Upload
Login or register

tylermcall

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Age: 25
Date Signed Up:1/04/2012
Last Login:7/30/2016
Location:Detroit Michigan
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#31616
Highest Content Rank:#1308
Highest Comment Rank:#7239
Content Thumbs: 1808 total,  2210 ,  402
Comment Thumbs: 1007 total,  1669 ,  662
Content Level Progress: 46% (46/100)
Level 114 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 115 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 90% (9/10)
Level 194 Comments: Anon Annihilator → Level 195 Comments: Anon Annihilator
Subscribers:2
Content Views:79900
Times Content Favorited:53 times
Total Comments Made:864
FJ Points:2440
Favorite Tags: the (4) | Pokemon (3) | black (2) | challenge (2) | Nuzlock (2) | to (2)

latest user's comments

#62 - Bill Maher seems like the kind of person that would only enter…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/04/2016 on Bill Maher +1
#73 - anon (06/04/2016) [-]
This comment may hold some water if he didnt host a talk show every week where he has prominent people, journalists, and community leaders both liberal and conservative to discuss current events. But he does, so I guess you're just a salty bitch.
#91 - Such a badass! 05/16/2016 on Equality +5
#169 - People can do whatever they want. Let people respond as they see fit. 05/06/2016 on Hahaha short guys should... 0
#49 - Why would it matter if she was black though? I understand that… 04/16/2016 on We wuz hogwards nd' sheeit +2
#132 - Who are these "YOU people"? I never made any assumpt… 04/04/2016 on anon wants to play an mmo 0
#93 - Saying he probably does something is an assumption, and since …  [+] (2 new replies) 04/03/2016 on anon wants to play an mmo +2
User avatar
#122 - infinitereaper (04/04/2016) [-]
Are you fucking kidding me? What are all YOU people doing? Fucking braindead.
User avatar
#132 - tylermcall (04/04/2016) [-]
Who are these "YOU people"? I never made any assumptions to argue your point, and if anyone else has, that's their business, not mine. Before you get all pissy and start calling people names, learn how to make an argument.
#170 - Batman is less Mary-sue and more of a Dues ex Machina characte…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/29/2016 on Batman dick worship 0
#174 - Lambert (03/29/2016) [-]
No it isn't better. When Superman and Batman are bad, they are bad. When they are good, they are good. But it really comes down to how much the author relies on the just random plot convenience.
#83 - I'm glad we are having a respectful argument now. Abortions wo…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/28/2016 on I exfoliate every damn day +5
#88 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
Which is why it is not really an awesome idea to boost the overpopulation any further.

Also, there are crapton of women even every day having abortions. That is how it is. People have sex for shits and giggles and nobody should have the right to stop them my taking away their way to cop out if something goes wrong.

This is 21st century buddy, medical knowledge of humanity allows our species to have free inconsequential sex, and it would be stupid to give something like that up, not to mention pointless. People's lives shouldn't be messed up just because they wanted to have some fun and it went wrong.
#66 - Jeez, I wish there was some type of Adoption program. Y'know w…  [+] (43 new replies) 02/28/2016 on I exfoliate every damn day +7
#69 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
Jesus fuck come on, do you know how horribly overpopulated the world is by now anyways?
User avatar
#112 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
You do realize the overpopulation essentially has NOTHING to do with western civilization right?
#113 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
But it will start to have if you wont let people abort kids they do not want.
User avatar
#114 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
It wont help at all unless you start giving the eastern civilizations massive amounts of birth control and condoms
User avatar
#141 - ilovehitler (02/28/2016) [-]
or genocide
#120 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
We can clash opinions all we like, but it will lead nowhere regardless. I have presented in one of my earlier posts why the idea is stupid apart from practical reasons.

Here is the rundown:

''Also, there are crapton of women even every day having abortions. That is how it is. People have sex for shits and giggles and nobody should have the right to stop them my taking away their way to cop out if something goes wrong.

This is 21st century buddy, medical knowledge of humanity allows our species to have free inconsequential sex, and it would be stupid to give something like that up, not to mention pointless. People's lives shouldn't be messed up just because they wanted to have some fun and it went wrong. ''
User avatar
#122 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
They just explained in this thread that you can put up the child for adoption, your life isnt autofucked
#125 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
I mean, why force people to bother carrying the child 9 months if they can get rid of it outright? Just for someone's convenience?

Are you going to breed and ride a horse to the work just because someone thinks cars should be banned due to the exhaust emissions?
User avatar
#127 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
Its a moral argument
Whether you think its a blob of cells or a future child is all up to everyones own morals
#132 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
It is stupid to consider life of anything that barely has (or does not at all) cognitive functions.

That is why I believe it to be a stupid opinion. You are considering life of something that is not even living on basic level of human being.

It is the same stupid shit as keeping mentally challenged people who cannot move, speak, think...heck that are not even aware of their sense of being alive.

Calling that a half life would be flattery, and in comparison to that, you are considering a life of something that did not even reach that kind of existence yet, and weighting it against lives of two healthy almost adult human beings.
User avatar
#134 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
Not even close
Its the same as keeping a mentally challenger person that cant move speak or think, that will get better, alive
Its only gonna be that way for 9 months anyway
And im weighing its future life against the inconvenience two healthy consenting adults for 9 months
#137 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
Exactly, it is inconvenience that will force 9 month pregnancy and giving a birth to someone who does not have slightest interest in anything like that. That is pretty stupid.

Also, what I have meant is that at the point of abortion, the fetus cannot even be called a living cognitive being, and thus there is no sense of morality involved. You are not called murderer for killing a rodent, so why should you be morally devaluated by being an indirect cause of something that doesn't even have any self-consciousnes, or barely any mental activity at all?
User avatar
#139 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
And i said thats all about point of view
Its like saying an 8 year old isnt human because its not as tall or smart as an adult
You dont think that a fetus counts, but thats all according to your own morals
#169 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
''Huehuehue this is all your opinion!''

No shit sherlock, you are also talking in opinions and this whole discussion is opinions.
Originally, we have talked here about me calling the argument that couples should be forced not to abort stupid, which I stand by, because considering life of something that is not even a human being yet is stupid in its own.

Nothing that has or has capacity to leave the womb and live on is human being. You can deny it all you like but that is the reality of it right here. I am honestly tired of your shit because honestly, you have presented nothing but strawmen and personal attacks yourself.

Once you will bring unmistakable facts that prove that something that is not able to leave the womb of another human being and live on independently from the body of that being, we can discuss this matter further, but up until now, you have wasted more than two hours of my precious time for baseless bullshit notion that fetus that has not reached a certain level of development can be called a human being.
User avatar
#171 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
Are you some kind of a moron?
My argument was that since a fetus is human youre weighing a life vs 9 month of inconvenience
#173 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
But since fetus prior to the point where it is able to live on after leaving the womb cannot be called human being. You are not weighting a life of a human being unless the fetus is older than 6-9 months. Also, you are acting like it does not affect the parent at all in any way, but pregnancy and giving birth is a good deal more than just an inconvenience for someone who is not interested in anything like that.
User avatar
#174 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
A baby cant live without parents or caretakers
Its not really much different from a fetus not being able to live outside the womb
If independence is your argument for being human then barely anyone is capable
And im not saying it doesnt affect the parent
But you take risks when living mate, what is worse, carrying and giving birth to a child or dying?
#195 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (03/01/2016) [-]
You cant call something that does not have a mind state and never had a person, that is what this is about. Again, sleeping people are not only conscious but achieved that consciousness before. The difference between that and a pre-20 week old fetus is that the fetus never had consciousness in the first place, thus it cannot be classified as a person.

#193 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (03/01/2016) [-]
Those people were sentient and conscious once before. That makes all the difference. Also, a sleeping person does not lose consciousness completely, which is why is it called sleep.
User avatar
#194 - admiralen (03/01/2016) [-]
My point wasnt that they lose consciousness, my point was that if you only judge a person by his current mindstate all sleeping people would have to be taken to insane asylums
#191 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
Something that didn't previously have or does not have sentience cannot be considered human. You said it yourself, It will achieve sentience but not until 18-25 weeks of existence. Until then. It is just an attached bag of flesh.

Just because something will attain some kind of status later does not mean it holds that status now.

What matters is what is here and now, not the future state of the matter.
User avatar
#192 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
And if what is here and now is all that matters maybe you should arrest all people sleeping for being insane
#188 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
No it does not have sentience, at least not until 18-25 weeks of development, and even taking that into consideration that sentience is extremely limited to the point it can barely be called that way. 30 weeks is for most fetuses the point where the word sentience can be taken at face value, which goes to prove my point nicely, and it took me only one single search to find that information.

A fetus without sentience is not a human being and no matter how many ''but mah babbies'' posts you will make, it will not stop being any less of a truth.
User avatar
#190 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
Maybe you should google the word "will" as well
My point wasnt that it gains sentience in the womb, my point was that it will gain sentience eventually
My point also included that it doesnt matter if its sentient yet or not, its still human
#186 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
You are on the side of something that has no sentience whatsoever and has not even been born yet nor is it capable of being born. How exactly do you consider that a human being?

And by the way, where are you valid facts, all of your posts were ''omg I bet you dont consider babies humans either''

For the last dozens or so posts here I have been advocating common sense and reason. How exactly does that make me a moral fag?
User avatar
#187 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
But it will have sentience
That is a fact dude
And what has your facts added to this conversation anyway?
That a baby gets sentience at a certain month?
So what?
Youre just moral faggoting over the girl instead of the child, and apparantly im the other way around
#184 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
I do not honestly care what other people perceive to be a standard for existence of a human being. 6 months onward is when a human can be born to various effects.That is a scientific as well as medical fact, and this is the exact time-span when a fetus has developed into a human being that can be born. Anything else before that is a developing lump of flesh unable to live outside the body of a carrier.

You are the one who needs to shut the fuck up. Your biased views and persistence on sitting on your moral high horse will not get you anywhere.

''Its only in your retarded reasoning it automatically becomes human when it can touch air''

Because it makes so much more of a fucking sense to perceive something that cannot be born and will die if removed from its environment as human being right?

''Hurr durr you are retarded fegget'' is not going to cut it here. Either present valid fact backed opinion why should something unable to leave the womb of a carrier as living human being or get the fuck out of here.
User avatar
#185 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
It is a valid fact backed opinion, just cause you dont agree or dont understand doesnt change that
And youre not any different with your moral faggotry, im on the childs side and youre going "my girlfriend is gonna be inconvenienced"
#182 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
It makes it an actual human being because it does not exist inside of another human being but as a sole independent entity. In the moment it is capable of living outside the womb is when it becomes an independent life-form. The fact it still needs care and nourishment from the parents is irrelevant here because these do not happen inside a body of another human anymore.

I dont know how much more of an explanation do you need you thick skulled moron.

''Get inconvenienced or kill a person
It might suck, but you got yourself into that position, you knew the risks and you fucked it up.''

You are not fucking killing a person, because at that stage, a fetus can not be called a person yet. It is a growing part of something else, like a developing organ, a tumor or a parasite. And it continues to be until it gets developed enough to leave the body of their carrier and live outside the womb.

Also, by your logic, we should have doctors not to affix appendages cut off by accident because it is a recipents fault that it got cut off, and they can live without that hand/finger, it will just be an inconvenience. Believe it or not, medicine is here to alleviate not only pain and illnesses, but also bodily inconveniences.

I do not even fucking care about your stupid moral-faggotry, you can not kill a person that has not been or is not able to be born yet. Period.
User avatar
#183 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
Are you really this retarded dude?
My whole point has been about the fact that different people consider different stages as human
Its only in your retarded reasoning it automatically becomes human when it can touch air
Just shut the fuck up and stop being a dumbass
#180 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
That point is irrelevant here. It is not about independence, and I am surprised your reading comprehension is so crappy.

For the umpteenth and the last time, this is about whether the fetus is developed enough to leave the womb and exist alive as an entity separate from the body it was given birth to.

If it is not then it is a cluster of cells that is a part of the carrier's body.

''But you take risks when living mate, what is worse, carrying and giving birth to a child or dying?''

