And then when you ask why the orphan-crushing machine exists, Americans act bewildered that the large hydraulic device with a chute labeled INSERT ORPHANS HERE could be mistaken for an orphan-crushing machine.
"You put orphans in, as the label suggests. It crushes them. It's even named the Orphanhammer 2000."
"Only if you're foolish enough to put orphans in it," the American responds.
And if you ask why they, knowing this, continue to put orphans into the orphan-crushing machine, the American will be baffled at the idea that you wouldn't use an orphan-crushing machine.
"It's right there. Would be a waste if you didn't use it."
Thank you for contacting me! I hope I was able to assist you with your inquiry. If you have any more questions or concerns, don't hesitate to reach out again. Have a great day!
I can pick out fire hydrants and mountains from little squares.... Iv already proved to the almighty google im not a robot.... I don't have to justify myself to you!
In answer to your edited question, it's because this is a pinned post. People will keep clicking on this post when they are introduced to the sub like I just did, and you are right at the top of the first comment.
It's only "basic and critical healthcare" if you use a very very loose definition of those words. Nothing basic or caring about a process that's designed to kill 50% of patients.
Each year, 4.7–13.2% of maternal deaths can be attributed to unsafe abortion. But the majority of these are in developing countries without access to safe abortions. That’s why it’s essential that we provide women with access to safe abortions. (About half of the world’s abortions are unsafe.)
It's only "basic and critical healthcare" if you use a very very loose definition of those words.
These are words used by medical professionals. Are you a medical prOfessional? You might have an opinion about it, but try to remember that your opinion is not fact.
It comes from the definition of the procedure. The whole point of an abortion is to kill one of the two patients.
Abortion is not healthcare because the very word "healthcare" literally means "caring for health". Abortion does the exact opposite by ensuring the victim is so unhealthy they die immediately.
It's not always alive, but it is still called abortion even if the fetus is dead. Sometimes the fetus just stays there even if it is dead, and it starts rotting and can cause infections and death of the mother if left there.
This is one of the things being banned by 'no abortion, no exeptions'
Other times the fetus is still alive yes, but in a way where both mother and baby will not live (tubular ectopic pregnancy) so you have a choice, kill the baby or kill both, there is no way to save the baby, 'no abortion, no exeption' means you are killing both - no you can't wait until the baby dies, because it kills the mother first, then dies as a result of the mother being dead.
Other times the fetus is alive and can be born alive, but will die when born (eg hydro encephalitis) and mother has to suffer the whole pregnancy knowing it will die and then the death of the baby after delivery instead of termination several months earlier. I know I got through the birth of my own child by saying it was worth it to have my child, but how do you even give birth to a non viable child?
An abortion is not a miscarriage, because abortion by definition involves ending the pregnancy and killing the child. You can't abort what's already been aborted by nature. Your argument about abortion bans banning miscarriages comes off as pro-abortion lobbyist propaganda, have you actually checked what the laws themselves say? Is there a jury that would convict a mother whose baby died through no fault of hers and she was forced to remove its dead body from inside her?
ectopic pregnancies, etc
It's morally permissible to perform a lifesaving operation even if it has negative side effects. Many prescription medications list "death" as a potential side effect, this is no different. The chance of child survival is just very very small. Most abortion bans recognize this and allow for the procedure when it's performed to save a life.
nonviable pregnancies
There are plenty of cases where the doctors said a baby wouldn't survive and that killing it was the best option, but then the baby survived and ended up having a full and happy life. That aside, death is certain for all of us. Just because someone's going to die young doesn't give us the right to kill them preemptively.
There are no exeptions for life of the mother, so you will end up with dead women who could have been saved, and still no babies.
Personal story time, my abortion was a pregnancy that went 16 weeks and stopped at 12, I was not able to expell it and there were retained products, so I went in for an abortion, because yes it is listed as abortion, dumbass nurse comes up to me and asks me if I really want to kill my baby, I told her "You numpty,it's already dead, I wouldnt be doing this if it was alive" all because she saw abortion on the record and did not bother to read further, and this is in England, where we are allowed to do it. In America there have been women who have died from it, and the case of a woman dying because of retained products of conception prompted the law change in Ireland.
