But I like to say to all, that if you don't right anything back against trolls and cyberbullies like Channel or Funnel, that doesn't mean you lost.
No matter how delusional it comes to their minds claiming their trash has "owned" the victim (e.g. 'wwwarea')
An interesting journal article still stands due to them failing (and saying the same thing over and over again that's already been debunked).
Request Used
==============================
Of course, while REM already lost and can't debunk me (Proven why) and the blind cyberbullies including LMJ (who also supports the guilt of slander) continue to be corrupted as usual, the bigot (can't tolerate other people's personal views with prejudice) FunnelDelusion continues to act as disrespectful, and idiotic as usual.
http://funnelvortex.deviantart.com/journal/commentary-wwwarea-and-the-Church-of-Sonic-571236491
Note: Of course, within quote spacing: The deeper quote spacing is
his, the main quote spacing without the bold is mine and the bold
messages in the quote spacing is his again (But recent).
Note again: Some of my own quotes he posted within the quotes pacing may have some bold stuff too.
Also, the deeper quote spacing with bold words are most likely Funnel's too.
Note again: Some of my own quotes he posted within the quotes pacing may have some bold stuff too.
Also, the deeper quote spacing with bold words are most likely Funnel's too.
Sorry that it took me a while to get around to doing this. It took me a while to get around to doing this because I actually have a life. Now moving on.A classic internet troll who pretends his life counts and others don't.. and unaware of the fact that I don't always stay in this boring house.
I will still post the request, I still don't know about the taboo idea though.You don't get it. It's explaining that the more this blog is monitored by stalkers like you, the more views this blog is going to get. Keep them up!
Request Posted:
You think I do this for views?
And what is this whole "request" thing? I do not get it.
I thought we already went through this (The request thing).
I do not act like a fucking psychopath. Lot's of people who question popular beliefs are not psychopaths.No their isn't. Everyone has a reason and I already told you, I do this for the sake of promoting more possibilities, against discrimination with actual reasoning, etc.
Oh the emotions of your bigotry cannot stand it.
Yet, regardless, you have no right to slander me.
There is questioning popular belief based on a solid basis, and then there is questioning a popular belief just for the sake of questioning a popular belief with no other goal other than just trying to be some big rebel.
Yeah it's called disagreeing and giving criticism back.The thing you called "made up" was that.
What does that have to do with it?
Yeah right.And you need to be aware that you are not right about me.. At all.
Well its true.
Example: You are not right about me being "delusional" because you don't have proof that 'my claims' are 100% wrong.
*Drinks* <The 'depend on popularity' beerI don't know if you did it too, but I think I was inspired by REM who failed to argue the comparisons and posted a *drinks* thing because I used a word to compare.
Seriously?
Though on my side, I actually argue why you were wrong too.
And how do you know that?Umm they should follow the laws, and not depend on feeling.
Because depending what other people FEEL about me is NOT a valid excuse to argue that I'm "guilty".
Alright. When you end up facing a judge and jury in court, tell them what you just said. They will not give a fuck because what the judge and jury thinks of you will be what determines whether you are guilty or not. If your peers are displeased with you, then you most likely are guilty.
I admit some laws are unconstitutionally passed based off feeling and I think people should abolish them.
Also, I am not guilty for what I defend with my opinion. It's not against the law to believe in change.
No it's not. Kissing in movies has annoyed a lot of people off, does that make it wrong?Asexuals, people like me, heterosexuals in some situations, homosexuals in some situations, and maybe more.
I do not know anyone who is annoyed by kissing in movies unless it is poorly-written.
Oh and people who just wants to see action.
No. It's you. Sometimes though I may NEED to say some stuff that is the same because they still argue further than your repeating arguments or other styles that still couldn't debunk it.You are the one looping in a circle forcing me to repeat myself.Umm I'm actually not. You are the one repeating the same exact thing based off your overly emotional popularity bullshit.
You are the one who keeps responding with the same exact responses.
Such as proving a law to you that you KEEP fucking denying.
And Sonic never had quality to begin with then.And Alpha and Omega had a lot of quality with the graphics, the smooth animation, and some effects.
