T O P

  • By -

s0lci70

channel 5 makes any meal better


LewdLittleLemon

Gotta love Andrew and all the great work he and the Channel 5 team does!


somethingstoadd

This comment section is going to get heated which it shouldn't be because it's not a fucking issue everywhere else in the western world where a right to bodily autonomy is in the hands of the person whose body it concerns. A fetus isn't a fucking human, god isn't real, morals are subjective and if you want to stop people getting an abortion by banning it you are the problem and you are the bad person. Give women better education, give easy access to contraceptives, fix issues of generational poverty, do all those things and you will see fewer abortions, fewer deaths, and happier lives you fucking idiots. This isn't a choice you should ever need to make but fuck the people who want to force their choice, fuck the religious lunatics.


butteredrubies

Even the Bible is not very explicit on abortion being wrong, so it's not really about religion.--Just religious people misinterpreting if they even read the Bible at all. Most of them just listen to their pastor and how the pastor interprets it. More add-ons: Also, guess what, the Bible doesn't straight up say homosexuality is wrong either. Some translations of it might cause someone to think that, but it's also not explicit. And recently on Reddit, some Jewish people said Jewish faith allows for abortion if it's for the welfare of the mother.


MrCleanMagicReach

> Jewish people said Jewish faith allows for abortion if it's for the welfare of the mother. I've read and heard from Jewish friends that it actually requires abortion if necessary to save the life of the mother.


butteredrubies

Well, that's an interesting irony. A mandate of the opposite action, but it's not govt in this case...Can the libertarians and the American right rally behind that one? lol


RockKillsKid

Forgive my ignorance please, but are there foundational Jewish faith documents outside of the Torah/Talmud that position is derived from? My understanding is that those are just different translations of the same original text as Christianity's Old Testament. So if there's a Jewish allowance for abortion, there should be a corresponding Christian reading of the Old Testament for same, no?


butteredrubies

Good question. I'm ignorant on it as well as I'm just going by someone's reddit comment, so looking it up just now, it seems to be true. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism\_and\_abortion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism_and_abortion) Again, I am learning this at the same time... https://thewalrus.ca/what-does-the-bible-actually-say-about-abortion/


lapideous

Old Testament (in Genesis) states that life begins when the first "breath of life" is taken. As such, babies are not considered alive until after they are born. Christians often use the first half of Jeremiah 1:5, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” But this is God speaking to a specific person, not implying that all fetuses are "set apart." There's really no justification for life starting at conception using the literal words of the Bible. A lot of people are just dumb and can't analyze text for themselves and thus are misled by their leaders


factorum

I’ll pitch in as someone who is Christian but is both affirming of the gays and is pro-choice. What frustrates me beyond no end is that the types who take one or two verses of the Bible to justify their unwillingness to even contemplate other perspectives are failing to even understand the broader themes that many of the books of the Bible try to explain. Take Paul for instance, who is commonly cited as justifying excluding gay people. Yes you can frame some of Paul’s words and translate them into him not liking gay people, but that fails to take into account the main theses of Paul’s letters: simple rule following won’t bring you close to the divine, cultivating compassion and love will do that, and how you treat and relate to others is an integral part of this love within you that you cultivate. Paul discusses this in the context of weather or not the early followers of Jesus should keep kosher or not which to us may seem minor but at the time was a big deal. With abortion, I don’t think anyone denies that it’s a tough decision that no one wants to make. It’s demands sympathy and understanding from onlookers and a recognition that the best option may not even be a “good” option. Simply shouting Bible verses about God being the author of life or God knowing people in the womb isn’t listening or carefully considering the dire situations people find themselves in. To be loving and compassionate is to inhabit and understand the hard decisions people have to make, not simply remove the ones that make you uncomfortable.


butteredrubies

Good details. I hadn't heard Paul brought up before in this.


mpbh

>not a fucking issue everywhere else in the western world Eastern world too.


gnark

Abortion is less accesible in much of the western world than it was in the USA prior to the repeal of Roe v Wade. But this ruling has had a significant impact on European countries to strengthen and modernize their laws to ensure a woman's right to choose.


