Chattooga
4d ago
I’m guessing some number of abortions are because the mother changes her mind, and it seems very counterintuitive to say that the intent of the parents influences the morality of the abortion.
To be clear, I’m broadly pro-choice, but I don’t think sex and pregnancy can be neatly decoupled, any more than driving and car crashes can.
Chattooga
4d ago
Yes, when taking part in risky activities I accept the risk. I’m not sure what the alternative would be?
In the framework you gave, abortion for an accidental pregnancy would be permissible, but one for an intentional pregnancy would not.
Chattooga
2mo ago
I assume Amadan is being sarcastic here, because it’s a silly comparison.
I have a hard time when discussions of dating come up because my personal experience is just not that women’s standards are unreasonable.
Despite being socially awkward and not meeting any of the 6/6/6 qualifications, I’ve been able to meet and date my fair share of athletic, attractive, interesting 20-something’s. (Not so much submissive and agreeable because I find those unattractive.) Many of my friends have as well.
We have all agreed that our greatest difficulty is finding women who are sufficiently interesting with good chemistry. It is genuinely hard to find people with compatible lifestyles (My most specific gripe is that many women (and men!) spend most of their time consuming shortform videos and very few actually live intentionally, but I have found plenty who care about life.), but my rejection rate among women I’m interested in is not unreasonably high. I’m not bragging here, certainly I’m not having crazy success, but my experience leads me to believe the problem doesn’t lie with either gender, and are more a result of broader weakening of social ties. (Or geography. If you don’t live near a city then it is harder)
If I can offer any thoughts, I think many men and women don’t know their market. Most people don’t want ‘most people’, they want a more specific type of person. If your standard for a woman is ‘young + hot’ then you will be rejected more often by that pool not because they have unreasonable standards, but because it’s too broad. If you pool is ‘young, hot, outdoorsy, wants a family, reads, etc.’ then you will have more success, (provided you fit in with that pool of course) In the first you get rejected 19/20 times, while in the second it may only be 2/3 times. Even though it’s smaller, it’s significantly more productive.
Chattooga
3mo ago
Oh I have no doubt he was afraid, I don’t think he was maliciously trying to manufacture an excuse to kill somebody. I think he was panicked and angry, and instead of taking the reasonable option of making sure he was clear, he immediately went for his gun.
I could speculate further on his personality or mental state, but the point is it was an unreasonable and dangerous escalation.
It’s also worth pointing out the car was coming out of reversing and turning. She wasn’t bearing down head-on to run him over.
Chattooga
3mo ago
Look I don’t know what to say. By now I’ve seen a dozen slow-motion versions of these clips. He was not materially struck.
Chattooga
3mo ago
Unfortunately this is where we get to both repeat different versions of the narrative at each other, even in the face of multiple video angles.
She reversed initially, basically doing a shallow 3-point turn, as he was crossing in front of the car. It seems almost certain to me that she was not trying to run over the agent, she likely didn’t know he was there. Not only that, but the agent was out of the way, or trivially able to move out of the way. (He was not significantly struck by the vehicle, although the exact mechanics are messy because he stumbles a bit on the side.) Why pull a gun there?
To say she “waits until a guy is right in front of her, then hits the gas” is to imply she was actively trying to kill him, instead of being careless. It’s also just not accurate!
Ah yes, you can see the woman has pure motives, she was just trying to leave, I can tell my a frame by frame analysis of her tire movements. But ICE agent, he reached for his gun while he was a foot in front of accelerated into him, that's suspicious!"
I think there’s an extremely strong case that it was clear she was not attempting to kill the agent, and that he would have known that, and that his reaction was comically incompetent. I would speculate he was frustrated, aggressive, and panicked, and turned what was at worst reckless endangerment into an execution.
Chattooga
3mo ago
She literally hit him with her car. It's on video. You can just watch it. There's three different angles in the top post. He's folded over on the hood. I never cease to be amazed at the willingness of people to refuse to believe their own eyes.
In none of the videos do I see the officer folder over the hood, or even significantly struck.
Chattooga
3mo ago
I think your analysis of the mechanics is fair, but doesn’t solve the issue.
The driver seems to be trying to leave, not run down an officer. He’s crossing in front of the car and nearly out of the way, and yet as soon as the car shifts to forward he has his gun out and is shooting.
If a car begins accelerating towards you and your split second reaction is to go for your gun, I’m questioning your motives. The fact that a car is dangerous isn’t relevant, because it’s not clear he was fearing for his life!
Suppose for a minute an officer is directing traffic. He looks over, and sees a driver, texting, heading in his direction. To shoot in that scenario, instead of moving out of the way, would be deranged. The only reason it’s being defended here, as I see it, is because the driver is disobeying ICE orders.
Chattooga
3mo ago
Are you making a legal point or a philosophical one? Police are not allowed to shoot at a fleeing suspect. (Barring extreme circumstances, I assume.)
Chattooga
3mo ago
Watching these it’s pretty hard to convince me that the officer was shooting in self defense. The second video is behind a login wall, but if it’s the same one I found by googling, you can see the officer who is crossing in front of the car begin reaching for his gun while the vehicle is reversing. If he truely fear for his life, he could have just moved. By the time he was firing, he was clearly not in front of the vehicle.
It’s also kind of unfathomable to me that an officer begins firing at a moving vehicle in a residential neighborhood with bystanders on the sidewalk. This was not a life or death scenario, and he took less than a second to start firing.
State enforcement of laws is violence, but that violence has to be mediated by circumstance. This reads to me like a frustrated officer having a ‘FAFO’ moment, which is not what I want in law enforcement. You cannot start shooting because you’re mad.
Chattooga
10mo ago
Are there any countries comparable to the US that have fallen into civil war? I’m thinking about how incredibly interconnected all our systems are, it seems like trying to cut those apart would lead to collapse almost immediately.
People like to laugh about how ‘the right has so many more guns than the left,’ or that ‘the left controls the military and would easily beat the hillbillies’. But I’m just trying to figure out how the power grid, oil pipelines, trucking, hospitals, cell/satellite service and all the other million little things that go into keeping the country running could handle any kind of sudden partitioning.
My assumption would be that whoever controls the federal government controls the nation, and any state/region that tried to secede would lose instantly. So something like a coup could happen, but things would have to get a lot worse before you would actually have regional factions.
Chattooga
11mo ago
Suffering would be defined as a specific process in the brain, so plants for example don’t suffer. It is a sort of extremist veganism where you posit that, on average, (animal) life is a net negative in terms of suffering, therefore the moral position is to prevent/end it. A biosphere-wide euthanasia
Seems like those making blasphemy allegations are right leaning, or at least strongly Christian.
The democrats reaction more likely stems from the fact that this is a pretty strong instantiation of the idea that Trump has a savior complex and that ‘MAGA is a cult’. Add in the self-own of the leader of the Christian right committing blasphemy, and it makes sense why this is notable.
Trump is the president, it’s more notable when he does unusual things. I think it’s safe to say it would have been national news if Biden(‘s staff) or Obama posted a picture of themselves as Jesus.
Also, not to nitpick, but Piss Christ and Passion of the Christ are from 1987 and 1988 respectively. I doubt most democrat (or republican) voters know what Piss Christ is, and probably more than a few have never seen the movie. Just seems odd to call this out as evidence of the democrats ongoing support of blasphemy.
More options
Context Copy link