Well Sonic did have quality from Sonic 3 through Unleashed, discounting the mid-90's games like 3D Blast and Labyrinth. And there was Chronicles and 06 which really sucked as well. But other than those hiccups Sonic was pretty good through that time period until Lost World and Boom happened.
A creative story as wolves, and new ways that never happened.
Unique designs rather than generic realism wolves.
Pretty good.
If you say it's not, then I will say your reasoning is not good either then.
Yet, you are wrong (Because again, you force your hate at me for expressing my own likes for a picture), it had enough quality for a general amount of people.Said the guy who said the movie was bad, etc. under some part involving that.
I am not hating you for liking Alpha and Omega. I just said I thought the picture was creepy.
Yet, you didn't need to say that (The "creepy" thing), you could of kept that to yourself.
Just because you think it's "obvious" doesn't mean you are right.Just like anything. If you know you are not 100% sure, then don't act like you are 100% sure.
Sock accounts?
No, it doesn't mean I am right. But it raises the chances that I might be right.
And your past doesn't connect to this.What?
I wouldn't have credibility without experience.
A past is a past. I am already over the Sonic.EXE thing and you still bring it up and try to connect to it.
Again, when I say that some stuff from 'Tumblr' is right that doesn't mean I am saying everyone there is right. It's like you forgot what I said on some parts.Yeah, on Tumblr. Which would be the perfect site for you!Oh stop being a baby. Maybe SOME Tumblr stuff is right then? Such as the 'Be yourself' stuff, etc.
Actually, why won't you just move to Tumblr? You would be at home with all the other SJWs, Otherkin, and special snowflakes who run rampant on that site.
Stop being a fucking dick, you fucking asshole.
Yep. Tumblr is totally fine! Except for the sad special snowflakes and the Social Justice Warriors who bully people for not agreeing with their views. Hell, the SJWs bullied someone near the point of suicide because she drew Stephen Universe characters in a certain way.
And a lot of the people who engage in this behavior are otherkin, misanthropes, SJWs, and things of the like.
I am more than sure that wwwarea will attempt to take the above statement I just made and turn it around on me telling me why I am some hypocrite. But before he does, let me get this clear:
I do not like A&O's art style. But I do not bully people over it.
I do not advocate bullying or suicide, but the kinds of people who did this to the SU artist are the kinds of people wwwarea supports!
And where is the proof actually? Just because ONE otherkin or ONE misanthrope did that, doesn't mean I am the same (And I don't think I am exactly an Otherkin). Discriminating someone based off what they like, doesn't make you any better than someone who bullies someone for drawing a character in a certain way.
I need to study for your first claim.
But you DO advocate bullying at least.
And you ALSO advocate slander.
If I had to say who belongs in the list of bad otherkinds, misanthropics, etc. you are one of the bad sonic fans (I couldn't think of something in general, sorry) who advocates bullying, (E.g. mock, and some other) and you promote slander.
Maybe you should move their for your shitty Sonic OC garbage then.And DA is half fighting (Honestly...)
Nah, DA is half Sonic art so I have no reason to move to Tumblr from DA just to be with other Sonic artists. I haven't drawn Sonic in a long time, actually.
And neither do I have a reason to move there, since it has a lot of stuff I like too.
And for your shitty spiritual beliefs then, etc.No you don't. You attack other people for having different spiritual beliefs than you.
At least I am rational and behave reasonable with mine.
Plus, I am reasonable with mine too with the evidence you always claim to be "pseudoscience" just because you want to.
I'll say your spiritual beliefs are 'pseudoscience' because I said so then.
Adults swear all the time.Oh rly?Stop talking like a 13 year old.
Acting like a 13 year old? No no no. Constantly swearing and spamming memes is acting like a 13 year old. I am just telling it how it is.
Spamming memes, I know someone who keeps spamming immature Death Battles and I know a someone (Channel) who sometimes post memes.
Again, making up excuses for him to start fights with me.It really depends on how people disagree.