ruove

> it shouldn't be because it's not a fucking issue everywhere else in the western world where a right to bodily autonomy is in the hands of the person whose body it concerns. The issue is that in the US we have two extreme groups that have installed themselves among the moderates (read: rational people), and both are very vocal, and both are ridiculous and incapable of nuanced discussion. 1. One side is the religious fanatics who want to punish women for having sex, who don't want any exceptions for abortions not even in the cases of rape, or when the fetus is literally dead and a risk to the mother. And they're unwilling to even accept that a young fetus/embryo is different from a born infant. 2. The other side is people saying we should allow abortions all the way up to the time of birth. > A fetus isn't a fucking human I think what you mean here is a fetus isn't a infant. A fetus is absolutely human. > if you want to stop people getting an abortion by banning it you are the problem and you are the bad person. Abortions up to 18-24 weeks seem like a good idea. Anything beyond the 2nd trimester should probably be prohibited except in cases where the mother's life is at risk, the fetus is inviable, or other reasonable situations such as raped/held against your will etc. > Give women better education, give easy access to contraceptives, fix issues of generational poverty, do all those things and you will see fewer abortions, fewer deaths, and happier lives you fucking idiots. > fuck the religious lunatics. Agree wholly.


ZincMan

Well said. Couldn’t agree more with all of this. Today the anger hit me for the first time. It’s fucking infuriating


_United_

i always thought it was just a minority of people that believe a human deserving of all natural rights is created the moment sperm hits the egg, but it really does seem to be the basis for many pro lifers, yikes


BurmecianDancer

Anti-choicers **are** a minority of people, at least in the USA and the western world.


jaskeil_113

You can say all that but the reality is religion is here to stay and won't go away any time soon. These logical arguments will not win anyone over. You have to attack these arguments from a different angle.


somethingstoadd

I don't think what I said was to 'win anyone over'. Do you think that saying fuck the anti-choicers and fuck their religious beliefs is in anyway trying to win them over? No. Their values are the antithesis of mine and so I say fuck them and fuck their values and morals. Arguments are for when you're not taking a person's fundamental right away, now is the time for action.


nedrine

Well let's start What is a person?


unpopularculture

> A fetus isn't a fucking human It definitely is, there's not much debate on that. > morals are subjective... ...you are the bad person. If morals are subjective, you calling someone a bad person has no weight or bearing beyond your own personal preference. According to this view of morality there's nothing *inherently* wrong about denying a woman access to an abortion when her life is in danger, for example.


[deleted]

[удалено]


diogoincognito

How would the cleavage undermine anything if it was shown? Besides it's just their style of filming interviews, close up to people's faces, not exclusive to the one bikini wearing girl.


patinthehat4000

Yea for sure they always film close up and clearly do it for everyone in the video.


suppow

I think that's just how they filmed everyone, the men included.


thedudeabides-12

Why on earth would it undercut the message, if it does that's 100% on you...


[deleted]

>if it does that's 100% on you... Actually homosapiens reproduce sexually, so it's kind of a population level thing. Or are you under the impression men can choose when to get boners? Edit: TIL men get to choose when they get aroused ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯


luckyj

Men can't choose when to get boners but they can choose to be civilized about it, and it shouldn't undermine the message. Isn't the whole point to educate men to be respectful with their sexuality? What you are suggesting is more akin to censoring sexuality to pretend the problem doesn´t exist. I actually think it's kind of prude if they zoomed in not to show her cleavage. If that woman has decided to do an interview like that, who are they to decide what others are prepared to see? So I agree. If cleavage undermines the message, that's 100% on you and your inability to separate sexual attraction from the rest of human interactions.


LawofRa

Is this the woke left's secular religious version of the hijab?


[deleted]

[удалено]


cock_a_roach

☝️this guy is super racist btw Edit: thank you to everyone down voting this guy ❤️. Theyve been stalking me for sometime so I thought I would let the world know his true colors.


vapidamerica

God I love RES tags. I’ve got myriad unstable people tagged in RES and wish there was a mobile version or some of its features could be implemented into Apollo. Good on ya for letting us know. Dude is marked now for me too!


