DABDA

The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

-Pastor Dave Barnhart

I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise but I just want you to recognize that your position is that you're ok with "bad" people being killed as a form of punishment and mine is that ensuring that label is always appropriately applied is an impossibility.

I don't like the thought of terrible people getting to continue to live if they've done irreparable harm to others, but I'm also not ok with saying that we totally need to burn THAT WITCH because Goody Constance totally witnessed them communing with the devil.

Osama/Hitler getting killed in military action - fine. An abused child/person killing their attacker - look the other way. Giving Edward Snowden lethal injection because he totally deserves it for endangering Americans - not acceptable.

Consider what your thresholds are for what constitutes witnesses and admissions of guilt. For example, confessing to crimes that weren't actually performed by them, do you honor the claim anyway?

And does a group of police witnessing a suspect or conversely a group of the suspect's friends witnessing a police officer do something heinous count?

Remember any mistakes cannot be remedied.

The possibility/certainty of intentional or accidental false convictions doesn't affect your acceptance of the state meting out permanent punishment?

AFAIK it's the Blu-ray "Skynet edition" release.

Seems like there might be a lot different versions of releases, saw a Collider review which mentions a Japanese version being "somewhat better" and mentions "There’s production commentary from the laserdisc, with 26 participants, and the Cameron and screenwriter William Wisher commentary from one of the earlier DVD releases."

On IMDB I saw this mentioned:

On the 'Ultimate Edition' DVD as well as the 'Skynet Edition' Blu-ray, there are three versions of the film, albeit only two at the menu, the Theatrical and Special Edition versions. However, highlighting the 'Special Edition' option and keying in '82997' (August 29, 1997), will open a Extended Special Edition Option, with the T-1000 searching John's room and an Alternate ending added on and replaced. Some DVD players may need to push ENTER between each digit.

In the totally legitimate digital copy it has both of those elements so it's probably the 'Extended Special Edition' [Super Mega Turbo 2000]. I definitely prefer the theatrical ending.

EDIT: Found this on YouTube

It's certainly not the most disturbing thing about the text but "a women" is also on the list.

It's satire :) That clip comes from the mockumentary Death to 2020, there's also Death to 2021.

I learned a lot about the production and design choices around Terminator 2 from the commentary -- the totally legitimate digital copy I have has 2 tracks (one labeled just director and the other director & writer) and I think I remember most stuff from the one with the writer.

• James Cameron talks about paying for "digital winky removal" for the T-1000 intro scene and how he should see about getting a partial refund since they didn't completely remove the nudity from Robert Patrick in the finished scene
• There's talk about the difference/debate in how to handle removing objects in post; do you make them bright and obvious in production to make it easier to see/mask them out after, or try to blend them so if you miss portions in editing they are harder to see?
• Lots of little details like how they didn't want any scenes of John Connor using firearms. It was ok if he handled them and helped with reloading etc. but they didn't want to influence kids to think it was cool to shoot at people (it also works thematically with John not wanting to kill)

I haven't checked it out but I've heard good things about the Cannibal! The Musical commentary track, IIRC they get progressively drunker throughout.

I tried to link an image but comment got removed for the URL being on the blacklist - not sure if it was the image link or the link giving attribution which pointed to Twitter (I'm assuming the latter).

Tried to post the Corporate Memphis version of "Saturn Devouring His Son"

Hopefully I can hotlink that image. If it doesn't load it is the Corporate Memphis version of "Saturn Devouring His Son" attributed to @clayohr on twitter