reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I believe abortion should have no restrictions, allowing individuals to have the procedure at any stage of pregnancy. If I am unable to receive abortion training or perform abortions in Wisconsin, I will leave the state, as will many of my colleagues who share the same career path. Thank you for your understanding, but I will not contribute to resolving our shortages.

The speaker opens by reframing Jesus’s presence in today’s terms: “If Jesus were here today, he would be a clinic escort distracting women from the hatred of the protesters or an abortion doula holding women's hands and offering support and love as they end their pregnancies.” They anticipate Jesus would have “a stern word for self righteous legislators who use abortion as a political issue rather than showing compassion for the people seeking abortions.” On this Row Sunday, the speaker aims to share some collected stories, describing them as “the sacred stories of women's lives.” They note that if Jesus were giving a sermon today, he might also have said, “blessed are those who end pregnancies, for they will be known for their loving kindness.” The speaker continues with a personal testimony: they have been pregnant four times, “I have had two abortions, and I have two amazing children.” They describe each reproductive decision—to have children and not to have children—as sacred because “they reflect the moral responsibility of reproductive power that is part of our inheritance as human creatures.” They remind the audience that each person has a reproductive story, and they point out a statistic: “one quarter of American women will have an abortion by the age of 45,” suggesting that some audience members’ reproductive journeys may also include abortion. They reiterate, “Blessed are those who end pregnancies for they will be known for their loving kindness.” The speaker then calls for a reimagining of theological understanding surrounding abortion, arguing it is essential “to addressing the violence that is being done to people across the country in the name of Christianity.” They frame the current climate as marked by “rampant reproductive injustice in our society,” and pose the question: “what does God require of us?” They close with “Amen. Amen.”

Speaker 0 argues that abortion is murder and frames it as a ritual akin to human sacrifice, claiming civilizations like the Incas and Vikings killed people to appease gods and gain power. They insist abortion isn’t ritualistic, reference an abortion truck outside the Democratic convention, and challenge the idea that abortion is a right, suggesting that abortion is the only right people have. They express empathy for individuals who might face pregnancy decisions, recounting childhood conversations about a 12-year-old farmworker who might be pregnant from rape, and acknowledge sadness about abortion, but insist that now abortion is “the only right you have.” Speaker 1 pushes back by denying that abortion is a ritual and emphasizes that people do not have the right to keep someone from taking a medical injection or consuming unknown products, arguing that the only right claimed is to murder one’s own children. They describe the statement as dark and urge Speaker 0 to reconsider their stance. Speaker 0 responds with a personal perspective as a father, asserting that the most important thing in life is having children and that one’s children are what will matter most. They reject the notion that jobs or material concerns are paramount and criticize the idea of just killing one’s children. They apologize to Brookie for the upset but maintain their view that abortion is grotesque and sad, noting that many people who have abortions are not happy about it. Speaker 1 contends they don’t care about what Speaker 0 says and asserts a lack of interest in further discussion. Speaker 0 elaborates on the idea that the issue is highly ideological and that the reality of abortion is often hidden behind abstractions. They argue that a human being is beheaded with a knife inside a woman, insisting that if beheading didn’t take place, that person could have led a different life, and that it is not for us to kill people simply because they are “in the way.” They warn that if it is permissible to kill children who are in the way, then the elderly or even others could be killed as well, concluding with the assertion that you can’t do that. Speaker 1 reiterates that abortion is a matter of human rights, while Speaker 0 maintains that there is no human right to kill people, insisting that killing people is the enemy of human rights and that the human right is to live. The conversation ends with an unresolved tension between preserving life and recognizing individual rights, framed by extreme positions about abortion and its moral implications.

The speaker expresses concern about late-term abortions and mentions a statement made by the governor of Virginia regarding keeping babies alive after birth and then killing them. They discuss the potential financial incentives for keeping a baby alive for two weeks and registering its organs for bidding. The speaker also mentions the practice of taking babies from their mothers without their knowledge. They compare this to how tomatoes are engineered to last longer on store shelves. The speaker states that California has already passed a similar law, while Virginia, New York, and three other states are attempting to do the same.

The speaker discusses the issue of abortion and the debate within the Republican Party about whether to continue making it a central tenet. They argue against abandoning the pro-life stance and emphasize the importance of standing firm on the issue. The speaker also highlights the influence of the World Economic Forum and their agenda of depopulation. They criticize the idea of compromising on abortion and urge for a clear articulation of principles and a fight for what is right. The speaker concludes by stating that a nation that destroys its children invites the wrath of God.

The speaker discusses concerns about late-term abortions and the alleged practice of keeping babies alive after birth to harvest their organs. They mention the governor of Virginia's comments, but the speaker claims they didn't see it. They suggest that these babies are kept alive for a short period, and their organs are registered and sold for profit. The speaker also mentions that California has passed a law related to this issue, and Virginia, New York, and three other states are trying to pass similar laws.

Abortion is seen as a choice and a right, but it is also considered a tragedy. The focus should be on making it rare and safe, and finding common ground to limit the number of abortions.

The video emphasizes the importance of vaccination and the risks associated with being unvaccinated. It highlights the need for everyone to be vaccinated in order to achieve safety from COVID-19. The speakers express frustration and concern towards those who choose not to get vaccinated, suggesting that they are a threat to society. They advocate for measures such as banning unvaccinated individuals from certain places and denying them healthcare. The video also mentions breakthrough cases among vaccinated individuals and debates the effectiveness of vaccines. Overall, the message is clear: vaccination is crucial for personal and public safety.

The speaker discusses the position of Trump and his running mate on abortion. They state that Trump and his running mate say they believe in exceptions to abortion bans to save the mother's life. The speaker then says, "Let's break that down."