I'm not making up bullshit, and he has no right to stalk me just because you and him finds a standing up for themselves person's speech "bullshit".
How are we inflicting your free speech? Don't you know someone is going to disagree when you say something?
You can disagree, but if you go out with it, this is where it all depends.
Disagreeing is no excuse to bully those (e.g.) for their fetishes.
All I did was posted another comment complaining about you censoring me."I didn't censor you! *Censors/Hides Comment*" <You
And because of you, censoring me and the topics around the game which caught my interest.
I did not "censor" anyone. I was trying to make you shut up, because you would not shut up throwing a huge fit over something you don't even care about!
Are you saying it's bad to get that? And no I don't have that.Just because I don't have that, doesn't mean I have a worse job.
So you do not even have THAT?
If it's stalking, and forcing people to change without consent, then that's bullying.No, you are pressuring people to change (It's basically the same as forcing). That's another form of bullying.
We are not forcing you to change without your consent. The only one who can change you is yourself.
It's like if you complained at me for not personally liking Sonic, and I avoided it, then you made people attack me for it, and acted like I was "bad" for that, then that's kind of forcing. No, I'm not saying you did that, but it's an example.
And no, I'm not forcing myself to change. That is literally insanely non-sense.
How far can victim blaming get?
No, it's not. That's just something you made up to make yourself look different from 'assumption'.Educated assumptions are."educated assumption"?
*Facepalm*
It's true you know.
Assumption, is not and will never be concrete.
Umm what? I go against them because an overly emotional society doing that to subjects promotes harm, and more discrimination, and other bullshit. That's a reason why I love to question taboos.Just because society got better with some stuff, doesn't mean they are perfect.
Meanwhile the same society elected a black president and legalized gay marriage.
Plus the fun of exposing how stupid humanity in general has gotten.Just because they are clever at some stuff, doesn't mean they are smart.
Actually humanity is getting smarter. www.bbc.com/news/magazine-3155…
You can be clever and still stupid about random subjects.
So stop straw picking or whatever that means.
If they were smarter, then we wouldn't have any discrimination, tabooing, tolerance for people being as "weird" as possible, and some more.
And judging by some stuff I've seen too, we in general are still stupid.
Oh and also: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-25/dumb-dumber-scientific-proof-people-are-getting-stupider
And in case you do not click on the link, here is one thing from it:
Actually it does? Because of the reasons.Not exactly true. A lot of the time, they connect.
Stop dictating other people not you.
I am for revolutionary (Hmm, I wonder where you hea... eh, nvm). I believe we should address the overly emotional things that lacks any scientific result to keep something 'forbidden'.
Science is only one field. There is also sociology, philosophy, theology, politics, idealism, etc. Not everything can be answered by scientific means.
Plus scientific is supposed to be concrete results, etc. Which is more superior than a non-concrete result.
Example: The science shows how many there is, the history, etc.
That's superior than someone saying "No it's not!" because of so.
What? Face it, the research was very much better than overly emotional people who censors the scientific results, the open mind, the curiosity, and some other and freaks out over open discussion, etc.No, a lot of overly emotional people try to keep things forbidden, makes it hard for other people to open. Plus some direct censorship exist.
Where did you get this idea from? While scientists do take shit from the religious right, there is nothing stopping them from making their findings public.
And "probably" is just your emotional opinion without any real concrete evidence as usual.http://www.thefreedictionary.com/probably
No, "probably" just means sometimes it can be true. But most of the time it isn't.
It's a non-concrete assumption. Probably has a possible CHANCE, but it's not 100% certain and can possibly be wrong. Science can possibly answer which side is correct on a subject.
Again, an overly emotional feeling.Pretty sure they do.
Plus, consenting is the only moral thing.
Rape is unwanted sex. Plus, I am pretty sure they know what is happening. Plus the term "perverted" is just an opinion.
They have no idea what they are being fucked by. And perverted is not an opinion.
And perverted IS an opinion. The term "perverted" is made up by some humans who has a unscientific opinion about people's likes and calls any other likes a weird made up term.
