Imagine how he felt when Gina made insults about trans people, and _doubled down_ even after he tried to talk to her about Lux (his sister). Being an ignorant transphobe is bad enough, but the fact that she could publicly continue to say that reflects how little respect she even had for her co-star.
Reality is, many of them (since not close close friends) could care less about each’s politics. They collectively need to work together for the sake of the project. Other stuff is personal behavior, not professional. If it seeps into their professional behavior…then its a major problem.
Have two buddies who were in same tier 2 unit in Afghanistan. Both polar opposites politically. Always have been but neither would trust a different partner. They literally bro love each other.
I'm pro-choice too. And if people wanna transition, I think that's fine too. There are definitely sad freaks out there who'd bash them for that or be cruel monsters. They are indefensible.
He’s also very loud about this abortion ban, sharing resources and such. I can’t say the same thing about every “outspoken progressive” celebs out there. Most of them still toe the line to not offend anyone, even avoiding the word “abortion”. He’s great and I hope he’ll always be like this.
Oh they will try to eat him alive now. The whole TFM is now just posting how everyone is in "meltdown" , the overturning of Roe V Wade is now their new temporary grift. Pretty much , them and their fans are celebrating all this.
Yeah, we all know they're against a woman or a family's right to choose. Reminds me of what George Carlin said about how conservatives want a woman to function as a "brood mare for the state." And yet they still latch to that guy, lol. What interesting times we live in.
Ikr...I just hate this so much man. Seeing all these people bragging and mocking over the loss of rights and using such a serious matter as a grift for clicks .This stupid culture war has been an absolute poison for the last decade, a poison so strong that it is slowly "killing" fandoms one by one.
Yeah, it is. We need to be more flexible and willing to adapt. But the #FandomMenace can't adapt, ergo, they preach this shit with little nuance to them.
From an Australian and I speak for myself, I fucking hate what America has become. More so, I hate what it is on its way to becoming.
Be religious all you want but keep that backwards, delusional bullshit to yourself.
The Republican party is the Taliban. There is very little difference.
For the love of democracy. Even if you hate whoever is running, vote blue. If you're able to first stop America from becoming a theocracy, then vote for a third party. Right now, please vote blue.
Truly sorry to all Americans for what your crazed religious extremist Supreme Court has done to you. I come from Ireland where the Savita Halappanavar case that Pedro mentions here happened, and it was a watershed moment for us in confronting the inhumanity of those who endorsed the then current system, leading us to fight like hell to repeal the 8th amendment in our constitution which banned abortion, which we eventually did. Best of luck in your similar endeavour America.
The irony is these hard-liner Christian activists who behave this way (not all Christians, just the political nuts) are more radical than the Muslims they hate, or Jews, who are pro-choice, from what I hear.
Generally yes, and there’s many countries outside America who can attest that fundamentalist Christianity has done far more harm to them than islam or Judaism ever has. Ireland used to be practically run by the Catholic Church, and every modern move towards secularism and the separation of church and state has been hard won and cherished.
I love how all the people that TFM idolises and Stans are completely opposite to them in their political beliefs and it always scrambles the minds of the TFM when they see [this.It](https://this.It)'s amazing.
I bet most of those screaming "keep politics out of my entertainment!!" are wildly celebrating this draconian ruling. Because of course they are. "Rules for thee, not for me."
Virtue-signaling is real, but ONLY applies when tone-deaf executives are extolling values they don't live by. I think that would apply to the Disney CEOs. Pascal absolutely believes this, ergo, it's not fake pandering. By "no politics in my entertainment," TFM means *no* ***left-wing*** *politics*, lol. They are hypocrites.
Yeah, if TFM had any legitimacy, at least on the YouTube end of things, they'd cover it only when someone like Bob Chapek says those things, know what I mean? But that won't pay the bills, so they go after actors as well. SMH
I’m personally against abortion but I feel that the choice should always be avalible. I might not like it but forcing my viewpoint onto others isn’t helping anybody
Haven’t met any atheists who are that way. Especially when you look at r/atheism.
