A debate I had on Reddit about abortion rights.

The person I'm arguing with is an active participant of the Mensa subreddit, so they already fancy themselves a genius to some extent.

Me:

No arms, no legs, no heart, no brain. Just a blood vessel pumping blood from the host to the clump of cells.

And the "But there's a heartbeat" excuse is a lie. You're only hearing the host's blood pumping into cells cause the heart isn't fully formed until 10 weeks. Additionally, the brain isn't even fully developed until 24 weeks. No heart organ, no brain, it's not a viable life outside its host body.

Them:

Yeah that's an empirical argument to deny ontology. That's not convincing to anyone who thinks there is an essence to being human that isn't tied to having arms and legs.

Me:

I'm sorry, but are you trying to use philosophy to argue whether or not someone is capable of living without a heart, brain, and lungs?

Them:

How do you determine what is human and what is not? Arms and legs? What do you call someone without arms and legs? Or a mechanic heart? You can't answer the question 'what is human' based on physical qualities only. So yes, logically you cannot answer the question without philosophy.

Me:

I think you are confusing personhood with the human species.

A person is someone who can think, breathe, and exist on their own. They have a personality and their own opinions on subjects like abortion.

A human being or homo sapiens is a species on earth that evolved enough to form social groups and cultures and, therefore, are capable of personhood. Some other more complex animals might be capable of personhood, like Koko the Gorilla. She was intelligent, learned to communicate using sign language, and even had her own pet.

I'm not discussing this subject in terms of personhood. A fetus isn't developed enough to form a sense of personhood if it can't even survive on its own at 2 months gestation.

Them:

I'm talking about the essence of what makes one a living human. As long as pregnant women before the 3rd month believe they're carrying a child, which is all of them who want to *keep* the child, I am not appealed by the argument that it's suddenly no longer a child but rather a fetus for biological/scientific/empirical reasons when there are various financial and social advantages of it being so.

The points you mention are even still different from mine.

Me:

>The points you mention are even still different from mine.

Correct because again, you fail to see the point of the argument.

You yourself say;

>As long as pregnant women before the 3rd month believe they're carrying a child, which is all of them who want to *keep* the child,

That's all fine and dandy cause it's her *choice* to do so, not yours and not the government's. But it's not yours or anyone else's place to force your philosophical or religious views on an entire nation and bully us all into following them by making your opinions a law.

Them:

It's a choice to recognise a human as a human, you're saying? So where's the end to that travesty of logic? A cat is a dog, a man is a woman, that dog is a man and that man is a dog. That's a wild world you're living in. I don't see the world that way, it defeats both logic and common sense. But it surely makes a way to justify doing whatever the hell you like doing. I won't force morality on you, but I'll tell you when it's absent.

Me:

Again, you're trying to use philosophy to argue science, and that gets us nowhere. I already stated I'm not talking from a philosophical standpoint.

You can see the world however you want. Your morals aren't always going to line up with your neighbors morals. Your neighbor might think it's immoral to eat any kind of meat. Are you gonna give up that steak dinner cause they can smell it in their living room? How would you feel if the entire government decided eating meat is a crime and, therefore, it's banned and you go to jail just for eating a hamburger. Kinda sucks when other people force their philosophy and religion on you by passing laws to get their way.

Now I know you're gonna be like, "But you can't compare pregnancies to diets!" But you're already equating philosophy with science. So, let me give you another scenario.

Do you like eggs? Eggs are just undeveloped chickens who were denied the ability to develop and hatch. Will you give up your eggs and bacon just because your vegan neighbor says it's immoral?

Since to you personhood and human are one and the same. Say aliens decide to visit earth; they have arms and legs and a brain, can speak, express emotions, and have their own culture. Are they human? Do we give them the same rights as you and me even though they weren't born on earth and are basically invading our planet? Or are they just displaying personhood?

If you say yes, they are human and deserve the same rights as you and me, then you also need to give those same rights to the "illegal aliens" that cross the border.

