"Are you saying terrorism isn't unjust?  How about Nazism?  Is that just?"

no, im saying whether or not they're just is subjective. a neo-nazi would beleive nazism is just, why is your values more important then his?

"Without life, all other potential values are meaningless."

without all the other potential values, life is meaningless; life is just as subjective a value as the values giving life value.

"That's the value which I respect. "

and why is the value you respect any more significant then a neo-nazi's?

"Now, if you want to sit here and justify the Holocaust, be my guest.  I'm sure you'll win plenty of brownie points with the mods for that.  tongue"

i'd probably get banned before we even started the debate.

i think you got side-tracked, you didnt discuss how you determine what are good and bad ideas, only that you consider nazism and radical racism as part of the "bad" category.

> Listos wrote:

> we've already talked about this and my thoughts about it. violent video games have barely any effect on the person if any at all. I play Call of Duty and Halo constantly, Prototype and Oblivion as well, and you don't see me running up buildings and then slicing people with my dagger hands! X(

the issue is that parents are lax in what they allow children to buy, play and do. Look at 11 year old girls wearing short shorts. 35 percent of the time I can see their underwear, and all I have to do is glance at their shorts. what the hell!? and the mothers are standing there without a care. then there's the whole issue of me being in Gamestop and seeing a mother buy her 12 year old (I assume) son buy 2 mature rated games (GTA San Andreas and I don't remember the other) because his friends had them.

I know fourteen girls who have kids and they aren't out of high school yet. I know 2 middle schoolers with 2 year olds. The parents are the ones who hold the responsibility over the violent video games. If the parents buy them the video games without questioning its content, if the parents are the ones who don't pay attention to their kids, if the parents DON'T EVEN KNOW the kid has a DAMN GUN, then there's something wrong.

society doesn't help much in the way of it not doing much to help. Sure there's this and that, but when it comes down to it, 80% of what you see on tv involves some sort of violence (yes, even aladdin was violent) and it is just a part of our society today. I bet you 65% of the movies you watch will have a gun in them. and 45% will have at least one person die. Society has practically accept the whole problem of violence and said, "Well, ok because there's so much violence, there's nothing we can do about it, we may as well accept it and make it a part of our society since people seem to enjoy it. If we do that, then maybe people won't notice it anymore! More money! YAY!" and then society simply bats an eye at someone dying.

just 2 years ago I heard on the news "Today there was 4 deaths from a shooting. Diane I think that brings the death count up to 145 this year so far. Last year we had 468. I wonder if we'll break that record?"

come on people, what the hell are you?! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU!!! Tell me that I may know? No society should have an accepted standard for this kind of thing. Before long we're all going to be like that and that thought scares me not just a little.

[], societies havent accepted violence and murder, all societies are trying to reduce violent crimes; just because our governments arent being oppressive and putting us in prison states inorder to reduce the number of violent crimes, it doesnt mean our society has become indifferent to murder and violence.

orly?

ouch, that was uncalled for

coffee, you just dont get it

or make his vip tag an avatar....

wow man, hate is such a strong word

"People die and get seriously injured in rugby. "

i dont doubt it, but the frequency that it would happen in american football would be insane without pads.

and blood? oh my, they got cut alittle, so what? and i've seen that video, and the hits are pathetic comapred to those of american football. in football, a receiver will be running straight and at top speed to catch a ball, a safety will be running from the opposite direction at full speed to hit the receiver, the receiver has to take the hit straight on inorder to catch the ball, it is way harder then you get in rugby; you can't slow down or change your direction to lessen the blow, you have to take it full on, even if its 2 people coming from opposite directions at full speed.

> Econ wrote:

> > Morbo the Annihilator wrote:

> > it is pointless and inhibits exciting running gameplay

> Don't worry, no chance of that!

Too bad that many people don't agree with you:
"Remember that in the first Rugby World Cup, in 1987 the game was amateur. In 2003, the Rugby World Cup will be the third largest sporting event in the world after the Olympics and the Soccer World Cup. The 1999 Rugby World Cup in Wales was attended by 1.75 million people and broadcast to a further three billion people in 150 countries,"

A little old, but it was the first thing that popped up.

By comparison:
"A frequently-misquoted figure from NFL press releases has led to the common perception that the Super Bowl has an annual global audience of around one billion people. In fact, the NFL states one billion as the game's potential worldwide audience

> Chris_Balsz wrote:

> Which is it

Arnold shows up

Or

Its a good action movie

dude, arnold is the best, you're crazy!

my current theory for why the US has such high murder rates compared to other first world countries is because of our immense population. our immense and educated population means there are enormous groups of the population that hate certain government positions, there probably isnt a single person that doesnt hate at least some aspects of the government; this hatred fuels acts of violence and even murder.

censorship
2 entries found.

   1. censorship
   2. self-

Main Entry:
    cen