The speakers in the video express concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine and its potential side effects. They discuss issues such as the lack of data on vaccine safety, increased mortality rates among vaccinated individuals, adverse reactions including blood clots and heart inflammation, and negative effects on reproductive health. They also criticize the FDA and other organizations for not addressing these concerns and call for the immediate suspension of vaccine mandates. The speakers emphasize the need for further research and support for those who have experienced vaccine injuries.

During the Republican debate, the speaker tweeted about the misleading claim that Democrats support abortion up until birth. They provided statistics showing that abortions past the point of fetal viability are rare, with over 80% happening before 10 weeks of pregnancy and less than 1% happening after 21 weeks. Personal stories from women seeking late-term abortions highlight the difficult decisions they face due to catastrophic fetal abnormalities or risks to their own lives. The speaker emphasized that no one is advocating for late-term abortions or running on a platform of aborting viable babies. They argued that these claims are an attempt to change the parameters of the debate on women's healthcare. Democrats aim to protect a woman's right to make these decisions with her doctor.

President Trump has stated he will veto a national abortion ban, viewing it as a state's rights issue. The speaker believes that if a baby can survive outside the womb, abortion is not permissible; it constitutes murder at that stage of gestation. The speaker claims the education system has instilled terror in girls and women, pushing the idea that pregnancy is the end of their lives and careers. This fear leads them to believe they must have access to abortion, even in extreme circumstances, and they will vote against any candidate who might restrict it. The speaker asserts that having children brings more joy than anything else and that it is natural to love one's children.

The speaker discusses the topic of abortion and argues that it should be considered murder. They emphasize that if there is no life in the fetus, then there is no need for an abortion. However, they believe that the fetus is alive and developing, even if it doesn't have consciousness. They conclude that abortion is objectively the killing of a human being.

I believe abortion access should be protected from day 1 of pregnancy by reinstating Roe v Wade. Congress can pass legislation to restore these protections, and Joe Biden will sign it into law.

The speaker expresses concern about late-term abortions and discusses a statement made by the governor of Virginia regarding keeping babies alive after birth and then killing them. They mention the potential financial incentives for keeping a baby alive for two weeks and registering its organs for bidding. The speaker also mentions the engineering of tomatoes to last longer on shelves. They claim that California has passed a similar law, while Virginia, New York, and three other states are trying to pass it.

The speaker discusses concerns about late-term abortions and the alleged practice of keeping babies alive after birth to harvest their organs. They mention the governor of Virginia's comments, but the speaker claims they didn't see it. They suggest that these babies are kept alive for a short period, and their organs are registered for bidding, potentially making large sums of money. The speaker also mentions that California has passed a law related to this, and Virginia, New York, and three other states are trying to pass similar legislation.

The speaker expresses strong support for the availability of fertility treatments like IVF in every state. They state that the goal is to make having babies not harder for mothers and families. The speaker claims that the overwhelming majority of Americans, including Republicans, conservatives, Christians, and pro-life Americans, also strongly support IVF availability for couples trying to have a baby. They suggest that supporting IVF is a beautiful and good thing.

The speaker expresses their belief that a nominee should not be required to state their stance on Roe v. Wade, as it could set a precedent that contradicts their own beliefs. They admit uncertainty about the significance of knowing the nominee's position, as they could still support Roe while also supporting restrictions such as wider hallways in abortion facilities. Ultimately, the speaker concludes that knowing the nominee's stance on Roe would not provide much insight.

This video is part of a series on the mental health aspects of abortion. The speakers discuss the importance of inclusive language and accurate terminology when discussing abortion. They also mention the emotional impact of seeking an abortion and the negative emotions experienced by those who are denied one. The video highlights the financial and emotional burdens associated with abortion, as well as the influence of partners and societal restrictions. The speakers emphasize the need for multidisciplinary decision-making and support for individuals considering abortion. They also mention the potential emotional advantages of at-home abortions. Overall, the video addresses various factors that can affect a person's decision-making process and emotional well-being when it comes to abortion.

This video features a discussion about a baby girl with lacerations on the back of her skull. The speaker mentions that the skull is broken and wonders if it moves when the baby comes out. They explain that the umbilical cord is severed first and they wait for it to stop pulsing before the fetus expires. The speaker mentions that legally they would be obligated to help the baby survive, but it probably wouldn't. They also mention that if the pregnancy were to progress naturally before the termination procedure, they would not provide assistance.

A 13-year-old girl's parents are unaware of her abortion plans. Planned Parenthood in Missouri helps minors go to Kansas for abortions without parental consent. They provide transportation, accommodation, and cover costs. The organization also assists with school excuses and contraceptives without parental knowledge. The director mentions doing this daily for minors. The video questions the legality and ethics of these actions. Stay tuned for part 2 for more on similar situations in conservative states.

In this video, Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 about the timeframe for performing an abortion in the 3rd trimester if it would affect a woman's mental health. Speaker 1 mentions that the 3rd trimester goes up to 40 weeks and states that there is no limit in the bill. Speaker 0 then asks if a woman who is about to give birth could still request an abortion, and Speaker 1 says that it would be up to the doctor and the woman. Speaker 0 clarifies if the bill allows for this, and Speaker 1 confirms that it does.

This video discusses the controversial issue of abortion in Brazil. The speaker explains that there has never been any constitutional controversy surrounding the interpretation of the law criminalizing abortion, as it has always been considered a crime except in cases of rape or risk to the mother's life. The video also highlights a specific case where a woman died during an illegal abortion procedure, leading to the arrest of the clinic owners. The speaker criticizes a recent decision by the Supreme Court to consider decriminalizing abortion, arguing that it violates fundamental rights and undermines the principle of proportionality. The video concludes with a call for intervention by the Senate to prevent the legalization of abortion.