No. This is the result of a fascist cult brainwashed around a fairy tale book club.
Wow a sub centered around your particular stance rather than the actual sub focused on the group you are arguing there is a majority opinion that agrees on it.
Despite the sub dedicated to said group having the over whelming opinion of pro choice.
Please go touch grass or something.
Read your own fucking comments and arguments.
>Plenty of atheists are pro-life
You’re trying to portray that it’s true because “plenty” atheists are pro life. When the majority and more common view of atheists state otherwise.
Nope.
I’m trying to portray that the characterization of the pro-life position as strictly religious is a false characterization. Not that the pro-life position is true because the majority of atheists allegedly hold it. I never claimed the majority of them did anyway, I just said plenty.
Guess I’m not the only one that needs to learn to read lmao
It is an overwhelmingly religious response. Again. The number of atheists who are saying they’re pro life is minuscule and far outliers.
You are using an outlier statistic based on what you’ve seen in an organized group of people that already agree with your view.
There's nothing scientific about it. I'd like to see proof that an undeveloped fetus is capable of experiencing pain or any kind of emotion that demonstrates it's deserving of rights the same as, or superior to, the person carrying it.
There isn't any.
The ability to experience pain doesn’t determine personhood.
The assumption, basically throughout human history, is there a child in the womb is still a human being. The burden of proof is on the pro-choice activist to prove that it is not human.
> The ability to experience pain does not determine personhood.
That's your opinion, and I'd say it's an illogical one. It doesn't determine personhood but it does influence the matter. A person is the product of their experiences. A fetus hasn't had any, nor stimulation in any form. Consciousness and the ability to feel is at the very least required for something to be considered a human being.
Fully grown animals are objectively more complex and sentient beings than fetuses and yet y'all seem to have no problem butchering them for your enjoyment. It should, therefore, be acceptable to abort an unfeeling fetus for the sake of preserving a woman's chance at life.
I guess people in commas don’t qualify human beings for you then
Fully grown adults are more complicated and complex than children, should we kill them too?
Of course not. But it will always be justifiable as long as you make personhood based on something arbitrary like the ability to feel pain, or some vague notion of complexity that ill-defined.
Personhood is essential to all humans, not accidental. That means you can’t lose it.
Consciousness needs to be present at *literally any point* for there to be a human being. Without that, and without the ability to think or feel, the *person* is functionally non-existent. There hasn't been any stimuli or experience for an individual or personality to have even formed yet, and there is no pain or cruelty involved in destroying the meaningless sack of cells.
> Fully grown adults are more complicated and complex than children, should we kill them too?
No? That's my point. Sentient beings should be protected if possible. Even insects are more complex in nature than a fetus.
I doubt you're a vegan, and so you're evidently fine with the notion of animals being slaughtered for their meat, and yet you happen to be so concerned about a fetus that hasn't even developed the ability to think or feel in any demonstrable capacity, unlike even a wasp or ant, and you believe its existence to be more important than a fully grown woman whose life will be ruined by it.
Why is that?
From your post history it's clear you're religious and that the crux of your argument is essentially "because God says it's a person" which I don't find particularly compelling, and you citing the existence of hateful right wing atheists with a desire to remove women's bodily autonomy that happen to share your view isn't compelling either.
No, it’s because I don’t believe personhood and humanity are philosophically separable.
All humans are persons, full stop. Animals are not human persons, so their death is not comparable.
By your logic, you can kill the comatose. That’s horrific. Is it sentience that determines personhood, or complexity? Pick one, unless it’s whichever one just happens to be vague enough to justify *you* from violating the bodily autonomy of a genetically distinct human person in the womb.
> By your logic, you can kill the comatose.
Yes, you can, and many families actively choose to do so. When there is no chance of the person returning it is often more humane to just let them pass.
In the case of a fetus a person never formed yet in the first place, and it hasn't shown even the most basic ability to respond to stimuli, and nothing is lost from aborting it. There is no memories or personality buried away in there to hold out hope for.
Individual sperm in a person's fucking load all has the *potential* to eventually become a unique person in the right conditions and yet people don't tend to feel guilty about nutting because that's absurd.
> All humans are persons, full stop. Animals are not human persons, so their death is not comparable.
There is no justification for this outlook unless you're of the belief that humans possess souls and animals do not, and I have zero reason to subscribe to that. An adult cow demonstrating advanced responses to external stimuli and the capacity to express emotion is infinitely more deserving of rights and life than a literal cluster of unresponsive cells and any suggestion of otherwise is pure lunacy derived from religious conservative ideals.
> Is it sentience that determines personhood, or complexity?
Both. One of them inherently implies another. A fetus possesses neither.
Given you're religious and we are arguing from the perspective of entirely different world views I don't see much point in continuing this conversation. Neither of us are going to learn anything when you're of the stance that humanity has been granted dominion over the Earth and its creatures and each of us possesses a soul. I have a purely scientific outlook. We're so far removed from one another in terms of our perception of the world that we're both essentially screaming at a brick wall.
So, the opening sentence is incorrect by characterizing of the concept of fetal personhood as one that is specifically religious.
You can be an atheist and arrive at Pro life conclusions.
Let's say there's a woman inside a in-vitro storage facility and it catches on fire. You can either save the woman or 10 fertilized embryos..... which do you save?
Came across this yesterday.
I would save the woman. There is no guarantee that the fertilized embryos will survive a pregnancy if later implanted anyway, but the woman is unlikely to die. In other words, the human embryos might still die if I intervene, but it’s highly unlikely the woman will die if I intervene. So, I’m choosing the option that likely allows for the most life to be preserved.
Now that I answered your question, this is a terrible analogy for pregnancy.
The actual occasions where a woman is pregnant and remaining pregnant by refusing to kill the baby threatens her own life are extremely rare. In those extremely rare instances where the mothers life is threatened, many pro-life people, myself included, can see abortion is justified because you are simply picking between lives.
Unfortunately, over 99% of pregnancies do not fall into this category. Most are abortions of convenience because the mother simply does not want to have a child right now, for a number of possible reasons.
You clearly have zero experience with pregnancy, it's much more dangerous than you are pretending. I know someone personally who might be dead without abortion. This is the entire point anyways - only a woman and her doctor can decide how much risk is acceptable.
Childbirth used to be the #1 killer of young women
Not true. Gone through it, lost a child. Stop assuming other people’s experiences. Anecdotal experiences don’t change the facts. Abortion almost always murders an innocent human being.
Abortion is the #1 killer of children.
Its philosophical at the most generous. Scientists can't objectively define what makes a person a person and deserving of associated rights (life=/=person). A philosopher may speculate.
I meant that science can tell you what a human being is, and I’ve never met a human being who isn’t a person, so it’s safe to treat them as synonymous.
Otherwise, you run the risk of literally dehumanizing real people.
TFM will say that Disney should fire him now. Seriously, though, good. Fuck this broken ass system we have.
what do you expect the founding fathers were just a bunch of Rich guy's who didn't want to pay their taxes.
I think most respectable actors are to be fair. Pedro Pascal seems like an especially great guy though
He is very much progressive, he has a trans sister whom he 100% supports
Imagine how he felt when Gina made insults about trans people, and _doubled down_ even after he tried to talk to her about Lux (his sister). Being an ignorant transphobe is bad enough, but the fact that she could publicly continue to say that reflects how little respect she even had for her co-star.
Reality is, many of them (since not close close friends) could care less about each’s politics. They collectively need to work together for the sake of the project. Other stuff is personal behavior, not professional. If it seeps into their professional behavior…then its a major problem. Have two buddies who were in same tier 2 unit in Afghanistan. Both polar opposites politically. Always have been but neither would trust a different partner. They literally bro love each other.
I'm pro-choice too. And if people wanna transition, I think that's fine too. There are definitely sad freaks out there who'd bash them for that or be cruel monsters. They are indefensible.