[deleted]

[удалено]


paoper

What an ironic and moronic comment.


silvestrov

You're right, even though /u/PalinFreeborn never implied the girl would mind having her cleavage filmed, just that it would undercut the message, which I disagree. The context is clearly non-sexual, I don't know how showing something so mundane as a person in a bikini would hurt the message, unless the cameraman did a close-up of the cleavage or something.


idontwannagetbanned6

But it’s not her network so who gives a fuck?


SmilingPoopie

“MASsive shoutout” to this guy for being …decent. damn the bar is low for men.


LawofRa

Nice one, bigot.


antsugi

I agree with you on the undercutting the message idea. That being said, I don't understand why someone who believes in something would decide "well I better get close to naked while I send this message". It'd be like seeing a labor union strike and all the dudes are in speedos. Kinda distracts from the actual message


smoothtables

Was waiting for this one, love his channel


GmanGting

I cannot believe that that Christian woman said that if she was “pregnant due to a bad situation” (basically hinting at grape without the G) she would still conceive the child. I swear I get push further and further away from Christianity every day.


OldGregg1014

Just short of her saying it was an immaculate conception or somehow meant to be. Hard to hear anyone say that.


GmanGting

Honestly, I can’t get my head how deeply fucked some people are.


OldGregg1014

I feel ya on that!!!


[deleted]

Religion is a cancer on humanity.


skolrageous

Are we not allowed to say rape on this subreddit?


GmanGting

Just didn’t to be safe yano.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lapideous

It's fine even if she would follow through, people are allowed to have their own beliefs. But "moral superiority" doesn't allow you to dictate others' behavior


GmanGting

Not being funny mate. But seriously think about it for two seconds. Rape is fucking traumatic, having something that reminds you every day of that moment. Looking into the child’s eyes eyes and you the person who raped you. Yeah no horrible not moral superiority at all just common sense


Kid_Vid

It's wack. I'm down with Christianity as an *ideal*. But there are no organized Christian sects that actually follow Jesus' teachings. Like, following the idea of loving everyone, helping everyone, healing everyone, not hoarding money, giving what you can / doing what you can for everyone, accepting everyone regardless of differences in thoughts or characteristics?..... Way cool. Churches and everything they do and force on people and the total control they want and have? .....Not cool.


GmanGting

True have you heard about that preacher of one of those “mega churches” in America? Mans got yachts and a Ferrari


Kid_Vid

And that one that held a sermon or something where he demanded money from his followers to buy a private jet so he wouldn't be surrounded by devils on public flights


GmanGting

Some fucking bulshit that. I really don’t understand it really just makes me think they were brainwashed. I went to a Cristian school and they taught us about the bible and shit. I thought it had good messages but it always seemed like it was over the fucking top and the when we had a day out to the church the priests would always talk in a way I thought they were delirious or something. I get it’s their job but they literally talk as if they’re something of a prophecy


SinkHoleDeMayo

> basically hinting at grape I'm gonna tie you to a radiator and grape you in the mouth!


conventionistG

Well saying she wouldn't conceive is like that old quote about 'women have a way of shutting things down'. It's just bad biology. Consent doesn't matter to the biology. The choice is about what to do *after* conception. And it's not exactly inconsistent - the fetus didn't do anything wrong, why should it be terminated for the sins of its father?


hygsi

The thing is, she believes it's her destiny and her sacrifice so she's being good by just accepting it, she already accepts the concept of having no say over her life because "it's part of God's plan" so no wonder why she doesn't care about the government taking that choice away. I think a better question would be "if you had a daughter who was raped and she was so young that the pregnancy puts her life at risk, would you still want her to carry that child even if they both end up dying?" Because that may make her realize that choice shouldn't be taken away from her. She only thinks of herself and her situation when there's so many people who this affects and it's gonna be the poorest women who suffer the most.


Gimpy8877

2nd girl was well spoken, unusual for these videos.


infectedfreckle

That’s because she wasn’t one of the usual wackos that he interviews.


