Post your unpopular opinions

[Minath Khalsi 195]

I don't know id this counts, but I only know of 4 people who actualy likethese bands...

Blood on the Dance floor is amazing, so is Blood on The Dance Floor, Black Veil Brides, Sleeping with Sirens, and Asking Alexandria.

 

And communism would be great if it actually worked.

I don't think any of the Mane six pes are cute. exept Owlawishes. He's freggin adorable

[Kazuki Fuse 534]

If this is true, then I see no reason for anyone to be offended over someome calling anyone "broken." He didn't say they're bad. He said they're broken. I'm fairly certain he meant in that aspect, but not entirely as people. I believe he is right. They are broken. But I would add not completely. They are functional, they (depending on the specific individual) can be intelligent, they can be anything. However, they are broken in regards to sexuality, because they are not conforming to what it is humanity NEEDS to do in order to survive as a species. But that's fine. So, really, if you're taking offense to them being considered "broken", you're the one(s) that are putting them into the bad lighting, and not accepting them for who/what they are.

 

You are joking right? What humanity NEEDS is to decrease the amount of copulation in the world. Hell, I say we need more homosexuality in the world, one: so it becomes more widely accepted, and two: so our population growth may slow down a bit.

[MeowLord Noraasha 135]

This might be the semi unpopular one:
- I strongly dislike when people perceive characters in the show as potential pets for themselves. Uhm It's weird, selfish, and kinda humanlike.

 

- Generalization is so bad, yet most of us do that every day, without even trying to perceive from different perspective.

- It's almost sad when I see people dating, and observe how they look for partners. No wonder they end up divorced so quickly.

[Skrinky 25]

- Apple is a bad company

- Iphones are bad in every way I can think of

- Macs are overpriced pieces of crap

- Ubuntu/Lubuntu/Kubuntu is best OS

- Windows xp was really really really really bad

- Wrath of the Lich King was a fun expansion

- I really like WoW private servers (mostly because I can just play Vanillla, TBC and WotLK on them)

[DusK 1,264]

The conclusion was not that if you can't reproduce then you can't get married or have sex, the conclusion was that since two men cannot biologically reproduce together, That liking other men is not right.

"I'm not saying that having sex while being unable to reproduce is wrong, I'm just saying that having sex while being unable to reproduce is wrong."

 

[Sunny Fox 5,950]

Lets try taking it to the extremes.

 

In World A everyone is gay or lesbian.

 

In World B nobody is gay or lesbian.

 

What do you think the conditions (regarding reproduction) of the two worlds would be?

 

If I had to guess, I would say that World A is going to have a big reproduction problem while World B would not. Do you disagree? I'm interested to see what you have to say on this.

 Anyway, this argument is reductio ad absurdum, and is a tricky business to get right. You might be right in that World A condition, the probable result would be extinction (I can think of a few ways it could be avoided, not even counting intentional donations of sperm, but I'll refrain). However, the most extreme case does not prove the less extreme cases, let alone what we could reasonably expect to be the situation in real life. As long as enough people continue to be heterosexual, those who are homosexual can continue their non-reproductive, married lives without significant harm to society. 

 

 

Let's take another example. One could use your logic as follows:

World A, no one votes.

World B, everyone votes.

 

In world A, the democratic political system would collapse, and a dictatorship would probably arise, while in World B, we still have Superman fighting for truth, justice, and the World B way. This doesn't mean not voting is a crime. And it certainly doesn't mean the collapse of the political system as long as enough people vote.

 

If you were to deny gay people the right to get married based purely on the inability to procreate, as seems to be your stance, then you should by rights oppose the right to marry of heterosexual couples who are unable (or even unwilling) to conceive due to other issues, such as either of the pair being infertile, or the woman being over the age of menopause.

[Bohtty 1,775]

"I'm not saying that having sex while being unable to reproduce is wrong, I'm just saying that having sex while being unable to reproduce is wrong."

That hurt my brain to read. You seem to be having trouble with basic english so let me clarify. Sex does not always mean reproduction. You can love someone and not reproduce, get married or have sex with them. I thought that was pretty common knowledge, but apparently not...

