Unpopular opinions you agree with.

I hate religion with a passion. Just as fascism or nazism, most religions are totalitarian ideologies. I don't care if you personally believe in god and want to live your life according to a book. That part of religion is none of my business. However the fact that most times those books that people worship specifically tell the practitioners to convert, or in the worst case scenarios (such as in the Quran) to kill those who don't follow the religion, it becomes a problem. Because I don't want to follow your religion. So if you won't allow other people to choose for themselves how to live their life, then I don't see how there is any place for your religion to exist in any democratic society with freedom of religion. I just don't see how any religion that promotes to mission/converting people etc. could fit into a democratic society without fucking the system of religious freedom up. I find it quite annoying to ruminate on because "religious freedom" is contradictive when the religions that people are free to follow tell them to get all up in other peoples business about their religion.

I think freedom of speech and press are the most crucial parts of a democratic state and that they are more important than peoples feelings being hurt. I don't think we should ever give up our right to express ourselves however we want just because some person might be offended by what we say. Who would even decide what is okay and what is not okay to say. It is a slippery slope towards authoritarianism when we invoke laws that limit our freedom of speech.

I don't think censorship is ever justifiable. I mean there have been moments in history where I can see that it might've been justified to some exent. But I still believe that ignorance is never the best alternative. People should see reality as it is, and not some altered version of reality.

I despise feminism. I don't even know where to begin...

I think religious private schools should be illegal. Children need a place where they aren't indoctrinated by religion so that they have some chance of learning how to differentiate fact from fiction. That place of factual studies should be school.

I think burqas/niqabs should be illegal. It is an oppressive and humiliating garb. And while some might choose to wear it, I think it is enough that some people are forced to wear it to completely forbid it. I also don't think that just because someone say they "choose to wear it" means they actually want to wear it.

I think it should be illegal for kids to wear the hijab. The gender oppression in islam becomes so pronounced when you see the young girls wearing the hijab in contrast to their brothers next to them not wearing it. The mere fact that it is still legal for parents to force young girls to wear the hijab in developed western countries, is to me baffling, even sickening.

I think I might actually hate smartphones. I don't like how consumed people are by their phones to the point that they'd rather bury their face in the screen than to actually talk to the people around them. I also dislike how they are literally surveillance devices.

I think the term 'islamophobia' is misleading/mis-defined and that the people who use it are most often hypocrites. Islam is a religion, muslims are the people who practice the religion. Saying that someone is an islamophobe is implying that a person is scared of the religion islam, by how the word is built up. Muslimophobe would be the appropriate term to describe what most people use the word islamophobe to describe. I also find that the word has helped shield islamic establishments from criticism, which is just crazy. All establishments should be equally susceptible to criticism. Especially religious insitutions that are known for being intolerant.

I think the word racist might be one of the most diluted, overused, misused words ever. Which is terrible because of the fact that there is actual racism. I believe that the actual racism in society is being diminished by the misusage of the word. When people use the word to describe someone who is against immigration etc. it is a misusage of the word. Being against immigration doesn't automatically make someone a racist.

Ok, enough of that.


Inb4 unfriended


But I dun give a damn

 

I'm with you on this one, I think they'd be cute decorated. Maybe with small snowflakes here and there, stars, I dunno.

 

-Everything that anyone ever thought to be true, is true. In other words, every perspective is inherently valid.

-Logic is a weak way to procure knowledge.

-Empiricism* is more of a curse than a blessing.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism

-God exists beyond questioning. That is because God exists in people's minds. People's minds are not seperate entirely - they interlink. God exists as a psychological link made up of partial belief, strong belief, etc. in God. This further affects people's behavior, actions, and society. At the very least, God exists in this way.

 

Being gay isn't all in the genetics, and you might not be born that way. Let me explain. Many scientists are like "we can't find a gay gene" while other ones are still looking for one. I believe the reason for this is because, I feel like some of us are born with genes that may make us more likely to develop homosexuality, but those genes may also make someone turn out to be straight. Depending on all the factors in our life, personality, other genes, life experience, everything will factor into what sexuality we become. I definitely don't want to encourage the stereotype that everyone is gay because we had a bad experience with the opposite sex, that is NOT TRUE. Honestly, maybe in some cases that could be one factor in somebody, but even then it's just one factor when you have thousands within one person. I also believe that's why sometimes peoples sexualities change, like I definitely believe that sometimes it changes because you were in denial, I get that, but sometimes people say it genuinely changed. It was once something different, but things changed, your personality, things in your life, people around you, media, etc therefore your sexuality changed. Now, you cannot change someone on purpose, like therapy for gay people to "turn them straight" is bullshit, i'm not saying you can do that. Also, not to say this can't start showing very early, like looking back I was really gay as a kid and no one realized, lol. Maybe I and others just have a personality that develops us to be gay as a child. I sound like an asshole with this whole post but, there is no changing what your sexuality is (unless it happens naturally), there was no one incident that determined your sexuality, we need to just accept everyones sexuality and move on. Some people turn out straight, some gay, some bi, some pan, etc. It just may not be your genes causing that, at least not entirely.

 

...Really? So what do you suggest, if not empiricism, for figuring out how the world works? Do you not think evidence is fundamental to understanding how things work? How would anything but empiricism work in a court of law? Without empirical scientific research how would we conclude which medicines work and are appropriate for human consumption?

Empiricism is the base of science. Without empiricism science would be nothing but a guessing game and a bunch of random unsubstatiated opinions.

 

I suggest you read some Vonnegut, especially Cat's Cradle. It gives some context for that opinion and might make you less hostile.

 

Doesn't mean we can't re-watch 20 year old movies he starred in.

 

I wasn't being hostile, I simply asked her ligitimate questions in response to her statement on empiricism.

I understand that science can be and is used for bad means. However I don't see how it would change my opinion on that empiricism is the best route to take when trying to figuring out how things work in the world around us. Empiricism is simply used to decide what is fact based on data that we can collect and analyze from the world around us. What I believe has happened here is that there's been a slight misunderstanding; because ethics and empiricism are two completely different things.

I might take you up on that suggestion to read some Vonnegut though.

 

Can I just package you up and ship you here?

 

@imnotreallysure: perhaps...I was under the impression that a lot of people still thought he was the sex god of hollywood.

@Browncoat: Indeed we can, indeed we can. :eusa_droo

 

I don't like Caitlin Jenner. I think her depiction of transition is dangerously unrealistic. Most people can't afford the plastic surgery and all the rest and are certainly not going to be out there in "society circles" as she is. In reality, they will be making do with whatever they can afford to do, and trying not to get the crap beaten out of them.
I have no problem with her transition, and the fact she could afford to do it, I have a problem with the media's (read reality tv and gossip mags) response to it. Over the top and grabbing as much money as they can.

Oh and I hate reality tv.

 

Apparently everyone hate my views on gender inequalities. Feminists hate it, men's rights activists hate it, even some little kid at the ice cream social hates it. I don't know why, but it's just not something I feel comfortable talking about anymore. Also Modern Family was a terrible show and the LGBTQ community needs to stop pretending it was good.

---------- Post added 16th Nov 2015 at 08:17 PM ----------

I agree. I didn't like her before I knew she was trans so I'm not just going to drastically change my opinion on her because she happens to be trans. The way the media has been glorifying it only further perpetuates the stereotype that people do this stuff for attention. Overall I think she's done more harm than good for the transgender community.

 

Homosexuality does not need a biological base in order to be acceptable.

One's uniqueness is unrelated to one's worth.

It's okay to like what everyone else likes.

 

Okay, may I first say that I sometimes tend to be a bit scatter-brained and not explain things thoroughly, but I will try. (It is also 5.40 in the morning).

I am quite the knowledge skeptic. I think it is ultimately very difficult, perhaps impossible, to know something. But I am, on the other hand, also a knowledge optimist when it comes to certain things such as many practical matters and matters of insight. But as far as it goes, I think one can test things out and see "if I am right in X, then Y should happen if I do Z", thus utilizing empirical methods. But the problem I see is this. I think empiricism can function well to explain things very accurate, but with limited scope. It is slow in processing and it can only cover so much before it's prevented from going any further by its own rule of requiring experimentation or sensory perception. On the other hand, other, more 'care-free' and philosophy-based ways of gaining knowledge excel with this in that they utilize pure insight to gain broad and often also deep knowledge about things, with the weakness that it might be a bit sketchy at times.
In other words, empiricism may work well for very specific questions, but it fails when it comes to the bigger picture, in my opinion. And I tend to be more interested in the big picture than in details, it comes with my personality, I suppose. Furthermore, I think that since this has become the "proper" way of thinking, it has hurt people's minds, if not souls. I think it places too much authority in the hands of the few who write the factual books that the rest of us reads, rather than inspire individual, free thinking. There is an aura of arrogance about it that I dislike, as well. Take for example the theory(s) about chakra energy. If I meditate and I feel that, again for example, I have opened my first four chakra centers and I feel good because of that, I think someone with an empiricist mindset would likely be inclined to say "No, that's just because you were breathing slowly which released neurotransmittors and... etc. etc.", rather than acknowledging that the chakra thingy is just one out of many ways to look at it. And that "it" doesn't necessarily need to be known through empirical methods. One can know it just through feeling or thinking.
Of course, nothing is black or white and empiricism has always, I guess, and will always be part of humanity.

---------- Post added 17th Nov 2015 at 06:10 AM ----------

Another unpopular I agree with/hold: Intelligence is overrated.

 

I'm not sure if this is in relation to my post or not, which is similar to this one, but yes, all sexualities are okay and should be accepted, whether it's common or not. Love is love

 

Winter season is ugly. There, i said it.

 

THISSSSS. I so agree.

 

feeble and haggard, the wind blows right through brad pitt, the crusty old king under the mountain

 

REALLY??? I always thought the snow was so beautiful.
http://globe-views.com/dcim/dreams/winter/winter-02.jpg
Come on, how can you turn this down?