I like how Deadpool and Spider-Man's relationship in a nutshell is generally always, "Of course I kiss my homies good night."
The Bible does not use the word abortion. How could it? The term itself as a procedure wasn't invented yet! However, the Bible does cover:
Humanity's inherent value and rights as (uniquely among creation) made in the image of God
Murder
Child/infant murder as something abhorrent to God
Life's beginnings, indirectly (although that also has biological support)
Legal ramifications of killing a child in the womb
How God sees and interacts with children in the womb
How we as His followers are meant to treat children
What He expects us to do for the defenseless and vulnerable (i.e., the most defenseless and vulnerable human imaginable is the one in the womb)
And how the question of following Him and His Word is what makes or breaks the difference between a Christian and someone who claims the name but is tragically unsaved Below are some verses and some additional explication (partial credit: @glowsticks-and-jesus)
Proverbs 31:8
Luke 1:44
2nd Kings 17:17
Jeremiah 19:5
Genesis 9:6
Exodus 21:22-25
Matthew 7:20 - 23
John 15:14
1st John 1:5-10, 2:3-6
Exodus 20:13
Mark 10:13-15 Leviticus 20:3-5 (https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mizzaro_2233.htm)
Matthew 18:10, 14
Psalm 22:10
Jacob & Esau, John the Baptist, Samson, etc.
Judges 16:17 Glowsticks-and-Jesus Collection:
"Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 'Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.'"Jeremiah 1:4-5
"The Lord called me from the womb, from the body of my mother he named my name."Isaiah 49:1
John the Baptist leaped in Elizabeth’s womb when Mary greeted her cousin (Luke 1:39-45), an example that babies in utero are responsive human beings already aware of the outside world.
The righteous Hebrew midwives at the time of Moses pleased God by saving babies deemed unworthy of life by the authorities of their day (Ex. 1:15-21).
As an additional note -- these references are included above, but worth a second mention -- it's plain that child sacrifice - child murder - is something that God abhors and explicitly does not command. I'd look here (https://biblehub.com/jeremiah/19-5.htm) and here (https://biblehub.com/2_kings/17-17.htm) and check out the cross-references as well. Likewise, there is direct support for laws against murder and the protection of the unborn (up to capital punishment) in the Bible (Genesis 9:6; Exodus 21:22-25 -- an additional reference here included about the common misunderstanding of the latter verses: https://www.str.org/w/what-exodus-21-22-says-about-abortion).
In summary -- it's possible (although, I believe, it does deprive its proponents of a foundational basis for the value of life) to be both secular and anti-abortion. But it is not possible for a Christian who truly understands their faith, their God, and His Word to be pro-abortion.
You are a genius, this makes so much sense.
This is no longer a headcanon now. It IS canon. Because as you said, there's literally no other way to explain otherwise why she was able to be an avenger.
Sorry not sorry, I will ride the Wanda-ain't-shiitake train till the wheels are worn out. I do not care what her fangirls say. And if you're legitimately going to be so overly offended just from me disliking a FICTIONAL character, I highly suggest you click off, make some tea, and watch a Ghibli movie.
How many times does it need to be said? Just because someone suffers from some form of (small or big) trauma, IT DOESN’T GIVE THEM A PASS TO DO EVIL SH—
I really REALLY sincerely hope there's lore or bits I'm missing here (and if so, PLEASE tell me because I WANT to be wrong so BAD). But from what I know and remember, I feel as though I have every right to be disgusted with who Wanda is as a person.
It frustrates me so much how this carmine-colored narcissist will whine about people being scared of her, but she does stuff only a scary person WOULD do.
Purposefully setting the Hulk off so you could use him as a wrecking ball on innocent civilians in Johannesburg during Age of Ultron? Seems scary as heck.
Literally warping the universe itself to hunt and kill a teenager who did nothing to you during Multiverse of Madness? Seems scary as heck.
Brainwashing an ENTIRE town JUST so you can live in delusion about your man not being dead during Wandavision? Seems DOUBLE scary as heck.
Don't even try to defend what she did in Age of Ultron. Even if she supposedly didn't INTEND to have civilians killed, she sure as HECK didn't seem all too sorry that it happened. She wasn't ‘regretful’ that she did it. She was only ‘regretful' when Bruce confronted her on it. She has the nerve (the utter AUDACITY) to hate Tony Stark for the same CRAP that she does (if not worse, which let's be honest—it’s worse).
At least Tony Stark DIED out of an effort to save everyone, whereas Wanda usually tends to only help others when it benefits HER.
