MovieChat Forums > filmflaneur > Replies
filmflaneur's Replies
<blockquote>There is nothing unwarranted in a White person being on the side of his ethnic group if they are under attack. Yet a White is called "racist" for being on the side of his group </blockquote>
And who do you think you are 'under attack' from?
You will have to be more specific then in what you will and won't accept. I would argue that a clear example of 'double standards' from a White identitarians (people who are called "White supremacists") with regards to race would be accepting a partner of a different race as an equal. More examples:
https://nypost.com/2017/08/29/i-was-a-neo-nazi-until-i-fell-in-love-with-a-black-woman/
Keith was a neo-Nazi. Catherine is black and needed a bodyguard. Now they lovingly hold hands and kiss everywhere they go.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=368049040454619
Perhaps, you can supply an example of that which you will accept? I hope people won't think you are just moving goalposts.
Yes, with them falling behind in the polls and with an elderly candidate, they must be... oh, wait...
It works well enough to exercise you lol
UK
I think I have read about a version of Lost, which uses Season 1 only, made into a satisfying self contained movie. Can't remember what they did. Part of the fun of edits is to see bad films/TV resurrected into something more than their parts.
And yet, here you are...
<blockquote> Name me a single example of a double standard from White identatarians (people who are called "White supremacists")</blockquote>
<blockquote> I was a neo-Nazi. Then I fell in love with a black woman </blockquote>
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-40779377
Glad to help
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I just wish some would step back from condemning the authoritative and substantial sources which disprove their conspiracy theories and recognise the echo chamber they are in.
Recommending really comes down to personal taste in movies. For instance I am unimpressed by the endless tinkering with versions of the Star Wars universe & etc. My favorites include the two mentioned above. I had a hand in re editing the 60's movie Battle of Britain ('Battle of Britain: Second Flight') a few months ago which made it into a much better film imho. I have also seen a version of Saving Private Ryan, rendered in black and white and which removes the sentimentality entirely of Ryan and results in much more harrowing war film. I have enjoyed the later Lord of the Rings films edited to remove unnecessary humour and longeurs etc. The two sites I listed are very good resources. The danger is that once one starts to dip into the world of alternate cuts it is hard to stop!
And don't tell me, they are all fake news, and against witch hunted defendant Donald? And you are among those patriots who know the real truth?
>Is that what the lying MSM told you?
Nope. See below.
>After the 2020 United States presidential election, the campaign for incumbent President Donald Trump and others filed 62 lawsuits contesting election processes, vote counting, and the vote certification process in 9 states (including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) and the District of Columbia.
>Nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped due to lack of evidence or lack of standing, including 30 lawsuits that were dismissed by the judge after a hearing on the merits.Among the judges who dismissed the lawsuits were some appointed by Trump himself.
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_U.S._presidential_election .[/url]
I note you offer no substantiation .. is this what the lying conspiracy sphere told you?
This is correct. Defendant Donald and co filed in over 60 cases alleging electorial malpractice, in different jurisdictions - all but one was thrown out of court.
That unfortunate Supreme Court decision will inevitably have consequences. The Watergate break in for instance would have been legal now.
You entitled to your opinion. Good luck to defendant Donald!
Providing information germane to the OP is trolling? You seem very quick to characterise people, as I said when you first called me this. Apparently sufferers of gymnophobia, of which you admit, experience undue anxiety (even frustration in your case, you say) even though they realize their fear is irrational. Their fear may stem from anxiety about sexuality in general, from a fear that their bodies are physically inferior, or from a fear that their nakedness leaves their bodies--and their personalities--exposed and unprotected. <b> A very strict moral or religious education that prohibits or stigmatizes nudity can also contribute to the development of gymnophobia. </b> These limiting beliefs 'can create a negative association with nudity from a young age, leading to an irrational fear of it in adult life.
<blockquote>Many people with gymnophobia are unable to participate in sexual activities and may develop a more generalized genophobia, or fear of sex that stems from their gymnophobia. . https://www.verywellmind.com/gymnophobia-fear-of-nudity-2671747 </blockquote>
This site may be able to help:
https://www.mentesabiertaspsicologia.com/blog-psicologia/blog-psicologia/gymnophobia-fear-of-nudity-causes-and-treatment
I wish you the best during this continuing period of difficulty.
I just wanted to be reassuring....
Gymnophobia refers to an actual fear of nudity, but most sufferers with the condition learn how to function in general society despite the condition.
<blockquote>I just don't consider God's actions as immoral. Being that he is the source of truth and righteousness, as the Creator of the universe, it is literally impossible for him to be immoral. </blockquote>
The problem with this position is that it inevitably leads to the justification of a deity which, supposedly, has instigated or authorised mass murder, rape, deceit and mutilation. This justification is known as 'command theory' the notion which proposes that an action's status as morally good is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God. There are serious issues with this and apologists are inevitably left uncomfortable, to say the least.
<blockquote> our own corrupted standards of good and bad compared to a sinless, perfect, holy and just God </blockquote>
Is a morality really 'corrupted' if it condemns the actions listed above? Surely the corrupted morality is that which seeks to present them as good things when clearly they are among the worst forms of behaviour we can think of.
The notion that a supposed God has his own standards, inaccessible to mere mortals, sounds like special pleading, in that God essentially moves in mysterious ways and so we cannot know for sure the standards He works to, what He is thinking etc. This, an argument from ignorance, conveniently avoids having to justify the worst acts of the Almighty. (Oddly enough it does not stop apologists recognising and praising his motives and thoughts, when it suits on other occasions) And yet if one was put on trial for murder would it impress the jury to make such claims? 'Objective' morality and justice, if they exist, does not reply on accepting the inscrutability of motive.
<blockquote>These attributes mean absolutely nothing, since they are defined subjectively, supposedly by the entity in question. </blockquote>
This indeed the case. Objective morality must perforce be free of the bias of personality. But the Xian god is one admitted as being alternatively angry, jealous, loving, hating and forgiving. He also has his 'chosen peoples'.
> The concept of the trinity
Can you explain this concept in terms a child can understand?