How Stupid is This College Student About Infanticide? This Stupid. [VIDEO]

How Stupid is This College Student About Infanticide? This Stupid. [VIDEO]

How Stupid is This College Student About Infanticide? This Stupid. [VIDEO]

If college students are really as dense as this half-wit, then as a nation we’re in deep doo-doo. Or maybe his stupidity is due to brainwashing by Planned Parenthood. Or the media, or the internet (because you know they can’t put anything on the internet that isn’t true, right?)

At any rate, this University of Tennessee student is full of arrogant dumbassery as he argues for infanticide. Behold, a peabrain on parade:

Oh, my. I have so much to say here.

First of all, I’m a speech pathologist who works with kids, so I have a bit of knowledge on speech and language development. And I can tell you that toddlers start putting two words together at about 18 to 24 months of age — a year-and-a-half to two years old. Moreover, at 24 months — when a child turns two — he already has about 200-300 words in his spoken vocabulary. And between two and three years old a child can begin to ask simple questions and put endings on words, such as -ing.

But that’s just verbal communication. A one-year-old who says only one or two words can point to things when you ask her, or show you things. She can shake her head yes or no in response to questions.

Yes, that’s communication, too. But that U of Tennessee nitwit is too dense to comprehend this. Consider, too, his self-absorption: ‘If that child can’t communicate with me, then I say that child’s life doesn’t have value.’

However, this buffoon doesn’t only show lack of knowledge about tiny children, or concern for their lives. He also demonstrates a frightening lack of morality when he bases the worth of a human being on “sentience.”

Back in September, conservative Ben Shapiro was challenged by a college student at UC Berkeley who also believed that ‘sentience’ determines moral worth. It did not go well — for the student, that is. Here’s how the exchange went:

“So when you’re asleep, can I stab you?” Shapiro asked.
“I’m still considered sentient when I’m asleep,” the student responded.
“OK, if you are in a coma from which you may awake, can I stab you?” Shapiro asked in a follow-up question.
“Well, then, uh, no,” the student said.
When the student then claimed that he would still have “potential sentience” even if he was in a coma, Shapiro agreed.
“I agree it is potential sentience. You know what else is potential sentience? Being a fetus.”

Ka-boom! 

Needless to say, a two-year old — or one-year-old, or one-day old — also possesses worth. Why? Because human life has intrinsic value, no matter how young. No matter how much “sentience” some self-important college smartass thinks that life should have. And whose thought processes are not much more advanced than those of the children he apparently holds in contempt.

Written by

Kim is a pint-sized patriot who packs some big contradictions. She is a Baby Boomer who never became a hippie, an active Republican who first registered as a Democrat (okay, it was to help a sorority sister's father in his run for sheriff), and a devout Lutheran who practices yoga. Growing up in small-town Indiana, now living in the Kansas City metro, Kim is a conservative Midwestern gal whose heart is also in the Seattle area, where her eldest daughter, son-in-law, and grandson live. Kim is a working speech pathologist who left school system employment behind to subcontract to an agency, and has never looked back. She describes her conservatism as falling in the mold of Russell Kirk's Ten Conservative Principles. Don't know what they are? Google them!

7 Comments
  • George V says:

    Ummm, this ignoramus ain’t got no vocabulary. Doesn’t know what “sentinent” means. “Sentient” is defined by Merrian Webster as “responsive to or conscious of sense impressions”, So a newborn, (or even a fetus!!!) can respond to impressions from the senses. I imagine they would even respond to the burning heat of the stupidity of this….. blob of protoplasm.

  • GTB says:

    It is moral wrong to compare this idiot with the Honorable John Blutarsky, Senator, MD. You should’ve compared him to Chelsea Hander.

  • Deanna Fisher says:

    BOOM!

    I dare this idiot to say to my face that my severely speech impaired son with autism isn’t “sentient.” Just try and take his iPad from him. You’ll get an instant “sentient” reaction, along with shattered eardrums.

  • Jim says:

    I have worked in the disability field – early intervention to aged clients – for over 40 years in the USA and Australia. The attitude described in this article is not that surprising given a discussion I had in mid-program with two fourth year student nurses on placement some years ago. For many years student nurses had been trained in hospital-based programs but there was a change to college-based training a few years before I met these soon-to-graduate-and-be-turned-loose-on-the-unsuspecting-populace. I was working with three young adults, all severely physically and intellectually impaired and presenting complex communication issues and quite severe patterns of manipulative behaviour. [I am a teacher specialising in severe behaviour.] In mid-program one day I was stunned to be asked by both students why we were bothering to provide developmental and therapeutic programming to the clients! I never heard such comments from hospital-trained nursing students who quickly learned about the realities of the human condition being based in hospitals with live clients, but these college-trained students were clearly divorced from the reality and diversity of human Being. I gave them a quick lecture on eugenics [including Hitler’s view on human difference], mandatory sterilisation, exclusion and placement into terrible residential institutions and so on. Sadly they did not get the message and a pointed letter to their college lecturers about the meaning of life, etc. was not acknowledged. Such students should never have reached fourth year without being confronted with certain realities relating to being a Human Being.

    Having worked for so long with the most impaired [and often very dangerous people], there is one thing of which I am certain: the louder and more noble the rhetoric about caring for Humanity that pours from the mouths of Social Justice Warriors from universities, the less likely they are to tolerate, let alone go near people, who present severe impairments and difference.

  • David R Byler says:

    so if this arrogant snob encountered me and overheard speaking Croatian with one of my fellow Croatian Americans would he determine on the spot that since he cannot understand my communication that I was not “sentient?” Would this apply to Hispanics, Asians of various sorts, and so forth? Can he understand inner city street language? Perhaps he is admitting that he is the ultimate racist? What I hear from him is that he would be most pleased to exterminate everyone with whom he is incapable of communicating

  • GWB says:

    ‘If that child can’t communicate with me, then I say that child’s life doesn’t have value.’
    OK, then, when I begin to speak to you about astronautical engineering, and you give me that bewildered ferret stare, I can end your life, right, Skippy? Because you can’t communicate with me and I can therefore say that your life doesn’t have any value, right? Because I guarantee you are not the fastest bus on the motherboard.

    And, yes, all humans have intrinsic value. Period. Unless, and until, they actually remove that value by committing heinous crimes (murder, rape). Then they have earned being removed from this life. Not before then.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram
Instagram has returned invalid data.