Wanda is nothing more than a Multiversal brat with a god-complex and no one can tell me otherwise. If something does not go 100% her way, she completely acts out and throws a reality-warping tantrum.
“Oh, but she tried to fix everything in Wandavision!”
Yeah, only after finding out she was BRAINWASHING people!
How the FREAK do you reality warp an ENTIRE town (especially at the large radius she used her magic) and expect NO one to be under mind control? Would you NOT try to fly around the premises to see if ANYONE else was there?
Once again, even if this was an example where she didn't INTEND for it to happen, then that proves another great flaw that she has.
Wanda hardly (if ever) thinks through her actions. And then when her actions bite her in the butt, she has the nerve to be surprised. Wanda almost never (and I'm being generous here) considers how her actions harm or affect others until it turns around and affects HER.
She did not deserve Vision, he was too good of a man for her, sorry not sorry.
Just the stuff she did BEFORE Multiverse of Madness ALONE is enough to not like her.
Let's not even get into the fact she never ACTUALLY apologized to Bruce Banner for everything she put him through. All she said at most when he confronted her is, “I know you're angry…”
Oh wow, REALLY? I couldn't POSSIBLY understand why Banner would EVER be angry at you for essentially brain-raping him (going into his mind and memories without his CONSENT) and using his worst fears against him to trigger Hulk so you could use him like a personal killing machine, further lessening the very few support systems he already HAD. She should feel grateful Banner didn't immediately throw her through a wall upon seeing her.
“But she became an avenger and helped them in Endgame!”
I could not give less of a DOOKIE about the fact she did that. Wanda fighting Thanos was literally the ONLY option she possibly had if she didn't wanna turn into dust along with the other half of the population. Sure, she also did it because she was forced to kill her boo BECAUSE of Thanos, but let's be honest—she would've had to fight him regardless. Her handing Thanos’ butt to him (while a very cool scene) doesn't prove JACK about her character.
The fact she ever BECAME an avenger after effectively traumatizing the MAJORITY of them is mind-boggling to me.
“Oh, I'm sorry I weaponized all of your traumas against you for my own personal gain because I wanted to work with a genocidal robot, can I join you guys?”
“Sure, Wanda! Come into the team and we'll pretend like you didn't do a darn thing!”
(The fact this isn't even ALL that she's done is absurd, I can still keep going—)
Don't even get me STARTED on Multiverse of Madness. And before anyone tries to say, “She did it so she could have a reality with her children!”
BRO, HER KIDS WEREN'T EVEN FREAKING REAL—
Wanda Freaking Maximoff wanted to murder a TEENAGER all for some children that were not even ACTUAL people. And when she did have them, didn't she make them FIGHT against the military in Wandavision or am I mistaken (which I VERY MUCH hope I am because what the he---)?
I do not care whatsoever what her reason is or what trauma she went through. Attempted murder of a minor (ESPECIALLY in this case, a minor who didn't even do anything) is inexcusable to me.
There is no way in frog fingers you guys are ACTUALLY trying to justify and/or downplay a grown ADULT trying to murder a CHILD (because that's what America was—a CHILD).
(Her and Miguel O'Hara would get along GREAT, when's the collab--)
And by then, she had ALREADY brutally murdered a whole bunch of people and probably corrupted the multiverse even FURTHER than she already had.
It wasn't until an ALTERNATE version of her (who ACTUALLY had her kids) told her to sit the [BLEEP] down (I'm paraphrasing here, but you get my drift).
Wanda is NOT a victim. Is she a good villain? Yes. But this witch isn't a victim. Not anymore at least. She doesn't apologize for her actions. She doesn't take responsibility. She doesn't reflect on what she does.
And even when she DOES finally do ANY of those things in ANY capacity, the damage is already done. In fact, it's not JUST done, it's also BURNT inside the oven causing smoke to go everywhere.
There is no rhyme or reason you could pull out that will convince me to be anything short of angry with this character and I'm so tired of her fans trying to defend her just because she was a lab rat and lost her man.
Once again, it's not bad to like a character that does awful stuff. But please, for sanity sake, STOP acting like they're a lost little angel BECAUSE you like them. I know they say "hurt people hurt people" but that still doesn't justify doing bad stuff just because bad things happened to YOU.
I'm so sorry, but characters who do a bunch of awful stuff and then apologize AS they're dying are straight up punks to me. You do not get to raise hell on this planet and then try to act like you learned your lesson now that you're seconds away from meeting your maker.