 

 

 Anyway, this argument is reductio ad absurdum, and is a tricky business to get right. You might be right in that World A condition, the probable result would be extinction (I can think of a few ways it could be avoided, not even counting intentional donations of sperm, but I'll refrain). However, the most extreme case does not prove the less extreme cases, let alone what we could reasonably expect to be the situation in real life. As long as enough people continue to be heterosexual, those who are homosexual can continue their non-reproductive, married lives without significant harm to society. 

 

If you were to deny gay people the right to get married based purely on the inability to procreate, as seems to be your stance, then you should by rights oppose the right to marry of heterosexual couples who are unable (or even unwilling) to conceive due to other issues, such as either of the pair being infertile, or the woman being over the age of menopause.

 

 

That was in response to someone else. It wasn't to imply that we would ever be in that situation. It was simply to try and explain to the person who i quoted, why I consider them broken. The basic answer to World A is that everyone would go extinct while World B would be relatively fine. Of course now we have technology and they could possibly work together, but aside from that everyone would basically go extinct in World A.  

 

Actually as seen by my stance, I think that gays should be allowed to marry. Someone proved it wasn't a heterosexual only institution and then cited their sources.

 

 

I'm sure there will always be an initiative to continue the human race. Of course you're giving rather vague hypothetical situations seeing that I can highly doubt seeing a world with only Gays and Lesbians as opposed to one world where everyone is assumed Heterosexual. We also have technology, and with that we have sperm donor banks and artificial wombs. Also Gay and Lesbian couples would want to seek children to raise, so their option is sperm donor and artificial wombs, etc. You can call this unnatural I suppose, but it is possible in your hypothetical example.

 

But I'm rather confused with your objective approach, you claim those that are inclined to love someone of a gender or person that is incompatible of engaging in reproductive intercourse is broken. But what if sex is not the main component in a relationship? I know I see it that way at the moment, I rather just love someone for who they are and not get involved with sexual intercourse. Do I control that though? Most likely not, I cannot force myself to have sex if it does not appeal to me. Does that qualify me as " broken " ? Maybe if someone was a Eugenicist and looking for the able man and thought that sure, not to point fingers at you though.

 

Truth is, we all have these odd subjective standards of what is " broken ", as Stryker has stated, Humanity has many broken elements that most of us can't control or we voluntarily engage in. Someone with Autism may have some mental deficiencies, but does that make them broken and not perfect? After all, many brilliant scientists and mathematicians had Autism and the like and outnumbered many groups of non-Autistic academic individuals, but even them too are not broken because they cannot grasp the high standard that these Autistic intellectuals have.

 

 

I don't think World A would be able to even get that far as Erio has said.

 

My argument has very little to do with the actual relationship. Reproduction is, in my opinion, the only known goal of most living things. I does not mean we have to achieve it or even try to. You're decision to not want sex with the opposite gender is your choice. I was under the impression that it was not a gays choice to not want to love the opposite gender and as such I would imagine sex with that gender to not be very appealing. 

 

Finally someone has said something that I agree with. Yes almost every person is broken. Autistic people are broken. Stupidity isn't being broken unless that stupidity is caused by brain damage or a deficiency somewhere in the body. I think that most people are broken including myself. It's very rare to find someone that does not have some sort of disease or injury.

 

Well you're so abrasive about it, like unreasonably so...Also "designed", do you believe in a god? If you're Christian then I don't believe we need to discuss futher, also do you carry a different attitude towards gay people? Something others would call prejudice? You realize the human race is stable enough at this point that having a few gay people would be benefitial to the population increase?

You'd be abrasive too if you had to repeat the same thing several times because others can't read what you wrote the first time. I don't believe in God, I'm atheist. I don't carry any different attitude towards gay people. I am aware that gay people can be beneficial. You make it sound like I hate gays.

 

No, the brain is actually just fine, that's like saying people who are left-handed have a brain not in working order, it's merely a different shade of a color. You realize it's not impossible for a gay man to father children right? Being gay doesn't turn off your testicles or ovaries...It's just not your personal preference to have sex with the opposite gender.

Being left handed or right handed is something that is trivial and does not hinder reproduction. Being gay does present an obstacle of some kind towards reproduction.

 

If you think sex without reproduction is fine then why are gays "wrong" for doing what you consider "ok"? You argue that having a condition such as homosexuality that hinders your reproduction is wrong, but having sex for recreation is ok? Broken is a pretty harsh term to use by the way. It's not like having a cold, it's someones identity.

Gays are not defined by having sex with other men. Unless I am mistaken, it was simply to love another man. I don't care if they have sex. Yes having sex for recreation is ok, it's not like you can't reproduce afterwards if you wanted. Maybe this is where we differ. I don't see my sexuality as having anything to do with my damn identity. Sounds pretty shallow and stupid to me. Also broken my be harsh, but if you look at the definition, it's not really that harsh. Having a cold and being gay are both cases of being broken. 

 

 

Your argument, what does society lose by having a few gay people? Why are you so strongly defending this idea that gay people are "broken" even though in today's society it doesn't matter, as in, our population is stable, we don't need more babies and they don't hurt anyone.

 

I do disagree actually, you're providing a scenario without some kind of history, what's the cause of the mass homo/hetero sexuality in each world? If it's evolutionarily dictated then obviously it would benefit reproduction, if not, then I'd argue humans are not stupid, if the fate of a species is an issue then obviously people would reproduce merely to save it. You're scratching the bottom of the barrel merely to fuel this debate over semantics and personal identity while failing to see it's impact on modern society, which overall pretty neutral because again...we don't need more babies, a modern society such as ares doesn't need to be held up to this prehistoric notion of "what's natural".

 

If it doesn't hurt anyone, why do you regard it with such harsh terminology? Why is being gay, where you can infact reproduce if society needed it, worse than being infertile or sterile?

 

Do you believe gay people deserve the same rights as straight people? (not marriage, you mentioned that earlier)

Society loses nothing. I am defending the idea because they are broken. I know they don't hurt anyone.

 

They were born that way. That entire argument had nothing to do with you or anyone else except the person I quoted. You're reading too much into it at any rate, the basis is that they would have a problem while World B would have no such problem.

 

I don't think it's harsh terminology I just think all of you are babies. Being gay is not worse than being infertile or sterile. It's basically the same broken to me. Gays can technically reproduce, but the argument is that being gay puts forth an obstruction of some kind that heterosexuality does not.

 

I'm pretty damn sure I mention this before, but yes I believe they should have the same rights as heterosexual people. Even marriage as I mention earlier. I don't consider marriage a right though so it's kind of pointless.

 

I will say this one more time because people clearly missed it. I do not think gays are worse people than myself. I think they deserve as many rights as I have. I treat them exactly the same as a heterosexual person. I don't give a shit what they do. I don't care if they get married. I don't care if they have sex. I merely posted an opinion that gays are broken and everyone thought they knew what I was saying and replied. As such everyone has totally missed what I was saying. Gays are broken just like people with colds, cancer, autism, diabetes, red eye, the plague or any other disease or injury. By the definition of broken, if you have a physical or mental injury, abnormality or a disease then those things are obstructing something in your body to do what it is suppose to and is therefore broken to some degree.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Bohtty

[Darke Pony 27]

Unpopular Opinions: the Final Fantasy Edition

 

- Cait Sith was one of the best characters in Final Fantasy VII and I liked him more than Cloud

- Tidus wasn't that bad of a protagonist

- IV and IX had the best cast of characters

- VI and VII aren't that great, and are actually my least favorite games in the series(so far)

- Squall from VIII was the best main lead in the entire series

- The sphere grid was the one of the best ability system in the game

- X-2 wasn't that bad, and had one of the best battle systems in the series

- VIII and IX are my favorite games in the main series

- The original Tactics is my favorite game in the entire franchise

- Tactics Advance was a great successor to the original game, despite the radical shift

- Wakka is cooler than Auron

This.

THIS.

Aww...

This ^-^

Definitely this...

 

 

Final Fantasy was a brilliant collection of games...some of the older ones were brilliant too, even if the graphics looked like a Minecraft Cosplay with beer goggles.

[Lightning Fluttershy 1,844]

Asking Alexandria.

I love Asking Alexandria. One of my favorite bands actually.

 

 

 

More of my generally unpopular opinions:

I don't really like meeting new people or making friends in real life.

I'd prefer to stay at home with my laptop then travel or go on vacation.

Skyrim is the best Elder Scrolls game.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Lightning Fluttershy

[DusK 1,264]

That hurt my brain to read. You seem to be having trouble with basic english so let me clarify. Sex does not always mean reproduction. You can love someone and not reproduce, get married or have sex with them. I thought that was pretty common knowledge, but apparently not...

If it hurt your brain to read adult-level English, maybe you are the one having reading comprehension issues here. Jus' saying.

 

To get back at the argument at hand, you're contradicting yourself. Your very last post before this one expressed that any two people who are unable to reproduce "liking eachother" is wrong.

 

So give it to me straight: Which is it? Is it okay for people unable to reproduce to have sex? Consider that, if the answer is "yes", then your entire argument against gay marriage holds absolutely no basis whatsoever. If the answer is "no", you might wanna stop posting self-contradictory messages like the one I just quoted.

 

One more thing I should mention: Research by Brock University of Ontario has proven that people who hold socially-conservative viewpoints and prejudices, such as those you're expressing in this thread, generally have lower IQs than those who don't. Reseach by the London Insitutue of Cognitive Neuroscience has also proven that conservatives have an enlarged right amygdala, the part of the brain responsible for emtional reactions, particularly negative ones such as fear and hate, and this enlargement results in their malformed brains sort of overriding their logic centers, causing the person to reject information, no matter how true, that contradicts their preconceptions.

 

So if that's too long, here's the short version: As a social conservative, you're more broken than a gay person. Have fun with that.

Edited January 10, 2013 by DusK

[Shiki 5,855]

You are joking right? What humanity NEEDS is to decrease the amount of copulation in the world. Hell, I say we need more homosexuality in the world, one: so it becomes more widely accepted, and two: so our population growth may slow down a bit.

I was speaking in terms of what we "needed" to do when we were more primitive of a species. However, at this point, I think it would be best to say that we have advanced to the point in which we've adapted enough in order to consider homosexuals NOT broken, because nowadays, we have technology available to us to keep them "functional", meaning they can have kids and all that stuff. But I will agree that, if we're discussing our old, old cavemen-leveled selves, then yes, homos were considered broken.

 

I guess that's what I wanted to say from the beginning, bit could not word it. Gays were considered broken way back when, but now, I suppose they are not. Guess that's my view on the matter. :3c

[Bohtty 1,775]

If it hurt your brain to read adult-level English, maybe you are the one having reading comprehension issues here. Jus' saying. 

 

To get back at the argument at hand, you're contradicting yourself. Your very last post before this one expressed that any two people who are unable to reproduce "liking eachother" is wrong.

 

So give it to me straight: Which is it? Is it okay for people unable to reproduce to have sex? Consider that, if the answer is "yes", then your entire argument against gay marriage holds absolutely no basis whatsoever. If the answer is "no", you might wanna stop posting self-contradictory messages like the one I just quoted.

 

One more thing I should mention: Research by Brock University of Ontario has proven that people who hold socially-conservative viewpoints and prejudices, such as those you're expressing in this thread, generally have lower IQs than those who don't. Reseach by the London Insitutue of Cognitive Neuroscience has also proven that conservatives have an enlarged right amygdala, the part of the brain responsible for emtional reactions, particularly negative ones such as fear and hate, and this enlargement results in their malformed brains sort of overriding their logic centers, causing the person to reject information, no matter how true, that contradicts their preconceptions.

 

So if that's too long, here's the short version: As a social conservative, you're more broken than a gay person. Have fun with that. 

My brain didn't hurt to read "adult-level" English. It hurt because I can't actually believe that someone like you actually exists. It's frightening. I hope you are still in school...

 

The answer is yes.

I haven't been arguing against gay marriage since you posted your sources. 

What you quoted has no contradictions at all... You may want to consider rereading what contradiction means...'

 

Well thats a good thing because I am not conservative in many ways nor am I prejudice. Well, prejudice has many meanings of which some apply to me, you and virtually everyone I know. I think, however, that you were referring to " an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics" of which I have none.

