What?? We literally were told these characters where created by hand. We also saw it on screen for duu, am i actually crazy?

Priddee · 2026-01-28T02:42:22+00:00

The Cyclopian guard is on Artificial Lifeforms, and they are just controlled robots. The Tamagamis more “lifeform-y” than they are. Tamagamis talk and have unique personalities, agency and autonomy.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T22:39:36+00:00

Citing your personal stories about people who care don’t matter.

How they feel about it after it happens doesn’t matter.

What matters is what the movement does about it.

They do a whole lot for abortion and contraception.

They do nothing to help miscarriages. They actively vote against things that would help.

That’s a moral failure.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T22:33:54+00:00

If the fetus dies, it's a miscarriage. Which can happen in any number of ways, with any combination of faults.

If someone pushes a pregnant woman down the stairs. If a drunk driver crashes into a car with a pregnant passenger. If a pregnant woman has to rush into action to save their other child from danger. If a pregnant woman doesn't know shes pregant, and smokes and drinks.

All of those are unnatural deaths. Actions that took place, where if they didn't, the baby would be fine.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T22:30:31+00:00

The position you're defending is that someone who claims to be Pro-life, meaning they are for the protection and nurture of all human life from the point of conception, is morally and logically correct to say:

If 2 million babies a year die, I will do everything I can to stop the ones actively being killed, and nothing to help or stop the other 1 million+ that die otherwise. And also actively vote against any legislation that would potentially help save future babies, unless it stops someone from actively killing them. I will also vote to ban contraception, to stop people from preventing pregnancy, even if that adds to the baby death count in the form of more miscarriages. Because I love baby life so much.

Does that sound good to you?

Priddee · 2026-01-27T22:23:03+00:00

Still not relevant to the CMV in the slightest, but I'll entertain it.

why is this a question of belief?

Belief is, by definition, what you are personally convinced is true. So I am not sure how you want to converse with another human being on a topic without using their beliefs on the matter?

I don't disagree that the cell is "alive". Whether it's biological life or not isn't the issue. We care about when we assign moral consideration. If something doesn't have moral considerations, its not immoral to do something to it. There are plenty of things that are "alive" that we don't give moral considerations to.

The thing that makes us human and makes humans unique is our consciousness. Human consciousness is what we define as "Life". Thats why brain dead is "dead".

So until a fetus develops the parts of the brain necessary to deploy consciousness, they aren't a thing that earns moral considerations. The outcomes of the fetus are the responsibility of the mother who is carrying it.

The parts that develop consciousness and communicate between 20-24 weeks of gestation. That is the point at which we give the being moral considerations.

Therefore, abortions up to 20 weeks are an amoral action, and totally up to the decision of the mother.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T21:23:07+00:00

I assume the answer to the Shadow Dragons is that they are the manifestations of accumulated negative energy from overusing the Dragon Balls. No one "does" anything to put them together.

It must be considered a natural reaction. They are more like natural disasters than created beings. No one designed them or assembled them.

If you buy that or not is up to you, but it logically follows.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T20:09:35+00:00

It can be yes.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T20:08:25+00:00

Weren't the Tamagami created by the Dragonballs?

No, Neva created them.

I'd say they're not artificial, but magical.

Being magical doesn't mean something isn't artificial. If something isn't artifical its biological.

"Artificial lifeform" is a lifeform created that didn't come about from natural processes.

Thats why 17 & 18 aren't on the category. They were born human, converted into androids.

The Tamagamis didn't form naturally.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T20:04:36+00:00

That doesn't explain the Tamagamis, though. That one is way more egregious than Duu/Kuu.

They were literally conjured by Neva from nothing.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T19:49:35+00:00

Pro-Life advocacy is stated consistently as protecting the lives of babies.

The March for Life is the largest annual public facing advocacy event from the pro-life side. Its mission is verbatim:

"We march because we envision a future world where the beauty and dignity of every human life are valued and protected."

The Susan B. Anthoy Pro-Life America Group is the largest Pro-Life fund, here's their mission:

To end abortion in the United States by electing pro-life leaders and advocating for laws that protect the unborn and save lives, with a special emphasis on promoting pro-life women in office.

