logo Sign In

moviefreakedmind

User Group
Members
Join date
22-Jul-2014
Last activity
26-Apr-2023
Posts
8,754

Post History

Post
#1241123
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Mrebo said:

Collipso: supporting violence against people who hold controversial/offensive/wrong views is wrong.

Not necessarily. There are plenty of examples now and throughout history of violence being necessary to defeat dangerous people. I’m generally opposed to violence, but it’s not bad 100% of the time.

SilverWook said:

Mods have lives, mostly. Contrary to popular belief, we don’t see every thread/post on here. Not to mention a mod just retired. That thread is now being discussed among the remaining staff, so keep your powder dry.

I’d like to address this and say that nowhere in that thread did I claim or even imply that all police are guilty of abusing their power or committing crimes against humanity. I just said that I wanted a thread where I could list all of the many examples that I find rather then clutter up this thread with them. If Warbler or anyone else is so offended by me doing that, then they have every ability to make a thread chronicling heroic police stories. (I might even contribute to it.) I didn’t create that thread to debate the issue of fair and just policing, which is a totally different discussion, I created it to illustrate how widespread the problem is without having to constantly post links in here that people in this thread probably don’t even want to read. Doing so would break up other people’s discussions and just make a ludicrously long thread even longer. I’ve considered making this thread for a while and I was prompted to do it when I kept finding links and posting them here. If that thread goes, then all my examples of police brutality that I occasionally post are coming back to this thread. I am diplomatic, though. I’ll change my thread’s title. How does “A Chronicle of American Police Brutality” sound?

Post
#1241122
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

Now I wish to address why I lost my temper and went off. While I agree there is no justification, there is explanation. I was pushed to the edge. I was falsely accused of opposing any protest that “ruffles peoples’ feathers”, and of worshiping the flag. I was falsely accused of putting order and etiquette ahead of justice. I was falsely accused of being nationalistic. Just about the worst was being falsely accused of using children of soldiers that made the ultimate sacrifice as a shield. (the only reason I posted those pics was to show how the flag isn’t just a piece of cloth, not to use them as a shield). I was very offended by that. I was falsely accused of not being a patriot and being unAmerican. These assumptions were all made by someone that barely knows me or anything about me. Anyone that wants to tell me that I don’t get grief for my position on the protests during the National Anthem, I will quote the posts from this debate. What was said, hurt, and it got to me. I had finally had enough of the rude insulting and disrespectful treatment and I lost my temper. Despite what that person thinks, I am not the terrible person he thinks I am.

I get grief too. You’re giving me grief now. I expect that from arguments.

Yes, I deserved my ban. But I am not the only one that crossed the line. I consider the above a rude and dirty and low and insulting way to debate(bully?), and I refuse to engage with that person again.

I was not bullying. My posts did not fit the definition of bullying. It is nice to be referred to as an untouchable now.

I see that the person in question has continued to cross the line with a very offensive thread title about cops. I refuse to post in that thread. If someone wants to create thread to talk about all the cop shootings and which are justified and which aren’t and to talk about the state of our policing and what is good and bad and what needs to be changed, that is fine. But to name the thread what it was named is wrong and offensive. I can only imagine how Ferris would react if he saw it. What about new members that might come along that happen to be cops? I am disappointed that Jay and the mods allowed it.

Am I not allowed to make a thread where I list bad things done by cops? Do you really think that that shouldn’t be tolerated? I never said that all cops were evil, I just created the thread so that I wouldn’t have to list all of the policing stories that make me mad in this thread when no one usually responds to them.

Post
#1240887
Topic
Religion
Time

It’s a tenant of the Catholic Church that was not derived from anything biblical. In 1 Timothy, it actually says that heretics are the ones that forbid people to marry. I guess you could say that Christ was celibate, although that isn’t even explicitly stated in the Bible. He was also homeless and destitute and you don’t see the Catholic hierarchy following those examples.

Post
#1240868
Topic
Religion
Time

It involves a minority of Catholics, but a majority of the Church’s most powerful officials are complicit at least. It’s official policy to handle them internally rather than approaching the police, and by “handle” I mean relocate the offender to a new, unsuspecting parish. In the United States, and most civilized countries, abetting a felon is also a crime. I’m arguing for the religious institutions to be dismantled because of their crimes. If it turned out that JCPenney’s was doing this, then there’d be no debate over shutting down the corporation and arresting those responsible.

As for repression vs. integration or whatever, that just sounds like Newspeak to me.

Post
#1240863
Topic
The Criterion Collection Thread
Time

That’s fascinating. To be fair, there are many DVDs that I haven’t watched in over a decade. I suppose it’s possible that some of them don’t work anymore, but I’ve not seen any discoloring or anything like that. I’ve never had that problem with old video game discs that I still sometimes play. Do you think it has something to do with the climate they’re stored in? Were they left in heat or humidity or something like that?

Post
#1240842
Topic
Religion
Time

All four of those causes seem like reason enough to me to shut down the Catholic Church. They also don’t account for the systematic cover ups.

Your #5 point confuses me. Them unhealthily repressing their urges is in accordance with the Catholic religion. How is that not, at least in part, the fault of the Church?

Post
#1240398
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Collipso said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I’ve never understood the appeal of drinking.

i wanted not to think about some stuff that’s been on my mind so i decided to drink a heck of a lot. it worked, plus i don’t remember most of what happened, but i’m not sure it was worth it.

Right, I just think there’re better methods of detaching from reality.

Post
#1240383
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Sure, once he’d won states like Florida and Ohio, his chances went up. That makes perfect sense. That’s like saying that the Oklahoma Sooners had a 71% chance of beating the Kansas State Wildcats, but once the Wildcats were up by 14 at the start of the 4th quarter, Kansas State had a 90% chance of winning. That doesn’t change that it’s an upset. That doesn’t delegitimize polling or predictive models. That doesn’t mean that you always pick the underdogs in every contest because sometimes they win.

Post
#1240357
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Yes, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if republicans strengthen their control. I think overall they are pretty happy that Trump has done a lot of what he says he would do, has waved the flag and ridiculed the evil football players, and they don’t give a damn about all this abstract Russia stuff. Plus he kicked out all those bad immigrants that are taken are jobs.

They definitely won’t strengthen their control. They may maintain a slight majority in the House, which would be a huge victory for them, but that isn’t strengthening their control.

Post
#1240355
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

FiveThirtyEight puts a Democratic majority in the House at an 83% chance with a median of a 36-seat gain.

They don’t take Russian interference into account at all, otherwise I’d be pretty close to agreeing.

I don’t see how Russian interference could be so widespread as to send dozens of individual seats all over the country into Republican control.