 

Since I don't really follow politics at all, I wasn't quite sure how conservative I was. So I took this quiz lol. http://www.blogthings.com/howliberalorconservativeareyouquiz/ It said I was 50/50. In the social issues category it gave me 25% conservative and 75% liberal. 

 

Your stupidly baffles me. You claim that research applies to me, but I changed my view when you presented evidence and sources.

 

Also I don't believe in someone being "more" broken than someone else. You're either broken or you aren't. Even if there was, why would I care? For that to bother me would imply that I thought I was superior to gay people and if you thought I thought that then that would mean you didn't actually read my last post.

[Modphase 1,271]

ACDC is an awesome band and their songs are amazing. Same with a lot of other rock bands. I also think Dubstep is crap and an absolute waste of time.

[DusK 1,264]

My brain didn't hurt to read "adult-level" English. It hurt because I can't actually believe that someone like you actually exists.

Well, people like you tend to believe a lot of things that conflict with reality.

 

Your stupidly baffles me.

Heh. Says the guy calling everyone broken.

 

I'm gonna test your reasonability, though. Answer this question: Do you still agree with the statements quoted below?

What it really boils down to is that someone who is homosexual cannot reproduce with other men. Therefore, the desire to be with other men is not right.

the conclusion was that since two men cannot biologically reproduce together, That liking other men is not right.

Edited January 10, 2013 by DusK

[Bohtty 1,775]

Well, people like you tend to believe a lot of things that conflict with reality.

Like?

 

 

Heh. Says the guy calling everyone broken.

Are you implying that you are a perfect human being?

 

 

I'm gonna test your reasonability, though. Answer this question: Do you still agree with the statements quoted below?

Yes. Although right is not quite the correct word. "Correct" is the correct word. Homosexuality is not correct. 

[DusK 1,264]

Like?

Like homosexuality being "wrong".

 

Are you implying that you are a perfect human being?

Such a thing doesn't exist.

 

Yes.

Then you've contradicted yourself, as those opinions conflict with a "yes" answer to the question I asked before.

 

Although right is not quite the correct word. "Correct" is the correct word. Homosexuality is not correct. 

Homosexuality is really no less "correct" than being black, or short, or blue-eyed, so I'm not seeing your point here. If you're arguing that homosexuality is wrong based solely on it being some sort of "anomaly" in the human form, then really, any variation among humans from whatever arbitrary standard you've set is "wrong" or "incorrect". And that's a really, really closed-minded viewpoint to have.

Edited January 10, 2013 by DusK

[Bohtty 1,775]

Like homosexuality being "wrong".

 

Such a thing doesn't exist.

 

Then you've contradicted yourself, as those opinions conflict with a "yes" answer to the question I asked before.

 

Homosexuality is really no less "correct" than being black, or short, or blue-eyed, so I'm not seeing your point here. If you're arguing that homosexuality is wrong based solely on it being some sort of "anomaly" in the human form, then really, any variation among humans other than whatever arbitrary standard you've set is "wrong" or "incorrect". And that's a really, really closed-minded viewpoint to have.

I just said right/wrong were not the correct words. replace it with correct.

 

Exactly, everyone is broken to some degree. You're last post would imply that you are or you know of someone who is perfect. (protip: thats a contradiction)

 

Please quote the contradiction that I made.

 

Being black, blue-eyed or short do not prevent you from reproducing. 

Two men cannot reproduce together. That is a fact.

While still possible, being homosexual puts of more of an obstacle in ones way when reproducing. Disregarding technology.

Therefore, since it was not how the human was designed to work, it is not correct. Correct meaning free from error. The error being that they are attracted to men and not women. Is that false? If so, tell me where the false part is and why.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Bohtty

[Yellow Diamond 7,565]

Folks, please limit this thread to sharing unpopular opinions. If you wish to debate them, either do it via PM or make a separate topic. Anything beyond this point which features a debate overtaking the thread will be treated as off-topic.

 

Do bear in mind that posting an unpopular opinion is not an excuse to be rude or outright offensive. If you have a particular opinion which you know may truly offend your fellow members, keep it to yourself.