What is worse, carrying a child for 9 months then giving a birth to it, potentially risking your own health on something you have no interest in anyways, or aborting it in due time to avoid all this inconvenience altogether?
User avatar
#181 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
Get inconvenienced or kill a person
It might suck, but you got yourself into that position, you knew the risks and you fucked it up
And what is the difference between if it can live outside of your or not?
Why does that make it more human?
#143 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
Nope, an 8 years old, hell even a newborn already harnesses all the functions of a human body, both physical and mental.

Although those are extremely primitive at the stage of development in the case of a newborn, it is officially be classified as human being. This is about common sense, not sense of morality.
User avatar
#144 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
Your common sense
A fetus also harnesses all the functions of a human, its just in early stages, its developing its brain and body
Just cause its the start of the journey doesnt make it any different
Its also a human being
#150 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
''A fetus also harnesses all the functions of a human, its just in early stages, its developing its brain and body''

No it does not. It is not developed to what can be scientifically considered a basic level. It is a part of a different being and has no consciousness whatsoever.

By your definition you can also call sperm human beings because they are the start of a journey.

Any life form that has no consciousness and is not living individually outside can not be considered human being.
User avatar
#151 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
You dont really abort sperm though
It lives its short life in your balls
And if you wanna go into "what makes you human" territory you might as well start arguing for the soul next
Its a human, its a developing human
Guess you dont consider babies human either, they barely have a consiousness and they cant live individually either
#166 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/29/2016) [-]
Alright, any more straw men and we will be able to start a large scale agricultural company.

I urge you to read this very carefuly. A human being is a fetus that has reached its full development cycle and has left the womb of its mother, I.e. a newborn and forth.

Anything before that is an undeveloped cluster of flesh. Though arguably, a fetus that is older than 6 months can already be most likely called a human as well, but being born in this state will lead it to have many defects, if it survives at all.

Nevertheless, a limit for abortion is 5 months, and until then, the fetus has not yet developed enough to leave the body of another human being alive, thus it can not be considered human being itself. It is a part of another human being and has no consciousness of its own, and thus is not something you can call a human being. End of story.
User avatar
#168 - admiralen (02/29/2016) [-]
None of that shit proves any of your point though
My whole argument was that a fetus is still human, what you consider human is entirely up to you
Not being capable of living on your own is essentially 99% of the human race
Everything you say here is just your own opinion, in a moral debate there are no objectively wrong answers, just what you consider moral or true
#154 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
Yes you do abort sperm, by jerking off. Big deal huh?

''And if you wanna go into "what makes you human" territory you might as well star''

You have been cruising into that territory for a while now. Sad thing you are unable to notice that.

''Its a human, its a developing human''

No, it is a cluster of flesh that will develop into a human in a certain amount of time, usually 9 months. Only after it develops enough to be born, can it be called a human being. A newborn is developing human, learn the difference.
User avatar
#156 - admiralen (02/28/2016) [-]
By that argument all humans are just clusters of flesh
And i honestly didnt realize you thought fetuses were fleshblobs
Didnt think you were that insane
If thought is all thats required to be considered alive then the rat you spoke of earlier probably shouldve made you a murderer
A fetus is a human, and if you wanna argue that being in a different state makes you less human you might as well argue that old people and babies arent and that only 30 year olds are human
User avatar
#83 - tylermcall (02/28/2016) [-]
I'm glad we are having a respectful argument now. Abortions won't stop over-population, at best it only marginally slows it down. On the global scale, people are going to have babies, tons of babies, and riding the world of someone's unwanted pregnancy isn't going to come close to solving the over-population problem.
#88 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (02/28/2016) [-]
Which is why it is not really an awesome idea to boost the overpopulation any further.

Also, there are crapton of women even every day having abortions. That is how it is. People have sex for shits and giggles and nobody should have the right to stop them my taking away their way to cop out if something goes wrong.

This is 21st century buddy, medical knowledge of humanity allows our species to have free inconsequential sex, and it would be stupid to give something like that up, not to mention pointless. People's lives shouldn't be messed up just because they wanted to have some fun and it went wrong.
#82 - anon (02/28/2016) [-]
Yep. It's terribly over populated, and not to mention the adoption program in the US is horribly terrible.
#34 - Holy ****, I went to high school with that girl, and yes she w… 02/18/2016 on Words hurt me guys 0