Why do people shower Penn and Teller with praise?

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Whenever it comes to government regulation on something, freedom, or individualism there are often people who keep posting clips from Penn and Teller's show "Bullshit" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_%26_Teller:_Bullshit!) to make their points and prove how the rights of the individual are sacred and all of that stuff.

However, I don't get it why these guys get as much praise as they do. Don't get me wrong, I MOSTLY favor the rights of the individual over the rights of the government, but these guys are not as great as people make them out to be.

For example, did you know that they are against universal healthcare because it "violates the rights" of each person "to choose" his own healthcare? Its not just stupid shit like the war on porn and nonsense anti-smoking laws that they are against, they appear to hate pretty much anything that the government has anything to do with in general and don't even like the positive aspects of some more left leaning policies like universal healthcare, because of their extreme individualist believes.

In addition to that, they also sometimes contradict them self's.

For example, in the bible episode they talk about the idiocy of trying to decide what certain parts of the bible really mean thousands of years after it had been written creating the risk that the true meaning and context behind many parts may have been lost over time as a result, but at the same time dismiss exactly this same kind of criticism during the constitution episode where they them self's start to use the same arguments as the fundamentalists in the bible episode by arguing that the constitution should be taken literally word by word regardless of the original context.

They still make many valid points on many issues, but they aren't the heroes lots of people appear to paint them as. Why are they so popular on the forums/interwebs?

Thoughts?

Hardcore_gamer:
Whenever it comes to government regulation on something, freedom, or individualism there are often people who keep posting clips from Penn and Teller's show "Bullshit" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_%26_Teller:_Bullshit!) to make their points and prove how the rights of the individual are sacred and all of that stuff.

However, I don't get it why these guys get as much praise as they do. Don't get me wrong, I MOSTLY favor the rights of the individual over the rights of the government, but these guys are not as great as people make them out to be.

For example, did you know that they are against universal healthcare because it "violates the rights" of each person "to choose" his own healthcare? Its not just stupid shit like the war on porn and nonsense anti-smoking laws that they are against, they appear to hate pretty much anything that the government has anything to do with in general and don't even like the positive aspects of some more left leaning policies like universal healthcare, because of their extreme individualist believes.

In addition to that, they also sometimes contradict them self's.

For example, in the bible episode they talk about the idiocy of trying to decide what certain parts of the bible really mean thousands of years after it had been written creating the risk that the true meaning and context behind many parts may have been lost over time as a result, but at the same time dismiss exactly this same kind of criticism during the constitution episode where they them self's start to use the same arguments as the fundamentalists in the bible episode by arguing that the constitution should be taken literally word by word regardless of the original context.

They still make many valid points on many issues, but they aren't the heroes lots of people appear to paint them as. Why are they so popular on the forums/interwebs?

Thoughts?

Universal Healthcare, if i'm not mistaken, means that you are FORCED to take a certain healthcare policy regardless. And if i'm not mistaken, you still HAVE to pay for this (I.E. Canada's supposedly high tax rates) regardless of if you want it or not. Medicare/Medicaid is already a large drain on our federal budget, so assuming we can make universal healthcare "free" is pretty optimistic. I don't know what they prefer, but I'd prefer cheaper healthcare in some manner (such as combating obesity to save a few billion in medical expenses yearly).

And with the Constitution/Bible part, 240ish years is not the same as thousands. That and the Constitution refers to actual practical ideas, not religious super natural stuff or a guide to being a good christian. That and the Bible is so full of, and I mean this, evil ideas. That is, if you take it literally (E.G. Murdering homosexuals). So that's another reason to not take the bible seriously. The worst thing I can think of in the Constitution was that they didn't address the problem of slavery at the start and i suppose the stupidity that was prohibition.

I always considered them popular because they at least try to apply reason and use facts to back themselves up, and state things bluntly. That and it's somewhat entertaining watching them.

They're popular because they're successful entertainers, hence why they get quoted a lot.

Frostwhisper21:

Universal Healthcare, if i'm not mistaken, means that you are FORCED to take a certain healthcare policy regardless. And if i'm not mistaken, you still HAVE to pay for this (I.E. Canada's supposedly high tax rates) regardless of if you want it or not. Medicare/Medicaid is already a large drain on our federal budget, so assuming we can make universal healthcare "free" is pretty optimistic. I don't know what they prefer, but I'd prefer cheaper healthcare in some manner (such as combating obesity to save a few billion in medical expenses yearly).

And with the Constitution/Bible part, 240ish years is not the same as thousands. That and the Constitution refers to actual practical ideas, not religious super natural stuff or a guide to being a good christian. That and the Bible is so full of, and I mean this, evil ideas. That is, if you take it literally (E.G. Murdering homosexuals). So that's another reason to not take the bible seriously. The worst thing I can think of in the Constitution was that they didn't address the problem of slavery at the start and i suppose the stupidity that was prohibition.

I always considered them popular because they at least try to apply reason and use facts to back themselves up, and state things bluntly. That and it's somewhat entertaining watching them.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most-efficient-health-services

The NHS is proven to be both more effective and cheaper than the current system in the USA.

I'm not completely socialist when it comes to health care, but I do believe that an efficient well ran universal health care system is better for everyone than a private one run in the same fashion.

However, doing a bit of both always ends in tears. The American system is ridiculous and Obama dropped the ball big time. From what I've heard Canada's system isn't ran very well either.

Frostwhisper21:

Universal Healthcare, if i'm not mistaken, means that you are FORCED to take a certain healthcare policy regardless.

Just because a governance may have a universal health care system in place does not mean private health care systems and hospitals are outlawed. So you're wrong about this.

Frostwhisper21:
And if i'm not mistaken, you still HAVE to pay for this (I.E. Canada's supposedly high tax rates) regardless of if you want it or not.

Yep, that's true. You're right about this. For me I don't mind doing this at all. I'm all in favour of paying a little bit of money to a government ran health sector so all of us can benefit from satisfactory levels of care. It's something I completely agree with.

But I can certainly see why some people have a problem with it. But really, speaking from someone who lives in a country where we are forced to pay for healthcare - it's not that big of a deal. I don't even notice to be honest and I don't know anyone who does.

A lot of Americans who are anti universal health care seem to really make a big deal out of it and act like the tax is so high everyone has their pocket drained. That isn't true. Yeah, everyone pays a bit more taxes but last time I checked the economy in Australia and the UK was a hell of a lot better than the USA. I dunno, I just don't think it's a big deal.

--

In regard to Penn and Teller, I praise them because they are flashy entertainers who are some of the best magicians in the business.

As far as their views go, they are just middle of the run libertarians. So yeah, like all libertarians, they are full of shit more often than they are right.

Oh i fully support some sort of universal healthcare simply because we already have it somewhat in Medicare and Medicaid. This isn't THAT big a step, and as much as I hate people I cannot condone letting a person die because they're poor. It's one thing to not have a nice house or the best clothes or a fancy car, but to die? That shouldn't be a topic of discussion when we're spending money on $500 toilet seats and using anti-terrorism money on sno-cone machines (sorry, shaved-ice machines).

But i meant a "certain" healthcare in that you had to pick one. Bad choice of words, I didn't mean that private healthcare would be banned at all. I just meant that not having healthcare would not be an option (as stupid as it is).

Quite frankly, the only ones who care about this would be those that already have healthcare through work. When it's part of your benefits then you're getting it at very little sacrifice. But since that's generally going to those who dont NEED universal healthcare from their income alone, it's a bit of selfishness i suppose.

But i do have to say:
GDP
2009 2010
(forecast)
Japan -5.3% 1.7%
U.K. -4.8% 1.3%
Euro area -3.9% 1.0%
U.S. -2.5% 2.7%
Asian NICs -1.2% 4.8%
China 8.7% 10.0%
India 5.6% 7.7%
World -0.8% 3.9%

Taking into consideration that we're already at our supposed natural growth rate, we're always going to be below the less-developed countries.

