• Unpopular Opinions V6 You know maybe fascism wasn't all that it was cracked up to be
    5,009 replies, posted
The lightsaber fights in the prequels were not better or even as good as the original trilogy. I do have to give them credit for being probably the biggest inspiration for the lightsaber fighting in the Jedi Knight series which was the bomb but that's just them inspiring something great, not [I]being[/I] great
both trilogies had shit fighting tbh, but i still enjoyed the prequel's more because of how dumb it was.
Humanizing characters by immediately making them a black person with vitiligo is dumb I'm looking directly at your fucking face, Tumblr [editline]e[/editline] Actually I kind of find humanizing characters in general to be a bit stupid because a lot of the time it brings in racial politics and shit where it doesn't belong and it usually messes with the character design in a way that separates them too much
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;51147346]Humanizing characters by immediately making them a black person with vitiligo is dumb I'm looking directly at your fucking face, Tumblr [editline]e[/editline] Actually I kind of find humanizing characters in general to be a bit stupid because a lot of the time it brings in racial politics and shit where it doesn't belong and it usually messes with the character design in a way that separates them too much[/QUOTE] What are you referring to?
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51147386]What are you referring to?[/QUOTE] artwork like this [img]http://serijskiubojica.tportal.hr/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ma%C4%8Dke1.jpg[/img] That's supposed to be two cats from Aristocats if it wasn't obvious (and I'm sure it wasn't) I see it around tumblr sometimes and it seems to be pretty popular there
People on Tumblr can be dumb, unfortunately. I don't think anyone besides them would disagree with what you've said anyway.
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51147695]What made the original fights so good was how real they felt and how much emotion was fueled into each fight. Not to mention lightsaber battles were used sparingly. The prequels have none of that. Impressively choreographed but not much else.[/QUOTE] The fights in the prequels were a major guilty pleasure for me. They got better in Revenge of the Sith, but that's it. Compared to another modern trilogy with kick-ass sword fighting was Pirates of the Caribbean, but they at least incorporated the fights into the story very well and made the action a spectacle.
the thing I hate about the lightsaber fights in the prequels is that they had the opportunity to make lightsaber fighting really cool but made it stupid and flashy instead you'd think if you were going to use a weightless laser sword you'd adopt a fast and elegant fencing-style fighting technique but they just flail their shit around like idiots and now that's canon
Im an USA citizen. If there was a movement to restart the British empire I wouldnt mind joining for the lolz.
there is no defending Clinton other than "shes not trump". shes about the most corrupt high-level politician in the country, but at the end of the day she doesnt think global warming is a hoax, which is why im voting for her instead of the orange
[QUOTE=usaokay;51148073]Circlejerking about Hillary Clinton's email scandal is tiresome and stupid. If you're voting Green Party, then that's even dumber. [B]Edit:[/B] ~unpopular [I]opinions[/I]~[/QUOTE] libertarian party is probably worse tbh. it's an alliance of ayn-randian cultists and weirdoes who consider the abstract concept of a market as a panacea for social ills. their main reason for existence is solely because they are usually republicans who are apathetic about social issues. as a system it doesn't actually have anything to offer to anyone unless they're a plutocrat green party might be trash at times but at least it gives a bit of a shit about ordinary people and their concerns, not to mention bigger problems like the environment and the like
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51147997]Circumcision should be banned unless it's being performed on a consenting adult.[/QUOTE] That reminds me, teaching religion to kids in anything but an objective sense should be heavily discouraged if not considered a form of child abuse.
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;51148643]That reminds me, teaching religion to kids in anything but an objective sense should be heavily discouraged if not considered a form of child abuse.[/QUOTE] i agree with you up until the child abuse part
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51148818]Teaching children "you are a sinner, and being a sinner is bad, you are a bad person from birth" isn't child abuse?[/QUOTE] The gist of it is that you can "be saved from the punishment of being a sinner". It'd defeat the point of having a religion rewarding believers if didn't have that.
[QUOTE=Bathtub;51148655]i agree with you up until the child abuse part[/QUOTE] It's not that I believe religion is inherently harmful as much as it is that you're essentially forcing a complex ideology on to a person incapable of fully understanding it or being able to make an informed decision, and then forcing them to accept it as fact. And it's something that affects them through the entire rest of their life. I mean, how many people have their religion essentially because they had it shoved on to them as kids and just kind of take it as read now? I know it's not harmful in the majority of cases (at least not in any obvious way) but this is what allows the Westboro Baptist Church to brainwash their kids in the most extreme of cases and I believe can cause mental harm or propagate bigotry and mental issues in other cases. I'd say it's not as bad for obvious reasons but functionally the same as forcing your kid to become a nazi.
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;51148896]It's not that I believe religion is inherently harmful as much as it is that you're essentially forcing a complex ideology on to a person incapable of fully understanding it or being able to make an informed decision, and then forcing them to accept it as fact. And it's something that affects them through the entire rest of their life. I mean, how many people have their religion essentially because they had it shoved on to them as kids and just kind of take it as read now? I know it's not harmful in the majority of cases (at least not in any obvious way) but this is what allows the Westboro Baptist Church to brainwash their kids in the most extreme of cases and I believe can cause mental harm or propagate bigotry and mental issues in other cases. I'd say it's not as bad for obvious reasons but functionally the same as forcing your kid to become a nazi.[/QUOTE] Functionally the same as forcing your kid to become a nazi. Wow. So, from that comparison, would you bar parents from teaching their children any sort of moral framework whatsoever? Nazism isn't a religion after all, it's, as you say, an ideology. At what point do you stop restricting parents from teaching their children to believe what they themselves believe? Is it OK to indoctrinate your children as Nazis, because Nazism isn't a religion? How do you know if parents are teaching their children religious principles, or just general purpose morals? Would you forbid parents from acting as a part of their faith in front of their children, given children's propensity for Observational Learning?
[QUOTE=Bathtub;51148272]there is no defending Clinton other than "shes not trump". shes about the most corrupt high-level politician in the country, but at the end of the day she doesnt think global warming is a hoax, which is why im voting for her instead of the orange[/QUOTE] I highly doubt shes even in the top 10 most corrupt high level politicians out there
American politics was designed to be exploited. Hillary is simply one of the ones people know about, because she has a high profile. That said, even Ignoring sanders, another democrat would've been better. I think trump would be simultaniously the worst and best thing to ever happen. He'd fuck your country up, but you'd all be a little more aware of politics from that, at least i hope. Your next president will be a good one.
[QUOTE=The Jack;51149434]American politics was designed to be exploited. Hillary is simply one of the ones people know about, because she has a high profile. That said, even Ignoring sanders, another democrat would've been better. I think trump would be simultaniously the worst and best thing to ever happen. He'd fuck your country up, but you'd all be a little more aware of politics from that, at least i hope. Your next president will be a good one.[/QUOTE] I think fucking up our country and doing irreversible damage to thousands if not millions of people in our country is a bit worse than any intangible "benefits" wed get from a trump presidency
[QUOTE=Stonecycle;51148826]The gist of it is that you can "be saved from the punishment of being a sinner". It'd defeat the point of having a religion rewarding believers if didn't have that.[/QUOTE] There are/were religions and denominations where that's not true though. For instance the Calvinist view is that you're predestined to either heaven or hell and have no agency in the matter.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;51150824]There are/were religions and denominations where that's not true though. For instance the Calvinist view is that you're predestined to either heaven or hell and have no agency in the matter.[/QUOTE] Isn't that less of you not having agency in the matter but more the logical conclusion when you say god is omniscient? It's not "oh, x is born, yeah this one'll be going to hell" but "Ah, x will do this in life, I know he'll be joining me in heaven when he dies."
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51150988]God brings people into this world when he knows they will rape and or kill innocents. Neat religion[/QUOTE] that's not how the belief works
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51151339]What about the divine plan?[/QUOTE] You're talking about stuff that has been debated by sects since the execution of Jesus. The fact that people can say "well hardy durr god's plan hurrhurr" means they know jack shit about Christianity. Not all sects believe in predestination. In fact, few do.
[QUOTE=The Jack;51149434]American politics was designed to be exploited. Hillary is simply one of the ones people know about, because she has a high profile. That said, even Ignoring sanders, another democrat would've been better. I think trump would be simultaniously the worst and best thing to ever happen. He'd fuck your country up, but you'd all be a little more aware of politics from that, at least i hope. Your next president will be a good one.[/QUOTE] i hate this bullshit argument that "if we elect a shit guy then everybody will wise up an elect a good guy next time". voting for the worst possible pick and then hoping that the next person to come along is good is terrible for a multitude of reasons mainly due to the fact that it creates a precedent for voting for shitty candidates because none of the other candidates are "good" so you keep voting for a shitty one before 60 years down the line you're trying to justify your stupidity to your unsympathetic grandchildren
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51147997]Circumcision should be banned unless it's being performed on a consenting adult.[/QUOTE] wow way to be antisemitic and islamophobic at the same time! /s but seriously though those actually are two huge roadblocks
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51151584]i hate this bullshit argument that "if we elect a shit guy then everybody will wise up an elect a good guy next time". voting for the worst possible pick and then hoping that the next person to come along is good is terrible for a multitude of reasons mainly due to the fact that it creates a precedent for voting for shitty candidates because none of the other candidates are "good" so you keep voting for a shitty one before 60 years down the line you're trying to justify your stupidity to your unsympathetic grandchildren[/QUOTE] And accelerationism has no guarantee that the "good" the populace settles on is actually good, desperation has opened the doors for many horrible leaders in the past
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51151656]They still believe in a God would allow people like that to exist, regardless if they believe in a divine plan or not.[/QUOTE] Yeah it's called free will
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51151656]They still believe in a God would allow people like that to exist[/QUOTE] And then you enter the idea of original sin or sinless births. Trying to boil it down into "weeh weeh chrisshuns" is asinine
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51073696]paid political advertisements ought to be banned in America, along with all forms of political advertising on radio and television (with maybe some exceptions shortly before elections)[/QUOTE] i feel like this is the right direction, but not the right severity. i'd rather have more strict regulations on political advertisements than outright banning them. people deserve to be educated on who's going to potentially be their president so they feel compelled to vote for whomever they feel is most suitable for the position. taking away ads almost entirely might result in very low voter turnout because 'out of sight; out of mind'. ideally we want everyone to vote. but some things i'd like to see: • [i]attack[/i] ads are banned, turning a political campaign into a pissing contest only serves to deter people from voting entirely. it's involuntary voter suppression. • private and personal funding aren't allowed in any capacity, and funding in general has a hard limit which is updated every 4 years as determined by inflation. • ads can't run on specific channels at times desired by the political participant or their campaign runners, but rather all channels and times deemed appropriate by a committee within a branch or division of the government (fcc perhaps?). appropriate being "which channels do most people get" and "which channels aren't heavily politically biased" and "which channels aren't for children" etc. • ads can't contain appeals to emotion; appealing to emotion can be easily construed as misleading advertising. "ISIS IS GOING TO BOMB US PLS PANIC" or "I'm a family man *hugs children* :)" aren't useful info points for someone's presidential agenda. i understand personal values are important to peoples' decision making process, but in the bigger picture it's quite irrelevant and should be left up to actual research rather than being allowed to waste most peoples' time in tv/radio ads. [editline]4th October 2016[/editline] sorry this is 2 weeks late, just thought i'd share my thoughts :s:
Why do people think antisemetic = anti jewish?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.