It's like calling petting "petveriliskj" and that if the pets don't know that new made up term (Like how perverted is made up), then it's automatically "bad" now?
Yet again, if they enjoy something, nobody is hurt. or even raped (And as long if consent is involved in the first place).
I can find a VERY good article to show why the arguments are wrong, because I believed it addressed many things, but alas, what's the point? You won't read it.Again, depending on 'where' and 'who'? This is why you are still not good at arguing.
It will probably be from some furry site anyways.
You seem to think that a very good article is "false" JUST because of where it came from?
This is why humanity in general is getting more dumb.
Guess what? I don't do that crap. Even if a good article was from a horrid guy who supported rape of humans, I would still ONLY depend on the article regardless of who, where, why, when, and maybe others.
Plus, do animals consent to being killed?Actually they can consent. Consenting is about behavior, and action. You do not need to know English and write papers. If consent didn't exist, then non-human animals wouldn't exist.
Do animals know why people 'owned them'.
Do animals consent to being trapped in a house?
Do animals consent to being used for meat?
Do animals consent to being moved to other places by forced?
They can't consent, they are simply not capable. And many animals are bred specifically for those purposes.
And if they can't consent to anything, then everything should be illegal with a non-human animal.. if they somehow exist.
Yet, if it's legal to kill them for meet, then even actual rape of non-human animals (That even I am against) should be legal then.
Umm, no, I'm not.Umm no it's not.
Let me give you an example: In the report, if a human didn't do a thing and the other did it, how did the human "raped" it?
I know it sounds like I am one of those guys by some, but I'm still on this subject because of me being very angered with stupidity.
Then it is still rape.
That is hilariously ridiculous.
I had a comic in an idea that a human was raped by a horse, (or whatever) then the police came and the guy explained the horse forced him to have sex, then the police arrested the men for.... "raping" the horse?
I'm sorry but if I had to depend on the evidence, the human didn't rape the horse. It was the horse that raped the human. (Or if the human wanted it, nobody is raped)
Just because you think it is, doesn't mean you are right.
Rape is UNWANTED, and an animal literally wanting to do that and doing it by force, is not rape.
People like you are the reason why humanity in general is getting very stupid. How emotionally idiotic people like you are becoming.
Of course, SOME humans are smart though.
Killing an animal is wrong though. PETA being against that it's self is a good thing, though at the same time PETA kills animals too. So nope!And you are one of those anti-rape douchbags then.. Considering killing an animal without consent is worse than actual proven rape.
So you are one of those animal rights/anti-hunting douchebags.
Again, exposed to how stupidity it is, and worse, you support violating the natural right of an animal and consider GOOD things as "bad".
If animals don't have rights, then humans don't have rights.
And you know what else people freak out over of things they do not like?Again, you expose your hypocrisy of you freaking out about people freaking about things they don't like.
Humans murdering other humans, abusing animals, etc.
Because murdering other humans is murder.
What you do, is something wrong, and fairly unlikable like murder.
It's an overly emotional reason filled with prejudice, bigotry, and other hate. That's it.No, it's real healthy. The only anarchy is tabooing consenting things out of pure belief.
Actually a healthy society wouldn't make things taboo. And wow, you don't even believe in Polygamy rights either? WTF.
Again, your reasoning is bullshit. Just because things are considered "downhill" doesn't mean it's a good reason to keep things a taboo.
Again, your reasoning for that is based off prejudice, and bigotry, and other hate.
So basically your idea of a healthy society is anarchy?
Why things are a taboo is due to either religious beliefs, random whiny opinions, etc.
It's all an unhealthy belief that is forced upon others for consenting in privacy.
And if you can't respect consenting things (e.g. Polygamy) then people won't respect you.
And shows how unhealthy you are obsessing with things consenting in private.
You also want to know something? It's been viewed on homosexuality too in the same exact way.But it's fair.
Knew you would draw that comparison.
And we need to make other things less taboo too.Real mature.
It's not over you know.
It's not ogre! It's never ogre!
There is still problems with bigots who is against consenting things such as Polygamy and a few other things, etc.Anything consenting, or alone.