[DusK 1,264]

Edited to reflect the admin's last post, which I missed. If you really wanna learn just how wrong you are, Bohtty, feel free to shoot me a PM.

Edited January 10, 2013 by DusK

[Le Kvlt Dawn 2,364]

Let's see...

 

-I thought Justin Bieber was cool a few years back (when he peaked in his fame, and everyone hated on him).

-I HATE Disney channel's sitcoms.

-I never liked anything from McDonald's.

-I enjoy the Twilight Saga movies (excited to watch Breaking Dawn PII with my mom).

-Karate is USELESS and Kung Fu is AWESOME.

-I am a top notch conservative, I always listen to Rush and Hannity, and Fox News is my favorite channel.

-I don't believe in gay marriage (BIG one there, sheesh). <_<

-Global warming is FAKE.

-Michael Jackson was my roll model.

-I am a Mormon.

-I hate rage face that goes; "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-".

-I hate basketball, football, soccer, and almost any sports that only involve one ball (Parkour is awesome because it takes two).

.

 

..

 

...

 

Oh, and I also watch My Little Pony.

Mormonism is probably the most ridiculous religion out there. I thought what's written in the Bible was odd but, Mormonism takes that a step further. 

Oh yea and Octavia is WAY beter than DJ-PON3.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Neighvana666

[Beat Shock 581]

Mormonism is probably the most ridiculous religion out there. I thought what's written in the Bible was odd but, Mormonism takes that a step further. 

Oh yea and Octavia is WAY beter than DJ-PON3.

 

 

I posted this on the 'unpopular opinions' thread, because obviously everyone hates mormons!

 

Oh, and I like DJ-PON3 as much as Octavia.

[Le Kvlt Dawn 2,364]

I posted this on the 'unpopular opinions' thread, because obviously everyone hates mormons!

 

Oh, and I like DJ-PON3 as much as Octavia.

Well I hate almost all religions. The only ones I don't hate are Buddhism, Paganism, Jainism and Satanism (both LaVeyan and Theistic). I also hate Capitalism and dubstep.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Neighvana666

[Jymm 49]

I believe Final Fantasy 7 is the most overrated game of all time (I've played most FF games and 7 is my second least favourite after 2)

I believe Sephiroth is the least successful villain of all FF games.

I don't like PC gaming, I prefer consoles. Most of the games I play on PC are exclusives (e.g. League of Legends) or games that I can mod (e.g. Skyrim)

I don't enjoy PVP gaming very much, I prefer single player or co-op games. This is why I could never get into TF2 and most of my games on League of Legends are against bots.

I enjoy listening to and playing bass guitar over electric or acoustic guitars. There's something about a well played bass line that sends shivers down my spine. 

... I'm not a big fan of Rainbow Dash.

[Kamil 315]

I think Gangnam Style is a legitimately good song, but don't like the fact that it's popular.

 

Because,

It made liking K-Pop cool,

Which means that, ever since Gangnam Style came out, I officially liked K-Pop before it was cool.

 

It makes me feel so hipster.

[Flutterbee 92]

Others have doubled dipped so here I go for round 2.

 

1.  Penut butter has one of the nastiest smells in the world.

 

2.  Their are two religions that I cannot accept as legitimate and would not trust anyone that claims either of them.  I will not state which two in interest of possibly protecting my life.  Any other religion I can at least accept even if I disagree completely

 

3.  Final Fantasy 7 is over-rated

 

4.  First person shooters suck

 

5.  People that play video games are not gamers.  Gamers at a minimum play several table-top games.  They may play video games as well though.

 

6.  Allowing computers to control the world may just be exactly what we need.

 

7.  Minecraft is a dumb game.

 

8.  Anyone that has more than 3 kids is hurting the planet.  People that have no kids are heroes.

 

9.  Both the republican and Democratic parties are horrible and destroying this country.

 

10.  People should be able to do anything they want as long as they do not do harm to any other person or animal.

 

11.  Agnostics are the only ones that are 100% correct.  They are the only ones that admit they do not know.

 

12.  Rodeo's should be illegal

 

13.  13 is a lucky number

Edited January 12, 2013 by Flutterbee