Why are undeveloped fetuses given more rights to life than families with children who are trying to seek a better life? Why do we value a fetus over the actual baby? Once it's born, if the mother says she needs help, she's scorned and looked down on for asking for WIC, foodstamps, and cash benefits to help feed and cloth her baby. She should have thought of that before deciding to have a baby, right? But if she decides she's unable to afford a baby, and she can't afford to take time off because the pregnancy is making it hard for her to work, she's called a murderer for seeking an abortion.

To pro-life advocates, a fetus is more important before it's born than after it's born. And you won't convince me otherwise. The same people pushing for abortion bans, banning mifepristone (a drug that's also necessary to help with incomplete miscarriages), and even simple birth control are the same people who vote to cut funding to welfare programs, free lunch programs, and to entire school districts. That's not very pro-life of them now, is it?

-------

They gave up the argument after that.

I could have converted this into a rant solely from my perspective, but I felt it would be better just to copy it as a script.

Pro-lifers are not actually pro-life. They are just anti-women and anti-choice. If they actually cared about the fetus, they would care about it after its born by passing laws and regulations that would ensure the child has the best quality of life possible and every chance to succeed. Instead, time and again, they vote against those laws.

They don't care about the fetus once it's born. Why is that? Could it be that their true goal all along is to force women back into submission because they romanticize the bygone era of the 1800s and early 1900s when women didn't hold jobs, didn't vote, and couldn't do anything without their husband's explicit permission?

I dunno, that's just the vibe I get from the anti-choice supporters. Why else would they say things like, "Stop riding dick if you can't take accountability." But then start foaming at the mouth when you remind them accountability goes both ways. When's the last time they made a child support payment?

Shoreless Sea snippet

Instead, she met her sister’s gaze and saw a stranger. Faelit blue eyes shot through in temper, in magic, silver flame and dancing light, more dawn that drawing fire. Opalescent. Sunrise on serene water, like she’d stolen some more magic to match that pearl smeared all over her body.   Of course she had.   “You,” Feyre swallowed, thick. “You’re been in Summer this whole time. I tried to go there, I tried”-   A gentle frown reshaped Tarquin’s handsome face. “Borders are not flexible. Not after what you took from us.”   The first humiliating, furious tear, ran down Feyre’s nose. “To find Amren. To get back my family.”   Silent, they did not need to speak to carry out the charade, Tarquin twisted and Nesta pulled her leg free. Stood in a slide of soft silk layers, fingertips dancing across Tarquin’s back as he leaned forward and away.   Hand held out between them as she moved, Nesta offered a handkerchief, soft grey fabric forming between seconds.   Feyre fought the urge to take it. To throw it back in her face.   The minute went on and one, before Nesta dropped her hand. Squared those familiar, stubborn shoulders, and went stone still.   Feyre swallowed. “What do you want? For access to the Library?”   “What do I want?” Her voice was a whip crack.   A fresh wash of tears tumbled free. “You’re my sister,” Feyre said, choking on the word, “We need the library. We need- people are dying.”   Nesta did not even blink. It was like the words could not even reach her. “The Library is open to all who do not break its rules.”   She couldn’t-   “Do you want to come home?” Feyre offered, frantic. “Money. Jewels. To be Emissary. Anything, just”-   Very slowly, Tarquin rose to his full height. No true menace in the motion, but something worse. Concern, unhidden, bleeding free, the whole of his attention on Nesta’s bone white, stone cold face. He didn’t try to protect her from Feyre’s anger, painting the air with sparks, rug ruined. Did not even bother to try and end the fight; all Tarquin did was reach for Nesta’s hand, cupped in both of his.   “You would like to be High Lady,” he said, without looking up, Nesta’s unmoving hand a dead thing between the gold adored darkness of his grip, “You only have one job. Take care of your people.”   A thousand miles away, Nesta whispered, “Are they dying? Or are they paying?”   Keir, nothing left of his body but a handful of carved bones. Morrigan’s brothers, cousins, eaten whole. It was only low fae who lived, servants and prisoners fleeing, freed. A wraith who’d spit in Feyre’s face, when she’d promised they’d find her a home.   No High Fae could live through that night.

