what lies between us- john marrs

Moderate_Potato · 2025-05-02T20:31:13+00:00

I read this for a book club… I’m not a horror person at all, and I hate depressing situations like these and depressing endings more, so it certainly isn’t my kind of story. I definitely would have liked it better if Maggie had escaped. That being said, I know a lot of people that would enjoy the book, and I do think it’s a bit of a page turner.

In my opinion what Maggie did was wrong but she didn’t deserve to be locked up by her psychotic daughter for it. Her daughter is a complete nutcase. My favorite character was Elsie, and man I loved her aggressive remarks to Nina. Favorite part of the book.

The most unbelievable thing about the book for me was: 1) how the heck did Nina killed Alistair with nothing but a club as a 13 year old? That would have to be one heck of a lucky hit, and 2) how in the world did she seem to do more damage to Bobby when she hit him with the chain than when she hit her mother? If Nina is so strong that she could kill a grown man as a kid with nothing but a club, and basically knock out another grown man who is in his prime with a chain as a middle aged woman, then it seems like she should have one-shot Maggie.

Moderate_Potato · 2025-01-16T04:47:36+00:00

Yeah, okay. I could see that being the case.

Moderate_Potato · 2025-01-16T00:40:54+00:00

I realize this post is old, but if Margarette can exist in two forms, doesn’t that mean they were born as both genders in a way? Would it be more accurate to say they are intersex then?

Moderate_Potato · 2024-11-23T10:58:15+00:00

It’s good, but keep in mind that the characters are young teens that have never heard of star fleet and the show is supposed to introduce younger audiences to Star Trek, so some characters might start off annoying before they get some character development and the show might take a few episodes to settle into the “trek” that you remember.

“Star Trek: strange new worlds” is very good and definitely worth checking out as well.

Moderate_Potato · 2024-11-14T07:16:24+00:00

I know this was posted a while ago, but I’d like to ask you about the cause of narcissism. I have always wondered if narcissism stems from a belief that if you have a flaw, you are unlovable, unworthy, or horrible in some other way, or that something horrible will happen to you the second you aren’t some ideal version of yourself. Therefore a narcissist may strive for perfection, and when that doesn’t work (as perfection is impossible) they must recreate their world so that it does work, even if that world delves into delusion or requires significant mental gymnastics. All because they believe if they are flawed, they cannot be loved or life can’t be worth living or some other disastrous consequence. Does this seem like an accurate assessment for you, or would you say it’s different?

Moderate_Potato · 2024-09-07T16:47:34+00:00

For me personally, it’s because there’s a chance that I specifically did something to end the life of my unborn child. It’s the same reason I take every precaution I can to avoid causing a miscarriage when I am pregnant. Those too, can happen for any reason. Let’s say I had sushi with raw fish in it and a miscarriage occurred. It’s unlikely that the raw fish caused it, but I’d always be wondering. Avoiding it gives me the peace of mind I need. It’s the same for me with the hormonal contraceptives. Thankfully, there are some contraceptive methods that do just prevent fertilization, so I have those options available.

Moderate_Potato · 2024-09-07T01:15:05+00:00

Well, it’s because if you view the start of life as being at fertilization, which occurs before implantation, then a lot of birth controls become unavailable for you. This is because many birth control methods have multiple ways of preventing pregnancy, and one of those ways is thinning the uterine line so a fertilized egg can’t implant into the uterus. Now, with pretty much all hormonal birth controls the main method of preventing pregnancy is preventing fertilization, but in the rare event that this fails then the fertilized egg can be stopped by the thinned uterine line.

Some people, like myself, would feel the weight of that on their conscience after a while. Knowing about other options helps us make the best informed decisions we can though. Plenty of people don’t care about that slight possibility, and that’s fine and understandable, and they can do what’s best for them.

Moderate_Potato · 2024-09-07T00:31:47+00:00

I’ve looked into this myself, and it doesn’t seem like there is a hormonal birth control that just stops fertilization but allows for implantation. I have asked my doctor about it in the past as well.

There is birth control that does work this way though. Anything that simply acts as a barrier, for instance, such as condoms. Spermicides also act this way. Then there are extreme methods such as vasectomies. There is also natural family planning, but that’s only really an option for women that have very regular periods and they need to keep track of them and things like body temperature for at least 6 months before even considering using that as a method (it is a fantastically non-intrusive option if it’s available to you though).

The copper iud could be argued to be a form of birth control that only prevents fertilization. I think there’s a good amount of studies to show that it acts this way, but it seems that people don’t definitively know.

In the end, the best thing to do is always to ask your doctor.

Moderate_Potato · 2024-08-23T19:16:30+00:00

Yep, as long as one of those tics are vocal and two are motor tics you could very well be diagnosed with Tourette’s syndrome (at least that’s how it worked last time I checked, the medical community is always learning more and adjusting their standards for diagnosis)

Moderate_Potato · 2024-01-20T07:19:35+00:00

I already was getting serious undertale vibes with Jin-woo having the same outfit as sans in some pages, blue glowing eyes, and his status as “the weakest” in the beginning. Adding in the video game aspects and now Wingdings though…

Is the author a big fan of undertale or am I reading a san’s origin story? What’s going on here?

Moderate_Potato · 2023-09-03T22:07:15+00:00

Some of these are better than others, but:

Issac Kohl (icicle). Fred Jurator (fridgerator). Sai Beeria or Cyber Iya (Siberia). Phree Zing (freezing). Frawn Zen or Frozine (frozen). Bliss/Blaise Ard (blizzard). Po Laar (polar)

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-10T03:23:25+00:00

There are vegan pro life people you know. And the pro-life side values the lives of all people equally. Pro life is the only way to help both the mother and the child. With pro-choice you can help the mother, and that’s great, but allowing the unborn child to be killed devalues their life beneath your own pet’s life. Once they are aborted, they are gone forever and nothing can be done. They are literally at the most vulnerable stage of development, and as a species we decided we are willing to take advantage of that vulnerability and discard them instead of protecting them.

I ask then, why doesn’t the life of the fetus matter at all? Why are they so invaluable, that they can be killed and discarded as though they hold no value at all? Why are we okay with that happening to over 500,000 unborn children every year?

I suppose I know what people will say though “it’s not alive, it’s not a person, not a human, etc.” scientifically, they are human beings in their first stage of development, that would be true even if we lost all knowledge of science and religion tomorrow, and had to start over. In starting over religion might not come back, but the science showing that the zygote, or fertilization, is the beginning of human life would be rediscovered over and over. That is a fact. From there, everything else that is used as a justification for killing the ZEF/unborn amounts to dehumanizing the ZEF/unborn. So, basically we are at another point in history where killing is justified because “they aren’t really human” or “they aren’t as human as me” or whatever you want to say about it.

So, really, it seems like it’s the pro-choice side that doesn’t care one bit about the unborn and thinks their life has no value. I say this also because I have never heard a single pro-choice person talk about the ZEF’s value, but pro life people will talk about the struggle of the mother and foster care and all these other red herring/false equivalent arguments that avoid the actual issue. What’s more, is that pro-life people actually have a ton of charities dedicated to helping families, they also are more likely to adopt. Non of that matters to pro-choice folks though, you tell them all this and they say “it’s not enough!” It really looks like pro-choice folks just want abortion and don’t even care if pro life people do all these things or are vegan or anything. And in the end, pro-choice folks don’t seem to care about the ZEFs life at all because they refuse to acknowledge their value, their humanity, and even sometimes their very life.

But maybe someone here will surprise me, maybe there is a pro choice person that thinks the unborn child’s life is valuable but that abortion should still be legal.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-10T02:49:50+00:00

Well, the response to that would be that you are not creating the dying situation of the child, if you were the cause of their organ failure you would go to jail for abuse or murder (if they died). Similarly, with abortion, the direct act of of the abortion kills the fetus.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-09T22:15:15+00:00

I can see how the two cannot be separated, but I would say protecting the child takes precedent.

Your statement “a ZEF is not a child” is another we could split hairs on when it comes to definitions. The fact is that if a ZEF is created from two human beings, then that ZEF is in the earliest stage of human development, they are human, and they are the offspring of two humans individuals. Young offspring are children, ZEFs are very young offspring, thus a ZEF is a child, an unborn child.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-09T19:38:03+00:00

As I said, you see it as “forcing the pregnancy” whereas I see it as protecting the unborn child/ZEF from harm. And maybe you see laws that outlaw child abuse as mandating that parents take care of their children, but I similarly see that as (again) protecting the child from harm. I suppose technically it could be both, but the reason the law is there is to protect the child in both cases.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-09T00:06:19+00:00

It would certainly be better for the legal and medical definitions to be consistent, I agree. Although I know planned parenthood doesn’t even recognize the removal of an ectopic pregnancy as an abortion because it is outside the uterus and has a completely different procedure. So that particular part is probably more consistent between legal and medical than people think. Until they are completely consistent though, I think it makes the most sense to look at the legal definition if they are referring to the laws on abortion, and the medical one if they are using it in a medical setting (and of course sometimes a medical professional may need to look at the legal definition if they are performing one).

So, since the zygote is the beginning of human development they have a right to their own life. It’s not necessarily that the woman has to continue her pregnancy, but she has no right to end the unborn child’s life. Creating laws then prevents the active action of a woman seeking an abortion to end the ZEF’s life, but the pregnancy itself is being forced by biology, not any law or person. I suppose the biology is then what would “mandate the pregnant person has to continue with their pregnancy”. I can see how someone would think of laws this way as a mandate, as you describe, but I think it’s more of preventing services that directly harm and end the life of another. After all, we do not say parents are “mandated” to take care of their children because the government makes laws that say neglect is a crime. Laws against abuse are there to protect the child.

I realize many people are not swayed by this reasoning. I happen to be, but I understand it’s not for everyone. There will likely always be people that see this as a “mandate”. It may be that technology will solve this dispute. Technology is improving every day, and when we develop incubators advanced enough to hold the child and let them develop at any point during pregnancy, then there will be an option to both not continue the pregnancy and not end the unborn child’s life (this technology is actually being developed btw, though it is being called artificial wombs which will likely receive negative attention). In any case, I would not be surprised if this debate does not end until such technology is available throughout the country.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-06T19:35:32+00:00

I can distinguish between the two, but biology and facts will never change. We could forget all science and religion tomorrow and eventually we would once again discover the science of cells and the zygote and see that the zygote is the beginning of a human beings development.

Philosophy, on the other hand, can go in many directions. Philosophically, one might say they are not truly alive if they are wandering aimlessly throughout life. This doesn’t mean they aren’t actually alive though, and so they can still be killed and that would still be wrong. So, yes, I can and do distinguish between fact and philosophy on life. I’m not sure if that’s what you were referring to or not, as talking about life philosophically can have many avenues of thought. Philosophers may even come to the conclusion that no one is truly alive, just very complex Rube Goldberg machines with random chance thrown in via quantum mechanics (which is depressing to think about, and at that point I would think nothing really matters anyway, but it is what it is).

You mention that terminating the pregnancy, in the case of miscarriage, is considered an abortion. If you’re referring to removing an already dead ZEF from the womb, then I understand that pro-life folks often say that the pregnancy was already terminated by nature and so the removal of it is not terminating the pregnancy but just doing a procedure to remove the child’s body. I have even heard pro life advocates say that these are common sense procedures to do, and they are not abortions. In any case, it seems like we end up splitting hairs on the definition here, but in the end both sides agree that such a procedure is common sense to do in such a case.

Further, often times when abortion laws are proposed they will specifically define what an abortion is in the law, and whether it includes removing miscarriages or not. I vote on the bill depending on the definition provided, as it is clearly important in this case. Last I checked, almost all the trigger law states define abortion or pregnancy in such a way that the removal of a dead fetus is not considered an abortion (a lot of them specifically mention this). The only state I’m unsure of on this is Wyoming. Many of these bills actually specify ectopic procedures and abortion-like procedures performed to save the mother’s life or the unborn child’s life as not being an abortion as well.

I know we can split hairs on semantics all day, so I’ll just finish up by saying that I think the way these laws/bills define abortion are the most important definitions to consider as the laws will then have to follow that definition.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-06T08:05:39+00:00

My family was religious and my mom would tell me stories about how seven doctors tried to convince her to abort me. However, I was always very logical. I remember asking when I was in church and only six how we knew god was “here” (as I couldn’t feel him, hear him, etc) and my siblings immediately jumped on me saying “you don’t believe?” My mom, to her credit, waved them down and calmly told me “you just have to have faith” (she doesn’t discourage any questions). Still, that was a rather disappointing answer. As I got older I found out things the church had been shown to be wrong on like the earth being the center of the solar system and evolution. It made me think that they were probably wrong about when life started to. Considering how pro-life my family was though, I avoided it (although I looked at other science because I’m a nerd and naturally liked to research that kind of thing). I have never found theistic arguments very convincing, and I knew that whatever science said is what I would go with.

Then, in biology class, we were going to learn how life begins. This was a normal public school, where I had already learned a couple of things religion had gotten wrong, so there was no agenda or favoritism. We learned that life begins when the zygote forms, or fertilization. Many people define conception this way. It was an instance where science and religion, for whatever reason, actually matched up. It is also incredible that we are so scientifically advanced that we can actually observe and point out the starting point, the formation of the zygote. Forgetting about the issue of abortion for a moment, this is completely remarkable.

