|
Post by saskabronco on Feb 18, 2015 22:20:42 GMT -5
TMI @ saska - I see your point...but I see Jancey's too. And I do agree with you that violent movies do corrupt people's mind. But most of the people that get corrupted by either kinds of movies are weak minded people to begin with and are of little faith. One other thing that we have to remember here is that there isnt much we can do about being sinners,past praying for forgiveness. We all have a human condition. For the record, I don't believe that violent movies corrupt people either. I think that watching lots of violence might numb us to seeing violence, but I don't think it makes us prone to be violent people. I just think violence should be seen as worse than sex, since one is natural and necessary, while the other is just destructive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2015 22:23:31 GMT -5
TMI @ saska - I see your point...but I see Jancey's too. And I do agree with you that violent movies do corrupt people's mind. But most of the people that get corrupted by either kinds of movies are weak minded people to begin with and are of little faith. One other thing that we have to remember here is that there isnt much we can do about being sinners,past praying for forgiveness. We all have a human condition. For the record, I don't believe that violent movies corrupt people either. I think that watching lots of violence might numb us to seeing violence, but I don't think it makes us prone to be violent people. I just think violence should be seen as worse than sex, since one is natural and necessary, while the other is just destructive. Well,,I didnt say us...There are a select group of people that do get corrupted by it. Probably 2% of the nation. Thats lot of criminals,sex offenders,child molesters,rapists,murderers,psychopaths and serial killers.
|
|
|
Post by saskabronco on Feb 18, 2015 22:29:53 GMT -5
For the record, I don't believe that violent movies corrupt people either. I think that watching lots of violence might numb us to seeing violence, but I don't think it makes us prone to be violent people. I just think violence should be seen as worse than sex, since one is natural and necessary, while the other is just destructive. Well,,I didnt say us...There are a select group of people that do get corrupted by it. Probably 2% of the nation. Thats lot of criminals,sex offenders,child molesters,rapists,murderers,psychopaths and serial killers. But do you think it is violent movies that corrupts them, or is it a whole list of various cultural factors? Where they grew up, what type of people their parents were, traumatic events throughout their lives, etc... I could see violent movies possibly sparking an idea or triggering an impulse, but I don't think you can blame the movies at all. I would say that, since the huge majority of people are capable of watching those movies without acting out an impulse to commit horrible acts, that something more than the movie is to blame for the violent actions.
|
|
|
Post by Jancey on Feb 18, 2015 22:30:37 GMT -5
Alright saskabronco, as far as the whole 50 shades of grey vs violent movies, it's just not the same. I don't know how well I can explain what I think about this, but I'll try my best. In my opinion, violence doesn't have anywhere near the same kind of impact as sexual stuff. We can all watch violent movies or whatever and it doesn't really affect us. It has its place and it's extremes. Like in a war movie, the violence is fitting and I see no problem with watching it and it doesn't affect me in a negative way. If it gets really extreme and it's pointless, I won't watch it. Not because I think it will affect me necessarily but I see no point in watching something like it. With sexual stuff, it affects us so much more and in a completely different way. It causes us to lust and what is the reason for watching it? There could really only be one and that's to get some sort of pleasure from watching people on screen do all kinds of weird stuff. I understand that for a non-Christian it's not the same, and I don't expect you to agree with me. But I'll at least try to get you to understand my viewpoint. I've had a tough time of explaining this so I hope you get what I'm saying. And vaccinations, to be completely honest, I have done very little research regarding this topic and have formed my opinion mostly on what I have observed. Flu shots I've learned may not be a bad idea. Chicken pox shots for children - just unnecessary...your kid will get chicken pox once and then never have to worry about it again. Why inject them with something that opens them up to the possibility of something more serious later? I think that in some cases, they help, and in some they open a whole nother can of worms. Not autism can of worms..I think that's just dumb paranoia, and that issue is most of the minimal research I have done on the subject.. I get that it is a personal preference, and it makes sense based on your religious beliefs that you would demonize sex more than violence. The Bible constantly shows instances where violent responses (mass murder, sacrifice, etc) are not only allowed to happen, but encouraged and even praised. God has multiple occasions where he wipes out many, many people. But then sexuality is demonized over and over. Lust is a sin. Sex before marriage is a sin. Coveting thy neighbour's wife is a sin... But if someone sins, stone them to death or crucify them. An eye for an eye... Even sex is less demonized when tied to violence. Lust is sinful in the bible, but nowhere does the bible demonize rape. So it's wrong to want to have sex with someone else, but if you force yourself on them against their will, not only is that OK but you are inclined to take them as your wife (remember that the bible is written for men, not women). That is the most ass-backwards mentality and it makes me sick. Sex is natural. Sex creates life. Violence destroys life. Yet sex is bad and violence is good? This is just one more example of how the human beings who wrote the bible several thousand years ago didn't know what the hell they were talking about. Watching violent movies absolutely impacts people as well. Just because it doesn't give them a visible erection doesn't mean there is no impact. Watching violence over and over numbs you to violence. The fact that you think violence has no impact seems like proof that you have watched so many violent movies that you are quite numb to it already. I remember the first time I watched Saving Private Ryan. I was sick to my stomach at the violence in the opening scene. Last weekend I just watched Kingsman, which was insanely violent and gory, and it barely bothered me. Watch more movies with sex and nudity and I guarantee that after a while it will bother you less too. But just keep this thought in the back of your mind: Sex is natural. The naked human body is natural. Sex is literally required to keep our species in existence. Violence is man made. Guns are man made. Swords are man made. Wars are man made. Violence, and the push for the better and more powerful weapons, is one of the major things that threatens the existence of our species.You're so stuck on what happens in the old testament and you don't understand it saska. I don't really know what I can say about it. It won't make a difference. The old testament is all about showing the need of a savior. The new is all about the savior and his grace. And they're equally important. And both all about and centered around Christ and our need for him. I'm sure you'll respond with more hateful comments toward Christianity and try to point out how terrible it is and all that, but I don't know what there is I can say. You're right about people just being desensitized to violence, including myself. "Watch more movies with sex and nudity and I'm sure after a while it will bother you less too." You're half right. It has already happened to all of us to an extent. Seeing women in bikinis or low cut dresses or almost no clothes has become the norm and we think so much less of it now than people did like 50 years ago. And I do watch stuff with that kind of stuff in it because I've been desensitized to it by society almost and I don't think much of it. It becomes wrong when I look lustfully. Like the movie Requiem for a Dream, at the end there is nudity but I didn't feel conviction watching it because in the scene itself, it was so sad and I couldn't look at it in any kind of lustful way. In the movie Amistad, there was female and male nudity of a bunch of slaves, but they were like on a slave ship and I couldn't begin to look at them in any way other than sadness. The line for me is where I have to turn off my belief system to be okay watching it. The moment where I have to try so hard to justify it. The moment where I feel convicted. And obviously I'm so far from perfect and it's not like I do this so perfectly. I never at any point feel like I'm sinning for watching violent movies. There are points where it gets so extreme that I'm like "why am I watching this?" And at that point I turn it off. But the discussion of violence and how/if it impacts people and how we've been desensitized to it is an interesting one..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2015 22:39:08 GMT -5
See...I agree with Janceys post too.
Just wanna point out,,...When I say we all sin...I dont mean that by watching movies that we are intent on sinning.
Saska....other factors could and would play parts in that,but thats why I said 2%. If we take in other factors its probably 10 or 15%.
There is some nut cases out there and you dont have to trigger nothin. They was born that way.
|
|
|
Post by saskabronco on Feb 18, 2015 22:54:57 GMT -5
I get that it is a personal preference, and it makes sense based on your religious beliefs that you would demonize sex more than violence. The Bible constantly shows instances where violent responses (mass murder, sacrifice, etc) are not only allowed to happen, but encouraged and even praised. God has multiple occasions where he wipes out many, many people. But then sexuality is demonized over and over. Lust is a sin. Sex before marriage is a sin. Coveting thy neighbour's wife is a sin... But if someone sins, stone them to death or crucify them. An eye for an eye... Even sex is less demonized when tied to violence. Lust is sinful in the bible, but nowhere does the bible demonize rape. So it's wrong to want to have sex with someone else, but if you force yourself on them against their will, not only is that OK but you are inclined to take them as your wife (remember that the bible is written for men, not women). That is the most ass-backwards mentality and it makes me sick. Sex is natural. Sex creates life. Violence destroys life. Yet sex is bad and violence is good? This is just one more example of how the human beings who wrote the bible several thousand years ago didn't know what the hell they were talking about. Watching violent movies absolutely impacts people as well. Just because it doesn't give them a visible erection doesn't mean there is no impact. Watching violence over and over numbs you to violence. The fact that you think violence has no impact seems like proof that you have watched so many violent movies that you are quite numb to it already. I remember the first time I watched Saving Private Ryan. I was sick to my stomach at the violence in the opening scene. Last weekend I just watched Kingsman, which was insanely violent and gory, and it barely bothered me. Watch more movies with sex and nudity and I guarantee that after a while it will bother you less too. But just keep this thought in the back of your mind: Sex is natural. The naked human body is natural. Sex is literally required to keep our species in existence. Violence is man made. Guns are man made. Swords are man made. Wars are man made. Violence, and the push for the better and more powerful weapons, is one of the major things that threatens the existence of our species.You're so stuck on what happens in the old testament and you don't understand it saska. I don't really know what I can say about it. It won't make a difference. The old testament is all about showing the need of a savior. The new is all about the savior and his grace. And they're equally important. And both all about and centered around Christ and our need for him. I'm sure you'll respond with more hateful comments toward Christianity and try to point out how terrible it is and all that, but I don't know what there is I can say. You're right about people just being desensitized to violence, including myself. "Watch more movies with sex and nudity and I'm sure after a while it will bother you less too." You're half right. It has already happened to all of us to an extent. Seeing women in bikinis or low cut dresses or almost no clothes has become the norm and we think so much less of it now than people did like 50 years ago. And I do watch stuff with that kind of stuff in it because I've been desensitized to it by society almost and I don't think much of it. It becomes wrong when I look lustfully. Like the movie Requiem for a Dream, at the end there is nudity but I didn't feel conviction watching it because in the scene itself, it was so sad and I couldn't look at it in any kind of lustful way. In the movie Amistad, there was female and male nudity of a bunch of slaves, but they were like on a slave ship and I couldn't begin to look at them in any way other than sadness. The line for me is where I have to turn off my belief system to be okay watching it. The moment where I have to try so hard to justify it. The moment where I feel convicted. And obviously I'm so far from perfect and it's not like I do this so perfectly. I never at any point feel like I'm sinning for watching violent movies. There are points where it gets so extreme that I'm like "why am I watching this?" And at that point I turn it off. But the discussion of violence and how/if it impacts people and how we've been desensitized to it is an interesting one.. There is a difference between being hateful and referencing events from a book. If I just quoted the passages specifically, rather than summarize them, would it still be hateful? I do understand the meaning behind the books though, but what I don't understand is how Christians justify distancing themselves from the really bad things in the old testament while still latching on to everything that they feel still serves a purpose. If there are errors or problems with parts of the book, who are mere humans to determine which words an almighty God meant to last and which ones were only temporary? The lack of divine direction should be more than troubling, but yet Christians have no issue shrugging off one phrase that rests directly next to a phrase they are willing to live their entire life by. Is this hateful for me to say? The New Testament does not fix every problem in the Old Testament and one single error found should be more than enough to make any real Christian question every single word written in that book. If God could allow one error, then there is no guarantee that any word in that book is actually the words of God. On to violence vs sexuality (I will distance this from nudity, because as you said, there are times that nudity can occur with zero link to anything sexual). So, rank these from worst to best: - A husband and wife have sex and only the breasts are shown. - A husband and wife have sex and everything is shown. - A female stripper is shown, with all parts visible. - A female stripper is shown, with only breasts visible. - A male stripper is shown, everything is visible. - A man beats up another man. - A man beats up a woman. - A woman beats up a man. - A man beats up a child. - A human shoots a fellow citizen. - A human shoots an enemy in war, on the battlefield. - A human shoots a hostage of war. You can rank some as tied if you want, but I am curious how you would rank these. And this isn't based on what you like or not, it is what is considered moral. So ranking the male stripper higher than last doesn't make you gay...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2015 23:29:12 GMT -5
Is ISIS really going into Italy? Marlene says they are.
|
|
xdeadlyxmirage
NFL Starter
This Guy
Disrespecting narrative film since the 15th century.
Posts: 1,557
|
Post by xdeadlyxmirage on Feb 19, 2015 0:21:13 GMT -5
On to violence vs sexuality (I will distance this from nudity, because as you said, there are times that nudity can occur with zero link to anything sexual). So, rank these from worst to best: - A husband and wife have sex and only the breasts are shown. - A husband and wife have sex and everything is shown. - A female stripper is shown, with all parts visible. - A female stripper is shown, with only breasts visible. - A male stripper is shown, everything is visible. - A man beats up another man. - A man beats up a woman. - A woman beats up a man. - A man beats up a child. - A human shoots a fellow citizen. - A human shoots an enemy in war, on the battlefield. - A human shoots a hostage of war. You can rank some as tied if you want, but I am curious how you would rank these. And this isn't based on what you like or not, it is what is considered moral. So ranking the male stripper higher than last doesn't make you gay... I'm fully against almost any type of censorship, but I think this is a moot question for another reason. I can't imagine how this could not be a case by case sort of subjective deal. I think in American culture this fear of being "arbitrary" or subjective is absolutely absurdly out of control. We'd rather make a determination that a man beating up a different man is more acceptable than a man beating up a woman on tv, than trust ourselves to make the determination on a case by case basis as to what is acceptable and what is not. It's cartoonishly absurd and childish. Sorry for the short rant Saska, I don't mean to offend you or disparage what you are doing. I don't really know the context at all, just had to get the rant off my chest. Here's what I think the answer a general audience would give is (what I think is considered the normal answer for the culture I grew up in). The violence varies HEAVILY on gore. 95% of the violence is about gore levels. Most acceptable - A human shoots an enemy in war, on the battlefield. -------- All aboot gore. - A woman beats up a man. ---------- Come to think of it I don't think I've ever seen a woman truly beat up a man on film or TV (hit multiple times or with an object, yes, beat up, no) This sort of thing is kinda given a comedy vibe automatically. - A human shoots a hostage of war. ------------ This sort of thing is given an arty anti-war vibe that makes it more palpable. - A man beats up another man. ----------- This one is also especially dependent on the context - A human shoots a fellow citizen. ------------- This is 100% dependent on gore and reason for shooting (see westerns, Stagecoach versus Wild Bunch) - A man beats up a child. -------- Still in desperate need of a full picture. - A female stripper is shown, with only breasts visible. --------- How close to the camera? How long? In focus? With attention drawn? - A husband and wife have sex and only the breasts are shown. - A male stripper is shown, everything is visible. - A female stripper is shown, with all parts visible. - A husband and wife have sex and everything is shown. - A man beats up a woman. ---------- Assuming you mean beating up as in more than slapping once.
|
|
|
Post by Jancey on Feb 19, 2015 0:25:51 GMT -5
On to violence vs sexuality (I will distance this from nudity, because as you said, there are times that nudity can occur with zero link to anything sexual). So, rank these from worst to best: - A husband and wife have sex and only the breasts are shown. - A husband and wife have sex and everything is shown. - A female stripper is shown, with all parts visible. - A female stripper is shown, with only breasts visible. - A male stripper is shown, everything is visible. - A man beats up another man. - A man beats up a woman. - A woman beats up a man. - A man beats up a child. - A human shoots a fellow citizen. - A human shoots an enemy in war, on the battlefield. - A human shoots a hostage of war. You can rank some as tied if you want, but I am curious how you would rank these. And this isn't based on what you like or not, it is what is considered moral. So ranking the male stripper higher than last doesn't make you gay... Well, this is kind of silly and I think you're expecting me to answer a certain way and then make a point about it..but I'm a bit confused. Are we talking the actual acts of violence or seeing these things on screen? Seeing them on screen right?
|
|
|
Post by saskabronco on Feb 19, 2015 0:38:08 GMT -5
On to violence vs sexuality (I will distance this from nudity, because as you said, there are times that nudity can occur with zero link to anything sexual). So, rank these from worst to best: - A husband and wife have sex and only the breasts are shown. - A husband and wife have sex and everything is shown. - A female stripper is shown, with all parts visible. - A female stripper is shown, with only breasts visible. - A male stripper is shown, everything is visible. - A man beats up another man. - A man beats up a woman. - A woman beats up a man. - A man beats up a child. - A human shoots a fellow citizen. - A human shoots an enemy in war, on the battlefield. - A human shoots a hostage of war. You can rank some as tied if you want, but I am curious how you would rank these. And this isn't based on what you like or not, it is what is considered moral. So ranking the male stripper higher than last doesn't make you gay... I'm fully against almost any type of censorship, but I think this is a moot question for another reason. I can't imagine how this could not be a case by case sort of subjective deal. I think in American culture this fear of being "arbitrary" or subjective is absolutely absurdly out of control. We'd rather make a determination that a man beating up a different man is more acceptable than a man beating up a woman on tv, than trust ourselves to make the determination on a case by case basis as to what is acceptable and what is not. It's cartoonishly absurd and childish. Sorry for the short rant Saska, I don't mean to offend you or disparage what you are doing. I don't really know the context at all, just had to get the rant off my chest. No worries, I am not easily offended and I asked this question to generate more of a discussion. I firmly believe that it's not possible to actually rank those instances, but it gets you thinking what is considered more acceptable than what else. A female stripper in a show is far more socially acceptable than a male, especially if their privates are shown. A man beating up a woman is far less acceptable than a woman beating up a man. But our initial discussion was regarding what is worse between violence and sexuality on TV and Jancey believes that sexuality is much worse than violence. I just pointed out a bunch of examples. I doubt that all of the sexuality examples I listed would be considered worse than the violence ones. Ultimately, while I get the sexuality taboo (thanks to religion, more often than not), I think it is completely silly.
|
|