Also just because you get annoyed by something someone is doing doesn't mean they are evil you can leave us alone

I'll be honest the whole argument about it being imperative that the gang never "wins" is still so fucking stupid to me. did you watch 3x01 with your eyes closed. dennis has "won" before, and it ruled, actually. why do we need broad ass arguments like this trying to pin down sunny when there's like. countless examples to the contrary to show it's been like this the whole time.

if you're still not boycotting israeli products, protesting against the genocide, sharing the news, asking for a ceasefire, I am judging you. I know my followers, I know my mutuals. I know the ones who selectively interact with my anime shitposts and ignore the ones about palestine. I am seeing you and I am judging you. I won't call you out on your bullshit personally, because if you can still ignore this humanitarian crisis while being active online and seeing all those posts, you're just not worth trying to reason with. But know that if you still choose to be silent, if you still think this issue is too political or complicated you're an ignorant, pathetic little bitch. you can't live without your starbucks? grow the fuck up. you think celebrities don't owe anyone their support and it is okay for them to stay quiet when it's the brown, the muslim who suffers? you're fucking delusional and you're pathetic. you think you get to turn a blind eye because it's not effecting you? you're a self-centered whiney little toddler. stay in your bubble and keep quiet all you want, i know you will lie to your kids one day and tell them you stood with palestine.

none of us are free until all of us are. free palestine 🇵🇸

i AM a violent dog i DO know why i bite

not to sound like some guy who takes kids shows way too seriously but was anyone else really upset by those cartoon episodes that were like “omg actually everyone hates the protagonist bc theyre annoying and their lives would be better without them and thats the punchline” growing up. 

Do you think the fandom is too hard on Sky?

Mmm, no and yes?

I think people have a lot of good reasons to hate or just kinda dislike Sky. Even if you ignore the Diaspro situation, he has a lot of moments where he just... isn't great (to say the absolute least). Spying on Bloom, immediately assuming she's going to cheat or leave him, directly saying she can't hang out with other guys, implying that he can't trust Brandon, making fun of Stella, literally everything he says to Riven. And I mean that's like the major stuff off the top of my head yknow? Sky just isn't a great person and while he does get called out, it's never in a way that would actually make him change his behavior.

However, I think people also exaggerate his actions and intentions a lot. Instead of recognizing that Sky has practically no control over his life and that he couldn't just break up with Diaspro or tell Bloom the truth, a lot of people make him out to be some serial cheater that always intended to cheat on Diaspro or lie to random girls about his identity. Or when people think he's the worst friend ever because he occasionally doesn't trust people when his entire life he's been at risk of assassination and people getting close to him to yknow. kill him. Like no, implying that Brandon is a spy or that Riven wants to murder people isn't cool. But he's also only like that because there's a history of people trying to kill him, not because he just hates everyone.

Listen, I'm not saying that Sky is a good person or that his actions are justified OR that he's a horrible person who deserves a shit ton of hate. But I think the fandom in general tends to go with very absolutist claims when it comes to Sky. It's either he's the worst character ever and deserves to die or he's a misunderstood baby who's better than Riven. It's literally always one of those two - no in between. Imo, there are reasons to dislike Sky but the fandom also heavily exaggerates the reasons and makes him out to be much worse than he actually is. And on the other side, it's also annoying when people completely ignore all of his faults just to make him look better. He's just as complex and nuanced as the rest of the characters and acting like he's either 100% Evil or 100% Innocent is never fun (for him or any other character).

(i didn't really know how to fit this in but I think a lot of sky discourse also comes from riven stans which makes the situation so much worse. like it's never a fun discussion or debate, it's always just "well he was mean to riven so he deserves to die actually" which then makes riven antis foam at the mouth so they start to defend sky Exclusively to make riven look bad, not because they actually like sky. it's a mess man)

General disclaimer that this is just my opinion and I'm not trying to force it on anyone and it's fine if you disagree.

though i don't think it's right to say the party didn't like luke before he changed. there are a lot of times where its obvious they do have some sort of attachment to him even if its obscured by how annoyed and/or frustrated he makes them. like when luke went back to baticul for the first time and everyone was trying to cheer him up and go sightseeing together, or when they were worried about him during their trip to choral castle. they were rightfully biased, as they saw the forefront of his behavior, but if they hadn't liked him at all they wouldn't have agreed to travel with him again, nor would their feelings after akzeriuth be so personal.

The end of the game really is just Elle and Julius both asking Ludger to directly or indirectly allow their deaths for his sake because they both believe they can contribute more in death than if they live, and that Ludger will ultimately be happier with someone else anyway

conservatism almost by definition means the ppl believing it are insecure. like, to conserve is to feel uncertain and unsure about the future so you stubbornly insist things stay a certain way even if a different way would be better for you. you feel insecure if things will be okay if they change in this different and unfamiliar way.

Having Toybox thoughts rn, don't mind me if I post the actor's core character beliefs on main;

Kelly believes that he is a bad person, no matter what anyone says.

Vio believes that he is a bad person, despite what everyone else says.

Sable believes that they are a bad person, because of what they think everyone must be saying.

Pumpkin believes that she is a bad person because of the things he has done.

Redd believe that they are a bad person because of the things she has been unable to do.

Sapphire believes that she is a bad person, and justifies it because this is a dog-eat-dog world here.

Aure is unable to think of himself as a bad person in any capacity, or his entire worldview will fall apart.

Ivory believes that she has proof that everyone is a bad person, and that the proof also applies to herself.

Furthermore, for the Playwright and the Doll (player character);

The Playwright believes that humanity's nature is so base as to make everyone a bad person, and that they are simply proving this true through the time loop.

The Doll believes that humanity's nature is not inherently evil, and that the conceit of the timeloop forces everyone involved to carry out bad actions, as influenced by the beliefs that they already have.

i was watching abbot elementary, and they had one ep w that sahar woman who is like this... fake, performative progressive person, kinda just spouting off sociel issues nonsense that may or may not even w a big head, and a character near the resolution of the ep basically called her fake, but then i feel like a casual viewer of a mockumentary comedy type show would just see that and think "this person is crazy/not worth listening to because I don't understand" or whatever and its played for laughs. then i thought about it more and i remembered a lot of tv shows have that type of character you're supposed to dislike and theyre always kinda compared in a black and white way to the protag. like either they (usually the protag) dont quite talk abt social issues and are "normal" or you do talk about social issues, but its in a crazy, over the top, fake way and are meant to be disregarded

I think we need to bring back 'troll fics' but very specifically the ones where you are very much trying to potray the views and opinions of a made up author bc those ones are just objectively the funniest. Like I get why they went of out fashion a lot of them use tropes that can be mean spirited or even bigoted and not all of them were really funny. Typos can only be hilarious to read out loud for so long but also I do miss the days when u would read the most batshit plot and it basically laid out the authors opinions on certain fandom stuff very plainly. Stuff like when you didn't like a certain ship for some reason the way you would cope was by making a fic where your NOTP are together but one of them is a acoholic and the character u want to get with someone else constantly thinks abt how they totally made the wrong choice. Like no matter how nice and calm the characters would be if they were in a popular ship ppl didn't like suddenly you would get fics where they actually were super controlling and horrible. And it was bad dont get me wrong, it uses abuse as nothing more than a plot point to get a character to then claim they made the 'wrong choice' and get with a different person... But it was also really funny how far people went with it sometimes-

Yet another beautiful day to have the Maxwel tag blocked (can't see half of the posts in the Wendy tags)

The world, the universe, is not a person

It has no contempt, but also no compassion, no love, no joy

And yet,

When you spend time with your friends

When you eat some really good food

When you engage in your favorite hobby

When you step outside and gaze upon the lush greenery, the endless amount of unique creatures, the stunningly beautiful sky

It seems like, just maybe, it really is there

But it’s not coming from some faceless conglomerate of distant galaxies

That kindness, that love, that joy

It’s pouring into us from every person, every organism, every atom in the universe

A billion little glimmers in the night sky

The things we feel are not from the masterpiece

They are from every spec of paint

Every clump of clay

Every pencil stroke

Working in a glorious harmony

So that when we think of all the joys that they bring us, we feel we must credit the whole work of art

So that not one little fraction of it is left uncredited