It's a fact that Europe got screwed by this more than the US did. Not sure about Australia though, but they have Australium so they're fine.

But it's not really the point when this was caused by a financial crisis not a tax-based issue such as consumption and investment decreases due to high tax-rates.

I'd argue, also, that the increase in education and productivity that results from not having to pay for or worry about health care, or from having people who are sick/dying be cured better/not die, would offset at least partially the cost of universal healthcare.

As a child of WoW's off-topic forums i have an urge to devil's advocate, so i tend to argue for both sides. Sorry bout that. I just think it's good for the brain.
(you can tell I haven't done it in a long time :P ).

Because they are very charismatic? I don't know any one who showers them with praise actually...

I enjoy their show because its interesting and entertaining, sure they have some points I completely disagree with (like the recycling episode), but I know they aren't an authority on most topics and take everything they say with a grain of salt.

From who?

Right Libertarianism is better than Right Authoritarianism which is the ever-staying vanguard of the Republican party.

And they're one of the few people with the guts to be outspoken atheists on television. That takes guts as much this country is full of hyper-religious, atheist hating cretins.

Do you realize that a large part of how the right-wing parties even get elected in this country is because even people who hate the economic inequality in this country only hate one thing more? Non-Evangelical laws and values.

I have to respect them for putting themselves out there and on the line about issues that draw the ire of dangerous and influential religious extremists around the country.

People tend to cling to anyone that gives their socio-political views a sense of legitmacy. Liberals have Micheal Moore. Conservatives have Ann Coulter. Libertarians have Ayn Rand and Penn and Teller. When you find a modern prophet, you don't question, you just follow, even if contridictions pop up. In Bullshit's case, it was somewhat obvious in places, so much that if I wasn't aware of Penn and Teller's politics I'd swear they were just being arguemenitive. For me it was the death penality episode. After more than a few comments in other episodes about how it's wrong to force your morality on someone and taxes are theft, Penn goes into a tiraid about how wrong it is to kill even criminals and we should just keep them locked up. Or in other words: I find this wrong and am willing to pay more in taxes to fit my morality and the rest of you should feel this way too, it's just wrong if you do it to me. If I wasn't aware how easially most people can miss their own double standards, I'd think this was played for satire.

I still find the show entertaining and informative, but I do take it with a grain of salt. It's important to remember that the people they say are conning you sound like reasoned, logical and imformed people themselves, so you might need to think twice to make sure bullshit isn't bullshitting you.

LilithSlave:
From who?

Right Libertarianism is better than Right Authoritarianism which is the ever-staying vanguard of the Republican party.

And they're one of the few people with the guts to be outspoken atheists on television. That takes guts as much this country is full of hyper-religious, atheist hating cretins.

Do you realize that a large part of how the right-wing parties even get elected in this country is because even people who hate the economic inequality in this country only hate one thing more? Non-Evangelical laws and values.

I have to respect them for putting themselves out there and on the line about issues that draw the ire of dangerous and influential religious extremists around the country.

i dont really think it takes guts to be an outspoken atheist in the media these days at all, maybe say 40 years ago but now every other person on tv is an outspoken atheist, or someone who doesnt give a shit about religion (apatheist), sure there is a couple channels strictly devoted to religion but whatever, thats not important now is it. so i cant really admire them for being outspoken atheist.

Redd the Sock:
I find this wrong and am willing to pay more in taxes to fit my morality and the rest of you should feel this way too, it's just wrong if you do it to me.

What, you're saying that you think that the death penalty is cheaper?

Mortai Gravesend:

Redd the Sock:
I find this wrong and am willing to pay more in taxes to fit my morality and the rest of you should feel this way too, it's just wrong if you do it to me.

What, you're saying that you think that the death penalty is cheaper?

It would be if we didn't have the red tape with the legal fees and the appeals. But we need them because:

i've read statistics that state that about 8 people have been executed for every 1 person found innocent on death row (This is thanks to the relatively new forensics technology)... so there's another reason why death row is rather faulty.