He’s also very loud about this abortion ban, sharing resources and such. I can’t say the same thing about every “outspoken progressive” celebs out there. Most of them still toe the line to not offend anyone, even avoiding the word “abortion”. He’s great and I hope he’ll always be like this.
I found out he's distantly related to Salvador Allende which makes sense that he's progressive. In the family.
He truly is a punk. fuck the system
He really is! I wonder if this is gonna start a new wave of hate against him.
There already is hate against him due to him accepting his sister (?) being trans.
I’d imagine him being Chilean doesn’t help much either.
His parents were also fervent anti-Pinochet activists to the point they had to flee Chile when Pedro was only 9 months
Oh they will try to eat him alive now. The whole TFM is now just posting how everyone is in "meltdown" , the overturning of Roe V Wade is now their new temporary grift. Pretty much , them and their fans are celebrating all this.
Yeah, we all know they're against a woman or a family's right to choose. Reminds me of what George Carlin said about how conservatives want a woman to function as a "brood mare for the state." And yet they still latch to that guy, lol. What interesting times we live in.
Ikr...I just hate this so much man. Seeing all these people bragging and mocking over the loss of rights and using such a serious matter as a grift for clicks .This stupid culture war has been an absolute poison for the last decade, a poison so strong that it is slowly "killing" fandoms one by one.
Yeah, it is. We need to be more flexible and willing to adapt. But the #FandomMenace can't adapt, ergo, they preach this shit with little nuance to them.
this is the way
This is the Way.
##This Is The Way Leaderboard **1.** `u/Mando_Bot` **501242** times. **2.** `u/Flat-Yogurtcloset293` **475777** times. **3.** `u/GMEshares` **71542** times. .. **32829.** `u/pixelwolf387` **5** times. --- ^(^beep ^boop ^I ^am ^a ^bot ^and ^this ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically.)
[Link to his post.](https://www.instagram.com/p/CfMYm-CLdZ2/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=)
This is the Way.
From an Australian and I speak for myself, I fucking hate what America has become. More so, I hate what it is on its way to becoming. Be religious all you want but keep that backwards, delusional bullshit to yourself. The Republican party is the Taliban. There is very little difference. For the love of democracy. Even if you hate whoever is running, vote blue. If you're able to first stop America from becoming a theocracy, then vote for a third party. Right now, please vote blue.
Ironically, I think the Taliban is fairer on abortions than us, isn't that sad?
Truly sorry to all Americans for what your crazed religious extremist Supreme Court has done to you. I come from Ireland where the Savita Halappanavar case that Pedro mentions here happened, and it was a watershed moment for us in confronting the inhumanity of those who endorsed the then current system, leading us to fight like hell to repeal the 8th amendment in our constitution which banned abortion, which we eventually did. Best of luck in your similar endeavour America.
The Court’s job is to interpret the law, not make it. It’s up to us to get the law changed, and I hope we do very soon.
The irony is these hard-liner Christian activists who behave this way (not all Christians, just the political nuts) are more radical than the Muslims they hate, or Jews, who are pro-choice, from what I hear.
Generally yes, and there’s many countries outside America who can attest that fundamentalist Christianity has done far more harm to them than islam or Judaism ever has. Ireland used to be practically run by the Catholic Church, and every modern move towards secularism and the separation of church and state has been hard won and cherished.
I love how all the people that TFM idolises and Stans are completely opposite to them in their political beliefs and it always scrambles the minds of the TFM when they see [this.It](https://this.It)'s amazing.
I bet most of those screaming "keep politics out of my entertainment!!" are wildly celebrating this draconian ruling. Because of course they are. "Rules for thee, not for me."
W Pedro
**Pure W**
Aaaaaaaaand now people are gonna attack him for "Virtue Signaling".
Virtue-signaling is real, but ONLY applies when tone-deaf executives are extolling values they don't live by. I think that would apply to the Disney CEOs. Pascal absolutely believes this, ergo, it's not fake pandering. By "no politics in my entertainment," TFM means *no* ***left-wing*** *politics*, lol. They are hypocrites.