Now granted, in some specific (and well done) cases, this can be an emotional or amazing moment for a character or plot line. However, most of the time (to me personally), it's just a lazy or improper way for a writer to make a 'redemption' arc for a character without having the said character put the work in. How on Earth am I supposed to have empathy (sympathy even) for a character that out of nowhere got a change of heart 00000.01 seconds after finding out they're dying?
Congratulations, you realized too late that you were a piece of dookie and can't even do anything to help clean the mess that YOU made.
For example, I do not like Bakugou Katsuki whatsoever but at the very least HE of all people made the effort to apologize to Deku BEFORE he got murked and on top of that, actually tried to freaking HELP at some points.
You got me messed up if you think I'm really about to feel bad for a character that did nothing but contribute to the pain and suffering of others around them, and then think they can die an angel just because they apologize or admit they were wrong. You're not slick, I know what you're doing.
It's one thing to simply have that be a part of the plot and it's complete 'nother for the writers to try and gaslight me into feeling bad that the one who did nothing but cause problems is holding onto their final breath. Of course you wanna make things right now that you realize you're gonna be put to sleep for all eternity with potentially no one coming to the funeral. You had more than enough time, more than enough opportunities, to turn around and be better but you didn't take it.
When it comes down to villain redemption (or character redemption IN GENERAL), I feel it's a rather delicate process that I feel usually (not all the time, but USUALLY) is written in either the flattest or laziest ways possible. And having a crappy character who did crappy stuff apologize from their last breath or because they were close to it is on that list.
This isn't to say you can't like evil or horrible characters. You can like a character that does crappy stuff. But it's another thing to JUSTIFY the crappy stuff that they do. Stop acting like an angry 24/7 paid lawyer for this fictional being that I know for a FACT would not ever do the same for you should they be an actual person.
I hate how it's always a 'young woman who took advantage of a 60 year old for her position' and not 'a 60 year old man who only promoted women who were willing to give him sexual favors.'
This is like the third post of mine you've reblogged and commented on. I don't know why you bother responding to me either.
If I truly upset you that much, you can block me. There's nothing forcing you to be on my account. I'm clearly not as mature as you since you apparently have much more knowledge than me, so why are you arguing with someone who clearly is too dumb or horrible to care about something as far as you're concerned?
Please, for your own peace of mind, stop responding if my existence genuinely bothers you that much.
I hope you have a good day though :/
Something I think anti-abortionists (including myself) need to understand is that when you (rightfully) call out the fact that abortion is murder---or at the very least wrong, you're gonna get push back.
You're asking these women to confront a reality that's gonna force them to rethink every aspect of their life and how they see themselves as person.
Imagine if all your life you were told this thing was fine/okay to do, and that it's empowering for you to do it, only for you to find out you were actually committing evil in the process.
I doubt many people would be willing to face that reality because no one really wants to think of themselves as an evil person (lest they be a legit psychopath). Most people don't like confronting uncomfortable truths about things regardless of how necessary it might be because it's human nature to want to run from things that don't feel good to know.
Imagine if you found out that you were actually committing murder this whole time? Would you be so easily willing to accept that truth? Of course a bunch of these women are going to show major resistance because they don't want to believe what they're doing is horrible because by extension, it would mean they're a horrible person and they would have to wrestle with their self worth and regret because that's what it would translate to for them. No one wants to deal with that.
I'm not saying this erases it, nor do I believe all women who've had abortions are genuinely evil. But really take the time to look from their perspective here. Is it really any wonder that there's so much resistance/division on this topic?
EXACTLY!
Sorry not sorry, I will ride the Wanda-ain't-shiitake train till the wheels are worn out. I do not care what her fangirls say. And if you're legitimately going to be so overly offended just from me disliking a FICTIONAL character, I highly suggest you click off, make some tea, and watch a Ghibli movie.
How many times does it need to be said? Just because someone suffers from some form of (small or big) trauma, IT DOESN’T GIVE THEM A PASS TO DO EVIL SH—
I really REALLY sincerely hope there's lore or bits I'm missing here (and if so, PLEASE tell me because I WANT to be wrong so BAD). But from what I know and remember, I feel as though I have every right to be disgusted with who Wanda is as a person.
It frustrates me so much how this carmine-colored narcissist will whine about people being scared of her, but she does stuff only a scary person WOULD do.
Purposefully setting the Hulk off so you could use him as a wrecking ball on innocent civilians in Johannesburg during Age of Ultron? Seems scary as heck.
Literally warping the universe itself to hunt and kill a teenager who did nothing to you during Multiverse of Madness? Seems scary as heck.
Brainwashing an ENTIRE town JUST so you can live in delusion about your man not being dead during Wandavision? Seems DOUBLE scary as heck.
Don't even try to defend what she did in Age of Ultron. Even if she supposedly didn't INTEND to have civilians killed, she sure as HECK didn't seem all too sorry that it happened. She wasn't ‘regretful’ that she did it. She was only ‘regretful' when Bruce confronted her on it. She has the nerve (the utter AUDACITY) to hate Tony Stark for the same CRAP that she does (if not worse, which let's be honest—it’s worse).
At least Tony Stark DIED out of an effort to save everyone, whereas Wanda usually tends to only help others when it benefits HER.
Wanda is nothing more than a Multiversal brat with a god-complex and no one can tell me otherwise. If something does not go 100% her way, she completely acts out and throws a reality-warping tantrum.
“Oh, but she tried to fix everything in Wandavision!”
Yeah, only after finding out she was BRAINWASHING people!
How the FREAK do you reality warp an ENTIRE town (especially at the large radius she used her magic) and expect NO one to be under mind control? Would you NOT try to fly around the premises to see if ANYONE else was there?
Once again, even if this was an example where she didn't INTEND for it to happen, then that proves another great flaw that she has.
Wanda hardly (if ever) thinks through her actions. And then when her actions bite her in the butt, she has the nerve to be surprised. Wanda almost never (and I'm being generous here) considers how her actions harm or affect others until it turns around and affects HER.
She did not deserve Vision, he was too good of a man for her, sorry not sorry.
Just the stuff she did BEFORE Multiverse of Madness ALONE is enough to not like her.
Let's not even get into the fact she never ACTUALLY apologized to Bruce Banner for everything she put him through. All she said at most when he confronted her is, “I know you're angry…”
Oh wow, REALLY? I couldn't POSSIBLY understand why Banner would EVER be angry at you for essentially brain-raping him (going into his mind and memories without his CONSENT) and using his worst fears against him to trigger Hulk so you could use him like a personal killing machine, further lessening the very few support systems he already HAD. She should feel grateful Banner didn't immediately throw her through a wall upon seeing her.
“But she became an avenger and helped them in Endgame!”
I could not give less of a DOOKIE about the fact she did that. Wanda fighting Thanos was literally the ONLY option she possibly had if she didn't wanna turn into dust along with the other half of the population. Sure, she also did it because she was forced to kill her boo BECAUSE of Thanos, but let's be honest—she would've had to fight him regardless. Her handing Thanos’ butt to him (while a very cool scene) doesn't prove JACK about her character.
The fact she ever BECAME an avenger after effectively traumatizing the MAJORITY of them is mind-boggling to me.
“Oh, I'm sorry I weaponized all of your traumas against you for my own personal gain because I wanted to work with a genocidal robot, can I join you guys?”
“Sure, Wanda! Come into the team and we'll pretend like you didn't do a darn thing!”
(The fact this isn't even ALL that she's done is absurd, I can still keep going—)
Don't even get me STARTED on Multiverse of Madness. And before anyone tries to say, “She did it so she could have a reality with her children!”
BRO, HER KIDS WEREN'T EVEN FREAKING REAL—
Wanda Freaking Maximoff wanted to murder a TEENAGER all for some children that were not even ACTUAL people. And when she did have them, didn't she make them FIGHT against the military in Wandavision or am I mistaken (which I VERY MUCH hope I am because what the he---)?
I do not care whatsoever what her reason is or what trauma she went through. Attempted murder of a minor (ESPECIALLY in this case, a minor who didn't even do anything) is inexcusable to me.
There is no way in frog fingers you guys are ACTUALLY trying to justify and/or downplay a grown ADULT trying to murder a CHILD (because that's what America was—a CHILD).
(Her and Miguel O'Hara would get along GREAT, when's the collab--)
And by then, she had ALREADY brutally murdered a whole bunch of people and probably corrupted the multiverse even FURTHER than she already had.
It wasn't until an ALTERNATE version of her (who ACTUALLY had her kids) told her to sit the [BLEEP] down (I'm paraphrasing here, but you get my drift).
Wanda is NOT a victim. Is she a good villain? Yes. But this witch isn't a victim. Not anymore at least. She doesn't apologize for her actions. She doesn't take responsibility. She doesn't reflect on what she does.
