Brad Pitt Rocks!
- Started
- Last post
- 58 Responses
- colin_s0
i was in middle school when the whole legends of the fall/ initial "ooo brad pitt" mania came out and i just hated him out of the fact girls liked him and not me.
anyway point being now years and years later, this guy has not only done some amazing movie roles that have been provocative and noteworthy but his work in new orleans is just fucking unbelievable. kudos a million times over for his efforts.
- gramme0
I love Brad Pitt as an actor, and I think his philanthropic efforts are very commendable and very useful in the lives of downtrodden people (I'd call those efforts Christ-like, even), but I just lost a lot of respect for him at the personal level. I stopped watching shortly after he called Maher's movie "insightful". It's not because of his disdain for organized religion—he's certainly entitled to his opinion—but the implied misunderstandings about middle-road objections to the legal validations of gay marriage, as well as his assessment that Maher's movie was actually worth a damn. The issue of legalizing pot, well I won't even dignify that one with a response.
(Notice I say "middle-road" objections, because there are people who claim to be religious that do in fact hate gays, and are very wrong for doing so; but the middle-road approach is one that accepts people as they are but is not willing to accept all of their actions and choices as legally valid. Because yes, it is possible to separate person from action in a relational sense. We all have intrinsic equal value, but none of us are doing commendable things all of the time, and to deny that fact is to become a push-over. E.g., one can go down to their local homeless shelter and try to befriend and help out drug addicts, all without endorsing their drug addiction.)
We've become a culture that shapes moral standards based on what's currently popular, and on misguided notions of tolerance. I think a lot of people have bastardized the true meaning of tolerance and acceptance. And I think Maher is dead wrong that people who think this way about "tolerance" are "in the closet". Rather, they are very vocal and proud of their stance. Which is fine, we live in a great country where such freedom is allowed, but that also means I'm free to think they're mistaken.
- So what you're saying is you accept gays, but they'll burn for their sins?schjetne
- All of us, myself included, are responsible for our sins, unless we allow Christ to shoulder that burden.gramme
- I believe we're all in the same boat whether we realize it or not.gramme
- Even if marriage is contended - an equal standing (in a legal sense) is something gay couples deserve.lukus_W
- gramme0
I agree with a few things you're saying, BRNK. I too take issue with people who ignore large parts of their so-called holy text in order to reconcile their beliefs and their lifestyle. Another way to define what you describe is idolatry, i.e. putting personal comfort/agenda above God. We all do it in some way shape or form from time to time (since there isn't such thing as a perfectly Christ-like Christian), but some "Christians" are more brazen or misguided about it than others. Oddly enough, I think of fundamentalism as an aberration as well, though some would see this as semantics. In the early 20th century, fundamentalism in Christianity was synonymous with orthodoxy, i.e. believing the Bible to be the inspired, infallible word of God, and all that follows thereafter. Afterwards, some (but not all) adherents of fundamentalism retreated from society out of fear and misunderstanding. They proceeded to build hedges of extra-biblical law around their communities, and before you know it they had wandered far afield. So, these days fundamentalism is a dirty word to many orthodox Christians, myself included.
I wholeheartedly agree with your second paragraph. I will caveat that Jesus' message was about peace, but not a "let's all agree with each other" kind of peace. In fact, to that point he even said that he "came to bring the sword." In context, this doesn't mean Jesus or his followers did/should advocate violence, but it's merely Jesus saying that his ideas were radical, would piss people off, and that many of his followers would die for their faith.
I agree that some beliefs are harmful to the world, such as your examples of pedophilia and racism. I have said here before though, and I think it bears repeating, that (at least in the case of Christianity) people are to blame for atrocities committed in the name of Christ, rather than the other way around. I know Ghandi said something like "I'd like Christ more if people actually acted like him", but in truth one does find, without looking too far, Christians who are kind, humble, patient, and generous people. These people have become this way because of the life-changing power God exerts in the lives of those who belong to him.
About the specific issue of homosexuality. Where's the gay gene you mention, BRNK? Last I heard, it was yet to be found. I'm no scientist, so it's possible you know something I don't. BTW even if there is such a thing, it doesn't change the way I see things. Scientists have found a genetic disposition to alcoholism; and while that explains how some people end up as alcoholics, no one in their right mind considers it to be an excuse. So if we follow your argument about civil rights to its logical conclusion, then genetically-driven alcoholism should also be sanctioned by society, maybe even given a tax break or two, simply because going against one's genetic bent in some areas is surely a high crime.
To that end, I'd still contend that whether there's a gene or not, homosexuality is a degradation of the kind of relationships which were originally intended for mankind. You could even look at it from a naturalistic standpoint, since male and female physically fit together, but male/male, female/female, it doesn't work quite so well... although I believe of course that gender is much more than skin-deep.
- Hey gramme, did you get my email?TheBlueOne
- Yessir, I did. It was a doozy! I plan to reply soon. :)gramme
- alcoholism is harmful to society... gay marriage is not...SigDesign
- gramme - i've read and agreed with a great many things you've said on this site -> but this intellectual rationalisation for homophobia isn't one of them.lukus_W
- homophobia isn't one of them.lukus_W
- version30
true romance is on cable right now :D
- schjetne0
That's quite an essay there.
- Coffeemaker0
that killed it. well done.
*pats self on back
- monkeyshine0
...this thread reeks of man-crush
- ceiling_cat0
It's better to be lean like Bradd Pitt
- 3030
Who is Tyler Durden? :)
- harlequino0
Nice thread...."sir."
- baseline_shift0
What a disgusting display of ass kissing.
Bill Maher is a self righteous, pretentious, and misleading fuck.
And Religioulous was crap. Talk about MTV style, 'find the idiots and argue with them' type of reality show bullshit.
- < spot on with the "find the idiots & argue with them" approach. Well put.gramme
- facts are facts though so his points remain releventversion3
- No, because he gets "facts" from a bunch of misguided fringe types.gramme
- what 'facts' are presented in religious? It was all inflammatory rhetoric in a Michael Moore styled 'documentary'baseline_shift
- It was very over-egged... but a lot of religious propaganda is equally as biased -> perhaps the intention of the film was to highlight this?lukus_W
- highlight this bias?lukus_W
- identity0
I wouldnt want to get in an argument with either Gramme or BRNK
:-)
- CygnusZero40
Good actor, keeps very busy outside of acting. Hard to really take shots at the guy because he's better looking and richer than all of us. Just makes you look like a pompous designer that noone cares about.
- CygnusZero40
Good actor, keeps very busy outside of acting. Hard to really take shots at the guy because he's better looking and richer than all of us. Just makes you look like a pompous designer that noone cares about.
- utopian0
very annoying and preachy...