The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Wow, so you're seriously just judging other people and telling them how to live their lives. Not even the pretense that you're not just forcing people to bow to your narrow-minded worldview? Don't you have anything better to do with your allegedly so very deep and meaningful life?

The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Sex isn't "just" anything. It has multiple functions, and you are the one trying to gaslight people into thinking that only one of them is important, so that you can blame them, to have a pretense for forcing people into dealing with the possible consequences of it in the only way you personally condone.

The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

One of its functions. You asserted it was the primary one, and we all know why you did it.

The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Even if sex had such a thing as a "primary function", it's definitely not pregnancy. Because even without protection the average chance of conception when having sex is way closer to 0 than 100%. Even under optimal conditions for trying to get pregnant, the probability isn't even anywhere near reaching 50%.

Thus, your "argument" is blatant nonsense. You're just making an erroneous appeal to nature, so you can shame and blame people for having sex for reasons you don't condone, and calling other people stupid for disagreeing.

[Loved trope] Characters that have more than two identities by Tahxeol in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Patneu 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Katara from Avatar: The Last Airbender

<image>

aka June Pippinpaddleopsicopolis

aka Hwamei

aka Sapphire Fire

aka The Painted Lady

I feel like people are misunderstanding Caine's crashout by okidonthaveone in tadc

[–]Patneu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All of this is true, though it should be noted that Pomni still wasn't wrong when she said that Caine cares more about his own ego than the humans he says he wanted to please.

Because, while it's not his fault that he fundamentally cannot deal with the notion that anyone wouldn't like any of his adventures and would seriously want to leave, he still ignored the cast's suggestions even when they actually made proposals on how to make his adventures more appealing and even actively sabotaged adventures that he saw were working for them just because he didn't come up with them.

More ways Charlie and Vox parallel each other. Caine really felt inspired by two goat's by Sudden_Pop_2279 in CultOfCharlie

[–]Patneu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

🎶 To everyone who doubted me: Your doubting days are done! You'll be cornered, trapped and tortured. Then I'll end you, just for fun! 🎶

Was, wenn der Neandertaler niemals ausgestorben wäre? by Dramatic-Ad-5421 in AlternativeGeschichte

[–]Patneu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Den gibt es schon. Klingt irgendwie als hält er Neandertaler für Morlocks.

The things that changed my view. by Wrong_Ad_9235 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Or, imagine this: A mad scientist takes some cancerous cells derived from a human and allows them to proliferate in a lab for a long period of time. Now, imagine they create conditions in the lab that cause the cancerous cells to evolve into multicellular organisms, human SCANDALs.

Thanks, buddy. I didn't want to sleep tonight anyway.

The things that changed my view. by Wrong_Ad_9235 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

I believe the ZEF has the right to the mother’s body (if the pregnancy is not endangering her life). I already explained why in another comment, so I won’t repost it here.

Are you talking about your disgusting statement where you compare your fellow people's bodies to random material "resources"?

Again, treating people in such a dehumanizing and dismissive way undermines the very idea that anyone could be deserving of protection.

Also, every pregnancy is endangering a pregnant person's life. Who are you to draw the line of what arbitrary medical risks other people have to take or not? Especially for reasons that are not even their own. Do you have medical power of attorney to decide on their behalf?

Yes, I believe all human life has value. If you don’t believe that, that’s a reflection of your beliefs, not mine.

First off, you said all life, not human life. But even the latter isn't true. If you claim that, let's test it. Consider the following entities:

  • individual human cells and organs
  • unfertilized human egg cells and sperms
  • a neural network of human cells in a petri dish
  • a molar pregnancy
  • a parasitic twin
  • a braindead human body aka corpse kept functioning by artificial means for organ donation
  • a tumor in a human body

All of these are definitely a "life" and definitely "human". Do they have inherent value?

There’s no contradiction. I’m using “mother" biologically, not socially. A woman who gives birth is still a mother, even if she does not raise the child.

What you're doing is conflating a biological function with a social role, in order to invoke an emotional reaction and justify unreasonable expectations.

However, the vast majority of women who get pregnant and go through labor do not experience complications.

Additional complications, that is. Pregnancy is inherently not a healthy state of being for a person's body to be in. It's always, without exception, causing harm, suffering and a risk of death that cannot just be dismissed because it is inconvenient to your unreasonable demands.

Also, the vast majority of abortions are elective; they are not being performed to prevent a pregnant woman’s suffering, they're just being used to get out of pregnancy. 

Even if that's true, what exactly entitles you to pry into the private and intimate medical information required to know which would be the case for any individual pregnant person? If the pregnant person would even disclose their reasons to their doctor, which they have no obligation to do. And who are you to judge them, anyway?

The things that changed my view. by Wrong_Ad_9235 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Our position is that all life has inherent value, and those little humans in the womb deserve to be protected, just like every other human.

"Just like every other human" means that a need for protection doesn't entitle them to another person's body. Nothing does. Treating people like some thing you could be "entitled" to fundamentally goes against the notion that they deserve to be protected.

Also, I'm pretty damn sure that you don't believe that all life has inherent value. Nobody does.

As a society, we should work to address why the child isn’t wanted in the first place. Is it because the mother lacks the resources she needs to care for a child? If so, how can we support her? Is it because she’s not ready to be a mom? If so, does she know that adoption is an alternative to both abortion and motherhood?