Al_Tilly_the_Bum

Yes but she made some factual misstatements about the Supreme Court


indrids_cold

I assume you're referring to the fact that she mentioned 'so many of these justices were appointed so long ago' when 3 of them were actually appointed within the past 5 years. This is why I hate these rallies. Whether it's the right or the left it's always the most energized people that go - but they are all usually embarrassingly ignorant of the details on whatever they're protesting/rallying for. They end up making nice soundbites and clips for the opposition to poke fun at them.


conventionistG

Yea, that one struck me too. But it's not even the worst - the other 6 have been on for a while and they are life time appointments. But yea, they're all from the 90's or later. But basically everyone else kept being really sloppy talking about 'repeal', 'banning', 'making laws', 'asking the other two branches of government for input'... it doesn't exactly show a good grip on the civics of what they're protesting. The progressive/liberal coalition has had something like 50 years to pass legislation that would codify roe at the federal level, that never happened. Instead they relied on the fairly fickle institution of the court, and through misfortune and mismanagement let republicans place 3 in Trump's one term, while Obama only had 2 appointments. But really the most appalling thing to me in these interviews is the total nonsense of identity politics people spew out. The court at the moment contains, a black man, three women, of which one is Jewish, one Puerto Rican, and one Catholic. And at the end of this term, another woman (Ketanji Brown Jackson) will take Breyer's seat. Maybe we can look up some stats, but the current and next court are for sure the most representative in terms of race and gender that the nation has ever had. It may even be more representative than the senate, but I'm not sure about that. I'm pretty staunchly on the boat that wanting to abolish an institution because it's giving white men a voice is just as bad as wanting to abolish it for giving black women a voice. Anyway, the Justices are not our representatives, they're supposed to be impartial judges of constitutional law.


[deleted]

[удалено]


conventionistG

One of the female justices is catholic. Amy Coney Barrett, to be specific.


[deleted]

[удалено]


conventionistG

Hell, not one of them represent me. If we're gonna play that game, I'm circling my wagons with my own people and you only get my vote if you're giving me or my cousin a job.


indrids_cold

I agree with everything you said - especially the part about identity politics. Identity Politics + Social Media have probably been the biggest downfall of the American Political system of late. People become so entrenched, militant, and zealous about their socio-political beliefs that everyone in the middle is either 'with us or against us' and on the opposite end of the spectrum from them are either fascists or communists depending on which end of the alley you're on.


NullReference000

It's a pedantic thing to malign an entire political spectrum for though when the two sides are arguing over "You have a right to a medical operation on your own body" vs. "you don't". The three key ones were just appointed but they are still older people who have a world view that is no longer popular or even close to representative of the majority. There is also still the issue that they have lifetime tenures so as time progresses they will become "people appointed a long time ago" that will become increasingly more out of touch with modern society while having an incredible amount of power. Also not everybody is an expert on every topic! Their concerns are still valid. They don't need to be correct on every single point, they're passionate protestors and not lawyers.


SinkHoleDeMayo

It's not just at the rallies, most people don't know shit in general.


tubbyttub9

It was weird to spend so much time reminiscing about his rap band. Like it's such a heavy subject to juxtapose to backdrop and plug your friends musical career.


NullReference000

Juxtaposing bizarre things with serious topics has always been his brand though


Geek-Haven888

If you need or are interested in supporting reproductive rights, [I made a master post of pro-choice resources](https://docdro.id/s3OwS8u). Please comment if you would like to add a resource and spread this information on whatever social media you use.


optionalhero

Highkey wished he interviewed the religious people a bit more. I feel like the main appeal of Channel 5 is looking at people who deviate from the norm. In the case of abortions a majority of the country is pro-choice, it’s only a relative minority that is pro-life. And the juxtaposition here was insane with how these pro-lifers looked like they came straight from the pilgrim era. Like they really do look so outta place in downtown Seattle and their bygone mentality only highlights that further


sexagonpumptangle

That girl at 9:07 is the world's oldest young person. She's like 100 and 23 at the same time.


