Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Full Video: Is Roe Viable? W/ Norm Finkelstein (Patreon)

Published:
2022-07-25 15:20:03
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

Full video for patrons only! I’ll see you tonight at 8:30 for Callin to discuss!


https://callin.com/link/tIEUQlWgid


-B

Files

Previews only

DEBATING the viability of Roe (w/ Norm Finkelstein)

Briahna's favorite sparing partner, author and activist Norm Finkelstein, returns to Bad Faith podcast to discuss chapters from his upcoming book pertaining to Roe v. Wade, the Dobbs opinion, free speech, and "woke" culture. Is the Right right about their being no constitutional basis for abortion rights? Is the left dodging the question of when life begins, or is it actually morally unnecessary to pin that down (or peg abortion rights to viability at all)? Finkelstein also weighs in the recent debate over whether the left should support Twitter bans for hate speech, and opines on whether it's a "slur" to label someone a bigot.

Comments

Anonymous

Game recognize game! Great discussion. Can't wait for the rematch.

Anonymous

This guy was kinda a birdbrain... His points are all pedantic intellectual cul-de-sacs, and when it comes to anything actually substantive, he's impossibly obtuse. Particularly, the eugenics points he makes are are sleight-of-hand, if not altogether just made in bad faith. He says "sterilization" over and over, as if that's the problem with eugenics, with the the counter-point being "sanctity of life", and then he draws the comparison to abortion today along those lines (of course with a quietly different definition of "sanctity of life"). No Norm, the problem with sterilization under eugenics was that the people being sterilized *did not want to be sterilized!* It violated individual autonomy in favor of state control over reproduction, which is exactly what the anti-abortion side is trying to do! I listened twice, because I didn't want to be unfair if I'd missed something, but there's really not much more to his shtick than semantic hide-the-ball, conflate, conflate, conflate, and then hide behind the "I'm just asking questions" routine when he's called on his BS.

Dez Martin

I never thought I would see the great Norman Finkelstein make such an ass of himself. Truly disappointing.

Anonymous

I think Norm Finkelstein's argument is worth reflecting on – if it were up to all the people who respect and cherish the rainbow of humans that exist today, who embrace neurodivergent types, None of you would exist

Anonymous
>>88341267

I don't really see what that has to do with a woman's right to choose what happens to her body. He wants people to openly feel bad about having an abortion (regardless of women's *private* reasons) and for people to basically look at those that have abortions with some type of contempt or prejudice (unless maybe the woman is open about her reasons and her reasons are judged valid by others).

Anonymous

His request at the beginning of the podcast for Bri to cut him off if he went on was clearly not serious. He is a bully speaker - he cuts off and talks over. I could hardly listen to him in the last interview and this one was even worse. Kudos to Bri.

Anonymous

Loved it. The Norm/Bri chemistry is growing. You should make a spin off podcast where he is co host.

Joseph A Aisenberg
>>88321789

This so good, the point that forced sterilization and forced baby making are part of the same grotesque exploitation said so well by you

Joseph A Aisenberg

Why do you keep making legally superfluous free speech arguments about Twitter or social media? We have no free speech right on Twitter. SCOTUS ain’t goan make a company providing a free service support any and all speech. If you want that push for regulation to require it. If not I have no problem with a corporation kicking Peterson off its site. They gave him the choice to delete his tweet. He wouldn’t. That his choice

Joseph A Aisenberg

It’s like TV. SCOTUS won’t make TV air your views unless you’re part of a protected class, the way cable companies were forced to make space for creepy Christian channels in the 80s. The lesson: regulation. Otherwise enjoy the sweet suppression. It won’t last.

Anonymous
>>88321789

Yeah— he’s rhetorically evasive when it comes to standing by anything. So the only way to get an understanding of where he is at is to look at what he chooses to focus on and question. Then if you veer into tying him to an opinion he can slip out of it. Major Peterson vibes. He deals only in the abstract and is mortified of the concrete.

Demented Avenger

I love Finkelstein and agree with his point on this, but he obviously didn't read the Juvenal quote in the original context (whether in Latin or not). Juvenal (or D. Iunius Iuuenalis) was talking about cheating wives.

Nathan Ngumi

An interesting conversation.