OT: US Pres election

[Trumanator]

Yeah, the pic is crazy...and definitely an awesome photoshop job The funny thing is if you google Dark Knight or Batman politics you end up with some very interesting stuff from way fringe left websites about how much a product of the corporate and bourgeouis (spl?) conspiracy it is.

@JimMorrison- While I agree with you in essence regarding priests and such, I maintain that it is quite possible for parents to prevent their kids from having sex when they (the kids) aren't ready. I've managed to control myself, so has my bro, so have plenty of other kids. I'm mainly talking about high school here. Teaching contraceptives might be useful, but as the article I linked to explains, that doesn't work if the kids aren't being taught about how/when to be a parent. I will agree though that some of the insanely restrictive parents/organizations/whatevers only drive kids away.

You might be worried about the "religous right", but I think that there are fewer of them than their press and such would make you think. Despite this, I think you are starting to sound like hyperbole when you talk about how they will turn religous doctrine into law. Looking at Britain though, I am worried. When the head of the british church starts talking about instituting Sharia...you have a major assimilation problem, not to mention the effect on culture, or law and order.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by Trumanator

@JimMorrison- While I agree with you in essence regarding priests and such, I maintain that it is quite possible for parents to prevent their kids from having sex when they (the kids) aren't ready. I've managed to control myself, so has my bro, so have plenty of other kids. I'm mainly talking about high school here. Teaching contraceptives might be useful, but as the article I linked to explains, that doesn't work if the kids aren't being taught about how/when to be a parent. I will agree though that some of the insanely restrictive parents/organizations/whatevers only drive kids away.

Oh it's true. It always pleases me, with my designated leftist views, when I can find some sort of middle ground with someone much further towards the right. And I completely agree with your point - I feel that young people should be taught in great detail about the world, and their choices. I see no reason whatsoever not to try to stress the idea of abstinence, but I simply find it foolish not to cover all of the bases. Education is not a concept to be approached lightly - not in any way, especially when it involves people's livelihood, and lifestyle choices. To be perfectly clear, I do also believe that if sex (and post sex) education were thorough enough, more people would wait a bit longer before diving into the pool. When I was poking around, the thing that stood out was the very sharp division in pregnancy rates between teens who became sexually active before the age of 15, and those who did so at 15 or older. So in essence, delaying what is often "the inevitable" is certainly a step in the right direction. Beyond that..... well, I've said for many years that our current systems of corporate servitude and nuclear families are contributing greatly to the decline in sensibility in Americans.

Imagine when you have extended families and more communal living situations, that only a few people in the collected group need to be outstandingly sensible and wise. The point is to rely on those few to impress enough of their understanding on the others, that they become stable, well adjusted individuals. When you remove that influence by compartmentalizing all nucleic familial units (I may have just invented that term), you remove that influence from the vast majority of the population. Thus, you wind up with the same rate of extremely calm and wise people - but the average level of those same attributes declines in the population at large. Children are very fast, and very keen to pick and choose what they can from those around them - I very much feel that we need to find ways to allow more children to be influenced by more varied figures in their lives, and the benefit will compound over time.

So that said, I don't believe the Republican party knows, or does the slightest bit of good for family values. They figure if they brand "anti gay marriage", and "anti choice" as "family values", that it will win them votes. Obviously the sad comment there, is that it does.

[HoneyBadger]

I understand that we're talking about kids having sex before they're ready. I don't have kids of my own, so I'm not quite fit to preach about when they'll be ready, but what I can and *will* preach about is sex vs. violence, because that's a real mess, and it's caused a great many of the problems that we're debating here, and it should be addressed.

In my lifetime I have personally witnessed a grave inbalance between what level of public sexual expression is permitted in our society, and what level of public violent expression is permitted--and it always bothers me when people start throwing around the 'abstinence' argument, because it's like arguing that people should abstain from ever eating fish because they might choke on a bone.

I'd just like to point out, after years of having sex, trying to have sex, doing without sex, thinking about sex, learning about sex, teaching others about sex, promoting sex, and generally appreciating the hell out of my body's sex drive, that sex is actually a really good thing!

Sex is not wrong, or evil, or the Devil. Sex is not your enemy. Sex will not murder your children or burn your churches to the ground, or rob you, or destroy your livelihood. Those things require violence-even if it's the violence done by STDs.

Don't pretend that I'm saying that violence is automatically wrong. Anyone capable of reading this post and understanding it knows the kinds of violence I'm talking about-and that I'm not talking about a backyard game of football where somebody twisted their ankle, or going deer hunting, or self defense, martial arts, or even certain acts of war. I'm talking about rape, torture, arson, assault, disfigurement, devastation, murder.

I'm talking about choosing to bring destruction and harm to another human being, for your own motives and agenda. And I'm talking about the fact that those things are used for purposes of popular entertainment in our society, while sex is treated like a grotesque underground addiction.

And I'm not here to talk *against* violence, I'm just saying that the balance between acceptible sex and acceptible violence is way, way, way off.

To give you an example: I bought a copy of 'Diablo 2' at Walmart. If you haven't played it, it's a fairly violent game. They refuse to sell *any* game with even simple nudity in it, let alone sex.

These three things are undeniable facts: Sex causes life. Lack of sex ensures extinction. Violence, taken to extremes, can cause death and pain and fear and horror.

Yes I know, that's an astonishing and utterly disturbing view for an American to have, especially a middle-aged, white, married American, raised Christian and living in a generally Right-winged state.

But honestly--sex is awesome! It's good clean fun, too. I've never caught or spread a disease, I've never gotten anybody pregnant, I've never raped anyone or had anyone rape me. No children were involved.

It's even good for you. It's healthy, both physically and psychologically. It helps develope emotional intimacy with someone you care about and respect. It builds confidence and self-esteem. I'm a better person for having had sex, and I'm going to continue to have sex for as long as physically possible--and recent studies show that the more sex a man has, the longer he's likely to live, so I'll probably be having sex for a long, long time.

Sex hasn't caused me to develope alchoholism, a drug dependency, a gambling problem, or a history of violence. As a home owner, a tax payer, a registered voter, and a full time employee, sex helps me deal with the stress of my busy schedule and hectic work-week. Although I enjoy sex on a regular basis, I have never woken up in a gutter after having sex. I've never skipped a meal or failed to take my daily vitamins because of sex. I've never held up a convenience store in order to pay for sex-nor have I ever paid for sex. Sex has not alienated me from my friends and family, nor has it caused me to isolate myself from the outside world.

Sex has not caused me to turn my back on spirituality, or denied me a relationship with God. I do not use sex, or lack of sex, as an excuse for my failings. I do not profess that sex is the answer to my problems, nor do I attempt to convert the chaste to my way of thinking. I have never had sex with a virgin.

I understand that the act of consentual sex has caused deaths, but I have never heard anyone complain that those deaths were a bad way to die. It is my further understanding that sex has led to far more life than death. I do not consider a life filled with sex to be bleak or empty. I do not consider sex to be disgusting or wrong. I do not consider sex to be what's wrong with the world, or what's wrong with people. Many of the best people I know and admire have had sex-and I would rather have sex with someone I knew and admired than with a stranger, or with someone I disliked or pitied. I consider sex to be a beautiful gift, wonderful entertainment, and stimulating exercise.

Sex has not interfered with my education, or prevented me from graduating highschool. My parents had sex, and I still love, cherish, and respect them. If I ever have kids, and they have sex, I will still love and cherish and respect them, I promise you. I won't tell them not to have sex, or that sex is a bad thing. I will educate any children that I have to the utmost limit of my ability, and beyond, about the world they are entering, and every single facet of it, and I will not lie to them about it, because I wouldn't want them to remain children forever, nor would I want them entering that world while operating under untruths, non-facts, or false beliefs.

I recognise that the world can be a dangerous place, and that I have made it less dangerous for myself by educating myself-I would want them to be educated, too. I would expect them to use the education I give them, and my support, to make their lives as rich and full as possible. I would want grandchildren someday, and if I never have them, I will feel the loss.

I will not blame someone, or call someone a murderer, for having an abortion. I will not do these things because I hold that being a parent is a sacred responsibility, and if someone chooses to have an abortion, it is a clear and obvious sign that that person is not ready at that time to be a parent, and therefore should not be. There may be better ways to express that than having an abortion, but there are better ways to do many things which we as a species do by violence. I would not recommend abortion to anyone, but I also would not advocate killing them in order that they not abort. I would not advocate killing a medical doctor because that doctor has performed an abortion, or many abortions, because I just don't believe an unknown factor can outweigh a lifetime of experience.

I am neither pro choice nor am I pro life. I am pro birth control, and pro education, and pro love, and pro acceptance. I don't believe that you can do any good in this world by hating someone. I also believe that the more righteous you feel about doing something you'd objectively consider to be a wrong thing, the more likely you are to, infact, be wrong.

I don't believe that I'm qualified to make choices about a woman's body, or about anyone else's body, for that matter. I don't even trust my own doctor all that far.

I do believe that violence is an answer, and sometimes it is the only answer, and that it is still the wrong answer more often than it is the right one. I also believe that sex is *much* more family-oriented than violence. Without sex, there would be no families, and without violence, there were be a lot more of them, and stronger, and better.

I think violence should be X-rated. I think you should have to go downtown in a major city, and sit in a seedy little theater in a trenchcoat and sunglasses in order to witness extreme, graphic, irresponsible forms of violence, and that you should have to be atleast 25 years of age to get in. I think when you leave that theater, you should feel dirty, and ashamed.

I've had nightmares because of violent acts which I have witnessed, or committed. I've never had a nightmare about sex. Ever.

I'm proud of having had sex with people that I loved, and I'm ashamed of having committed violence against people that I loved.

But I am not a pacifist, and I do not reject violence. I do fear it though, and respect it, and I urge you to do the same. And while I do very much respect sex, I do not fear it, and I urge you not to. It's where you came from. If you also came from violence, then I appologise for the world we live in. I do not appologise for sex, however, unless it wasn't very good...

I believe that sex should only be between two consenting sentient, reasonably educated adults-of any species, race, creed, religion, color, gender, political view, or other designation you care to come up with.

I further believe that sex between two consenting sentient, reasonably educated adults-of any species, race, creed, religion, color, gender, political view, or other designation you care to come up with-is not only right, it's awesome!

It is my most firmly held belief that abstinence makes the heart grow bitter. It is also my belief and experience that life is much better and worthier, much more sacred and right and good and precious, if you don't spend it denying yourself or others happiness, pleasure, sensuality, compassion, or acceptance.

And if everybody abstains, if nobody's having sex, the human race will cease to be.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single other popular piece of advice to guide young people through their difficult lives-other than abstinence-that will, if every one of those young people follows it, result in the extinction of the human race itself.

I mean, even if they all jumped off a bridge together, a few of them will probably survive the fall...

I accept that any god or gods concerning themselves with this post know whether I am right or wrong in my beliefs, but that anyone else reading it is *not* God, and thus not fit to judge me, or anyone else, while I'm still alive.

[Trumanator]

Wow, I didn't expect that kind of feeling and such out of this thread. Kudos to HoneyBadger. That said, I think we are in some agreement. I do occasionally play violent games like Diablo 2, but not very often, and I don't know if I presently own any. I do think that some violence in games is okay, but I agree that some take it entirely too far. I also dislike movies with a lot of violence, but no greater point (300). I do though like movies such as Saving Private Ryan or We Were Soldiers, as they have an actual message to tell. I'm tired of the sex argument but on the whole am with you except for abortion. I wouldn't advocate killing people over it though.

[JimMorrison]

Actually, the movie '300' was about the indomitable human spirit. It was a message about overcoming great obstacles through self discipline and pride in one's self.

Granted, it attempted to bring those messages to the lowest common denominator, but hey - at least the protagonists of the film were not the senselessly violent ones, they were defending their people and way of life.

[HoneyBadger]

And 300 was very sexual, too, a balance was achieved between the two, and the sex was portrayed as part of the continuation of the society, every bit as much as the violence was-and I respect that it didn't shy away from suggesting that a homosexual relationship was possible between two very strong, confident, and *masculine* male protagonists. You don't see a whole lot of heroic gay people in our media, and when you do, they're usually in drag. That's fine if a character likes to dress in drag, but not when it becomes a steriotype for all gays, everywhere.

[Agema]

300 is not really about anything.

There's nothing in it more complex than Commando, Rocky 4, or Independence Day. Like Frank Miller's other work Sin City, 300 is essentially just a very stylishly presented fantasy targetted for the mindset of adolescent males. Although at least it's less misogynistic than Sin City.

[Tifone]

Originally Posted by Agema

300 is not really about anything.

There's nothing in it more complex than Commando, Rocky 4, or Independence Day. Like Frank Miller's other work Sin City, 300 is essentially just a very stylishly presented fantasy targetted for the mindset of adolescent males. Although at least it's less misogynistic than Sin City.

IMHO, totally wrong.

300 depicts the nationalist ideals. It depicts them in a very fascinating way: we all know they are dangerous, but looking at the movie we understand how they have charmed (I'd say, infected) many minds in recent times.
The Heroes of the Native Land are handsome, strong, fearless heroes, which women are beautiful and corageous.
Politicians are a) corrupted slugs or b) useless and incapable of doing anything. It requires the Dux/Fuhrer (Leonidas), the Man of Action to achieve anything.
Traitors are deformed beings.
The foreigner has wicked and sinful costumes and way of lives, the melting pot of cultures doesn't enrich him but make him just weird.
Etc...

This is what the film shows and says. I much appreciated it - I fear and dislike nationalism, but the movie depicts it very well. - Together with the great and strong visual art of gore and fighting scenes with rock music in them

PS: Rocky 4 is a somewhat ****y movie, but taken has "historical document" is very interesting. It shows a low-level occidental heroic propaganda which, even being quite humorous with today's eyes, was of great effect in these times of Cold War.

Best wishes

[Aapeli]

What Ive noticed down (or up, its all relative) here in Finland is that somehow donald duck seems to win every presidential election. Now I never voted for him nor did any of my friends but it just suprises me how many bother to cast a vote for him. They wrote an article to magasine about this weird phenomenom of the huge amounts of votes to fictional characters including superman and batman too.

[HoneyBadger]

Well, Donald's got a military backgound in the Navy, and a firm thumb on the issues-and he's a lot more coherant than George W. Not as Daffy though...