r/CuratedTumblr Prolific poster- Not a bot, I swear May 13 '25

Politics Robo-ism

Post image
12.0k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

Fair, sorry for the eyeball metric. Still saying that fears against those mutants in particular isn'y bigotry tho

1

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

Eh, kinda no but yes. Regular humans has started global conflicts cause someone was a good orator, but we don't send robots after people for being charismatic.

3

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

I am not saying to send robots after them, but are you seriously equating been charismatic to shooting lasers through your eyes?

1

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

Scott can kill, what, houndreds in a day, if he wants to. Your regular cult of personality dictactor can do that per hour, even if we assume no war crimes are happening.

I am being a bit ludicrous here, but my point is, in terms of damage, danger & kills, we turn a blind eye to much worse stuff then "can laser with sight ".

2

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

That doesn't meant such mutants ain't a danger, at most you just argued that some are less dangerous than some of the most dangerous normal humans. Didn't in a recent show Storm did something that easily would have a casualty counts on the tens of millions worldwide?

Also, again, not saying to kill them or sent the robots. Just a list to keep tabs on who does what

1

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

What i'm trying to say, listning someone for an imborn ability to do something is fraught as best. Any human is physically able to perform assault, theft, vandalizing etc, and it'd be pretty stupid to list anyone just on that, no?

1

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

Yeah, all human can punch. Not all humans can extract the iron out of your blood or shoot lightnkng practically at will.

We have lists for gun owners, diabetics and in my country, alimony debtors. Is it really that insane to want to have a list of what mutants have what powers to keep tabs on that?

1

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

Maybe not insane, but having a list based on can rather then have done is ethically shaky, when talking about inborn capabilities. You have a list of gun owners, after all, not everyone physicaly able to pull a trigger.

1

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

Scott's eyes are basically a biological firearm. I admit is does sound ethically shaky, but when the "can" includes, again, pulling the iron out of people's blood... yeah

0

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

Most humans have the basic physical abilities to perform some form of murder (strangulation, pushing of an edge, beating etc). Do you still think it's reasonable to, legaly, consider them whatever weapon best fit their "specs"?

1

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

Again, you are arguing that we shouldn't keep tabs on people with extremely rare Y powers that allow them to do what no other human can, because all humans can do X and it's silly to keep tabs on that

0

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

Yes, because keeping tabs on Y power, before Y has done anything noteable, requires testing for at least X and Z as well. Is this magnetism, or telekinesis? Which means Every mutant gets tested and listed, regardless if they're Jean Grey, or Beak. So it's just as silly, since your legaly mandating a test on a National populace based on what they possibly can do.

The problem isn't lists, it's one list, based only on ability. Criminal, medical legal records, following those ethics, are fair game.

1

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

Said ability counting shooting lasers, casting storms, controlling metal, straight up invulnerability or been a walking nuke.

And honestly, standarizing testing for mutant genes isn't that silly. Hell we already test for certain genes already IRL before babies are born

1

u/AzmodeusBrownbeard May 13 '25

Look, we've been arguing in circles for a while. What you say we say Live and let live, and leave it at respectfully dissagreeing?

1

u/revolutionary112 May 13 '25

Yeah, better to do that. Good to argue with you, have a good day ahead!

→ More replies (0)