And even when she DOES finally do ANY of those things in ANY capacity, the damage is already done. In fact, it's not JUST done, it's also BURNT inside the oven causing smoke to go everywhere.
There is no rhyme or reason you could pull out that will convince me to be anything short of angry with this character and I'm so tired of her fans trying to defend her just because she was a lab rat and lost her man.
Once again, it's not bad to like a character that does awful stuff. But please, for sanity sake, STOP acting like they're a lost little angel BECAUSE you like them. I know they say "hurt people hurt people" but that still doesn't justify doing bad stuff just because bad things happened to YOU.
I already know I'm probably gonna make some people disagree with what I'm gonna say, but honestly? I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone else comment on this yet. If you genuinely are going to be offended just from me having my own opinions and observations about a FILM, then I dunno what to tell you, bro. I perfectly understand if you disagree with my theory, but that's what it is---a theory, not fact. You can still like the movie.
Now finally addressing the main point...
So, according to some other fan theories, the Beast/Prince (his name is Prince Adam, don't know why they never mentioned it in the movie, but apparently, that’s his name) was a child when he was cursed by the enchantress since the flower was supposed to die during his twenty-first year.
And the movie specifies that enough time had passed to the point where the rose began to wilt and lose petals—which was the condition it was in before he met Belle anyway. Chronologically, this would mean Prince Adam got cursed when he was eleven. So if that were to be the case, then yes---the Enchantress would be the real villain here for cursing a child that followed the simple rules of 'stranger danger.' And for a while, I also believed this conclusion.
However, there's something else in the movie that I think disproves this theory entirely.
When Belle enters the West Wing despite the Beast telling her not to, she notices a ripped painting of a man. Then when the beast gets transformed back into a human at the end of the movie, he looks like the man in the ripped painting.
In order for that painting to have been made, he was way more than likely already a grown up before he became a beast---hence how the original artist even got the facial reference to know what to paint. You really expect me to believe this is a random painting of someone else who just HAPPENS to look like Adam? I don't think so.
Same creepy wide blue eyes, same length hair, same skin color, etc. And sure, the shading and colors are a bit different, but the similarities are still there.
There’s no way he was around 11 when that portrait was painted. Even if he was let's say in his late teens, he still would not have been young enough for him to be a smaller child. The ABSOLUTE youngest I think the prince could've been in order for that painting to be made and ALSO look like that is at the very LEAST 15.
Even in the beginning of the film, it shows Prince Adam definitely not looking like a kid. He's also wearing a SIMILAR collar to the one he wears in the torn painting.
That dude don't look 11 to me. And keep in mind, the curse said he would die during his twenty-first year if he didn’t find love. The curse very well COULD'VE meant his 21st year of being a BEAST and not necessarily point to his AGE. Considering the controversy around what Belle's ACTUAL age could/might be, I'm not gonna comment on that. But TLDR: I don't think Prince Adam was a child when he got cursed in the movie due to the ripped painting of him found in the West Wing.
Disney: Stop focusing on this dumb movie about a Hedgehog! Our Mufasa deserves that Oscar! The academy clearly thinks so as well! C'mon, watch our movie! Sonic fans: Ey, y'all hear something? Sonic 3: Nah, I can't hear anything over the sound of you guys throwing me your money.
Being an artist nowadays is so scary on the internet. Imagine working hard and spending HOURS on your art and then posting/sharing them to the internet only for some unknown entity to call it "AI" as a baseless accusation without actual proofs to back it up. Only for some inconsiderate jerks to steal your art, use it to train AI, use that very AI to create 'art', and then claim it's their 'work'.
If you make a minor and totally reasonable mistake in your art (mostly when it comes to anatomy especially because anatomy is a pretty hard field to grip on in art)? It's AI.
If your art is actually nice and up to your standards? It's AI because it's 'too perfect'.
Not to mention that as if AI 'art' alone isn't enough to fuck with artists, something called AI speed paint exists now so AI 'artists' can back their 'work' up with an 'actual speed paint'.
I feel so terrible for artists that have to go through this kind of bs when they post or share their art online. For artists that have to quit because jerks are either stealing their art for their AI or because people just point and make accusations without evidence nowadays. For artists that are afraid to share their hard work online because of these issues.
I understand spreading awareness about AI 'art' and being cautious, but some people do be calling everything AI at this point.
The bags under my eyes are Gucci. Feel free to simply call me Ben or Bennie.Unapologetically pro-life, plus a superhero and anime fanatic.Have a good day :)Current Age: 20
73 posts