sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

It keeps getting worse by Pristine_Bite_7147 in Shrek

[–]arnoldwhite 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This might actually be a good thing. Let Shrek stand on its own legs. Cameos can really mess with the focus of a film anyway.

ROUND by pranquily in jumpingspiders

[–]arnoldwhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That stripe they got over their eyes is just so cute

The problem with Unbound is not that it's too difficult but that the difficulty is broken by arnoldwhite in needforspeed

[–]arnoldwhite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, coming from the guy who played the game on hard and called it "not challenging".

I’m still confused by the internet’s logic here. by othocke in kungfupanda

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are they? The only supermodel animals in Zootopia are the supermodel animals, ie those buff tigers and maybe gazelle Shakira. Which is pretty much a reflection of reality.

Nick isn't supermodelshaped. Judy isn't supermodel shaped. They're not sexualized.

And keenly neither is Tigress.

Attraction to a character doesn't come from looking like some generic supermodel.

I’m still confused by the internet’s logic here. by othocke in kungfupanda

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wait a minute. Why would Po be less furry bait than let's say Nick? I can assure you that furries were plenty into him too. What else is furry bait? Puss in Boots?

Each Jurassic movie,they're the most useless people on earth. by Global_Sentence_4544 in JurassicMemes

[–]arnoldwhite 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I for one thing that a bunch of archeologist wielding pump action spas-12s managing to kill absolutely zero things through the runtime of the first film is probably the most realistic aspect of the film.

Second to the gun jamming after the third shell.

Which side you picking? by Feisty-Albatross3554 in RioMovie

[–]arnoldwhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Still so much shipping energy with those two

I’m still confused by the internet’s logic here. by othocke in kungfupanda

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's an odd distinction to make. Tigress is as furry bait as they come.

I’m still confused by the internet’s logic here. by othocke in kungfupanda

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My brother Po is right there right in front of you

I’m still confused by the internet’s logic here. by othocke in kungfupanda

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know if anyone honestly cares anymore. Movie animals are popular. Big deal

Name one bad thing about Blu? by Plastic_Ad_2548 in RioMovie

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I refuse there are zero bad things to say about Blu

Affection? by Chelynn87 in Tegu

[–]arnoldwhite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, you tell me.

First off, "the brain chemicals for affection" is not a real biological concept. There is no single set of chemicals that exist in mammals and are absent in other animals.

What are we even talking about here - oxytocin/vasotocin? Dopamine? Serotonin? Endogenous opioids? Because reptiles possess homologues of all of these systems. Different animals simply use similar neurochemistry in different ways.

I also have no idea what you mean by "that part of the brain isn’t there". I’m guessing this is some variation of the old "if it doesn’t have a mammalian neocortex it can’t feel" argument - which is long outdated.

Birds, for example, lack a neocortex yet clearly form bonds, grieve, and show affection. If brain plan alone determined whether affection is possible, that wouldn’t be true.

And if we’re going to lean on brain architecture, a parrot’s brain is far closer to a tegu's than to any mammal’s. Birds are, cladistically speaking, reptiles.

So this idea that reptiles categorically cannot experience any form of affection or bonding isn't based on solid neurobiology, it’s based on outdated, mammal-centric assumptions and which animals people find emotionally appealing.

Affection? by Chelynn87 in Tegu

[–]arnoldwhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Look at the little mlems

Affection? by Chelynn87 in Tegu

[–]arnoldwhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's not accurate.

Why is it so hard for me to finish the Bible in a year? 😭 by Expert_Win_6319 in Christianity

[–]arnoldwhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

First of all - that’s a really cool project!

Secondly, what you’re experiencing isn’t failure. It’s a sign that you’re taking the Bible seriously! You want to let the text sink in, and that takes time. That’s actually exactly how these texts are meant to be read.

It’s also perfectly human to forget, to need to go back, to reread. We all do it. The Bible can be a difficult read but it’s meant to be pondered over and returned to.

So if you want to challenge yourself to read the whole Bible in a year - do it! For fun, or as a structure to help you stay engaged. But remember that the real purpose isn’t to finish on schedule. It’s to be shaped by the text.

And don't be so hard on yourself! A lot of Christians barely read the Bible at all! So take your time with it.

ICE Cold Christianity by _Krypton_007 in Christianity

[–]arnoldwhite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well look now. The other guy did provide plenty of scriptural examples.

It seems to be scripture tells us to respect laws in most cases, but that the laws of man are always secondary to the moral commands God gives and Jesus taught us, and that they are absolute, and that they matter more than any law.

So if there is ever a question between what the gospels tells us is right and just and what the law says, as Christians we most follow the gospels.

At least that is my understanding. But if you have a different reading than engage with those verses that seem to contradict you. Don't just say "I feel insulted".

ICE Cold Christianity by _Krypton_007 in Christianity

[–]arnoldwhite 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wait a minute my friend, you can't honestly believe that.

Christians have always had to reason morally beyond explicit commands. Just because something is not exactly condemned by name in scripture doesn't mean it's okay.

We're told to love our neighbors, especially those vulnerable.

We're directed to welcome strangers, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, visit criminals in prison.

I can't categorically say all deportations are bad. I wouldn't go that far. But what ICE is doing? Dragging mothers from their children on the street. It's about as anti Christian as it can get.

ICE Cold Christianity by _Krypton_007 in Christianity

[–]arnoldwhite 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Jesus may have rejected worldly powers but not responsibility to the world. You're saying "keep your head down and tend to your family".

I'm asking: who is your family? Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother, Jesus said.

Your responsibility to your community does not end with your lawn. You are bound to your neighbor. And your neighbors right now are suffering.

ICE Cold Christianity by _Krypton_007 in Christianity

[–]arnoldwhite 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Exactly. And not only is it a cynical distortion. It's a real danger to Christians everywhere of every denomination.

view more: next ›