Cantousent Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I defy you to justify why someone on a religious website should avoid the topic of religion in their opinions. If you are linking recourses that are "websites that provide information about "family friendly" video games" you should not link to a website that is rating things based of their "Christian friendliness." That is deceiving for parents who are simply looking at things that might be good for their child and do not care about whether a game breaks biblical law. I don't understand. We're not only trying to protect the children, but now we have to protect the parents? The parents' obligation is to read this material in order to make an informed decision. Do you contend that religion doesn't exist? Hmm. Since it's clear that religion does, indeed, exist, it becomes an issue for parents trying to weigh views about what their children see. "Blblical law" seems as valid as any other basis for weighing values. I was mostly unconcerned about this topic at the beginning, but I'm starting wonder why exactly this example somehow damages the public in any way. Sounds like your crusading to me. Parents will weigh these issues and ideas and come up with what should be an informed decision. That's how it's supposed to work. What you suggest actually amounts to censorship, since you don't object to the idea of "family friendly," only that religion should not have any say on the matter. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadly_Nightshade Posted November 26, 2007 Author Share Posted November 26, 2007 "Blblical law" seems as valid as any other basis for weighing values. So children should be stoned for being unruly -as should anyone who missuses the word "god"-? Biblical law is both laughable and dangerous at the same time, if only because so many nuts believe in it... "Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum." -Hurlshot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveThaiBinh Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 So long as the link doesn't pretend to be a full endorsement, and the reviewer doesn't pretend not to have a religious agenda, it's for parents to decide how much weight to give a particular review. We have to trust their judgement. I just cannot see why that particular site has any merit, other then its value to religious Christians, or why it should be linked. It's there as part of a mix, which I imagine is intended to give an idea of the range of sites that's out there. Religious parents would presumably want to know that such religious-inspired review sites exist, and the ESRB is doing its job well if it is able to inform parents of that without forcing anything onto non-religious parents. "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 (edited) "Blblical law" seems as valid as any other basis for weighing values. So children should be stoned for being unruly -as should anyone who missuses the word "god"-? Biblical law is both laughable and dangerous at the same time, if only because so many nuts believe in it... Extremism is the culprit here. All extremism is dangerous. Anti-religious extremism just as much as the religious extremists. Edited November 26, 2007 by Tale "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 "Blblical law" seems as valid as any other basis for weighing values. So children should be stoned for being unruly -as should anyone who missuses the word "god"-? Biblical law is both laughable and dangerous at the same time, if only because so many nuts believe in it... Please address my statements, not ones you've fabricated for the purpose of argument. Parents will weigh these views and make an informed decision. By the way, could you please cite, in the material you've presented thus far, where the ESRB or links from its webpage advocate stoning children as a matter of public policy. I know you've gone a bit gonzo over the issue, but let's not fall into complete insanity. :Cant's disappointed icon: Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadly_Nightshade Posted November 26, 2007 Author Share Posted November 26, 2007 It's there as part of a mix, which I imagine is intended to give an idea of the range of sites that's out there. Religious parents would presumably want to know that such religious-inspired review sites exist, and the ESRB is doing its job well if it is able to inform parents of that without forcing anything onto non-religious parents. But why link there, and not a "hive mind" type site, were anyone can add their own review, that is similar to all of the other review sites? "Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum." -Hurlshot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 It's there as part of a mix, which I imagine is intended to give an idea of the range of sites that's out there. Religious parents would presumably want to know that such religious-inspired review sites exist, and the ESRB is doing its job well if it is able to inform parents of that without forcing anything onto non-religious parents. But why link there, and not a "hive mind" type site, were anyone can add their own review, that is similar to all of the other review sites? I could live with this arrangement, personally. I think they'd still have to keep an eye on it for folks who really do advocate violent or dangerous behavior and not just something one person or another find offensive. Hell, I find a lot of stuff offensive, but I usually just shrug and figure that exposure to offensive comments and ideas is the price we pay for living in a free society. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadly_Nightshade Posted November 26, 2007 Author Share Posted November 26, 2007 "Blblical law" seems as valid as any other basis for weighing values. So children should be stoned for being unruly -as should anyone who missuses the word "god"-? Biblical law is both laughable and dangerous at the same time, if only because so many nuts believe in it... Please address my statements, not ones you've fabricated for the purpose of argument. If you are claiming Biblical law is "as valid as any other basis" you should address the material contained within Biblical law and not scoot around it. Do you or do you not acknowledge that stoning children is acceptable under Biblical law and how that makes it "as valid as any other basis?" "Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum." -Hurlshot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 It's there as part of a mix, which I imagine is intended to give an idea of the range of sites that's out there. Religious parents would presumably want to know that such religious-inspired review sites exist, and the ESRB is doing its job well if it is able to inform parents of that without forcing anything onto non-religious parents. But why link there, and not a "hive mind" type site, were anyone can add their own review, that is similar to all of the other review sites? Perhaps, if you find one that's mature and doesn't emphasize just how idiotic people over the internet are and is not commercial (speaking of Amazon.com here), they'll put it up if you simply link it to them and recommend it. "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadly_Nightshade Posted November 26, 2007 Author Share Posted November 26, 2007 I think they'd still have to keep an eye on it for folks who really do advocate violent or dangerous behavior and not just something one person or another find offensive. Oh sure, but it would be a better indicator then one person's view. For example, Common Sense, although I disagree with some of its reviews, shows you not only what they think, but also what everyone else who reviews the game on their site thinks. "Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum." -Hurlshot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 "Blblical law" seems as valid as any other basis for weighing values. So children should be stoned for being unruly -as should anyone who missuses the word "god"-? Biblical law is both laughable and dangerous at the same time, if only because so many nuts believe in it... Please address my statements, not ones you've fabricated for the purpose of argument. If you are claiming Biblical law is "as valid as any other basis" you should address the material contained within Biblical law and not scoot around it. Do you or do you not acknowledge that stoning children is acceptable under Biblical law and how that makes it "as valid as any other basis?" What the hell are you talking about? So, the problem isn't that the fellow's basis is his religious beliefs, but that he doesn't adhere to them properly. ...And if he did, you'd have a better reason to be offended. Really? Come on. Now, with all those religious nuts who believe in it. I mean, let's look at this: "[a]t this time the right-wing of America is pandering to religious nuts, so they're about the same thing in my opinion...[/b]" So, you've come across a large number of these "religious nuts" who advocate stoning children? To repeat myself, don't put words in my mouth to further your argument. You're the one who brought up stoning, and then only as a cheap ploy to win the argument. Bash biblical law for being inconsistant all you want. Bash adherants to that law for the same reason. ...Just don't pretend that the site in question is dangerous for beliefs they have not stated. Furthermore, a person can advocate stoning children for unruly behavior. That's part of democracy. However, creating such laws and making them public policy isn't going to happen. ...And are you really saying that all those "religious nuts" would back such a policy? Really? This is a test, because I'd like to hear you state for the record that religious folks would vote for a candidate who includes child stoning as a plank in their election platform. Let's get back to a discussion of the ESRB and get away from this ridiculous, fear mongering talk about religious nuts stoning children. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveThaiBinh Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 Closed at original poster's request. "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts