agree it is potential sentience. You know what else is potential sentience? Being a fetus”


The student should thank Mr. Shapiro for the FREE EDUCATION / LESSON!

Watch: Student asks Ben Shapiro why a fetus is human life — his answer leaves student speechless

If the kid had simply said established sentience Shapiro would have lost the debate. And this was a kid? Big whoop. Shapiro should be embarrassed.

Why do some leftist extremists claim a baby is not a human being / a baby until out of the womb if not to justify barbaric late term abortions?

Obama once argued that a baby outside the womb that had survived a failed abortion attempt should be allowed to be 'terminated' because that was the original intent of the mother...

I could ask you the same type of question. Why are a lot of right extremists so dumb about most topics? I have no clue. It is what it is.

I'd love to see a legit link to your Obama claim. I was wondering why you didnt include one.

 

[easyt65]

It was reported that a woman who was in a vegetative state just gave birth to a child. Based on the student's definition of 'sentient human', had they pulled the plug on the mother immediately after the baby was born could it still be called an 'abortion' / the act be justified?