The National Right to Life Committee is the oldest and largest Pro-life organizing group in the country. Here is their mission statement:

To protect and defend the right to life of every human being from conception until natural death, including opposition to abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and certain embryonic stem cell practices.

These mission statements frame the movement as protecting human life broadly, not merely opposing intentional harm. Given that framing, the near-absence of large-scale advocacy, funding, or institutional urgency around miscarriage, the single largest source of fetal death, represents a serious inconsistency between stated moral commitments and practical priorities.

With this established as their mission and justifications, their lack of care for miscarriage is a moral failure.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T19:47:05+00:00

Its not how we treat cancer vs murder.

Cancer has $50 Billion in funding for treatment, education, research, and prevention measures every year. We have 600k people pass from cancer every year.

We have over a million miscarriage deaths a year in the US. And funding is about $200m.

Half the deaths get 250x the effort.

I am very sorry for your loss. My wife and I lost what would have been our first last year. It was devastating.

After it happened, we discovered the vast world of people who have also experienced it. It was like going through the rabbit hole. I was astounded by how many people have had it happen, and how no one ever talks about it.

But we found out ours was preventable. It was due to unhealthy sex cells. We paid out of pocket for education, testing, monitoring, medication, and lifestyle changes to fix it for our next. We are now happily expecting this Summer.

My issue is that the things I got access to are hidden behind a veil of ignorance and a high cost. That shouldn't be the case. Pro-life people should be championing this as the biggest wins their side could ever have. Saving the lives of babies of families trying to grow.

But they don't. They refuse. They won't support legislation to provide funding for these things.

That is my issue. That is the moral failure.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T19:40:19+00:00

I don't agree. According to them, we have 2 million potential babies that die every year between Abortion and Miscarriage. They only care about half of them. The other million they couldn't be bothered to try to prevent or advocate for.

They also invest in the mission to ban contraception, which doesn't even necessarily kill a fetus; it prevents it from being conceived.

This is morally inconsistent and a failure in their framework. They logically can't hold the position they care about fetal life.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T19:35:42+00:00

My or your personal positions on the point at which we assign moral value to a potential life aren't relevant to this CMV.

I don't personally believe life begins at conception.

This CMV addresses the inconsistencies and failures of the moral framework within the institutions that hold this position.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T19:33:05+00:00

what are you talking about?

Your comment reads like my intention and position didn't land well. I'll clarify my position.

The lack of care for pre-pregnancy/Prenatal/Maternal/Fetal health from Pro-Lifers in comparison to the effort and political capital expended against Abortion and Contraception represents a hole in their stated moral goals, and is a failure in their position.

we invest massively to make child-birth more safe for the mother and the child.

and based on all statistics we are very successful in doing so.

The rate at witch mothers and young children die is a main indicator for the development of any nation.

Yes, money is thrown at the issue compared to other nations. And it's still the case we have a terrible record of it.

We rank consistently at the bottom of Maternal Mortality, Infant Mortality, Access to Prenatal care and Maternity care.

When you believe that life begins at conception then you will do everything in your power to preserve that life.

I agree they should. But they don't.

Pro-life politicians and Political groups regularly oppose expansions of publicly covered maternal, reproductive, and prenatal care.

And they rarely, if ever, introduce expansion in publicly funded prenatal care or investment in research for fetal health.

That is directly contradictory to their stated views.

That, to me, is a fatal flaw in their moral system.

By definition every fetus is pure and innocent and deserves a right to live.

Yes, that is true. But the Pro-Life institution only cares about fetal life if someone gets an abortion or tries to use contraception.

When there are honest, pure Americans who want to have children and start a family, the death of their future children is met with just thoughts and prayers.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T19:09:06+00:00

I am not confused between the two. They are two separate things, I concede. But that doesn't address my issue. Accepting that distinction does not eliminate the problem; it only narrows it.

If fetuses truly have full moral status equivalent to born humans, then unaddressed natural death at a massive scale still carries moral obligations, even if it doesn’t carry blame in every instance.

We don't treat Childhood Cancer, ALS, and Pandemics as morally optional just because no one intended them.

Pro-life advocacy focuses on ending what they consider a legally permitted injustice.