A good an developing society wouldn't forbid freedom within individual privacy.
Are you referring to sexual activities?
While Polygamy is more of a marriage thing, it can suggest that too as long if no other Freedom of another is violated..
(Polygamy laws violate freedom though)
In the end, this is why I question taboos, and why I think making stuff a taboo is just wrong.All you did was explain why it was still a taboo, and it was a stupid reason.
The reasoning why stuff is taboo is all based off prejudice and random other beliefs.
Your explanation didn't explain why they were taboo in the first place.
I actually explained it pretty well.
You didn't explain why they were taboo in the first place.
Umm, no.How do you know? No really!
You are confusing action with personality.
Having a vore identity for your main orientation is not the same thing as taking an action.
Vore identity? What the hell is that? There is a vore fetish, but there is no vore "orientation".
Actually I mean it's part of your main orientation..
Plus, I think the term 'orientation' is just a bunch of bullshit it's self.
Everyone could be born an asexual.
Christianity isn't the only God worshipping. (Or your personal made up opinion God)Again, you don't have proof that you are right.
Plus, it was a part guess. Don't forget about your own "normal" religion.
At least I do not think I created the universe with my brain.
While 'Normal' is already debunked, there is evidence that mind is over matter. And a recent experiment with atoms proving the theory of that.
No it didn't.The line is not imaginary in that sense.It is. Just because you said so, doesn't mean it exist on people not you.
The line always existed.
The Golden Rule is about not interfering with other people. Following that is always a must.PaulandAmy has interfered with people. Different.
Even if they can turn into PaulandAmy
No I do so for the sake of protecting freedom, etc.To protect individual freedom at least.
And what are you going to do for it?
It's like fighting for your own country.
A moral tolerance is about accepting those for who they are and what they personally like to express.No. Not on this world.
Just because a popular cult believes that it's "not normal" doesn't mean it exist.
That's like saying a certain other fictional character exist on this world because many kids believe so.
Isn't that what you believe in? You think there are an infinite number of realities created by our quantum vibratory mind powers. Then wouldn't it be true, according to you, that the millions of kids who believe in Santa would eventually conjure up Santa?
I am not sure if the multiverse is the same, it's also might of been said that when 'You' create reality, you are going into other parallel universes. Then again, yes it could be created by 'our quantum vibratory powers'.
I also believe in 'Oneness', and 'everything is Oneness'.. I mean I am not sure about it, but that's a theory.
Actually that doesn't exactly works.
There is the theory that if 'everyone' believed, it would happen, but I am more into the theory of two kinds:
1. 'You' create all the events too, including people.
2. Each person does, but each one goes into their own parallel reality.
I don't care if you think it's crazy it's self, but that's what interesting theories 'are' about.
But it doesn't violate the PG thing, and yet, that's just your opinion. It's still a tamed down thing like kissing. And guess what? It is sexy for those who likes it. It's not your sexuality.No, it's a sexuality. Just like Kissing. Kissing is a sexual idenity, and so is a "fetish".
It's a fetish. Not a sexuality.
Even Psychology Today believes it's a sexual identity.
And regardless, it's still nothing more extreme than kissing.
Oh and why did you say that 'Vore can be sexualized" if you think it's not a sexual thing?
Plus, if it's "not" sexual, then I guess all types "fetishes" can just go to G-rated then!
Yet, the term "fetish" is a stupid term to describe people being different.
Fetishes don't exist, the other things are just different ways of sexual identity.
Plus the term "fetish" has went way too far that it got way 'overused' too.
Also kissing can apply to anthropomorphic creatures too.You said 'Kissing' means two humans.. So I put that there. :|
Yeah. And?
Whatever you say. You don't know that..It's like you ignored what you quoted when you said that...
Same with kissing. Yet, just because it's 'sexualized', still doesn't change the content it's self. It's just an erotic tamed down kissing style then when it comes to tamed down versions.
And some people will find kissing gross.
But just because some people find it gross, doesn't mean it's more extreme than kissing all of a sudden.
If you say it's "more gross" then KISSING is more gross than what I like then.
How is vore the equivalent to kissing?
Plus, hugging isn't exactly equal, but they are both tamed down and not pass the PG-rated (Unless maybe that even depends...)
Again, vore can be tamed down, and not past 'extreme content'. Regardless of the idea.
It's a fantasy. That's different.No (maybe), it's the same in terms of content, and 'how gross feeling' it is.
Plus, I'm talking about the content it's self.
My point is that in terms of 'what is"gross", a tamed down vore is no more extreme than kissing.
The IDEA for them may be different, but it's still not more extreme than seeing too people kiss.
So eating someone is the same as kissing.
Hmmm, why do you refer to vore so much? Are you a voraphile?
Besides, some find kissing humans more personally gross than humans.
Maybe it's because it's been talked a lot and the fact that it's a very understanding natural idea to a lot of people? And how some people compare 'vore' to very "extreme" things such as 'scat', and maybe some others.
Come on, vore has been shown on TV, and it doesn't matter of the idea, it's the content it's self that matters.
Let's say this was vore (It probably is):
http://thumb7.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/1096577/113670805/stock-vector-a-picture-of-humorous-a-wolf-and-a-rabbit-hare-looks-terrified-and-the-wolf-happy-upcoming-113670805.jpg
Now it's been made again, but with a 'sexual like' (e.g. Erotic?):
http://thumb7.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/1096577/113670805/stock-vector-a-picture-of-humorous-a-wolf-and-a-rabbit-hare-looks-terrified-and-the-wolf-happy-upcoming-113670805.jpg
OH NO. Different now.
*sarcasm*
No, it's the trolls and other types of cyberbullies fault that act that way to me, causing me to be concerned about them.Again, it's their fault. Sometimes responding is necessary.
You do not have to respond you know.
Making a journal against me for expressing a natural open minded thing about spirituality starts a fight. And that's just one of many examples as to why you start fights.No. That is an off-topic discussion.
Again, this started over the Sonic.exe thing.
If it wasn't then that journal would of mentioned it. But it didn't.
I didn't make a rant against Alpha and Omega.No. I rant against the CLAIMS regardless of whether they like it or not.
I made a rant to what is important for me to be happy in my own life, by bringing out the unfair arguments based off personality.
You rant against people who do not like it.
Even if they loved it, but still made up unfair claims, I would still rant probably.
Like if they think it "sucked" people of what "critics say" or something.
Umm so me giving you the correct link over and over again that still further debunks you makes it "wrong" all of a sudden now?You are just not making any sense anymore.
Plus, you spam that I "broke" the law without proof.
Most of the sites you cite are sites with an agenda.
The law said it's not illegal. If that law said it's not illegal, it's not illegal.
Just like your ridiculous reasoning like "It'z fromz a furryz site, theorforz, wrong", depending on some off-topic thing, does not make you good in arguing.
Nope, not an illegal form."I will say it's illegal, even if the law said it's not or at least if I don't know for sure." <Funnel's trump card.
Proof or its bullshit.
wwwarea's trump card.
Just because it's different, doesn't mean it's wrong.Say that to a homosexual, black person, white person, etc. who thinks the world should be about acceptance then.
It doesn't need to be, people can have different ideas and beliefs under spirituality and it doesn't matter how many people think differently.
Oh yeah. *drinks*
So according to wwwarea, it is okay to think the world revolves around you!
Again, just because they think different, doesn't mean they are right.
Again, moral arguments exist.
I am a victim though, and that you victim blame me and other is just wrong. It's not 'self-centered'.Again, can't respect open theories. And can't even argue.
That's the theory though. Just because you think it's "shitty" doesn't mean it is.
It's just an experiment. Maybe everyone in the world creates it at the same time.
Maybe you are in a dream creating it.
Or maybe everyone creates their own and each time they go, they go in a parallel universe creating other events, while I go to mine, creating more.
Sounds like what someone in a straitjacket would say.
Maybe you need to be in one, including Peter.
Yet, a crazy person is someone who puts pain on others, not a spiritual fan who likes to accept 'new' views about life.
But the 'Big Bang' is still just a theory.Actually there is evidence that stuff existed before the Big Bang. Some scientists believe that it was just another universe. Some also believe that we are inside a 'black hole', etc.
Or.. maybe the mind created the Big Bang!
Believe it or not, but even that can be a possibility. That our minds created our own history.
It may sound ridiculous to some, but that's what the theory is.
Beliefs create reality.
So let me get this straight. You think that we created the big bang, despite the fact there was nothing: no matter, energy, or consciousness before the big bang? So we were able to create the big bang with quantum vibratory mind powers even though we did not exist before the big bang. How the fuck does that work?!
And the big bang is still the best theory we have. The cosmic radiation background strongly supports it.
The point about 'consciousness' is that it was always there. Even some believe that our 'universe' was always there.
Like I said, the Big Bang and some ideas behind it of what you believe in, are still only a theory.
It could be a good theory, but you want to know what else is a good theory? The theory that stuff came before the Big Bang.
Hell, even some believe the the Universe goes in a major loop, swallowed by black holes, and recreated again.
It's fun when people are so open with theories, with another theory..
No, I mean morally arguing about morality and respect, is actually a good thing. It's against harmful things involving disrespecting other individuals. The only thing I am harming is the corrupted mentality that promotes unfair inequality, non-respect, and some other bad things.And if it is teaching something harmful and needs to be called out?It's not harmful.
If it "is" because of your fear, then your spirituality is harmful then.
Teaching that the world revolves around you is harmful.
It depends though, and it's not exactly "pulled out of ass", if it connects with possible legit theories (I.e. Attached with spiritual world creation, dreams in realities, mind over matter, etc) then it's less of an "ass" thing.And this is Funnel's:
It can be if they have that attachment. According to what connects.
You can have a fucking "stupid" Angry Birds cult and have some belief about it like that, and I don't fucking care.. like how a good person who tries to move on would do.
Yet, if you believe you can turn into anything AFTER death, I see that even less crazy. And since it's not crazy to believe in reincarnations. <Folks, this is my argument.
So basically you think that it is totally reasonable to believe that you will turn into Sonic characters to bask in Sonic's glory after you die?Because according to 'Mind over Matter', that the Spiritual World can be ANYTHING, and many other connections or so, it would be fair that someone can make up ... ANYTHING... and Sonic is part of that 'ANYTHING'. For logic, I had to say that as an example.
I better convert to the Church of Fast and start worshiping the fast SANIC hedgehog overlord now!
But seriously, if you have a religion based around Sonic and think you will turn into a Sonic character when you die then you have problems. Or you just like Sonic too much.
I fucking hate Sonic, but I still stand to my argument because it makes sense under the reasoning.
You seem to just attack it, and say "OMG, IT"Z SANIZ", as if that somehow "debunked" the reasoning.
Heaven is Heaven, you got to remember what that means.
OH NO! That means everyone else who likes Amy so much is automatically going to do the same thing!!!Only for one or a couple of people.
*sarcasm*
You also want to know something?
Someone who was a heterosexual couldn't control his/her sexuality and raped someone in a house.
Potential threats are potential threats!
Plus in reality, it's not a 'potential' threat because it's not going to develop that for everyone else who loves Amy so much.
You don't get it. It started out as an obsession and it grew into something horrible.
Not going to be the case for all.
I don't know if I wish, but I kinda "wish" I can like Amy (But I just can't) to show you why it's possible that more 'Amy lovers' are not going to the same direction.
Just like heterosexuality.
Depending on who eh?1. The first comment was probably giving an example of the actual rabid side.
Plus, look at all the feedback.
Yep. Really. Wonderful. Feedback
2. One guy who can't argue, yet, someone already took care of it.
3. That has nothing to do with the subject directly.
4. Look at the favorites. And the OTHER comments that might make more sense.
But you said I threat to show the ADDRESS.Give me the snapshot. I am giving you permission of you to upload it on a private image site, only for the purpose of sharing it to me. Go again, comment on one of my blogs for that link.
*Facepalm extreme*
You did.
I won't accuse you of harassment for this one because I am allowing just this.
Other than that, proof or it's bullshit.
I was offended because of your unfair censorship and with the reasoning around that game.In other words, "I censored wwwarea's comment because he disagreed with my opinion that it was a bad game!"
Why? It is a bad game and JC-The-Hyena is a dick.
More like throwing away 35 bucks when I can just use a Creative Commons for free (maybe) to stop plagiarism.Nah, it was like that grey guy face thing.
I also requested Imgur to take down a Copyright picture (Without money) and they took it down.
Maybe I'll ask DA if I need money to take action with a DMCA.
Let me guess. It was a screenshot of your comments?
No. CC-0 does.My 'view' is based off learning about Creative Commons from the outside of my mind.
But Creative Commons main purpose is attribution.
Sounds like somebody doesn't know what Creative Commons is.
More like you don't because you only want what fits your view.
Just like with a lot of stuff.
It's you that do that. Creative Commons (Accept for CC-0) is NOT open source, it's about credit generally. Don't believe me? Look it up.
A stamp that has many links leading to articles. Yet, I am a person that counts.Once again, depending on 'what' as if that was a "valid" argument to debunk the claim? This is why you shouldn't try to debate with people.
Copyright is not a human right.
www.techdirt.com/articles/2012…
Once again an anti-copyright site.
You: "Where is proof that 2+2=4?"
Me: Here, *Links to a furry site explaining why 2+2=4*
You: "That's a furry site."
Me: "So?"
You: "I'm going to ignore it and suggest it's false automatically because it's a furry site."
Me: *Facepalm*
I know you can't Copyright an idea (Though it's been argued that expression and ideas are the same) but it's still a monopoly, preventing people from using an existing thing to create more off of. It's also a monopoly preventing people to openly share.Yet it does.
Also, it's still considered (By man-made law) 'Copyright Infringement' to recreate something Copyrighted or to recreate something Copyrighted and use it for a later purpose.
Not how it works.
Talk to that dumb ass Anne Rice who would sue others for making Fan Fiction, talk to Nintendo who takes down ROM hack videos via Copyright action, talk to thousands of other people with take downs against fans work that already credited, etc.
You clearly don't know what Copyright actually is and does.
It's a monopoly/permission culture (Permission culture was learned from Nina Paley), etc.
Also, here is a video about Nina Paley explaining Copyright again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO9FKQAxWZc
But you will probably ignore it JUST because Nina Paley is an anti-copyright activist.. Showing you just can't take the open fair criticism.
Example: You are still not allowed to draw Mickey Mouse and make up your own story without monopoly permission.So you admit that Copyright is a monopoly?
EVEN if you give credit.
That doesn't stop all the mickey mouse fanfic writers and fan artists out there!
Just because it may not stop all doesn't mean it's not a monopoly anymore. It still is as it's still giving some writers legal "rights" to censor the expressions of them.
That stifles creativity and prevents Freedom of Expression.The hell?
No ir sowanr.
Either way, an immature reply.
But seeing Copyright being used to stop Freedom of Expression and limit creative possibilities, it justifies my point.
Another thing about this article that owned Funnel, is that the person ignored the 'popularity' spelling part, and other parts.Seeing the incredible amount of stupidity and non-sense from you, it did. And so did this article.
END
You did not own me.
Not only you depend on popularity, but you also depend on 'where' and 'who'. You still don't understand Copyright, you are somewhat hypocritical, and maybe other problems.
That's why you lost.
End of RequestAgain, we been over this didn't we?
What "request?"
And using that silly title (immature) shows why you can't understand the fair criticism and other people's reasoning.
--------------------------------
Well, that was wwwarea again.
Here I am signing off and reminding you all to pray to Sonic every night before bed!
This article owned Funnel despite what the stupidity of people said in those comments on DeviantART.
=======================
End.
Another comment to add, that "commentary" from Funnel literally is one of the most stupidest arguments I've seen.
I own a pet wolf
ReplyDeleteK, good luck with that then.
Delete-wwwarea