Frostwhisper21:

Mortai Gravesend:

Redd the Sock:
I find this wrong and am willing to pay more in taxes to fit my morality and the rest of you should feel this way too, it's just wrong if you do it to me.

What, you're saying that you think that the death penalty is cheaper?

It would be if we didn't have the red tape with the legal fees and the appeals. But we need them because:

i've read statistics that state that about 8 people have been executed for every 1 person found innocent on death row (This is thanks to the relatively new forensics technology)... so there's another reason why death row is rather faulty.

Well yeah, I know that but I was asking if he is actually implying that the death penalty is cheaper because I know that's wrong XP

Mortai Gravesend:

Frostwhisper21:

Mortai Gravesend:

What, you're saying that you think that the death penalty is cheaper?

It would be if we didn't have the red tape with the legal fees and the appeals. But we need them because:

i've read statistics that state that about 8 people have been executed for every 1 person found innocent on death row (This is thanks to the relatively new forensics technology)... so there's another reason why death row is rather faulty.

Well yeah, I know that but I was asking if he is actually implying that the death penalty is cheaper because I know that's wrong XP

Haha i know, i was trying to be slightly sarcastic but then it turned into something more serious. Prolly cause i had to do a presentation on the topic in community college heh.

Also: You liked Alpha Protocol? Or just Sis?

Frostwhisper21:

Mortai Gravesend:

Frostwhisper21:

It would be if we didn't have the red tape with the legal fees and the appeals. But we need them because:

i've read statistics that state that about 8 people have been executed for every 1 person found innocent on death row (This is thanks to the relatively new forensics technology)... so there's another reason why death row is rather faulty.

Well yeah, I know that but I was asking if he is actually implying that the death penalty is cheaper because I know that's wrong XP

Haha i know, i was trying to be slightly sarcastic but then it turned into something more serious. Prolly cause i had to do a presentation on the topic in community college heh.

Also: You liked Alpha Protocol? Or just Sis?

Ah I see. I've seen the death penalty discussed online before and seen people cite that it is actually more expensive.

And both =D

keiskay:
every other person on tv is an outspoken atheist

Not even close.

There is still a huge amount of distrust and antipathy towards atheists in this country.

Tell me, can you name me atheist members of Congress?

Mortai Gravesend:

Frostwhisper21:

Mortai Gravesend:

Well yeah, I know that but I was asking if he is actually implying that the death penalty is cheaper because I know that's wrong XP

Haha i know, i was trying to be slightly sarcastic but then it turned into something more serious. Prolly cause i had to do a presentation on the topic in community college heh.

Also: You liked Alpha Protocol? Or just Sis?

Ah I see. I've seen the death penalty discussed online before and seen people cite that it is actually more expensive.

And both =D

Yeah it is overall. People seem to think it's a simple matter of just injecting them with whatever or electrocution.. there's so much more involved. And oh lord the racial inequality lets not get started there.

Yeah i enjoyed Alpha protocol somehow too :) I know it's deeply flawed in gameplay and the main character was kinda a dick regardless of what stance you chose(which was honestly quite endearing), but something got me to beat the game three times haha.

LilithSlave:

keiskay:
every other person on tv is an outspoken atheist

Not even close.

There is still a huge amount of distrust and antipathy towards atheists in this country.

Tell me, can you name me atheist members of Congress?

pete stark is openly atheist and is currently serving in the house of representatives. there are others who are undecided or refused to answer so i cannot confirm what they are exactly.

also popular atheist in tv and movies.
kevin bacon
angelina jolie
keanu reeves
woody allen
james cameron
george clooney
jamie hyneman
kubrick
seth macfarlane
peter laurie
john malkovich
brad pitt
daniel radcliffe
ian mckellen
and the list goes on for a bit, so penn and teller being openly atheist has nothing to do with their popularity. its more due to the fact that they have been entertainers for quite awhile. heck they were popular before showing off their atheist side.

There are of course some.