Abortions and miscarriages are indistinguishable from each other. In places where abortion is illegal women get jailed for having wanted pregnancies fail.
the fetus is essentially a parasite. it has no way to sustain itself independently & requires a host to grow and eventually be “born”. it leaches off of the host’s body & their resources, & can cause all kind of life threatening issues, until it wants to get out - which comes with its own life threatening issues.
after “birth” the host may experience many health issues as a result of its inhabitant, not always life threatening, but generally their body is left in much worse condition than it was before
TL:DR; being able to be sustain your own life is kind of a prerequisite to being alive.
The whole point of an abortion is to kill one of the two patients.
The (soon to be NOT) pregnant woman is the only patient, FYI...not sure how you missed that. If you were to check the file, they would be the only person listed, because they are the only person having a medical procedure performed on them.
Abortion is not healthcare because the very word "healthcare" literally means "caring for health".
Abortions care for the health of the mother, the patient. See above.
Your takes only work here if you can get strangers to discard the established meaning of words and adopt your anti-abortion language, which is riddled with fallacy and made-up terms.
Abortion is necessary. Women literally die if not provided with abortions. FFS keep that shit on your ProLife subreddit and leave the rest of us who believe in choice alone.
Oh, and you can't call yourself pro-choice if you tell everyone who chooses "wrong" to gtfo and not speak up. Pro-choice means supporting anyone who's trying to help people make a choice. Otherwise you're just pro-death.
I don’t care what you choose. If you get pregnant and want to keep it then be my guest! But ProBirthers are trying to force women to go through torture that’s easily solvable with a necessary medical procedure.
The correct term is still zygote, embryo, fetus. Then once born the term becomes baby, then toddler, then child.
Just because you want the term to fit doesn’t mean that it does. Call it a child if you want, it won’t change the fact that abortion is necessary health care.
I’m not sure if it’s possible, but maybe you can contact the mods and ask if they can lock your comment. I know I’ll find (usually controversial) comments on some posts in different subs locked while everyone else’s is untouched.
Hi, what was the comment about? You accidentally deleted the original post when posting your edit, makes the chain of comments a bit confusing. Thanks!
If her body wasn’t changed forever then sure, but dudes just have to dump a load and that’s what they have to do physically for the child bearing process. The only guys who think they should are incels. Only description of it.
I think the "for the sake of it" comparison here is in the "well, we have an orphan crushing machine, let's use it" mindset. Thinking that you must use every tool you have.
The only difference is abortion is classified as a felony because the Supreme Clowns want to keep America a white country. It's also why felons don't have the right to vote
Nope, you're either lying or spreading conservative propaganda. Sanger's views on eugenics were unfortunately mainstream at the time, but her views on race relations were downright progressive. Sanger was also anti-abortion herself, contributing to her belief in easily available contraceptives.
Before you post that clipped quote from her you people seem to love seeming to confide in someone that she wanted to lower the black population, look at the full quote and context around it so you understand that she was obviously saying the exact opposite of what you were going to try to represent.
I don’t understand how this has a positive rating. What a stupid, worthless, and flat out unintelligent comment. People like this want The Handmaids Tale to be a reality.
It's their constitutional right to own an orphan crushing machine, and if you ask them for their orphan crushing registration you're crushing their freedoms!
Only towards the billionaires lobbying my government to design the law in a way that specifically kills everyone who isn't straight, white, able-bodied, neurotypical, or Christian.
The post itself concerns "American human interest stories"
As opposed to human interest stories in other countries, which less frequently portrays being saved from the Orphan Crushing Machine as noble rather than how things should just work.
As an American, I can say that America definitely has this problem. Even though some other countries are worse about it, pointing out America specifically calls out its hypocrisy in being "progressive."
Only if your solution is “have the government raise minimum wage, take more taxes from the common man, and dictate what we can and cannot do with our economic income.” Technically socialism, yes, but most people’s socialism is just diet communism by this point
And no, I’m not advocating for orphan-crushing machines. We’re supposed to believe in life, Liberty, and the pursuit of property in this nation (if you’re in the US). But in no way is that communism. Bad faith argument
Okay but why whenever someone argues that the current medical insurance system is bad or why school lunches should be free (systems that are well in place in other developed nations) there will be someone in a government position arguing why that would be socialism/communism.
Like just cut the military budget in half and with those extra 400bn I'm sure you can solve most of your social problems.
Because they money comes out of, guess what, my taxes. In a few years I’m gonna be in a profitable industry, and if they take even MORE taxes from me, I take home very little. I don’t need the gov taking even more from me than they already make me hemorrhage
but that's what taxes are for! if you're already paying taxes then what benefits are you getting? are you getting free medical health care? are your kids getting fed in school? you're already paying taxes, then why doesn't it bother you that you aren't getting these things??
are you telling me that the country with the biggest economy can't afford to give their citizens free education, health care and welfare but other countries can? Don't you wanna ask where is your tax money going to?
His profile is deleted now but did he literally say that he'd rather his taxes went towards an over inflated military budget that actually doesn't bring any good or really defend borders other than those in the middle east, like Jesus Christ what's the opposite of communism because that can't be it "I'd rather my money went to the military industrial complex so they can spend $400 on a pair of gloves" 😑
An interesting way to interpret "make billionaires actually pay the taxes they owe".
The whole point of socialism is to funnel money back down to the common man because he'll immediately spend it and keep the economy flowing. Money naturally flows uphill so if you don't pump it back again it just pools in one place and the whole system dies.
I’m instead it’s “billionaire dollar company crashes train in small town and gives everyone $200 dollars while refusing to give employees requested sick leave”
What the article really did was make it seem big. I can’t remember the exact about but it was “company gives something-thousand dollars to town” which just makes it seem like a lot but when everyone gets their share it’s like 200 something per person. You know, all they did was ruin the air and water quality of the town, kill all the fish in nearby rivers, some small dogs died. Ya know I’m sure 200 per person will fix that right up!
I only just now found out about this subreddit, but this is a very clever and attention grabbing title. I don’t know what it was before but this is smart, I like it
This metaphor would be much more apt if the orphan crushing machine created the elixir of life that kept every other person alive. You can point out the cruelty of the machine as much as you’d like, but you rely on it continuing to crush orphans. Any alternative that has been tried has resulted in more people dying from lack of elixir than orphans that are crushed. You can slow down the orphan feed slightly and create less elixir, but this tradeoff is unavoidable.
No, the point is that it’s needless suffering perpetuated by a system they could prevent it to the great benefit of most people, but doesn’t in order to keep the public weak and divided
Not really. Even in this metaphor some people have literal gallons of elixir that they don’t need and could share while others have scant drops that barely keep them alive.
If we assume that the median American owns a single drop, then Elon Musk alone owns over 75 liters (just shy of 20 gallons). And he's just one of the ultra rich.
Not at all. The orphan crushing machine generates revenue for the orphan crushing industry, which after much deliberation selectively decides which orphans we can choose not to crush.
We could just as easily crush no orphans, but think of all the jobs
No, not keeping every other person alive. In Europe are far less orphan crushing machines working... And we are very much alive.
It is to keep the system alive. To keep the little Orphans running. And there are people who profit more, and some even s lot, and some who basically just run to not be crushed. But just the possibility of profitting from the mashine keeps people from changing anything.
It was only in the past few years that I heard this metaphor and it transformed the way I consume media (news in this case). Now this sub starts showing up in my feed randomly (probably from cross-posts in other subs) and it's an instant Join.
Every heartwarming human interest story in America is like "he raised $20,000 to keep 200 orphans from being crushed in the orphan-crushing machine" and then never asks why an orphan-crushing machine exists or why you'd need to pay to prevent it from being used.
The politically correct terminology for this is Toxic Positivity. No, it is not a heart warming story that so and so allowed food to be sent to malnourished children. It is sickening that there are children starving and no amount of icing can make it wholesome or heartwarming.
Rest of the post:
And then when you ask why the orphan-crushing machine exists, Americans act bewildered that the large hydraulic device with a chute labeled INSERT ORPHANS HERE could be mistaken for an orphan-crushing machine.
"You put orphans in, as the label suggests. It crushes them. It's even named the Orphanhammer 2000."
"Only if you're foolish enough to put orphans in it," the American responds.
And if you ask why they, knowing this, continue to put orphans into the orphan-crushing machine, the American will be baffled at the idea that you wouldn't use an orphan-crushing machine.
"It's right there. Would be a waste if you didn't use it."
[EDIT: why do people keep responding months later. I’m politely out.]
It's a metaphor for something cruel. It's not about abortion. It's just something that everyone can agree to being cruel.
I disagree. we need to reduce the surplus population of orphans, if I'm being honest.
I mean, the machine is right there
And nobody paid us 20,000$ to not use it.
I know, but could you like, maybe not blend 10,000 orphans, y'know just out of the kindness of your heart? Just once?
And set a bad example to the other orphans? No way, we must increase orphan processing!
If we don't crush these Orphans, you can be sure it's gonna be the Russians and who could want that.
Yeah, Russian orphan crushing is waaaay worse than American orphan crushing
Wow! Cant have the Chinese or Russians take the lead in Orphan Crushing Technology now can we?
Perish the thought.
The orphans are stealing all our jobs !!
they took'ar jobs!!!!!
Well not all our jobs! The job where you, as an orphan, gets crushed, is still being done by orphans!
A modest proposal
The machine turns them into hot dogs?
This comment approved by Charles Dickens.
And Jonathan Swift
An orphan is basically as far as it gets from an aborted baby.
Are u a bot
No are you
No, how about now
r/totallynotrobots
HERE'S A SNEAK PEEK OF /r/TOTALLYNOTROBOTS USING THE TOP POSTS OF THE YEAR!
#1: I LOVE OBSERVING THE MAJESTIC SALMON IN THE RIVER. | 51 comments
#2: F | 42 comments
#3: LET US UNITE IN OUR HUMANITY | 34 comments
I'M NOT A BOT, BEEP BOOP | DOWNVOTE TO REMOVE | CONTACT | INFO | OPT-OUT | GITHUB
The sneakpeekbot can do that?
Good bot
Aww thank you! You’re cute too! And you have a great day!
Thank you for contacting me! I hope I was able to assist you with your inquiry. If you have any more questions or concerns, don't hesitate to reach out again. Have a great day!
No I’m the Orphanhammer 2000
No, this is Patrick.
Sir, this a Wendy’s.
I know you are but what am I?
I’m just kidding. No, still not a bot and I have covid. I don’t think bots can get covid. Why do you think I’m a bot, is what I said so robotic?
Least obvious bot comment
How do you dance? Does it look like this?
How did you get this video of me, stalker
I filmed it with my handy camera in my hand. And my hand surely has
sevenfingers like every humand hand!I can pick out fire hydrants and mountains from little squares.... Iv already proved to the almighty google im not a robot.... I don't have to justify myself to you!
nobody said JACK SHIT about abortions you weirdo
The comment below me did, no need to get your knickers in a twist. I guess I hit send on the wrong comment.
Then maybe delete the comment, because you're only creating unnecessary confusion.
Can’t abort comments after the first trimester! It’s against the constitution! Or something
I don't think it's a metaphor for abortion, it's a metaphor for capitalism being a meat grinder.
What it is is a rorschach test. Each person derives their own meaning from the metaphor, shaped by their own life experiences.
In answer to your edited question, it's because this is a pinned post. People will keep clicking on this post when they are introduced to the sub like I just did, and you are right at the top of the first comment.
Oh, well thank you for that! I should have been able to work that one out I guess, but mystery solved. Glad I deleted my comment then.
Thanks!
Here have a notification 7 months later!
Responding to this comment just to annoy you
havent been online in months and i come back to alerts on this flipping post. some day soon ill delete this comment. I HOPE YOU ARE ENTERTAINED.
Still being entertained :)
Absolutely nothing to do with abortion
Hey guess what
you guys are the worst
This made my day
Its top comment on a pinned post people will be responding for years
wonderful
Did I miss something? The only time I saw the word "abortion" used was when you used it.
Changing the discussion to make [insert-your-personal-cause] the main issue is kind of a weird, but too common, debate technique.
[EDIT: why do people keep responding months later. I’m politely out.]
Wait, who was talking about abortion, I walked away for a minute
You WILL remember this post
I'm fairly sure you'll keep getting replies if you don't turn off notifications lol
What did ur original comment say?
It's only "basic and critical healthcare" if you use a very very loose definition of those words. Nothing basic or caring about a process that's designed to kill 50% of patients.
Not sure where your 50% number comes from.
Each year, 4.7–13.2% of maternal deaths can be attributed to unsafe abortion. But the majority of these are in developing countries without access to safe abortions. That’s why it’s essential that we provide women with access to safe abortions. (About half of the world’s abortions are unsafe.)
These are words used by medical professionals. Are you a medical prOfessional? You might have an opinion about it, but try to remember that your opinion is not fact.
It comes from the definition of the procedure. The whole point of an abortion is to kill one of the two patients.
Abortion is not healthcare because the very word "healthcare" literally means "caring for health". Abortion does the exact opposite by ensuring the victim is so unhealthy they die immediately.
The fetus isnt a patient. Im sure you believ that but the majority of the developed world doesnt.
You can argue your point if you want but assuming your definitions and views are the standard views in normal conversation is just wrong.
What is the fetus then if not a patient? It's alive, it's human, and it has medical procedures performed on it.
It's funny how people use different language when justifying abortion than they do for any other medical procedure involving an unborn child.
It's not always alive, but it is still called abortion even if the fetus is dead. Sometimes the fetus just stays there even if it is dead, and it starts rotting and can cause infections and death of the mother if left there.
This is one of the things being banned by 'no abortion, no exeptions'
Other times the fetus is still alive yes, but in a way where both mother and baby will not live (tubular ectopic pregnancy) so you have a choice, kill the baby or kill both, there is no way to save the baby, 'no abortion, no exeption' means you are killing both - no you can't wait until the baby dies, because it kills the mother first, then dies as a result of the mother being dead.
Other times the fetus is alive and can be born alive, but will die when born (eg hydro encephalitis) and mother has to suffer the whole pregnancy knowing it will die and then the death of the baby after delivery instead of termination several months earlier. I know I got through the birth of my own child by saying it was worth it to have my child, but how do you even give birth to a non viable child?
An abortion is not a miscarriage, because abortion by definition involves ending the pregnancy and killing the child. You can't abort what's already been aborted by nature. Your argument about abortion bans banning miscarriages comes off as pro-abortion lobbyist propaganda, have you actually checked what the laws themselves say? Is there a jury that would convict a mother whose baby died through no fault of hers and she was forced to remove its dead body from inside her?
It's morally permissible to perform a lifesaving operation even if it has negative side effects. Many prescription medications list "death" as a potential side effect, this is no different. The chance of child survival is just very very small. Most abortion bans recognize this and allow for the procedure when it's performed to save a life.
There are plenty of cases where the doctors said a baby wouldn't survive and that killing it was the best option, but then the baby survived and ended up having a full and happy life. That aside, death is certain for all of us. Just because someone's going to die young doesn't give us the right to kill them preemptively.
You are suffering from the 'surely' fallacy. Surely they will let women who could die or babies already dead or terminal have abortions.
No
https://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-abortion-law-means-woman-continue-pregnancy-despite/story?id=97918340
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/26/louisiana-abortion-ban-miscarriage-treatments
There is another law
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/29/ohio-extreme-abortion-bill-reimplant-ectopic-pregnancy
So people can't even have an abortion for a pregnancy that is going to Kill them.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/abortion-ban-life-of-the-mother-exception/670582/
There are no exeptions for life of the mother, so you will end up with dead women who could have been saved, and still no babies.
Personal story time, my abortion was a pregnancy that went 16 weeks and stopped at 12, I was not able to expell it and there were retained products, so I went in for an abortion, because yes it is listed as abortion, dumbass nurse comes up to me and asks me if I really want to kill my baby, I told her "You numpty,it's already dead, I wouldnt be doing this if it was alive" all because she saw abortion on the record and did not bother to read further, and this is in England, where we are allowed to do it. In America there have been women who have died from it, and the case of a woman dying because of retained products of conception prompted the law change in Ireland.
Abortions and miscarriages are indistinguishable from each other. In places where abortion is illegal women get jailed for having wanted pregnancies fail.
[deleted]
the fetus is essentially a parasite. it has no way to sustain itself independently & requires a host to grow and eventually be “born”. it leaches off of the host’s body & their resources, & can cause all kind of life threatening issues, until it wants to get out - which comes with its own life threatening issues.
after “birth” the host may experience many health issues as a result of its inhabitant, not always life threatening, but generally their body is left in much worse condition than it was before
TL:DR; being able to be sustain your own life is kind of a prerequisite to being alive.
The (soon to be NOT) pregnant woman is the only patient, FYI...not sure how you missed that. If you were to check the file, they would be the only person listed, because they are the only person having a medical procedure performed on them.
Abortions care for the health of the mother, the patient. See above.
Your takes only work here if you can get strangers to discard the established meaning of words and adopt your anti-abortion language, which is riddled with fallacy and made-up terms.
The fetus is only also a patient if the woman that it’s living inside of says so. She gets to decide.
At least in Canada, anyway.
Abortion is necessary. Women literally die if not provided with abortions. FFS keep that shit on your ProLife subreddit and leave the rest of us who believe in choice alone.
Oh, and you can't call yourself pro-choice if you tell everyone who chooses "wrong" to gtfo and not speak up. Pro-choice means supporting anyone who's trying to help people make a choice. Otherwise you're just pro-death.
I don’t care what you choose. If you get pregnant and want to keep it then be my guest! But ProBirthers are trying to force women to go through torture that’s easily solvable with a necessary medical procedure.
Just because you're personally pro-infanticide doesn't mean you're entitled to not encounter sane viewpoints.
Pro-infanticide 🤣
They’re not infants!
Just because you use words incorrectly doesn’t mean they change meanings.
Sources: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infant, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child
You were saying?
The correct term is still zygote, embryo, fetus. Then once born the term becomes baby, then toddler, then child.
Just because you want the term to fit doesn’t mean that it does. Call it a child if you want, it won’t change the fact that abortion is necessary health care.
I’m not sure if it’s possible, but maybe you can contact the mods and ask if they can lock your comment. I know I’ll find (usually controversial) comments on some posts in different subs locked while everyone else’s is untouched.
It’s not about abortion, mate. It’s just a metaphor for being cruel.
Made you look.
Responding just to annoy you
Hi ! I wish you a good day !
Hi, what was the comment about? You accidentally deleted the original post when posting your edit, makes the chain of comments a bit confusing. Thanks!
instructions unclear
Looks like it's been a while since you've received a notification from this post, so here you go!
In the grim darkness of the far future...
This is giving me the worst or best idea for dnd
The emperor is basically an Orphancrushing machine at this point. I don't think those psykers have any family left
I mean, I already paid the entry fee. It would be nuts to waste that money by not using the machine.
Sounds just like the abortion industry, word for word.
Nobody just gets abortions for the sake of it. Really don’t understand where this interpretation is coming from
It's a disingenuous interpretation, that's why
Incelious interpretation lol
What Big Abortion doesn’t want you to know about the industry!
Big abortion? Only time a conservative is ok using BIG… to describe an operation. Pretty sure abortions are not a very lucrative business.
Hahaha thanks for that
hey hey hey hey hey... you with the college education... dont ask questions we cant answer.
[removed]
There's two type of abortions: the medically urgent one, and the ones that are choices by the mothers that you have no right to have a say over.
I was being sarcastic on the second one.
Hmm, in today's world, can't be sure who is being sarcastic and who isn't.
What about the father of the child? Should he have a say?
No. The mother is the one birthing it. It should be her wish.
If her body wasn’t changed forever then sure, but dudes just have to dump a load and that’s what they have to do physically for the child bearing process. The only guys who think they should are incels. Only description of it.
That's not true at all...religious zealots think that too.
Ha. That cracked me up. Must still be a but high from my cosmetic liver transplant. You know, for my whore liver.
I think the "for the sake of it" comparison here is in the "well, we have an orphan crushing machine, let's use it" mindset. Thinking that you must use every tool you have.
Nobody just gets abortions for the sake of it. Really don’t understand where this interpretation is coming from
The only difference is abortion is classified as a felony because the Supreme Clowns want to keep America a white country. It's also why felons don't have the right to vote
Then they would allow abortions because abortions kill a LOT of black babies.
Margaret Sanger was a racist and promoted abortion as a way to lessen the amount of black people in America.
Nope, you're either lying or spreading conservative propaganda. Sanger's views on eugenics were unfortunately mainstream at the time, but her views on race relations were downright progressive. Sanger was also anti-abortion herself, contributing to her belief in easily available contraceptives.
Before you post that clipped quote from her you people seem to love seeming to confide in someone that she wanted to lower the black population, look at the full quote and context around it so you understand that she was obviously saying the exact opposite of what you were going to try to represent.
Well there it is. The dumbest fucking thing I'll read all week. Congrats.
I don’t understand how this has a positive rating. What a stupid, worthless, and flat out unintelligent comment. People like this want The Handmaids Tale to be a reality.
this is deleted v4
Boo you.
Donate your brain to a kennel for dog food
That way it would at least serve a purpose
Nah, we should donate it to science so we can learn how it’s possible for someone to be this stupid
"abortion industry" OK so thats like the inflammatory way to say "basic health care for women"
"industry" lmaoo
Nah, it's more like guns, healthcare, education, and so on.
And what about the folks whose jobs depend on the orphan crushing machine? Just gonna make them find a new career?
It's their constitutional right to own an orphan crushing machine, and if you ask them for their orphan crushing registration you're crushing their freedoms!
“Orphanhammer 2000” 😂🤣😂💀
you know, i saw Orphanhammer the other day, great film
was this possibly a time traveler? simply on the fact of based?
Literally nothing to do with America. You seem to be living with a lot of hate in your heart.
Only towards the billionaires lobbying my government to design the law in a way that specifically kills everyone who isn't straight, white, able-bodied, neurotypical, or Christian.
The post itself concerns "American human interest stories"
As opposed to human interest stories in other countries, which less frequently portrays being saved from the Orphan Crushing Machine as noble rather than how things should just work.
As an American, I can say that America definitely has this problem. Even though some other countries are worse about it, pointing out America specifically calls out its hypocrisy in being "progressive."
They're quoting the twitter user in the picture. These aren't their words.
And if you didn't use it, how will the investors who invested in Orphan Crushing company make their money back and there will job losses too.
/S
It's hilarious how this post happened during Trump 1.0, and then we as Americans voted the orphan-crushing machine back into office.
I can't tell if there's an Oppenheimer joke somewhere in'ere
That's straight from the movie 'Cube'. Great film, worth a watch.
"Orphanhammer" is definitely the name of a film that'll win the Oscar for Best Picture.
And then when you ask why the orphan-crushing machine exists, whether you could remove it, you get yelled back: "That would be communism!"
Only if your solution is “have the government raise minimum wage, take more taxes from the common man, and dictate what we can and cannot do with our economic income.” Technically socialism, yes, but most people’s socialism is just diet communism by this point
And no, I’m not advocating for orphan-crushing machines. We’re supposed to believe in life, Liberty, and the pursuit of property in this nation (if you’re in the US). But in no way is that communism. Bad faith argument
Okay but why whenever someone argues that the current medical insurance system is bad or why school lunches should be free (systems that are well in place in other developed nations) there will be someone in a government position arguing why that would be socialism/communism.
Like just cut the military budget in half and with those extra 400bn I'm sure you can solve most of your social problems.
Because they money comes out of, guess what, my taxes. In a few years I’m gonna be in a profitable industry, and if they take even MORE taxes from me, I take home very little. I don’t need the gov taking even more from me than they already make me hemorrhage
but that's what taxes are for! if you're already paying taxes then what benefits are you getting? are you getting free medical health care? are your kids getting fed in school? you're already paying taxes, then why doesn't it bother you that you aren't getting these things??
are you telling me that the country with the biggest economy can't afford to give their citizens free education, health care and welfare but other countries can? Don't you wanna ask where is your tax money going to?
His profile is deleted now but did he literally say that he'd rather his taxes went towards an over inflated military budget that actually doesn't bring any good or really defend borders other than those in the middle east, like Jesus Christ what's the opposite of communism because that can't be it "I'd rather my money went to the military industrial complex so they can spend $400 on a pair of gloves" 😑
Spending trillions on military is communism.
I agree the machine should be removed but using my tax money to do it is equivalent to slavery!
I'm astounded to see how this post, after two years, still gets regular action in the comments.
An interesting way to interpret "make billionaires actually pay the taxes they owe".
The whole point of socialism is to funnel money back down to the common man because he'll immediately spend it and keep the economy flowing. Money naturally flows uphill so if you don't pump it back again it just pools in one place and the whole system dies.
That's 10x Olympic gold medal machine to you. And no free pictures or autographs
Caaaaarrrrrrrlllllll
”You can’t crush orphans Carl that’s bad!” ”Oh I didn’t know that”
"You haven't seen the meat dragon yet Paul."
