smacl wrote: » So perhaps you could show us a examples of how the pro-life movement are helping children in need? Specifically, in terms of effort and expenditure when compared to similar resources devoted to preventing pregnant women from making their own choices.
end of the road wrote: » a question not possible to answer without gaining access to the accounts of organisations to see what they are spending and on what. this is information that is generally not online from what i can see.
Charles Ingles wrote: » Babies lives matter
Ben Shapiro apologises to Andrew Neil after being 'destroyed' in BBC interview US pundit says he was not prepared for segment, which went viral after he cut it short
Cabaal wrote: » https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/may/11/us-pundit-ben-shapiro-apologises-bbc-andrew-neil-interview Abortion laws discussed so its relevant to this thread. Seems he couldn't handle being questioned Rather then answer the questions he started name calling the interviewer. Pretty pathetic stuff but something we've seen from pro-lifers before so not at all surprising. He holds very extreme views which are simply not based on facts or reality. Full interview is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VixqvOcK8E
Charles Ingles wrote: » Disgusting interview nothing short of an ambush. Ben Shapiro is an intelligent man he knew it was a set up no point in debating.
Cabaal wrote: » Intelligent? The interview shows otherwise, So its ok to abort an interview?
Charles Ingles wrote: » Ben Shapiro, are you really saying the man isn't intelligent? He is a lawyer
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » It didn't go the way he planned/hoped so he spat his dunmy out and skulked off in a huff. He even admitted himself he wasn't sufficiently prepared .
Charles Ingles wrote: » Or in other words ambushed, presenter wouldn't take him on in an honest open debate
volchitsa wrote: » Andrew Neil is a rightwing journo, he's on the executive committee of the Spectator FFS! The difference with people like Shapiro is that he's not just a alt-right propaganda mouthpiece but has a coherent set of opinions based on facts not bigotry. Oh and he also prepares his interviews.
Neil was appointed editor of The Sunday Times by Rupert Murdoch, and served in this position from 1983 to 1994. After this he became a contributor to the Daily Mail. He was formerly chief executive and editor-in-chief of the Press Holdings group.[2] In 1988 he became founding chairman of Sky TV, also part of Murdoch's News Corporation. He is the current chairman of Press Holdings Media Group, whose titles include The Spectator,
volchitsa wrote: » Alternatively, I'd suggest that it's not just about money raised but also time and effort invested in, say, getting laws changed or getting publicity for your cause in the media - the kind of thing that has made household names of a number of prolife lobbyists in Ireland. Cora Sherlock, Maria Steen, Caroline Simons, Breda O'Brien and David Quinn, to name just a few of those who were still busy in the last referendum campaign. Going a but further back there's Justin Barrett or Declan Ganley etc etc. So pick a couple of well known prolifers (not necessarily those I've named) and a few well known child poverty or other activists for children in need and see how much crossover there is between the two groups. Are any of them very involved in both? I'd say there actually might be one or two people - but only if you included members of religious organisations. Prolifers as a rule are not involved in child poverty action stuff here or in the States.
end of the road wrote: » all of those are certainly busy in the media on many issues. if there is cross-over between them and other groups, they are keeping quiet about it, which i think is a good thing. shouting about how great one is because they are involved in this or that issue is not a character trate i like personally. anyway at least 2 of those on your list have advocated for supports for the born. Cora Sherlock in this video mentions supports for single parents, all be it the video is about a different topic. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmQgXGJjx1aVMpRMpllgDdA?feature=embeds_subscribe_title Breda O'Brien advocates that groups should look for more supports for babies with life limiting conditions upon their return home as part of this article https://www.irishcatholic.com/irish-human-rights-groups-campaign-rights-disabled-not-termination/ nothing is turning up for the others on the list, but that means nothing really. as i said, it is understandable that some may feel that their focus is better being on the unborn as there are less advocates for their rights.
Kidchameleon wrote: » I don't agree with everything Shapiro says but he is most certainly intelligent
(he's Jewish FFS, average IQ's above anyone here).
The BBC interviewer looked to me like he was scraping the barrel for things to throw at him, bringing up tweets out of context from nearly a decade ago for example. Shapiro openly admits to being religious so its no surprise he is anti abortion, he's allowed to be, it doesn't make him stupid.
Kidchameleon wrote: » he's Jewish FFS, average IQ's above anyone here
Igotadose wrote: » Uhh, what? Why did you mention his religion?
Dr. Nisbett, a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, argues that what we think of as intelligence is quite malleable and owes little or nothing to genetics. “I think the evidence is very good that there is no genetic contribution to the black-white difference on I.Q.,” he said, adding that there also seems to be no genetic difference in intelligence between whites and Asians. As for Jews, some not-very-rigorous studies have found modestly above-average I.Q. for Ashkenazi Jews, though not for Sephardic Jews. Dr. Nisbett is somewhat skeptical, noting that these results emerge from samples that may not be representative. In any case, he says, the evidence is overwhelming that what is distinctive about these three groups is not innate advantage but rather a tendency to get the most out of the firepower they have.
Kidchameleon wrote: » [...] Shapiro [...] is most certainly intelligent [...] average IQ's above anyone here
robindch wrote: » Since discussions here on boards are notionally anonymous - the only person you can say this of honestly is yourself :rolleyes:
Kidchameleon wrote: » He is far more intelligent than me
Kidchameleon wrote: » I'll let Ben explain it to you... Jews traditionally have a high focus on education, therefore tend to have high IQ's. They also tend to marry and reproduce within the Jewish community (Interfaith marriage is strongly frowned upon by Jews, although that is probably changing in the past few years). IQ is largely genetic therefore Jew's pass gene's down through the generations that favor high IQ. IQ + genetics:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182557/ Jews + education:https://www.pewforum.org/2016/12/13/religion-and-education-around-the-world/?utm_source=adaptivemailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=16-12-13%20rel&ed%20immediate%20release&org=982&lvl=100&ite=599&lea=109399&ctr=0&par=1&trk=
Kidchameleon wrote: » tl;dr: <all sorts of things irrelevant to this thread, like conjecture on interfaith marriage in Judaism and whether Jews indeed have higher IQ's due to inbreeding>
