• Unpopular opinions! V2: I Don't like half life edition.
    17,782 replies, posted
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43482271]...If some bigot concedes that he should leave them alone just because they're born gay... [/QUOTE] For some reason this doesn't [I]sound like[/I] it would be 100% true. It can develop over time or be influenced, but I doubt sexual orientation is determined immediately upon birth rather than mental development. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong, I won't disagree with the facts. But the rest of the statement is true, it isn't anyone else's business.
[QUOTE=Ixmucane;43482416]For some reason this doesn't [I]sound like[/I] it would be 100% true. It can develop over time or be influenced, but I doubt sexual orientation is determined immediately upon birth rather than mental development. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong, I won't disagree with the facts. But the rest of the statement is true, it isn't anyone else's business.[/QUOTE] it can be effected in the early years of development, but a lot of it [i]is[/i] hormonal - hormones that are developed in the womb. it's mostly just a game of chance.
[QUOTE=Ixmucane;43482416]For some reason this doesn't [I]sound like[/I] it would be 100% true. It can develop over time or be influenced, but I doubt sexual orientation is determined immediately upon birth rather than mental development. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong, I won't disagree with the facts. But the rest of the statement is true, it isn't anyone else's business.[/QUOTE] Well I don't necessarily believe that you are "born gay" and your gayness is in your brain the moment you're born, but I don't believe you have any control over it. I don't have any control over the fact that I enjoy pizza. I can't force myself to hate something I like or like something I hate. (well okay, maybe I could eat an absurd amount of pizza, but you get the point) You are the product of your physical body and your environment.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43481912]boy you sure love generalizations i can't even remember the last time i watched anime and i know that what you're saying is BS, not all anime is that generic, you're hating on all of it because you assume it's all the same thing[/QUOTE] You realize this is the "Unpopular Opinions" thread, right?
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;43482484]You realize this is the "Unpopular Opinions" thread, right?[/QUOTE] and? my point still stands. you explained the reasoning behind your opinion and i explained that it is extremely biased
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43482551]and? my point still stands. you explained the reasoning behind your opinion and i explained that it is extremely biased[/QUOTE] I think anime sucks and I've seen plenty of it. Get over it.
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;43482588]I think anime sucks and I've seen plenty of it. Get over it.[/QUOTE] lol i'm over it just don't try to justify your opinions then get all pissy when people explain why your reasoning is stupid
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43482254]"alcohol and cigarettes kill more than weed" is just a short phrase that's often thrown around in discussions as an argument. are you denying it makes a point? why do you assume people use it intending to cover all aspects of the discussion? do you think that if you said "what about the other, non lethal harmful effects of weed?" to someone who used that sentence, they'd just go on tilt and be unable to talk, as you've just obliterated their only argument? no, they'd talk about those effects, and they'd probably mention that alcohol and cigarettes also have harmful but non-lethal effects on people, and that the ones weed has are negligible with moderate use, just like with the other two, legal drugs. it could be said that "alcohol and cigarettes kill more than weed and thus weed should be legal" is just a shortened version of the whole argument.[/QUOTE] I don't know how to put this more clearly. Alcohol being more dangerous than pot being used as an argument to legalize weed? [I][I]I[/I]t doesn't fucking matter[/I] Alcohol being more dangerous than weed? then we should ban alcohol. Pot killing less than alcohol is meaningless. You could apply it to [I]anything[/I].
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;43482484]You realize this is the "Unpopular Opinions" thread, right?[/QUOTE] Unpopular, not infallible. If a person thinks there's something wrong with how you've formulated your opinion then they have just as much right to call you out on it as you did to have that opinion, depending on just how flawed your reasoning is they may have more.
[QUOTE=OrDnAs;43482624]I don't know how to put this more clearly. Alcohol being more dangerous than pot being used as an argument to legalize weed? [I][I]I[/I]t doesn't fucking matter[/I] Alcohol being more dangerous than weed? then we should ban alcohol. Pot killing less than alcohol is meaningless. You could apply it to [I]anything[/I].[/QUOTE] why is it meaningless? in the context of a modern, civilized society, it's pretty clear that alcohol isn't going to be banned. there's no reason for it, it'd be illogical, and laws are created based on logic. comparetively, weed is less harmful than alcohol. it's only banned because of negative social stigmas attached to it, and that is illogical. what's a good, simple way of saying that it being illegal makes no sense? with a short phrase that says all you need to know: alcohol (a legal, recreational drug with harmful effects which is not going to be banned, for logical reasons) is more harmful than weed (an illegal, recreational drug with harmful effects which is banned, with no logic behind it), and that's why weed should be legal.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43482666]why is it meaningless? i[/QUOTE] It's right in my post. It could mean [I]anything[/I] We can give gun permits to children under 12. They could carry concealed weapons to school and even then they would kill less than alcohol. Should it be legal for a kid to be able to bring guns into school? I will repeat to yourself. I am not attacking weed, I am attacking this argument [editline]10th January 2014[/editline] Does the legalization of one unhealty activity obliges us to legalize everything less harmful than it?
[QUOTE=OrDnAs;43482762]It's right in my post. It could mean [I]anything[/I] We can give gun permits to children under 12. They could carry concealed weapons to school and even then they would kill less than alcohol. Should it be legal for a kid to be able to bring guns into school? I will repeat to yourself. I am not attacking weed, I am attacking this argument[/QUOTE] the point is, the argument is a COMPARISON. how many times do i have to say this? the ENTIRE BASIS for that one sentence is the fact that it is a COMPARISON with two other things that are VERY similar, and yet only one of the three is illegal. your comparison on that argument makes no sense as it is comparing two completely different things. [editline]10th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=OrDnAs;43482762]Does the legalization of one unhealty activity obliges us to legalize everything less harmful than it?[/QUOTE] why not?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43482874]the point is, the argument is a COMPARISON. how many times do i have to say this? the ENTIRE BASIS for that one sentence is the fact that it is a COMPARISON with two other things that are VERY similar, and yet only one of the three is illegal. your comparison on that argument makes no sense as it is comparing two completely different things. [editline]10th January 2014[/editline] why not?[/QUOTE] Does it matter if it is a comparison, an analogy or clever wordplay? Why are you constantly evading the whole point? Don't you realize that this very argument is detrimentral to legalization? I'll just quote John Cheese [url]http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-pro-marijuana-arguments-that-arent-helping_p2/[/url]
[QUOTE=OrDnAs;43482913]Does it matter if it is a comparison, an analogy or clever wordplay?[/quote] uhm yes those are three very different things [quote]Why are you constantly evading the whole point? Don't you realize that this very argument is detrimentral to legalization? I'll just quote John Cheese [url]http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-pro-marijuana-arguments-that-arent-helping_p2/[/url][/QUOTE] his argument is completely flawed and i've explained why, because it's literally the same shit you've been saying let me reply to what he said just to give you an idea of what i'm saying [quote]Throwing out death tolls from tobacco smoke, drunk driving and liver disease makes perfect sense as an argument for making those things illegal.[/quote] the thing is, they're not. they're not going to be made illegal, i think that's a safe thing to assume. there's reasoning behind that (they're harmful but you're free to use them since it's your body, that kind of stuff, but it's irrelevant to this argument), so why shouldn't be the same reasoning used for weed?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43482957]uhm yes those are three very different things his argument is completely flawed and i've explained why, because it's literally the same shit you've been saying let me reply to what he said just to give you an idea of what i'm saying the thing is, they're not. they're not going to be made illegal, i think that's a safe thing to assume. there's reasoning behind that (they're harmful but you're free to use them since it's your body, that kind of stuff, but it's irrelevant to this argument), so why shouldn't be the same reasoning used for weed?[/QUOTE] it's not about if they are going to make, it's about it being a good argument to ban them. You didn't explained everything. You are just repeating the same argument over and over and over again. I am telling you why it's meaningless and [I]you are repeating the same stuff[/I] In fact. You have been repeating the same stuff over and over and over again. [editline]10th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43482874]the point is, the argument is a COMPARISON. how many times do i have to say this? the ENTIRE BASIS for that one sentence is the fact that it is a COMPARISON with two other things that are VERY similar, and yet only one of the three is illegal. your comparison on that argument makes no sense as it is comparing two completely different things. [/QUOTE] What the fuck does that means? You can't make comparisons if two things are different? What?
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;43479334]It's making the forum good money And noone that's knowledgeable is clicking it, though I do think adding a warning that "This is a title set by X, it may contain a malicious or non-safe-for-work link, are you sure you wish to go there?"[/QUOTE] Because the user has no fucking say in it, that's why. Imagine if somebody stole al of your clothes and replaced them with clothes that said something like "Play rust." Would you not complain about it? [editline]10th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43480407]how is it a shit argument? it's saying that it's a drug that kills less than other, legal alternatives, and yet it's illegal[/QUOTE] [del]Yes, it's shit argument because alcohol is legal and you can just go down to the supermarket (in most countries) and buy it[/del] I am a bad reader, ignore this.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;43483284]Because the user has no fucking say in it, that's why. Imagine if somebody stole al of your clothes and replaced them with clothes that said something like "Play rust." Would you not complain about it?[/QUOTE] It's a forum, I don't quite think that requires real life metaphors. And it's not like this is a forum where we try to maintain professionalism. Also I wonder if this forum should make registering require either a garrysmod account, a rust account, or an invite, to keep these annoying spambots out. Not quite saying I support it, but it's a potential solution imo.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;43483384]It's a forum, I don't quite think that requires real life metaphors. And it's not like this is a forum where we try to maintain professionalism. [/QUOTE] I know I would personally hate if that happened. The user should be able to say yes or no if he wants to get a title from someone else. [QUOTE=thelurker1234;43483384] Also I wonder if this forum should make registering require either a garrysmod account, a rust account, or an invite, to keep these annoying spambots out. Not quite saying I support it, but it's a potential solution imo.[/QUOTE] It would probably keep these out [QUOTE=ticker]Seiteki permabanned shanta5269 in I am the new one with the reason “Spam.”[/QUOTE]
Walking Dead is the best action/drama on TV at the moment. Anyone who says otherwise is too stuck up to realise not everything on TV has to have the depth of Breaking Bad or The Wire.
I seem to find that everyone hates Iron Man 3. I like it :c
[QUOTE=OrDnAs;43483029]it's not about if they are going to make, it's about it being a good argument to ban them. You didn't explained everything. You are just repeating the same argument over and over and over again. I am telling you why it's meaningless and you are repeating the same stuff In fact. You have been repeating the same stuff over and over and over again.[/QUOTE] And you've been parroting John Cheese over and over despite the fact that his point is flawed and blantantly misunderstands the original argument. [QUOTE=OrDnAs;43483029] What the fuck does that means? You can't make comparisons if two things are different? What?[/QUOTE] You're under the assumption that 'pot is safer than alcohol, so why is it illegal?' is based on the logic that something's statistical lethality should determine whether it's legal or not. Ie: "This dangerous thing is less dangerous than some legal thing, so let's legalize it." So you're trying to demonstrate the logical fallacy there by pointing out that applying that logic to other dangerous things would just make society more dangerous. "Statistically putting a bomb in every 10000th box of cereal would kill less people per year than drunk driving or overdose, so let's do that hurr durr." That's not the argument at all. The point is that both things are recreational drugs with similar attributes and yet the worse of the two is legal, but the safer alternative isn't. The point is that it demonstrates a double standard and calls into question the logic behind making one illegal and one legal. It's pointing out that the laws themselves are illogical and 'danger' obviously isn't the real criteria by which things are made legal or illegal. The only way you could compare it to 'giving weapons to kids' would be if you let kids have compasses (those sharp tools for drawing circles) but didn't let them have pens because 'pens are dangerous, someone could get hurt'. You'd call into question the logic of giving them one sharp thing then denying them another less dangerous alternative. It would show a double standard in the reasoning behind the laws. Either you let them have both, or let them have neither. Either way, doing so would make more sense. So the argument is a sort of challenge to the lawmakers. "So you're classifying drugs based on danger? In that case, surely alcohol should be illegal because it's far more dangerous." But they're obviously not going to ban alcohol because 'danger' isn't the real reason the laws are in place. It's more of a cultural bias, and that's what the argument is really saying.
[QUOTE=NikoChekhov;43484324]That's exactly his point in the first place, you've only proved that it isn't a shit argument.[/QUOTE] I am stupid and I managed to misread it...
[QUOTE=darcy010;43483541]Walking Dead is the best action/drama on TV at the moment. Anyone who says otherwise is too stuck up to realise not everything on TV has to have the depth of Breaking Bad or The Wire.[/QUOTE] Zombies are a lame monster, they're only considered scary because there's like a million after you at once
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;43485449]Zombies are a lame monster, they're only considered scary because there's like a million after you at once[/QUOTE] hordes of pretty much anything trying to chase you down is scary.
[QUOTE=gokiyono;43483509]It would probably keep these out[/QUOTE] The bonus is that the bots that really want to join to post spam will be forced to give Garry money by buying Garry's Mod or Rust. I'm a little iffy on the inviting system though, because someone could easily send out tons of invites to spambots. It would probably require verification from mods before they get let in. [editline]10th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=darcy010;43483541]Walking Dead is the best action/drama on TV at the moment. Anyone who says otherwise is too stuck up to realise not everything on TV has to have the depth of Breaking Bad or The Wire.[/QUOTE] Too much talking and drama for my tastes. I'd be more content if there were no less than ten zombie deaths per episode.
Action movies get a free pass to be stupid way too often. Lazy storytelling, plot holes, and bad acting are often waved aside because "bro it's not supposed to be that serious it's just supposed to be fun and explosions"
[QUOTE=OrDnAs;43483029]it's not about if they are going to make, it's about it being a good argument to ban them. You didn't explained everything. You are just repeating the same argument over and over and over again. I am telling you why it's meaningless and [I]you are repeating the same stuff[/I] In fact. You have been repeating the same stuff over and over and over again.[/quote] no lol, you haven't brought up a single argument in this entire discussion, you're the one repeating yourself if something is not going to be made illegal and there's less harmful stuff out there that could be made legal, why not do it, is the point of the argument [quote]What the fuck does that means? You can't make comparisons if two things are different? What?[/QUOTE] of course you can. but saying "coke is sweeter than iced tea" makes a lot more sense than "coke is better than lasagna"
Beer is truly awful. Cider is pretty bad. I don't see why you'd want to drink this shit. If you're drinking just for the alcohol- wouldn't vodka or gin or something be better? Then there are plenty of good drinks that have alcohol in them when they don't need to be alcoholic. What's the point. "adult's ginger beer"? Why? (also don't realy like wine.)
[QUOTE=darcy010;43483541]Walking Dead is the best action/drama on TV at the moment. Anyone who says otherwise is too stuck up to realise not everything on TV has to have the depth of Breaking Bad or The Wire.[/QUOTE] American Horror Story doesn't have a lot of depth to it but it's definitely more entertaining than TWD to me.
[QUOTE=The Jack;43486336]Beer is truly awful. [/QUOTE] I used to think this, but I've found it depends on the beer and the temperature you drink it at. If I'm drinking for the alcohol then I usually drink whisky, but now I sometimes drink beer for the taste and refreshment. It's all down to your tastes though.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.