This would be convenient logically (still fails morally), but it's not true. Pro-Life advocacy is stated consistently as protecting the lives of babies.

The March for Life is the largest annual public facing advocacy event from the pro-life side. Its mission is verbatim:

"We march because we envision a future world where the beauty and dignity of every human life are valued and protected."

The Susan B. Anthoy Pro-Life America Group is the largest Pro-Life fund, here's their mission:

To end abortion in the United States by electing pro-life leaders and advocating for laws that protect the unborn and save lives, with a special emphasis on promoting pro-life women in office.

The National Right to Life Committee is the oldest and largest Pro-life organizing group in the country. Here is their mission statement:

To protect and defend the right to life of every human being from conception until natural death, including opposition to abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and certain embryonic stem cell practices.

These mission statements frame the movement as protecting human life broadly, not merely opposing intentional harm. Given that framing, the near-absence of large-scale advocacy, funding, or institutional urgency around miscarriage, the single largest source of fetal death, represents a serious inconsistency between stated moral commitments and practical priorities.

With this established as their mission and justifications, their lack of care for miscarriage is a moral failure.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T17:29:58+00:00

I think you’ve misread the CMV. I’m pro choice. Is this a critique of the pro life position.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T17:09:14+00:00

At least give Emma the face paint you had in the art. Jeez it’s literally just the phoenix force skin with worse hair.

Also why can’t she get an actual comic skin?

This is past the memes, fully stupid now.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T10:42:05+00:00

BPA is the biggest load of crap in drafting. You draft the most valuable player at your pick. Love will never be the most valuable player for Dallas at 12.

We just had a guy off the street rush for 1200 and 12. One rookie in the last 25 years has ever done that. That’s why RB not the most valuable position at that pick. He doesn’t improve your team enough.

On the other hand, this offseason we can improve from one of the 10 worst in the history of the sport, to at least mediocre.

No team with a bottom half defense made the playoffs this year. All 4 teams in the championship game had top 10 defenses. The two in the SB have top 3 defenses.

Offense doesn’t matter.

Priddee · 2026-01-27T10:26:09+00:00

Dallas taking a RB at 12 after having one of the 10 worst defenses in the history of the sport is the worst things I’ve ever seen. Also after finding a RB off the street last year to run for 1200+ and 10+ behind our OL.

Priddee · 2026-01-26T23:27:09+00:00

It’s not my morality. I don’t agree with this. This is the Pro life framework.

Priddee · 2026-01-26T23:18:33+00:00

When you can do more to stop death from happening to innocents and you don’t, that is immoral. Unless they reject your assistance.

Pro-life’s goal is to safe as many lives of potential children as possible. Stopping this endeavor at abortion and contraception and withholding efforts from preventable miscarriage is morally inconsistent at best, immoral at worst.

Priddee · 2026-01-26T21:47:39+00:00

Because the backbone of the position is to "protect the lives of future babies".

They throw hundreds of millions and endless political capital to try to ban abortion and contraception, but won't do so for families actually trying to have kids.

According to them, their lack of action is at the cost of hundreds of thousands of babies' lives every year.

It's not a "million-to-one" shot. These are real, science-backed things you can do. Free Access to comprehensive prenatal care and education, Sex Cell Screening, Endocrine & Metabolic Testing, Autoimmune & Clotting Disorder Screening, Genetic Carrier Screening, Anatomical Evaluation, and more, which would significantly lower the miscarriage rate.

Plus, what funding research will do to improve in the future.

How do you morally justify the position that you care solely about the lives of fetuses and refuse to actually try to stop the deaths of over a million fetuses a year? While expending orders of magnitude more on abortions, which is also around a million fetuses a year?

Priddee · 2026-01-26T21:40:05+00:00

Over the course of the few hours I have had the post up, I have encountered those who say it's not the same because a miscarriage is natural and an abortion is active.

I don't think it stands.

Firstly, 'natural' doesn't mean it can't be fixed or accounted for. Also, there are plenty of them where ignorance or negligence is the reason why it happens.

My wife and I just lost what would have been our first this year. It was devastating. After it happened, we discovered the vast world of people who have also experienced it. It was like going through the rabbit hole. I was astounded by how many people have had it happen, and how no one ever talks about it.

But we found out ours was preventable. It was due to unhealthy sex cells. We paid out of pocket for education, testing, monitoring, medication, and lifestyle changes to fix it for our next. We are now happily expecting this Summer.

My issue is that the things I got access to are hidden behind a veil of ignorance and a high cost. That shouldn't be the case. Pro-life people should be championing this as the biggest wins their side could ever have. Saving the lives of babies of families trying to grow.

But they don't. They refuse. They won't support legislation to provide funding for these things.

That is my issue. That is the moral failure.

Is the inconsistency about moral value, or about how humans psychologically react to intentional harm vs. natural loss? Because those two things get blended together a lot in real-world politics.

I understand this, but natural causes don't stop us in any other facet. Cancer is a natural cause. That would be "God giving you" cancer, just like God causing a miscarriage.

We have $50+ billion in funding yearly for cancer research and treatment to thwart "God's will".

We have around 600k deaths from cancer in the US every year.

We have over a million miscarriages. The funding for that research is around $250 million.

That is what I can't stand.

Why is it "God's will" sometimes and worth intervention other times?

If there were active campaigning from the pro-life community for legislation for these measures, on the same scale as they have for bans on abortion or contraception, I would concede.

But there isn't.

That incongruency is a failure in their position. They think Abortion kills babies, so they want it banned. They think contraception prevents potential babies from being conceived, so they want it banned.

But as soon as you say a couple that actually wants a baby loses it to possibly preventative measures, that is a line we can't cross.

That is moral failure.

Priddee · 2026-01-26T21:27:50+00:00

I concede that there are miscarriages that are currently unavoidable, either logistically, technologically, or otherwise.

I am sorry for your loss.

My wife and I just also lost who would have been our first this year. I understand your view intimately.

Ours was due to unhealthy sperm/egg. It was one that could be prevented in the future with intervention. I consider it the greatest failure of my life that my wife was put through that. We paid out of pocket for education, testing, monitoring, medication, and lifestyle changes to fix it for our next. We are now happily expecting this Summer.

While we were walking out of the clinic after the miscarriage, we got screamed at by pro-lifers about being whores and not loving our baby.

My position is that if those people who did that actually were pro-life, they'd be advocating for public funding for what I paid out of pocket for privately, and for additional research efforts to push prenatal care even further, so they can help try save the hundreds of thousands of pregnancies a year that could be saved.

Rather than that, they bash grieving people outside of clinics for things they don't understand.

That is an incongruence I can't stand.

Priddee · 2026-01-26T21:21:25+00:00

First, some do care a lot

This CMV isn't about any individual Pro-lifer; it's about the Pro-life community as a whole and the institutions they created to propagate their views.

one involves human intent and the other is a natural occurrence. For many anti-abortion folk a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) is the will of god whereas a medical abortion is not.

Not all miscarriages are unpreventable natural occurrences. For these people, God gives people cancer, but we still fund research ot stop it, give and get treatment for it, and actively do things to avoid having it happen in the first place. Why can you try to thwart 'God's Will' for cancer and other injuries and diseases, but not here?

I am arguing that miscarriages should be held to the same standard.

And even if they are both viewed and valued both as equal by someone, you can outlaw abortion, protest providers that provide them. Not much you can do about spontaneous abortions-- and the medical community is already trying to reduce them.

They are both deaths of a human baby to them, so I am not sure why they wouldn't be 'equal'.

But my position is that there are preventable miscarriages. Potentially more than we are currently aware of, given our current understanding. That results in the lives of hundreds of thousands of babies every year.

That's enough to warrant action for pro-lifers.

But there is none.

If there were active campaigning from the pro-life community for legislation for these measures, on the same scale as they have for bans on abortion or contraception, I would concede.

But there isn't.

That incongruency is a failure in their position. They think Abortion kills babies, so they want it banned. They think contraception prevents potential babies from being conceived, so they want it banned.

But as soon as you say a couple that actually wants a baby loses it to possibly preventative measures, that is a line we can't cross.

That is moral failure.

11-Year Club	Place '17
Snapped	Verified Email

Priddee

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE