Sigh no one ever wants to listen to me talk about bulk mail rooms
Phone:
doesn't go off for three hours
Me:
welp it's time for bed
Phone:
buzz
Me:
...
Phone:
buzz
Phone:
buzz buzz
Phone:
Phone:
buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz
Phone:
Phone:
Phone:
Phone:
buzz
So apparently it’s four in the morning??????
❝
A three-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. There are, for the sake of comparison, more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. If our concern is about suffering in this universe, it is rather obvious that we should be more concerned about killing flies than about killing three-day-old human embryos… Many people will argue that the difference between a fly and a three-day-old human embryo is that a three-day-old human embryo is a potential human being. Every cell in your body, given the right manipulations, every cell with a nucleus is now a potential human being. Every time you scratch your nose, you’ve committed a holocaust of potential human beings… Let’s say we grant it that every three-day-old human embryo has a soul worthy of our moral concern. First of all, embryos at this stage can split into identical twins. Is this a case of one soul splitting into two souls? Embryos at this stage can fuse into a chimera. What has happened to the extra human soul in such a case? This is intellectually indefensible, but it’s morally indefensible given that these notions really are prolonging scarcely endurable misery of tens of millions of human beings, and because of the respect we accord religious faith, we can’t have this dialogue in the way that we should. I submit to you that if you think the interests of a three-day-old blastocyst trump the interests of a little girl with spinal cord injuries or a person with full-body burns, your moral intuitions have been obscured by religious metaphysics.
Sam Harris, on stem cell research. (via cocknbull) —
Best Author-on-Author Insults In History
Virginia Woolf on James Joyce:
[Ulysses is] the work of a queasy undergraduate scratching his pimples.
Harold Bloom on J.K. Rowling:
How to read ‘Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone’? Why, very quickly, to begin with, and perhaps also to make an end. Why read it? Presumably, if you cannot be persuaded to read anything better, Rowling will have to do.
H. G. Wells on George Bernard Shaw:
An idiot child screaming in a hospital.
Ralph Waldo Emerson on Jane Austen:
Miss Austen’s novels . . . seem to me vulgar in tone, sterile in artistic invention, imprisoned in the wretched conventions of English society, without genius, wit, or knowledge of the world.
William Faulkner on Ernest Hemingway:
He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.
Ernest Hemingway on William Faulkner:
Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?
W. H. Auden on Robert Browning:
I don’t think Robert Browning was very good in bed. His wife probably didn’t care for him very much. He snored and had fantasies about twelve-year-old girls.
Mark Twain on Jane Austen:
Every time I read ‘Pride and Prejudice,’ I want to dig her up and hit her over the skull with her own shin-bone.
Truman Capote on Jack Kerouac:
That's not writing, it's typing.
![neptunepirate:
…Mark Ruffalo came by the shop yesterday. Having just gotten a new record player he was excited to stock his library… His tastes varied, Callas, Joni Mitchell, Led Zeppelin, CSNY, and Elvis. He left smiling. [x]
But why would you leave this out, omg:
We are neighbors and he’s a regular guy around town. Last year I found him sitting in a claw foot tub I had for sale in my driveway. I should have gotten a picture of that moment. He bought the tub and a sink. Besides acting (he’s shooting the next Incredible Hulk movie this summer) he is also an outspoken foe of Fracking and the rampant and destructive gas extraction threatening our community and the nation.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3z8pyWEvM1r0x9x6o1_r1_500.png)
