|Previous Next 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 |
|Clip from Left Behind (2014)|
The Left Behind series is fascinating, because it defies all story-telling conventions of having a 'goal' or 'arc'. The "heroes" spend all their time congratulating each other for knowing about the Rapture (all strawman non-evangelicals are so blind that all the world's kids disappearing is just dismissed), while occasionally referring to the need to convert people and stop the anti-Christ, but then never doing anything about it because it's all prophesied and part of God's plan they can't stop anyway.
They could kill the anti-Christ or publicly proclaim faith, but that would take effort and risk, so just like real evangelicals they'd rather sit together with like minded people and take perverse pleasure at anticipated suffering of others.
It's basically 50 Shades of Gray for people who get off on the suffering of others.
...wait, let me rephrase that...
It's 50 Shades of Gray for people who get off on the suffering of others who don't agree with their cultural beliefs and personal prejudices, but are too lazy and sexually dead to pull out the nipple clamps.
It's the kind of viral marketing that says directly what it is, and doesn't use actors to fake reactions (presumably). So it's fine.
I mean c'mon, spending the money on another subway ad, or on a roaming devil baby flipping off police cars and failing to phase sanitation workers who've seen worse things in the last three dumpsters they went to. You know what's better.
|Karl Pilkington - Alan Carr (Chatty Man) |
Yeah, that really settles any debate. Old stories are retold in an exaggerated version, and old questions Karl had about gays, dinosaurs and whatever which were previously answered, are brought up again as if for the first time, only with exaggerated comedy.
And that's fine. Regular Karl and acting Karl are both funny, and even acting Karl mines a lot of humor from his sincere reactions. He's not much different from any other comedian in that regard.
|Frank the Hippie Pope|
As far as I can tell the 'rope' explanation is just wishful thinking.
Yes, the words for camel and rope were similar, so a mistranslation is possible. But there's nothing textually to suggest he meant anything other than what he said. Putting a camel/elephant through the eye of a needle was a common rabbinical expression for something impossible, the rope metaphor isn't documented elsewhere.
The context is that Jesus is telling a rich guy he needs to give away his possessions if he wants to get into heaven. Not that he needs to live a simpler life in a metaphorical way, but literally give away his stuff to charity.
To an extent that's consistent with the 'don't be attached to stuff' interpretation, but the end of the story is the guy walking away frustrated because he doesn't like the idea of having to give it all up. He wants for his good deeds and following of the commandments to be enough, but Jesus says "too bad, heaven's not actually easy to get into." So of course we've had centuries of people saying "Well we don't actually 'have' to give it away to charity. We can do so metaphorically, I'm sure. Whatever lets me keep my plasma TV."
|The Best Way To BURN A Catholic Bible PerVersion!|
That is basically exactly what is happening. Only except for considering them all "Muslims", they have all sorts of divisions and subdivisions and factions used by politicians to turn people on each other.
Which like all religious schisms and wars, look to outsiders like comic books nerds arguing over which version of Green Lantern would win in a fight, only with more bombings and acid attacks. Occasionally stopping to unite and attack those who think the Flash is better.
|Charlie Brooker 2013 Wipe|
The "Ahem" doesn't indicate a contradiction. There is a difference between selectively suggesting that only marriages which can procreate be approved and wanting to discourage relationships in which birth defects are more likely to occur if they procreate. Like Bort said, the relationship between power relationships and consent in polygamous and incestuous relationships is directly at issue. Again, you can point out it doesn't always apply, but it's still a rational secular basis.
A slippery slope fallacy is typically when a person says "Yes but if we do this one thing, why not this other" when there is an actual reason not to. They might disagree as to whether that reason is sufficient, but as long as the distinction exists, the slope doesn't apply. You asked for secular reasons, and I gave them. If you disagree and either think incest isn't sufficiently harmful, or that homosexual relationships somehow are, then you'd have a basis for continuing to suggest a slippery slope.
|Charlie Brooker 2013 Wipe|
Incest is more likely to result in harmful genetic mutations for infants. Also like bigamy, incest is strongly associated with disproportionate power relationships in a way studies show is not the same for homosexual relationships, despite evangelicals citing discredited studies saying otherwise.
The arguments against incest are real, the arguments against homosexuality are based only on 'difference', or some false assumption we need to encourage childbirth, as determined by multiple courts. One can argue that the government shouldn't prohibit incest simply because it can be harmful, but isn't always. But the fact that these differences exist means a slippery slope argument is a fallacy.
And most of these attempts to compare gay marriage to other relationships, leave straight marriage out of the analysis. Because it's trying to establish gay marriage as something 'different' that needs to be let in. It doesn't matter if the same arguments for gay marriage work for incest, because they work for straight marriage as well. What matters is whether there's secular rational reasons why it shouldn't be allowed.
|Call of Duty: Ghosts Copy & Paste Modern Warfare 2 Ending|
It seems like there are people who actually think this was copy pasted out of laziness, rather than being an intentional reference, and thematic repetition.
I mean call it creative laziness all you like, but they didn't literally copy the code to put in less effort, and some people seem so swept up in video game nerd rage that they miss that. There are plenty of actual grounds to criticize the game on.
| Key & Peele: Cunnilingus Class|
The villainous laughter at the end went from "this is dumb and doesn't make sense" to "this is so dumb it's funny".
|Professor X fires Wolverine|
Most superheroes need backstories, to explain their motivations and the origin of their powers. X-men don't. That's why there's a billion of them, they all have the same explanation for their powers (mutant gene) and motivation (kill the bad humans trying to oppress them/ stop the mutants trying to kill the bad humans).
Magneto and Xavier as sort of exceptions because they define the sides the mutants line up on. But Wolverine never needed a backstory. He's a mutant. You wanna tell us he got his claws from an experiment, fine, although we'd have just accepted them as a mutant power. But a guy with amnesia literally has no need for a backstory explaining him.
|My Little Conan|
I seem to recall seeing on a documentary that he was into Japanese love pillows. Kimiko-tan her name was.
|Lost Planet 2's Traingun|
Seems like a fun boss fight. Too bad you can't play it.
I guess "aiming", "firing" and "turning" were things which couldn't be accomplished in gameplay, and needed minimal unrelated button presses while you watched.
|GTA V - Friendly Cops|
It's not like they didn't warn him.
The sign clearly says "No Loitering."
|Jimmy Kimmel Reveals 'Worst Twerk Fail EVER - Girl Catches Fire' Prank |
I don't get it. What's the point of making a fake 'injury' video?
It's not satirical, people aren't stupid for believing it, it's basically the video equivalent of passing off someone else's interesting story as your own. Yeah you get a bit of attention, which for a gimmicky late-night host is motivation enough. But it's not interesting or creative.
Also people have already noticed some of his "gas station videos" with the public, use actors. All this means is anything that would be interesting on his show if it were real, is now assumed fake.
|Saints Row IV - Romance|
Just to add to a completely off-topic long conversation, ME3 makes overall story mistakes, but some of the writing for characters is still great, often better than ME2. There's lots of little conversations around the Citadel and moments between characters that remind you these are some of the best writers in the game industry. And some of the big action-set piece blow away anything the other games had. It's just too bad the overall story and how it integrates past-decisions is a let-down.
|Saints Row IV - Romance|
You wanna romance Mass Effect characters? Exhaust all conversation options. You wanna see the conversation options and not romance them? Then in the on-ship conversation options, just be a dick to them once.
That's all it takes. I told Jacob to stow his whining and Ashley to fuck off with the anti-alien stuff, and it wasn't an issue.
Also you're missing out on both games. ME2 is great, and the Illusive Man isn't a big part, it's more about the well-rounded cast. ME3 does have a bad ending yeah, but the game before that is still not to be missed.
|Haitian ambassador shames Pat Robertson|
Yeah, what sort of Ambassador thinks it's his job to worry about his countries image? It's not like that has any impact on the aid they receive?
|Richard Dawkins baffled by stupidity|
You know what's an even worse fallacy than the Comparative Justice one? Leaving out all relevant details of a situation so as to suggest that Dawkins wrote an angry letter about Islam because a woman 'asked people politely not to hit on her'.
That's not even a fallacy, that's just lying by omission.
|Comic-Con Cosplay Catastrophe|
She specifically said she was cross-playing Harry Potter whose glasses were replaced by a visor, so she couldn't be Hermione.
Don't try to appease my unsated curiosity with your ill-considered lies.
|Ray Comfort Debunks Darwinian Evolution |
One professor of biology among many others is willing to talk to creationists, and so you think that makes them desperate for attention? Sounds like you got a separate issue with this guy.