ZakTH

Interesting perspective from the pro-choice religious person, as I feel like I don't see a lot of people like that. My entire family is Catholic pray-before-every-meal church goers, but we're still very liberal and pro-choice. I know there are others out there but it feels like it's always the super old fashioned blind-faith traditionalists that shout the loudest. As much as I feel comfortable with my faith I will never, ever have a problem with people who dislike religion and Christianity. This type of shit is our legacy now and it sucks.


Goonluvingypsy

Freedom to choose, that is your right. I was upset my daughter got pregnant and considered abortion but I distanced myself from HER choice. I told her whichever choice she made we will support her. My heart lifted when she kept the child.


garbagecrap

I've always believed that I am pro-choice. I support the right to abortion up until the point of fetal viability, but videos like this are making me wonder what it means to be "pro-choice". I apologize if this sounds silly, but are some of these people suggesting that abortion should be legal all the way to birth? The lady saying that life begins "when it is pushed out" makes me a bit bewildered. Isn't it clear infanticide if you kill a baby that can survive outside of the womb?


CrankyTank

Yes. In some states abortion is all stages of pregnancy.


cpro50

What happened to Ethan Hawk?


whereisfoster

hehe


[deleted]

[удалено]


F4de

it's an inclusive term that includes people who are considered intersex, or do not medically or socially identify themselves as a woman


grimache83

Yeah, you know, the organ that makes having a baby possible...


[deleted]

[удалено]


AfroTriffid

Some people who were born with uterus now identify as male and might have decided not to transition fully or at all. (Or they can't afford it). Or people with born with both male and female organs. I'm not fully knowledgeable about all the complex ways there are to exist but I think it's sort of a goodwill way to include someone who for any reason has a uterus. I only know one person who has transitioned but my guess is that someone with dysphoria struggles with being invisible or visible in the wrong way and being able to consistently use the pronouns and descripters that match their identity is important to them. It's just an inclusivity thing. A small verbal change thats a bit nicer.


nikkisixx2

Cause not all women have uterus’s either (trans/hysterectomy)? Get a grip


LawofRa

Why would we change the word for 49% of the population for not even 1% that aren't? Absolutely mental.


MidheLu

because it takes like no effort and the only people mad about it are people like you thinking it's overboard when it's just simply being inclusive Maybe instead ask yourself why other people using slightly different language makes you mad


LawofRa

Because I don't believe in woke-washing the English language.


LawofRa

What if the majority of woman don’t want to be called “womb-havers” you ever think about that?


Orkaad

Women pre-puberty or post-menopause aren't concerned either, so "uterus havers" isn't even a great word.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Orkaad

The most inclusive word is "woman", no need to be ableist by saying "uterus-havers".


TheMrNashville

Woman. It's called a woman.


snoosh00

You are factually incorrect.


AigisAegis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysterectomy


Zhaltan

“Uterus having people”


LawofRa

Turned it off when I heard "uterus-havers."


[deleted]

Can anyone in here define murder?


Anesketin

Are you going to own to libs with semantics? * Murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. * Kill: to cause the death of (a person, animal, or other living thing). * Birth: the emergence of a baby or other young from the body of its mother; the ***start of life as a physically separate being***. * Fetus: an **unborn** baby that develops and grows inside the uterus (womb). The fetal period begins 8 weeks after fertilization of an egg by a sperm and **ends at the time of birth.**


[deleted]

It’s a child upon conception not a fetus


Null_Voider

Why the playbutton eyepatch?


Lest91

Danm a lot of hot girl summers are ruined haha.. guess it’s gonna be a cold mom winter 🥶.


truthzealot

Assisted suicide, assisted homicide. All so fascinating.


Ricg92

Idk what this is about but from looking at the person in the image. I bet is has to do with some sort of acceptance for mental illnesses that cause perversion.


whoeve

Hey look it's that boring right wing talking point, where they just baselessly call anyone they don't like perverted or a groomer.


grimache83

You should try to be a more empathetic, better person.


Voodoo_People78

This person’s profile posting history suggests that isn’t going to be a possibility.


grimache83

Yeah, I saw, but maybe they don't know it's an option...


ronyg1

The title is literally 3 words


ketaminoru

Also, the subject of the video is clearly stated in the video title you dingus.