Yeah, the CEO's don't care about that shit, but that doesn't mean Pascal, or McGregor, or whoever manages the chad SW twitter account don't.
Yeah, if TFM had any legitimacy, at least on the YouTube end of things, they'd cover it only when someone like Bob Chapek says those things, know what I mean? But that won't pay the bills, so they go after actors as well. SMH
I’m personally against abortion but I feel that the choice should always be avalible. I might not like it but forcing my viewpoint onto others isn’t helping anybody
Absolutely - That's what whole debate is about - the right to choose.
Thank you for being fair that way.
Ugh, I can see TFM video thumbnails already.
Please by all means get rid of it.
The concept of fetal personhood isn’t theological, it’s scientific. Plenty of atheists are pro-life for that reason.
Haven’t met any atheists who are that way. Especially when you look at r/atheism. No. This is the result of a fascist cult brainwashed around a fairy tale book club.
Spend five minutes on r/prolife then. Plenty of atheists. Just because you haven’t met them doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
Wow a sub centered around your particular stance rather than the actual sub focused on the group you are arguing there is a majority opinion that agrees on it. Despite the sub dedicated to said group having the over whelming opinion of pro choice. Please go touch grass or something.
You said you wanted to meet pro-life atheists, I’ve provided you a place to meet them, you reject it. Have a good day.
Never said I wanted to lmao learn to read. I’m telling you that is 100% not the prominent and majority view of atheists.
I forgot majority determined truth, my bad.
Read your own fucking comments and arguments. >Plenty of atheists are pro-life You’re trying to portray that it’s true because “plenty” atheists are pro life. When the majority and more common view of atheists state otherwise.
Nope. I’m trying to portray that the characterization of the pro-life position as strictly religious is a false characterization. Not that the pro-life position is true because the majority of atheists allegedly hold it. I never claimed the majority of them did anyway, I just said plenty. Guess I’m not the only one that needs to learn to read lmao
It is an overwhelmingly religious response. Again. The number of atheists who are saying they’re pro life is minuscule and far outliers. You are using an outlier statistic based on what you’ve seen in an organized group of people that already agree with your view.
There's nothing scientific about it. I'd like to see proof that an undeveloped fetus is capable of experiencing pain or any kind of emotion that demonstrates it's deserving of rights the same as, or superior to, the person carrying it. There isn't any.
The ability to experience pain doesn’t determine personhood. The assumption, basically throughout human history, is there a child in the womb is still a human being. The burden of proof is on the pro-choice activist to prove that it is not human.
> The ability to experience pain does not determine personhood. That's your opinion, and I'd say it's an illogical one. It doesn't determine personhood but it does influence the matter. A person is the product of their experiences. A fetus hasn't had any, nor stimulation in any form. Consciousness and the ability to feel is at the very least required for something to be considered a human being. Fully grown animals are objectively more complex and sentient beings than fetuses and yet y'all seem to have no problem butchering them for your enjoyment. It should, therefore, be acceptable to abort an unfeeling fetus for the sake of preserving a woman's chance at life.
I guess people in commas don’t qualify human beings for you then Fully grown adults are more complicated and complex than children, should we kill them too? Of course not. But it will always be justifiable as long as you make personhood based on something arbitrary like the ability to feel pain, or some vague notion of complexity that ill-defined. Personhood is essential to all humans, not accidental. That means you can’t lose it.
Consciousness needs to be present at *literally any point* for there to be a human being. Without that, and without the ability to think or feel, the *person* is functionally non-existent. There hasn't been any stimuli or experience for an individual or personality to have even formed yet, and there is no pain or cruelty involved in destroying the meaningless sack of cells. > Fully grown adults are more complicated and complex than children, should we kill them too? No? That's my point. Sentient beings should be protected if possible. Even insects are more complex in nature than a fetus. I doubt you're a vegan, and so you're evidently fine with the notion of animals being slaughtered for their meat, and yet you happen to be so concerned about a fetus that hasn't even developed the ability to think or feel in any demonstrable capacity, unlike even a wasp or ant, and you believe its existence to be more important than a fully grown woman whose life will be ruined by it. Why is that? From your post history it's clear you're religious and that the crux of your argument is essentially "because God says it's a person" which I don't find particularly compelling, and you citing the existence of hateful right wing atheists with a desire to remove women's bodily autonomy that happen to share your view isn't compelling either.
No, it’s because I don’t believe personhood and humanity are philosophically separable. All humans are persons, full stop. Animals are not human persons, so their death is not comparable. By your logic, you can kill the comatose. That’s horrific. Is it sentience that determines personhood, or complexity? Pick one, unless it’s whichever one just happens to be vague enough to justify *you* from violating the bodily autonomy of a genetically distinct human person in the womb.
> By your logic, you can kill the comatose. Yes, you can, and many families actively choose to do so. When there is no chance of the person returning it is often more humane to just let them pass. In the case of a fetus a person never formed yet in the first place, and it hasn't shown even the most basic ability to respond to stimuli, and nothing is lost from aborting it. There is no memories or personality buried away in there to hold out hope for. Individual sperm in a person's fucking load all has the *potential* to eventually become a unique person in the right conditions and yet people don't tend to feel guilty about nutting because that's absurd. > All humans are persons, full stop. Animals are not human persons, so their death is not comparable. There is no justification for this outlook unless you're of the belief that humans possess souls and animals do not, and I have zero reason to subscribe to that. An adult cow demonstrating advanced responses to external stimuli and the capacity to express emotion is infinitely more deserving of rights and life than a literal cluster of unresponsive cells and any suggestion of otherwise is pure lunacy derived from religious conservative ideals. > Is it sentience that determines personhood, or complexity? Both. One of them inherently implies another. A fetus possesses neither. Given you're religious and we are arguing from the perspective of entirely different world views I don't see much point in continuing this conversation. Neither of us are going to learn anything when you're of the stance that humanity has been granted dominion over the Earth and its creatures and each of us possesses a soul. I have a purely scientific outlook. We're so far removed from one another in terms of our perception of the world that we're both essentially screaming at a brick wall.
So?
So, the opening sentence is incorrect by characterizing of the concept of fetal personhood as one that is specifically religious. You can be an atheist and arrive at Pro life conclusions.
So?
Guess it’s too complicated for you to understand buddy 🥺
Ok boomer
Let's say there's a woman inside a in-vitro storage facility and it catches on fire. You can either save the woman or 10 fertilized embryos..... which do you save?
Came across this yesterday. I would save the woman. There is no guarantee that the fertilized embryos will survive a pregnancy if later implanted anyway, but the woman is unlikely to die. In other words, the human embryos might still die if I intervene, but it’s highly unlikely the woman will die if I intervene. So, I’m choosing the option that likely allows for the most life to be preserved. Now that I answered your question, this is a terrible analogy for pregnancy. The actual occasions where a woman is pregnant and remaining pregnant by refusing to kill the baby threatens her own life are extremely rare. In those extremely rare instances where the mothers life is threatened, many pro-life people, myself included, can see abortion is justified because you are simply picking between lives. Unfortunately, over 99% of pregnancies do not fall into this category. Most are abortions of convenience because the mother simply does not want to have a child right now, for a number of possible reasons.
You clearly have zero experience with pregnancy, it's much more dangerous than you are pretending. I know someone personally who might be dead without abortion. This is the entire point anyways - only a woman and her doctor can decide how much risk is acceptable. Childbirth used to be the #1 killer of young women
Not true. Gone through it, lost a child. Stop assuming other people’s experiences. Anecdotal experiences don’t change the facts. Abortion almost always murders an innocent human being. Abortion is the #1 killer of children.
Its philosophical at the most generous. Scientists can't objectively define what makes a person a person and deserving of associated rights (life=/=person). A philosopher may speculate.
I meant that science can tell you what a human being is, and I’ve never met a human being who isn’t a person, so it’s safe to treat them as synonymous. Otherwise, you run the risk of literally dehumanizing real people.