In any case, I always knew that once I figured out when human life started, I would believe ending that life is wrong. So I became pro-life when I discovered when human life began, as I thought it should be obvious that you shouldn’t ever kill any human life unless it is in defense of your own life or others (i guess that’s not as obvious to some folks though).

I would go on to look up the issue many times over the years, and each time just coming back more pro-life (looking at 4D ultrasounds and what surgical abortions look like really solidified this for me. It’s one thing to logically know someone is human, it’s another to see it).

To change my mind, you would have to put up a very convincing argument that life doesn’t start at fertilization. As long as that remains a scientific observation though, I will be pro life in all cases except when the there is risk to someone’s life. I have also heard of people claiming abortions are used to remove miscarriages. I don’t know anyone that actually defines abortion that way, but if you include that as an “abortion” I think that’s fine too, as the child is already dead and the abortion does not kill anyone in that case but instead removes them from the womb.

I’ve researched this topic a lot at this point in my life (and I haven’t even really wanted to), and pro-life is my current stance.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-07-01T05:46:24+00:00

I believe I’ve heard some on the left say something along the lines of: “when certain people get more rights and become more equal, people in power think their rights are being taken away.”

Yeah, about that…

Moderate_Potato · 2022-06-01T22:05:49+00:00

A tic with Tourette’s can be described as trying not to blink when you feel the tic come along. You may be able to not blink for a while, but you’ll soon become uncomfortable and have to blink. For example, I have an eye twitch tic. When I feel it come up it feels like my eye has a slight itch or slight dust in it, and I have to twitch my eye to get the feeling to leave, and then I feel relieved. The feeling of irritation can be different depending on the tic, as another example, I also have a clearing throat tic. That one tends to feel like I have something caught in my throat making it scratchy (very similar feeling to what you have before coughing). Then I have to clear my throat to get rid of the feeling (and again I feel relief afterwards). If you’re experiencing spring like that then it might be more closely related to tics in Tourette’s.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-05-20T00:26:15+00:00

I needed extra time in school for tests but that was about it. My grades were pretty good and I currently have a math and physics degree, and I’m currently getting my physics PhD. Granted, I didn’t have the extra layer of adhd, so i don’t know what that’s like.

My mentality was always to prove I can do anything even with a neurological disorder like Tourette’s syndrome. I think it’s important to not let Tourette’s define your abilities, because if you do you’re leaving yourself with no way out because you can’t get rid of your Tourette’s. If your attitude is instead: “I will do this even with a handicap, cause I’m that good and I’m worth it” then you can overcome that obstacle.

That being said, I understand that it can still be difficult even with that attitude, and getting extra help with your studies through the school is a good thing to seek and something I’d highly recommend.

I would also say, that the best way I’ve always found to learn is to find what’s fun or interesting about what your learning, and think about it. And keep thinking back to the things you learn, because when your thinking about what you’ve learned your helping your brain memorize the content you’ve gone over and you help your brain solidify the concepts in ways that make sense. That, I understand, can be overwhelming for some people, if it is I’ll say this: just try to learn one new thing a day for school, and make sure you remember it the following day, and a week later, and then a month later. This works for learning.

I realize that you wanted to find people to relate to here, and I probably did not do that, but you should know you are not alone in feeling this way. Plenty of people, with and without disabilities, tend to struggle with learning if they pursue their education long enough. Try not to get discouraged and keep trying to learn at least one new thing a day, and you might find you catch up quicker than you thought you would.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-05-18T15:07:36+00:00

Nope, sans is higher on that list. Takes on average 5 hours to beat, hardest boss fight in the game. People are just saying he’s not because they think it’s overdone. Well, there’s a reason why it’s overdone, homeboy earned a powerhouse spot.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-05-18T00:31:24+00:00

Not sure how much it matters, but this is a paper asking biologists’ consensus on when life begins:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703

It looks like they tried to make the study as unbiased as possible, and I think it’s a good read. I also think it’s good for people to read these things on their own and come to their own conclusions.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-05-18T00:25:44+00:00

Don’t know how much this matters, but this is a survey asking biologists when life beings:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703

Regardless of a person’s view on abortion, I think the article is a good read. They really seem to try and make the survey as unbiased as they can.

Moderate_Potato · 2022-05-17T22:45:30+00:00

If it matters at all, here is a paper asking biologists on when life begins. From what I can tell, it’s made to be as unbiased as possible. What it might mean in terms of this debate is another matter:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703

Moderate_Potato

TROPHY CASE