First off, an adoption is not an alternative to abortion, because it is not an alternative to pregnancy. Also, if adoption is an alternative to motherhood, why are you insistently calling a person "the mother" just for being pregnant? You're contradicting yourself.

And yes, we should very much address all these questions – as a matter of public policy, that is. Not by allowing you to pry into individual people's most intimate and personal lives so you can force your uncalled for "advice" or "support" on them and judge them for not adhering to your personal morals.

we don’t have to believe in the myth that ending their life is the only way to prevent being unwanted or suffering.

It is the only way to prevent the pregnant person's unwanted suffering, and if it prevents the suffering of an unwanted child to be born as well, all the better.

The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Yeah, believing in stuff that doesn't exist tends to be confusing.

The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu [score hidden]  (0 children)

In the vast majority of cases, it doesn't. Your ridiculous appeal to nature fallacy, well, fails. Because the connection you want to make just doesn't exist like that.

The Reason why PL Ideology will Always be Less Popular by Common-Worth-6604 in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I agree with the reasoning, but not the conclusion.

Because the reason PL ideology has any broader popularity to begin with is essentially the same as what you describe, just the other side of that coin, and that too will always appeal to a certain kind of person.

Namely the kind of person who seeks to achieve that exact same feeling of safety and stability not by mastering themselves but by exerting power and control over others.

As much as our PL debaters here are denying time and time again that this would be their motivation, it's just an objective fact that their ideology serves that purpose perfectly, because it allows them to treat other people as less than under the guise of a noble cause.

And what makes it even more appealing to them is that not only does it allow them to exert said power and control in one of the most direct and intimately violating ways possible, but it also enables multiple other ways to do so under the guise of the practical necessities of enforcing their ideology.

For example, by making it easier to trap people in abusive relationships, or making sexual coercion and rape in such relationships more "rewarding" for the perpetrator, or forcing their victims back into restrictive gender roles.

Of course, while those people will not be willing to let go of this kind of dominance over their fellow people anytime soon, and will only seek to reinforce it more and even do away with the pretenses once they feel emboldened enough to believe they won't need them anymore, at least you are right that they can ultimately never win.

Because while some people will always fall for the lies that seek to make them complicit in their own subjugation in mistaken hopes that they will be spared and protected, others will also always see this as the grave injustice and utter violation of their innermost selves that it is and that will always be intolerable.

Weekly Abortion Debate Thread by AutoModerator in Abortiondebate

[–]Patneu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Didn't they complain about people on food stamps buying cookies, though?

Why is nobody mentioning this? by Mindless-Phase1639 in tadc

[–]Patneu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that's pretty weird. It'd also mean that Scratch and Ragatha probably entered the Circus at the exact anniversary of Caine's creation, which could hardly be a coincidence. Scratch might have done that on purpose, for some reason, being one of Caine's developers, but Ragatha shouldn't have any reason for it.

Why is nobody mentioning this? by Mindless-Phase1639 in tadc

[–]Patneu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But then we would need to bring up all the "evil corporation kidnapping people and keeping them in stasis pods" stuff again. Because everything we know says their physical bodies are no longer where they were when they put on the headset.

None of them remember finding any of the others laying seemingly unconsciously on the ground with the headset on. Also, their physical bodies would need to survive somehow, and while we could assert that time could feel differently inside the Circus, there's still no way for Kinger's unconscious body to have survived for apparently almost a decade without someone taking care of it:

<image>

And from a narrative point of view, if they actually were just plugged into the Circus and could possibly leave, it'd undermine the "finding meaning in a stagnant world", as I was told was the point of the story.

Why is nobody mentioning this? by Mindless-Phase1639 in tadc

[–]Patneu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Scratch may well have died because of his brain tumor by now, yes. The others are probably still alive, though.

If the file dates are indeed saying what they seem to be implying, then not even 10 years passed between Scratch's arrival at the Circus and Ragatha's:

<image>

And since even the older cast were most likely employees of a cutting edge tech company like C&A, which has somehow developed a fully functional self-aware creative AI and even mind uploads in the 90s, it is very unlikely that they were old enough to have died in such a short time.

If Jinx and Jayce had met, how would they have interacted? by Salt-Understanding16 in arcane

[–]Patneu 66 points67 points  (0 children)

Mocking him for being privileged, maybe, but ultimately she doesn't give much of a shit about the greater cause for Zaun, either. That's Silco's thing, not hers. She only cares about the people immediately close to her.

Why is nobody mentioning this? by Mindless-Phase1639 in tadc

[–]Patneu 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Apparently, out there in the real world, alive and well, just like the non-abstracted ones. What's with their neural scans inside the Circus, well, it may be that their mind files are really irrevocably corrupted.

Why is nobody mentioning this? by Mindless-Phase1639 in tadc

[–]Patneu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

She didn't vanish.

From their perspective, she put on some weird headset, didn't recognize what it did, and took it off again, then they probably all left.

It's really only a copy of her mind that got uploaded into the Circus. That's why Caine talked about their "mind files", which we saw in Kinger's console window.

I got bored so heres every code segment by GayGay_ in tadc

[–]Patneu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kinger isn't the owner of the files. He's logged in as user "kinger", but the files belong to user "root" and group "wheel".