But the fact of the matter is atheist politicians tend to not get voted for. Many atheist politicians are likely not "out of the closet" so to speak, about it. As doing so would likely compromise their chances of getting elected.

SillyBear:

Frostwhisper21:

Universal Healthcare, if i'm not mistaken, means that you are FORCED to take a certain healthcare policy regardless. And if i'm not mistaken, you still HAVE to pay for this (I.E. Canada's supposedly high tax rates) regardless of if you want it or not. Medicare/Medicaid is already a large drain on our federal budget, so assuming we can make universal healthcare "free" is pretty optimistic. I don't know what they prefer, but I'd prefer cheaper healthcare in some manner (such as combating obesity to save a few billion in medical expenses yearly).

And with the Constitution/Bible part, 240ish years is not the same as thousands. That and the Constitution refers to actual practical ideas, not religious super natural stuff or a guide to being a good christian. That and the Bible is so full of, and I mean this, evil ideas. That is, if you take it literally (E.G. Murdering homosexuals). So that's another reason to not take the bible seriously. The worst thing I can think of in the Constitution was that they didn't address the problem of slavery at the start and i suppose the stupidity that was prohibition.

I always considered them popular because they at least try to apply reason and use facts to back themselves up, and state things bluntly. That and it's somewhat entertaining watching them.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/07/nhs-among-most-efficient-health-services

The NHS is proven to be both more effective and cheaper than the current system in the USA.

I'm not completely socialist when it comes to health care, but I do believe that an efficient well ran universal health care system is better for everyone than a private one run in the same fashion.

However, doing a bit of both always ends in tears. The American system is ridiculous and Obama dropped the ball big time. From what I've heard Canada's system isn't ran very well either.

The US government is VERY bad at making cost efficient programs, and the current American healthcare costs more just because we got a large amount of highly advanced technology that cost a fortune to use and run.

Shouldering the cost when the government has enough debt issues is something I would prefer to avoid.

Hardcore_gamer:
Whenever it comes to government regulation on something, freedom, or individualism there are often people who keep posting clips from Penn and Teller's show "Bullshit" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_%26_Teller:_Bullshit!) to make their points and prove how the rights of the individual are sacred and all of that stuff.

However, I don't get it why these guys get as much praise as they do. Don't get me wrong, I MOSTLY favor the rights of the individual over the rights of the government, but these guys are not as great as people make them out to be.

For example, did you know that they are against universal healthcare because it "violates the rights" of each person "to choose" his own healthcare? Its not just stupid shit like the war on porn and nonsense anti-smoking laws that they are against, they appear to hate pretty much anything that the government has anything to do with in general and don't even like the positive aspects of some more left leaning policies like universal healthcare, because of their extreme individualist believes.

In addition to that, they also sometimes contradict them self's.

For example, in the bible episode they talk about the idiocy of trying to decide what certain parts of the bible really mean thousands of years after it had been written creating the risk that the true meaning and context behind many parts may have been lost over time as a result, but at the same time dismiss exactly this same kind of criticism during the constitution episode where they them self's start to use the same arguments as the fundamentalists in the bible episode by arguing that the constitution should be taken literally word by word regardless of the original context.

Laws generally are meant to be taken literally, and word for word. They're written to be very specific so that they won't be misinterpreted or abused (seriously go read a random federal law and watch how much space it dedicates to defining common terms that it's using).

On the other hand I've heard the Constitution was meant to be vague but I haven't seen a source for that.

If you ever see someone arguing that the 10 commandments should not be taken literally they would be viewed as a nut/idiot/wrong by even the other fundamentalists. Also the records we have on the late 18th century are much better than the records for Jesus' time (or earlier).

Hardcore_gamer:

They still make many valid points on many issues, but they aren't the heroes lots of people appear to paint them as. Why are they so popular on the forums/interwebs?

Because they present their points well and are at least entertaining to watch even if you disagree with them (most of the time anyway).

It beats the shit out of a tldr blog post don't you think?