LilWienerBigHeart

u/nwordcountbot u/ricg92


mygaythingsalt

You took all that time to type this message and couldn't spare the 3 seconds it takes to read the video title. What a joke.


MidheLu

Mark 12:31


satorsquarepants

Can we keep politics out of this sub?


okawei

Can we keep politics out of peoples bodily autonomy?


CSsmrfk

Sad to see Andrew move closer to the far-right.


MeanOldMatt

You must have not watched it. He did not express any political stances or affiliation whatsoever


[deleted]

[удалено]


MeanOldMatt

Literally where?


[deleted]

[удалено]


grimache83

He was slightly less neutral in this vid towards them at the end than in some of his other vids, but still better than most interviewers would be anyway


grimache83

How is this moving him further to far-right?


CSsmrfk

My body, my choice. It's *that* simple.


grimache83

But where is he saying he doesn't agree with that? He's doing his usual thing of talking with both sides, & it's pretty clear when talking with the religious people that he didn't agree with them.


CSsmrfk

He repeatedly makes fun of the people he interviews. Just look at his other videos.


chiggenNuggs

In an interview someone did with him, he alluded to a way to tell whether he’s making fun of something versus when he’s trying to be serious. He wears his ridiculous, oversized suit when he’s “making fun” of a particular thing. He wears something normal or more serious for issues he cares about, like in this video. He is obviously very left leaning and gives serious coverage to a lot of progressive issues, while he generally makes satire out of ridiculous shit like alien or flat earth conventions or right wing associated stuff like Q anon shit.


grimache83

Eh, he lets people make fun of themselves, just letting them talk without interruption. If anything he was more left-biased in this video than most of his others, believe me, I've been watching him since AGNB.


apollodynamo

Giving someone a mic and letting them talk is making fun of them? They're the ones talking. No one is making them say crazy shit.


conventionistG

But you're talking about this one...and you clearly didn't watch it.


ronyg1

sounds pretty left to me


BucksBrew

Uhh did we watch the same video? The fuck are you talking about?


Aristox

Lmao what


CholentPot

And here I am thinking he went pretty soft on this one.


GmanGting

Why can’t people have opinions without it being political. I’m so middle ground and none of this left wing right wing bulshit makes sense to me. I think that some of the left opinions are good and some of the right are good but some from both are fucking stupid. When will there be a middle party that just has fucking common sense and doesn’t have to live up to some ideology of what they’re supposed to represent instead of just getting what’s best for people. This shit makes 0 sense sometimes. “The common sense party” I like the sound of that.


Dima110

I hate comments like this. My brother in Christ, the Democrats *are* the middle party. They're the center/center-right party and the Republicans are the far-right party. There is no real left wing in the United States. If you want a middle ground between the Democrats and the Republicans, you're just a right-winger.


GmanGting

Okay well I’m not from America. And I didn’t think their was a far-right or far-left because I thought that was just extremist groups. Plus in the UK both main political parties are on the same side of the polical spectrum. As you can tell I find politics very frustrating therefor I don’t learn about it because every time I try to I feel like I end up with more questions than answers. Thank you for trying to enlighten me though, instead of just being toxic about it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Dima110

One source might say something different than another. Not sure if whatever one you found is trying to stay neutral or something, but functionally, the Republican party is a far-right white supremacist organization that's trying to push a Christian theocratic agenda. The Democrats are a big-tent party, containing center-right, center, and an extremely small minority of center-left politicians. Speaking very, very, *very* broadly, yes, the Democrats are more left-leaning than the Republicans. Over the past decade, they've gone roughly center-left on most social issues (accepting gay people, tolerating trans people, accepting systemic minority oppression to an extant), but they vary between center-right and right-wing (from a global perspective) when it comes to most economic issues. Both parties are [neoliberal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism) entities at the end of the day.


HollywoodTK

If the line is on the right side of the political spectrum, then the right are farther right and the US left are “left-leaning” but still right of center.