“Torch” — Part V, Page 25

Posted on January 15, 2010 at 5:00 am in FINDER as part of TorchTorch - Part Five, « TorchTorch - Part Five, . Follow responses to this post with the comments feed. You can leave a comment or trackback from your own site.

15 Responses

  1. Oneiros says:

    Oh, great. The monks have their own stern-faced Glasses. “And let us beat you, even though it won’t teach you any respect.”

  2. Um, Oneiros, she did just kill someone – are you sure this is going to be a beating? One doesn’t call people “scum” before trying to teach them respect. Scum just gets wiped off.

  3. Oneiros says:

    No, they’re “All life is sacred” nutters. They wouldn’t even kill scum.

  4. Oneiros says:

    Unfortunately, or, at least, contradictorily, Pro-Lifers generally have no problem with killing “scum”. Thus, capital punishment, and war.

  5. Speed says:

    They won’t shoot, stab, strangle, or otherwise kill directly. They’re very skilled at stomping the dogshit out of a person without actually doing anything that will cause death. They consider recovering from severe trauma to be a spiritual journey. If you don’t make it back, then that was not what your spirit wanted.

    They’d push Hau to the edge; where she goes from there is up to her.

  6. lethe says:

    Surely she’s seen the Matrix Reloaded.

    Leap across their bald-ass heads, Hau! You can do it! :D

  7. reptangle says:

    There is also the hanging question of -why couldn’t , or wouldn’t these monks properly feed that poor mother winged kitty? It couldn’t be that hard to get some extra calories into her. The monks weren’t even trying! -no empty dishes around…no IV bags.
    Perhaps certain models have nutritional requirements beyond what anyone can provide? The monks were letting the cat’s “spirit” decide for itself what to do?

  8. reptangle says:

    She didn’t quite say she killed the cat, just that she “kinda got it dead”, but assisted suicide is probably not allowed either.

  9. Speed says:

    Well, whatever Hauhet says, it wasn’t just starving. It was dying of old age. They were caring for it within the admittedly stringent standards they allow for themselves.

  10. Owlmirror says:

    More stuff I wonder about:

    Wouldn’t the designers have built in a way of controlling or limiting fertility as the mother model aged beyond usefulness? Especially if they are indeed supposed to be “limited editions”, with all the economic issues that that entails? Is there no hormonal cocktail that turns off the offspring-producing?

    At the most extreme, could the monks not have given her an ovarectomy/hysterectomy?

    Or would even that have been against their faith as well?

  11. diogenes says:

    The designers surely had a choice of ways to “limit fertility”: stop feeding the mother model springs to mind as the most obvious, followed by captive bolt to the head, then throw it in the trash.

    Time to launch a tribble-based DOS attack on the monks?

  12. Hmpf says:

    Diogenes, I like the way you think! (Re: tribble attack on monks.)

  13. reptangle says:

    You can’t treat a constantly pregnant breeder like an ascetic monk! That makes no sense. Dairy cows don’t get treated like that. ( or do they?).
    Anyway I am thinking back to when Hau was in teh club with the dancing weirdheads.. did she find out about where they came from by overhearing the cat lady talking about rescuing the golden eyed Meyu meyu? That must be how she found out about the “temple”.
    This web site needs away to navigate back to pages by number, the way the old one did!

  14. Oneiros says:

    One CAN treat a pregnant breeder like an ascetic monk, and they DID. It might not be good for her, but it CAN be done. That’s the way with some religious folks. How they live is how ALL should live, as far as they are concerned.

  15. K.L. Droscha says:

    Mmmmm…I think we are forgetting a couple things 1) Constructs are ‘constructed’, manufactured, etc…..which means the mothers are designed for ‘mass production’ at the cheapest cost possible. Even in our own world’s food production it works that way; produce the most you possibly can at the cheapest production rate possible, which is another way of saying ‘cut all costs to produce more’. If you can get a viable crop of babies with cheap food and horrendous living conditions, all the better. Babies that die are considered defects or are part of a waste quota that manufactures accordingly adjust for. Soooo, the more a mother pops out a bunch of poor quality babies, the more a good baby is a ‘limited edition’. 2) Constructs are commodities, not citizens. If a bunch die from poor nutrition or poor living conditions, probably only a few people will get upset about the issue. They are meant to serve a purpose for the humans that can afford them. If a few die, they are other constructs, and the ones left of that particular model increase in value due to their rarity…maybe like pedigree dogs or thoroughbred horses?m 3) I think it was hinted from the ‘Victorian Gentleman’ a few pages back, that the temple is made up of the poor, unwanted and those without rights. The monks probably barely have enough food themselves, and live off of the charity of others, kinda like the monks of our respective religions. They probably had enough food to give that poor winged cat the nutrients necessary to live, but it was still continuously popping out babies that were of poor quality, like apples on an old rotten tree…..

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required)

Some XHTML Allowed