Heartland

I don't think Doctor Who went in for the whole absolute good and evil. It ruined a lot of Star Wars for me, though. Though in ways, Star Wars *was* showing different shades of grey, were the Jedi really perfect, or was it simply the only chance the rebels have?

The thing is, at their most basic levels, good and bad aren't things you find in books, they're logical concepts. Good is something that makes people happy and work together as much as possible, and bad is that which disrupts this harmony, usually for selfish means. That's what they are.

But then you ask yourself, what *would* disrupt the harmony, and what *does* truly make people happy?

And that's when you have to *think* and realise that it's not as simple as the bible or other holy text puts it. Yes, there is a real base for right and wrong. There are some things you can tell probably don't really benefit everyone, I hate when people say everything is relative, and murderers aren't wrong in what they do they just "don't agree with them", and they "believe it's wrong". I hate that, and I've gotten beaten down on many boards for even daring to suggest there might be.

The problem is, people have religion for so long giving them "Morals" - once they don't have that, and see this isn't thew absolute - they have nothing, and really believe nothing is right or wrong, and things get confusing. This confusion is an *extreme* in itself and causes many bad things to happen, like people asking questions like "are homophobia and racism REALLY that bad?" and those who use their free speech for nothing but prejudice, hate and anger ending up with more rights to say what they "feel" more than the people they're attacking.

It doesn't take a genius to recognise some of this stuff. You *know* this is wrong, but since everything is "relative", they abuse this despite dealing in absolutes themselves. But that doesn't mean that those people are evil, and the people they are attacking are all good. You can't possibly know the life they've lived.

Some people don't take their lives as well as others - just because their lives aren't as tragic as yours doesn't mean they'll react to them better. This is another factor with skews the simple right and wrong conept.

There are basic absolute concepts of good and evil, based on no one human being really being any better than another. How they apply is anything but.

Batman Begins reflects that wonderfully.

We know that it's right for society to have as little strife and crime as possible, but how do you do that? Do you fight crime or take more drastic matters? What is good to do? What is bad to do? We know it's good to help people, and bad to hurt people, but we have to make sacrifices for the greater good of the world, so which would be right?

The organisation in Begins dealth in absolutes, "The mind of a criminal is a simple one". Batman fought against this. Perhaps the *real* crinimal was failure to see right and wrong aren't usually black and white?

Whereas Superman is "criminals are bad, superman is good."

boudicca wrote:You ain't seen nuthin' til you've seen Mr. Sinister as The Ultimate Superhero

Not seen that before!
Classy Timlad. Very classy.

Rosalie wrote:Whereas Superman is "criminals are bad, superman is good."

Red kryptonite is bad, m'kay?

I don't think shades of grey can be "overdone", since it's how the real world is, and if it is, you can move on to colours.

Wahey.

d00mw0lf wrote:

Dark wrote:Batman and Superman are both rubbish.
Bring on Eric Draven.

GGGggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Yes, d00my, you're a goth. We know. As do the police.

Dark wrote:

d00mw0lf wrote:

Dark wrote:Batman and Superman are both rubbish.
Bring on Eric Draven.

GGGggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Yes, d00my, you're a goth. We know. As do the police.

I still think she's the coolest person on this forum :3

Apart from boudicca when she's wearing those sunglasses, of course.

Dark wrote:

d00mw0lf wrote:

Dark wrote:Batman and Superman are both rubbish.
Bring on Eric Draven.

GGGggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Yes, d00my, you're a goth. We know. As do the police.

Ferk off!
And take those bloody crow comics with ya.
Damn dorty goffiks...

d00mw0lf wrote:

boudicca wrote:You ain't seen nuthin' til you've seen Mr. Sinister as The Ultimate Superhero

Not seen that before!
Classy Timlad. Very classy.

whaaa? it's only about the 5th time she's posted it

hallucienate wrote:

d00mw0lf wrote:

boudicca wrote:You ain't seen nuthin' til you've seen Mr. Sinister as The Ultimate Superhero

Not seen that before!
Classy Timlad. Very classy.

whaaa? it's only about the 5th time she's posted it

Yes, but i don't pay much attention

d00mw0lf wrote:

Dark wrote:

d00mw0lf wrote: GGGggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Yes, d00my, you're a goth. We know. As do the police.

Ferk off!
And take those bloody crow comics with ya.
Damn dorty goffiks...

I liked the Crow long before I was a "goff". I even liked the TV series, in fact. I am evil.

I'm not sure it's as good as Sin City though. A lot of Sin City reminds me a lot of the Crow for some reason.

I love comics. I don't know if I have a favourite. John Constantine is probably my favourite comic book character ever though. Or maybe Delirium.

I f**king hate what they did to John in the "Constantine" movie. Argh. It wasn't a terrible film, and I was almost impressed for the first few moments we see Reeves and thought that he was actually going to try an english accent. Then he opens his f**king mouth.

Why is everyone still trying so hard not to be a "goth"? Didn't Eldritch overdo that joke about 10 years ago?

joke?

Rosalie wrote: Didn't Eldritch overdo that joke about 10 years ago?

you clearly missed the point. bloody Goth

Rosalie wrote:I liked the Crow long before I was a "goff". I even liked the TV series, in fact. I am evil.

The TV series was a bit too stripped down for my liking. Love Mark Dacascos though.

Rosalie wrote:I don't think shades of grey can be "overdone", since it's how the real world is, and if it is, you can move on to colours.

Wahey.

Well that's not very goth, is it?

Shame on you!

(If I lend D00meh my shades, will she then be elevated to a state of Absolute Coolness? )

christophe wrote:

Rosalie wrote: Didn't Eldritch overdo that joke about 10 years ago?

you clearly missed the point. bloody Goth

boudicca wrote:

Rosalie wrote:I don't think shades of grey can be "overdone", since it's how the real world is, and if it is, you can move on to colours.

Wahey.

Well that's not very goth, is it?

Shame on you!

(If I lend D00meh my shades, will she then be elevated to a state of Absolute Coolness? )

I have my own shades. or did untill they got nicked

I liked the way the TV series expanded on things, but it got a bit silly towards the end. "I'm on a mission from God!"

XD

I'm sure that's exactly what James O'Barr had in mind when writing the original comic, a Blues Brothers parody.

Despite the Christian references the Crow was more based off an old Crow god than anything, as explained in one of the little explainy things in the comic itself.

J O'Barr should be your kind of guy though, he's into the "old-school" stuff like Joy Division and Bauhuas. Did you know Eric's face was modelled after Peter Murphy? Bet you didn't. Unless you watched the extras on the DVD, that is.

Also, mission mission mission mission mission mission mission mission UK!

Blasted filter. This is a message board, not a Wah Wah pedal or Analog Synth.

Rosalie wrote:The problem is, people have religion for so long giving them "Morals" - once they don't have that, and see this isn't thew absolute - they have nothing, and really believe nothing is right or wrong, and things get confusing. This confusion is an *extreme* in itself and causes many bad things to happen, like people asking questions like "are homophobia and racism REALLY that bad?" and those who use their free speech for nothing but prejudice, hate and anger ending up with more rights to say what they "feel" more than the people they're attacking.

It doesn't take a genius to recognise some of this stuff. You *know* this is wrong, but since everything is "relative", they abuse this despite dealing in absolutes themselves. But that doesn't mean that those people are evil, and the people they are attacking are all good. You can't possibly know the life they've lived.

Bollocks. False dichotomy. There are more choices for a morality than a) arbitrary morality based on the whim of an imaginary deity or b) moral relativism/nihilism.

Morality, on my view, is a result of the evolution of humanity as a social species; as an evolutionary strategy, co-operation has generally been of more benefit to humanity than has naked rampant competition.

markfiend wrote:

Rosalie wrote:The problem is, people have religion for so long giving them "Morals" - once they don't have that, and see this isn't thew absolute - they have nothing, and really believe nothing is right or wrong, and things get confusing. This confusion is an *extreme* in itself and causes many bad things to happen, like people asking questions like "are homophobia and racism REALLY that bad?" and those who use their free speech for nothing but prejudice, hate and anger ending up with more rights to say what they "feel" more than the people they're attacking.

It doesn't take a genius to recognise some of this stuff. You *know* this is wrong, but since everything is "relative", they abuse this despite dealing in absolutes themselves. But that doesn't mean that those people are evil, and the people they are attacking are all good. You can't possibly know the life they've lived.

Bollocks. False dichotomy. There are more choices for a morality than a) arbitrary morality based on the whim of an imaginary deity or b) moral relativism/nihilism.

Morality, on my view, is a result of the evolution of humanity as a social species; as an evolutionary strategy, co-operation has generally been of more benefit to humanity than has naked rampant competition.

Any post that includes the words "naked" and "rampant" must have some validity.

so? is the TV series worth the money?
I liked the original Crow but hated the sequel's...

Rosalie wrote:Did you know Eric's face was modelled after Peter Murphy?

I did not know that.

markfiend wrote:

Rosalie wrote:The problem is, people have religion for so long giving them "Morals" - once they don't have that, and see this isn't thew absolute - they have nothing, and really believe nothing is right or wrong, and things get confusing. This confusion is an *extreme* in itself and causes many bad things to happen, like people asking questions like "are homophobia and racism REALLY that bad?" and those who use their free speech for nothing but prejudice, hate and anger ending up with more rights to say what they "feel" more than the people they're attacking.

It doesn't take a genius to recognise some of this stuff. You *know* this is wrong, but since everything is "relative", they abuse this despite dealing in absolutes themselves. But that doesn't mean that those people are evil, and the people they are attacking are all good. You can't possibly know the life they've lived.

Bollocks. False dichotomy. There are more choices for a morality than a) arbitrary morality based on the whim of an imaginary deity or b) moral relativism/nihilism.

Morality, on my view, is a result of the evolution of humanity as a social species; as an evolutionary strategy, co-operation has generally been of more benefit to humanity than has naked rampant competition.

I'm not talking about all people, only some people, and the loophole this creates that allows homophobes and racists to still have so much power in this world.

christophe wrote:so? is the TV series worth the money?
I liked the original Crow but hated the sequel's...

Had its moments.

As I alluded to earlier, I'm a big fan of Mark Dacascos (who played the Crow character in the TV series) - excellent martial artist, pretty good actor and a very pretty man.

Not that I'm that way inclined, you understand.

Rosalie wrote:I'm not talking about all people, only some people, and the loophole this creates that allows homophones and racists to still have so much power in this world.

Tee hee.

"Homophones".

smiscandlon wrote:

Rosalie wrote:I'm not talking about all people, only some people, and the loophole this creates that allows homophones and racists to still have so much power in this world.

Tee hee.

"Homophones".

Gay telephones? on our messageboard?!
Whatever next....?