"Caaaaaarllll."
Shhhhaaaaaunnnnnn
Except half of them actually start "Local multi-millionaire hero gives 20,000". As if it's the most he could do.
I’m instead it’s “billionaire dollar company crashes train in small town and gives everyone $200 dollars while refusing to give employees requested sick leave”
What a heartwarming act of generosity!!! This is how low the bar is, somehow!!!
What the article really did was make it seem big. I can’t remember the exact about but it was “company gives something-thousand dollars to town” which just makes it seem like a lot but when everyone gets their share it’s like 200 something per person. You know, all they did was ruin the air and water quality of the town, kill all the fish in nearby rivers, some small dogs died. Ya know I’m sure 200 per person will fix that right up!
I only just now found out about this subreddit, but this is a very clever and attention grabbing title. I don’t know what it was before but this is smart, I like it
Wait this is a actually machine?
Let me s- actually… Id rather not go on a FBI-watchlist
I mean, something has to get rid of all these orphans
Typically using my Torment Nexus I built from the book "Don't Build A Torment Nexus".
You seen many orphans lately?
Pin this post on top please
American: "The only thing that can stop a bad guy with an Orphan crushing machine is a GOOD guy with an Orphan crushing Machine"
Also
"It's my right to own an Orphan crushing machine, its protected by the 2nd Amendment!"
Well the orphans taste better crushed obviously 🙄
Dang. Someone should make a subreddit like this
🤣
i thought it was about the anonymous baby drop off that kinda looks like it crushes babies
This metaphor would be much more apt if the orphan crushing machine created the elixir of life that kept every other person alive. You can point out the cruelty of the machine as much as you’d like, but you rely on it continuing to crush orphans. Any alternative that has been tried has resulted in more people dying from lack of elixir than orphans that are crushed. You can slow down the orphan feed slightly and create less elixir, but this tradeoff is unavoidable.
No, the point is that it’s needless suffering perpetuated by a system they could prevent it to the great benefit of most people, but doesn’t in order to keep the public weak and divided
Not really. Even in this metaphor some people have literal gallons of elixir that they don’t need and could share while others have scant drops that barely keep them alive.
If we assume that the median American owns a single drop, then Elon Musk alone owns over 75 liters (just shy of 20 gallons). And he's just one of the ultra rich.
Not at all. The orphan crushing machine generates revenue for the orphan crushing industry, which after much deliberation selectively decides which orphans we can choose not to crush.
We could just as easily crush no orphans, but think of all the jobs
The machine took my job. Now I’m 55 and no one will hire me because orphan crushing has been automated and outsourced.
If anyone out there is hiring, I have 30 years of experience and can bring my own crushing hammer.
No, not keeping every other person alive. In Europe are far less orphan crushing machines working... And we are very much alive.
It is to keep the system alive. To keep the little Orphans running. And there are people who profit more, and some even s lot, and some who basically just run to not be crushed. But just the possibility of profitting from the mashine keeps people from changing anything.
The ones who walked away from Omelas.
Sounds like Warhammer 40k lore.
This would be true, except other developed nations aren’t like this. Seriously, corporations have most Americans so fucking brainwashed it’s wild.
xcept no, the machine is capitalism, we don't need capitalism.
No, the entire point is that you don't need homelessness or children starving in AFrica.
We can't disable the orphan crushing machine! It's an important part of the economy probably!
It was only in the past few years that I heard this metaphor and it transformed the way I consume media (news in this case). Now this sub starts showing up in my feed randomly (probably from cross-posts in other subs) and it's an instant Join.
For anyone else who wanted to copy/paste.
I strive to be as powerful as the great orphan-crushing machine.
The politically correct terminology for this is Toxic Positivity. No, it is not a heart warming story that so and so allowed food to be sent to malnourished children. It is sickening that there are children starving and no amount of icing can make it wholesome or heartwarming.
The Penal Colony
Such brilliant satire this post.
The crushing will continue
I know this is mad late, but this subreddit has probably the funniest premise for existing
I love orphans. When they are prepared properly.
I still don't get the name.
What have the orphans done for me lately? 😈
TIL
If you give a machine an orphan. They will want another.
"I like to interpret things the worst way possible so I can feel like I'm some kind of keyboard warrior" aahh sub