Redd the Sock:
People tend to cling to anyone that gives their socio-political views a sense of legitmacy. Liberals have Micheal Moore. Conservatives have Ann Coulter. Libertarians have Ayn Rand and Penn and Teller. When you find a modern prophet, you don't question, you just follow, even if contridictions pop up. In Bullshit's case, it was somewhat obvious in places, so much that if I wasn't aware of Penn and Teller's politics I'd swear they were just being arguemenitive. For me it was the death penality episode. After more than a few comments in other episodes about how it's wrong to force your morality on someone and taxes are theft, Penn goes into a tiraid about how wrong it is to kill even criminals and we should just keep them locked up. Or in other words: I find this wrong and am willing to pay more in taxes to fit my morality and the rest of you should feel this way too, it's just wrong if you do it to me. If I wasn't aware how easially most people can miss their own double standards, I'd think this was played for satire.

I still find the show entertaining and informative, but I do take it with a grain of salt. It's important to remember that the people they say are conning you sound like reasoned, logical and imformed people themselves, so you might need to think twice to make sure bullshit isn't bullshitting you.

They said they were going to make the last episode be Bullsh$t of Bullsh#t, which I do not doubt they would of talked about these issues, but they switched to their new discovery channel show before they had a chance to make it.

keiskay:

LilithSlave:

keiskay:
every other person on tv is an outspoken atheist

Not even close.

There is still a huge amount of distrust and antipathy towards atheists in this country.

Tell me, can you name me atheist members of Congress?

pete stark is openly atheist and is currently serving in the house of representatives. there are others who are undecided or refused to answer so i cannot confirm what they are exactly.

also popular atheist in tv and movies.
kevin bacon
angelina jolie
keanu reeves
woody allen
james cameron
george clooney
jamie hyneman
kubrick
seth macfarlane
peter laurie
john malkovich
brad pitt
daniel radcliffe
ian mckellen
and the list goes on for a bit, so penn and teller being openly atheist has nothing to do with their popularity. its more due to the fact that they have been entertainers for quite awhile. heck they were popular before showing off their atheist side.

Frostwhisper21:

Mortai Gravesend:

Frostwhisper21:

Haha i know, i was trying to be slightly sarcastic but then it turned into something more serious. Prolly cause i had to do a presentation on the topic in community college heh.

Also: You liked Alpha Protocol? Or just Sis?

Ah I see. I've seen the death penalty discussed online before and seen people cite that it is actually more expensive.

And both =D

Yeah it is overall. People seem to think it's a simple matter of just injecting them with whatever or electrocution.. there's so much more involved. And oh lord the racial inequality lets not get started there.

Yeah i enjoyed Alpha protocol somehow too :) I know it's deeply flawed in gameplay and the main character was kinda a dick regardless of what stance you chose(which was honestly quite endearing), but something got me to beat the game three times haha.

Ah yeah... though for the racial inequality... well that's kind of in more than just the death penalty, but the system has to go on regardless in some form XP

I went through it twice, and might do a 3rd time some day but I've got other games to play. Regardless of any flaws it was really fun.

Redd the Sock:

People tend to cling to anyone that gives their socio-political views a sense of legitmacy. Liberals have Micheal Moore. Conservatives have Ann Coulter. Libertarians have Ayn Rand and Penn and Teller. When you find a modern prophet, you don't question, you just follow, even if contridictions pop up. In Bullshit's case, it was somewhat obvious in places, so much that if I wasn't aware of Penn and Teller's politics I'd swear they were just being arguemenitive. For me it was the death penality episode. After more than a few comments in other episodes about how it's wrong to force your morality on someone and taxes are theft, Penn goes into a tiraid about how wrong it is to kill even criminals and we should just keep them locked up. Or in other words: I find this wrong and am willing to pay more in taxes to fit my morality and the rest of you should feel this way too, it's just wrong if you do it to me.

The death penalty is not forcing morality onto you, unless you are literally an executioner. If you wanted to shoot someone who murdered your family that would get you arrested for murder (unless of course you were the executioner).

Redd the Sock:

I still find the show entertaining and informative, but I do take it with a grain of salt. It's important to remember that the people they say are conning you sound like reasoned, logical and imformed people themselves, so you might need to think twice to make sure bullshit isn't bullshitting you.

Solid advice, and not just for watching Bullshit.

LilithSlave:
There are of course some.

But the fact of the matter is atheist politicians tend to not get voted for. Many atheist politicians are likely not "out of the closet" so to speak, about it. As doing so would likely compromise their chances of getting elected.

i can say the same for any group despised by the public though. the only reason there are mormons in the house and senate is cause they either hide it or they live in utah. i also dont see many or if any satanist in the senate.

LilithSlave:

I have to respect them for putting themselves out there and on the line about issues that draw the ire of dangerous and influential religious extremists around the country.

You know the only reason they never did Islam was because they were afraid of the religious extremists that might try to kill them.

Just pointing that out. I still like the guys though.

Mortai Gravesend:

keiskay:

LilithSlave:

Not even close.

There is still a huge amount of distrust and antipathy towards atheists in this country.

Tell me, can you name me atheist members of Congress?

pete stark is openly atheist and is currently serving in the house of representatives. there are others who are undecided or refused to answer so i cannot confirm what they are exactly.

also popular atheist in tv and movies.
kevin bacon
angelina jolie
keanu reeves
woody allen
james cameron
george clooney
jamie hyneman
kubrick
seth macfarlane
peter laurie
john malkovich
brad pitt
daniel radcliffe
ian mckellen
and the list goes on for a bit, so penn and teller being openly atheist has nothing to do with their popularity. its more due to the fact that they have been entertainers for quite awhile. heck they were popular before showing off their atheist side.

Frostwhisper21:

Mortai Gravesend:

Ah I see. I've seen the death penalty discussed online before and seen people cite that it is actually more expensive.

And both =D

Yeah it is overall. People seem to think it's a simple matter of just injecting them with whatever or electrocution.. there's so much more involved. And oh lord the racial inequality lets not get started there.

Yeah i enjoyed Alpha protocol somehow too :) I know it's deeply flawed in gameplay and the main character was kinda a dick regardless of what stance you chose(which was honestly quite endearing), but something got me to beat the game three times haha.

Ah yeah... though for the racial inequality... well that's kind of in more than just the death penalty, but the system has to go on regardless in some form XP

I went through it twice, and might do a 3rd time some day but I've got other games to play. Regardless of any flaws it was really fun.

im trying to figure out why you quoted me and lilith. and i cant think of any reasons why

Also I like Penn and Teller because sometimes they bring up point I never thought of.

Here's a good example. I hate to drag up Rapeplay again though.

Oh and it is his old vlog and not his show so he rambles a bit.

Father Time:
Also I like Penn and Teller because sometimes they bring up point I never thought of.

Here's a good example. I hate to drag up Rapeplay again.

Oh and it is his old vlog and not his show so he rambles a bit.

I got about halfway through it before I wanted to punch the screen. He completely misunderstands rape culture. He makes a specious comparison to murder mysteries. He doesn't get the women's group's argument at all. He jumps right to prosecution, as if there's no space for saying "yes this legally exists but it's fucking reprehensible and contributes to a general environment where rape is minimized, laughed about, misunderstood, and yes, in certain ways, normalized" without jumping right to "they made this game, throw the fuckers in jail".

In short, typical fucking male privilege, and the reason why I can't stand him.

Father Time:
The death penalty is not forcing morality onto you, unless you are literally an executioner. If you wanted to shoot someone who murdered your family that would get you arrested for murder (unless of course you were the executioner).

Just because its interesting I wanted to point out that this is not entirely correct (though I am sure you did not mean it literally). I've read that a man assisting with an execution was arrested, tried, and convicted of murder for shooting the man who was being executed. This happened because they had botched the lethal injection leaving the condemned trashing about and convulsing in apparent pain and agony. The officer shot the man to put him out of his misery.

Let me see if I can find the case.... and no I can not find it. It brings up too many cop killer cases and generally botched executions, of which there are plennty.

Polarity27:

Father Time:
Also I like Penn and Teller because sometimes they bring up point I never thought of.

Here's a good example. I hate to drag up Rapeplay again.

Oh and it is his old vlog and not his show so he rambles a bit.

I got about halfway through it before I wanted to punch the screen. He completely misunderstands rape culture.

Watch the whole thing. He gets to the idea that this stuff normalizes rape.

Polarity27:

He makes a specious comparison to murder mysteries. He doesn't get the women's group's argument at all. He jumps right to prosecution, as if there's no space for saying "yes this legally exists but it's fucking reprehensible and contributes to a general environment where rape is minimized, laughed about, misunderstood, and yes, in certain ways, normalized" without jumping right to "they made this game, throw the fuckers in jail".

Problem is the group he's talking about (Equality Now) did call for it to be banned.

Polarity27:

In short, typical fucking male privilege

Typical non-argument. Although I don't see how misunderstanding an argument even qualifies as privilege.

TheStatutoryApe:

Father Time:
The death penalty is not forcing morality onto you, unless you are literally an executioner. If you wanted to shoot someone who murdered your family that would get you arrested for murder (unless of course you were the executioner).

Just because its interesting I wanted to point out that this is not entirely correct (though I am sure you did not mean it literally). I've read that a man assisting with an execution was arrested, tried, and convicted of murder for shooting the man who was being executed. This happened because they had botched the lethal injection leaving the condemned trashing about and convulsing in apparent pain and agony. The officer shot the man to put him out of his misery.

Let me see if I can find the case.... and no I can not find it. It brings up too many cop killer cases and generally botched executions, of which there are plennty.

Interesting case. I'd like to see it not because I don't believe you but because it sounds like a unique story. I guess I'll look for it myself later.

Anyway when I wrote that I had in mind someone on a firing squad while they were doing their job.

My fault for not specifying.

Father Time:
Interesting case. I'd like to see it not because I don't believe you but because it sounds like a unique story. I guess I'll look for it myself later.

Anyway when I wrote that I had in mind someone on a firing squad while they were doing their job.

My fault for not specifying.

I was already certain that you had some other thing in mind, I just thought it was interesting. Grisham is anti death penalty and brought the incident up in one of his novels pointing out the irony that a man was charged with murder for killing a condemned man out of compassion.

TheStatutoryApe:

Father Time:
Interesting case. I'd like to see it not because I don't believe you but because it sounds like a unique story. I guess I'll look for it myself later.

Anyway when I wrote that I had in mind someone on a firing squad while they were doing their job.

My fault for not specifying.

I was already certain that you had some other thing in mind, I just thought it was interesting. Grisham is anti death penalty and brought the incident up in one of his novels pointing out the irony that a man was charged with murder for killing a condemned man out of compassion.

I like Grisham or at least the tiny amount of his stories I read.

I read a ton of praise about him so I flipped to a random spot in one of his books and started reading. It was a story about the death penalty told by one of the characters. It was interesting and talked about the large amount of money they wasted trying to kill the guy.

Polarity27:
I got about halfway through it before I wanted to punch the screen. He completely misunderstands rape culture. He makes a specious comparison to murder mysteries. He doesn't get the women's group's argument at all. He jumps right to prosecution, as if there's no space for saying "yes this legally exists but it's fucking reprehensible and contributes to a general environment where rape is minimized, laughed about, misunderstood, and yes, in certain ways, normalized" without jumping right to "they made this game, throw the fuckers in jail".

In short, typical fucking male privilege, and the reason why I can't stand him.

Why don't you give us the long version? And explain what you mean, rather than hastily gesture at some body of... literature? Theory? Advocacy? What is it that makes you think the viewing of these images, or playing of these games, is so pernicious?

Not G. Ivingname:

They said they were going to make the last episode be Bullsh$t of Bullsh#t, which I do not doubt they would of talked about these issues, but they switched to their new discovery channel show before they had a chance to make it.

They actually discussed their plans for that episode after they ended Bullshit. I got it linked to the right time.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked