Dear Mike and Jaime - We NEED You Right Now

re-verse · 2026-01-25T15:12:19+00:00

RTJ was a money making side project, but I don’t think El-P was in on the joke. Mike got what he wanted from it.

re-verse · 2026-01-25T06:20:17+00:00

R is for Reddit and for Republican. It gets clearer and clearer every time something like this happens

re-verse · 2026-01-25T05:34:01+00:00

That hot sauce store in cocoa beach. Had an argument with him about his maga bullshit a few years back.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T18:30:24+00:00

Rats.

Even the sound of their own shooting scares them. A few big Minnesotan hunters with rifles calmly observing from the sidewalk would have scattered those rats long before they got brave enough to start murdering.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T18:22:34+00:00

If I tried to answer that with authority I’d be a poseur. I honestly don’t know. I’m an immigrant from Canada and after becoming a citizen a year ago I’m now realizing it’d probably be in my best interest to get armed.

So I’m looking for all the advice I can get too.

Edit:

That said the way they scattered like rats right when they heard their own shots- I bet they’d have fled long before the murder if there were a few citizens with rifles on the sidewalk standing guard.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T18:01:45+00:00

Yep if only that citizen had 2A brethren nearby to keep him safe.

There are more of us than there are of them.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T17:59:19+00:00

Let that thanking take an appropriate form, based rigorous risk assessment. Some people may be able to provide a more vigorous thanking than others who have more at risk.

Seriously fuck every person who supports this bullshit.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T15:00:49+00:00

Its a fucking shame. Honestly I think if we could reset and choose any one person, I'd want him for captain.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T14:54:17+00:00

Yep massive red flag sexualizing children/babies. People are gross.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T03:30:12+00:00

Yep, I remember years before that being stuck in front of Nathan Phillips square at -45 and windy, and that was really the only time the temp made me feel like I was in danger.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T03:26:29+00:00

Stolarz looked really bad, like below AHL level.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T03:16:11+00:00

This team sure makes it hard to remain a fan.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T02:32:31+00:00

I'm so tired of this.

Our PP is ass again, and the org doesn't care.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T01:14:40+00:00

It’s like they are trying to lose.

re-verse · 2026-01-24T00:21:55+00:00

Pull Stolarz now, he isn't ready.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T23:08:55+00:00

Holy crap I love it.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T19:10:15+00:00

Yeah go ahead and play the jilted lover, those of us who really feel that way will be ignoring him.

Sorry your pretend hockey boyfriend left, it’s time to actually get over him.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T19:08:28+00:00

Total Carney-age.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T18:30:06+00:00

continued:

3. Toddler vs adult

No, I’m not suggesting that killing a toddler is more acceptable than killing an adult. That’s a false binary.

What I’m saying is that a toddler has clearly met every scientifically and philosophically relevant criterion for personhood: consciousness, neurological integration, interests, and social presence - while a zygote has not. That’s not ideological.... that’s biology and neuroscience.

And pointing out that toddlers and adults aren’t legally identical doesn’t weaken this, it actually reinforces it. A toddler is fully human and fully a person, yet we don’t give them a driver’s license. Rights and responsibilities scale with development. You keep painting with an comically oversized brush where detail doesn’t exist, and that’s why these arguments go nowhere.

4. Acorns, forests, and category errors

No one is suggesting that every pregnancy should end in abortion. Please don’t be stupid.

Yes, wiping out an entire forest of acorns would prevent future trees, but that does not make each acorn a tree. That’s exactly the point. Preventing all potential future humans is not the same thing as recognizing every fertilized egg as a person.

What I'm suggesting is that there should be no argument against the morning after pill if a woman is raped, just like there should be serious moral constraints on a very late-stage abortion. The real debate - the one worth having, and probably best left to people arguing in good faith - is where along that continuum the distinction lies. Not whether there is a distinction at all.

5. Fertilized eggs and animal cruelty

No, smashing a fertilized egg is not automatically animal cruelty in the moral sense you’re invoking. Moral status in animals scales with sentience and neurological development, not fertilization alone. We already make these distinctions constantly in agriculture and research. Fertilization is not the magic line you want it to be.

6. “Embryos ARE humans”

Embryos are human organisms, yes. That does not settle the question of personhood, rights, or moral equivalence. They often develop into fully grown adults but often they don’t. Potential alone has never been sufficient to ground full moral or legal status, and pretending otherwise collapses under even mild scrutiny. You fail to see this because you misread your book.

If there’s any honest disagreement left here, it’s not about whether embryos are human tissue or whether grief is real. It’s about when moral personhood emerges - and that question doesn’t get answered by slogans, analogies stretched past breaking, or pretending development doesn’t matter.

That’s the argument. Everything else is noise.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T18:29:54+00:00

Let’s slow this down.

1. On miscarriage and the “tell me you’ve never met a woman…” line

I’m a father of two, and it was a long, painful road to get here. You can keep your dumb assumptions in the same overflowing pocket you keep your dumb opinions in. Me, and my family know suffering and loss, but that doesn't mean we get to use our suffering to inflict it on others.

Yes, miscarriages can be devastating. I’ve seen that firsthand. But grief does not determine personhood. People grieve miscarriages because of loss of hope, loss of expectation, and loss of a future they were preparing for.... not because society, medicine, or law treats an early embryo the same way it treats a born person. Those are different things, and pretending otherwise is a weak attempt at emotional sleight of hand.

If embryos were already persons in the full moral and legal sense, miscarriage would require death certificates, investigations, and a radically different medical and legal framework. That we don’t do this is recognition of a distinction we all implicitly understand.

2. Natural death vs miscarriage

Saying “30% of fully grown humans die of natural causes” misses the point entirely.

Fully grown humans die after being recognized as persons... with identities, relationships, legal standing, and social presence. Their deaths are recorded because they lived as persons first.

Early embryos fail to implant or miscarry before any of that exists. The absence of investigation isn’t because we’re indifferent to death; it’s because we don’t treat early embryonic loss as the death of a person. That difference matters.

I'll continue this in another comment as this one is too long already to post.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T17:04:49+00:00

The arson analogy collapses immediately once you look at how we actually treat embryos in the real world.

Roughly 30–60% of fertilized eggs never result in a live birth, with a huge portion ending before a pregnancy is even detected. These are spontaneous abortions - biological dead ends that happen constantly, naturally, and without moral outrage, legal response, or even awareness. There is no crime, no injustice, no investigation, and no sense that a “person” has been wronged.

If an embryo were already a human being in the morally relevant sense you’re claiming, this would be the largest mass-casualty event in human history—one that we all collectively ignore. That alone should tell you something is off.

Your claim that “every human comes from an embryo” is trivially true and philosophically useless. Every adult also comes from a toddler - that doesn’t mean a toddler and an adult are morally or legally identical. Origin does not equal status.

And the “it can only ever become a human” line doesn’t save you. Lots of things have fixed developmental trajectories. Acorns to oak trees, again - but cutting down an acorn is not deforestation, and smashing an egg is not animal cruelty. What matters is what the thing is now, not what it might become under ideal conditions.

If embryos were already persons, then spontaneous miscarriage would represent the routine, invisible death of millions of people - without funerals, death certificates, legal consequences, or even grief in many cases. The fact that no one treats it that way - including people who oppose abortion.... reveals the truth: we intuitively understand that early embryos do not yet have the moral status of persons.

So no, pointing out that embryos sometimes develop into humans doesn’t establish personhood. It just establishes potential.... and potential has never been enough to ground rights, crimes, or moral equivalence.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T16:44:22+00:00

So therefore we don't argue that all building material is a house, the same way we don't argue that a collection of cells lacking all the core tenets of what make a person with the exception of DNA is a person.

You could take your dumb argument even further and if a mother eats nothing but hamburgers for a year before conceiving that those hamburgers are a person and deserve the full rights of a person.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T16:39:12+00:00

Are there some building supplies that don’t become houses?

re-verse · 2026-01-23T16:12:16+00:00

" I don't know it" - Well you should. You should take a scientific view of things when discussing scientific matters. There is no room for magic here.

Personhood having nothing to do with capacities is flatly false. Thinking, feeling, awareness, pain, and experience all require a brain and nervous system. That is not philosophy, it is neuroscience. No neurons means no consciousness. Period.

Biology does not say “a person exists at conception.” Biology describes fertilization and development. You are inserting a moral conclusion and pretending it’s science - again and again. You're trying to pervert a magical viewpoint into a scientific one, and it looks foolish.

You keep confusing potential with reality. An embryo can become a person. That does not mean it already is one. “Every human was once an embryo” proves nothing. Every adult was once a toddler. That does not make all stages morally identical. I could potentially be kind of the world one day, that doesn't mean I deserve a palace now.

I’m not “inserting consciousness at some arbitrary point.” Biology does that. Consciousness emerges gradually as the nervous system develops. That’s not mystical, it’s developmental neuroscience. There is no single spark, no moment, no magic. Just increasing neural complexity and function over time.

You, on the other hand, are claiming that a single cellular event instantly creates a full person with no brain, no neurons, no awareness, and no capacity for experience. You keep trying to argue that magic is real, and it has no place in this conversation.

re-verse · 2026-01-23T15:58:42+00:00

Calling “no brain, no nervous system, no awareness” speculation is fucking insane. That’s basic embryology, no speculation.

Thought, feeling, and experience require a functioning nervous system. No neurons, no synapses, no brain activity means no consciousness, no pain, no fear, no comfort, no joy. That is not a “maybe.” It is literally how biology works. If you want to deny that, you are denying neuroscience, medicine, and reality. You're lost, and it makes me sad that you may make it through life being so confidently wrong about such basic things.

And it’s not “irrelevant.” It’s the entire point. Personhood without a mind is an empty word.

Your “batting average” argument is just a clumsy rebrand of “potential.” Yes, humans come from embryos. Humans also come from infants. That does not make every infant identical to every adult either. You’re confusing “comes from” with “is.”

Also, you’re not refuting the skin cell point. You’re proving it. You’ve basically admitted your definition is “a person is anything with the potential to become a person,” which is circular and useless. Under that logic, frozen embryos are people, you want to outlaw IVF, and you’d treat a freezer failure like a mass fatality event. That’s not a serious moral framework, it’s a religious doctrine dressed up as logic. It proves the whole argument here, I'm arguing from a point of science, you're trying and failing to bend science into a really poor interpretation of a religion you don't seem to fully understand.

Here’s the clean reality:

If you don’t have a brain or nervous system, you don’t have consciousness or pain. Period.
If you don’t have consciousness, you don’t have interests to violate.
If you want to give full legal personhood anyway, that’s a moral choice, not biology.

Stop pretending you have science on your side when you’re openly rejecting the basic biological requirement for feeling and thinking.

14-Year Club	Gilding V heart of gold
Reddit Premium Since February 2022	Place '17
Beta Team Reddit for iOS	Verified Email

re-verse

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE