Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
35 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: 180 Video rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Josiah Fiscus
United States
Pittsburgh (Monroeville)
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb


I thought this was pretty compelling and entertaining. It definitely has a "gotcha" element, but I won't spoil it as this is part of the appeal. (If you recognize the interviewer's voice, you may already see where this is going.) If nothing else, it is interesting to watch people struggle with their own morality (and discouraging to see how little they know about history). I find this unlikely to change anyone's mind, but I think it is worth watching regardless of which side of the issue you are on because it at least encourages self-reflection and consistency of belief.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
いい竹やぶだ!

South Euclid
Ohio
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
It's discouraging to me to see how little people know about human biology. Like believing a fertilized egg is a "person."
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josiah Fiscus
United States
Pittsburgh (Monroeville)
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Spoiler (click to reveal)
robigo wrote:
It's discouraging to me to see how little people know about human biology. Like believing a fertilized egg is a "person."


Touche. You need spoiler tags though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
happyjosiah wrote:
...because it at least encourages self-reflection and consistency of belief.


It does? I haven't watched the whole video, but then I really don't have any motivation to do so because it seems like a pretty horrid piece of work. Gotcha questions. Begging the question. Arguments from authority. I skipped around a bit and there isn't much there. Particularly from a consistency perspective. And the use of the Holocaust as the basis for the video is just crass.

This will only appeal to those who already believe. Because it never actually bothers to ask the question that's at the center of the debate - it just presumes that the answer the host/director/writer wants is the one and only right answer.

The only thing this strikes me as encouraging is improving history education and critical thinking in class. So when kids run in to such blatant and horrible propaganda they can recognize it for what it is and react accordingly.

The Holocaust? Really?
4 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
!
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Josiah, I couldn't watch the whole video because it's too long, but I skimmed it and then read an interview with the filmmaker to get a sense of the whole thing.

My beef with this, as someone who is both adamantly pro-choice and staunchly opposed to abortions, is simply a matter of method. There are many similarities between me and your average pro-lifer. We both think abortions are sad, horrible things. We both think that the world would be better off without abortion. We both think it's sad that so many young women choose that path with an unwanted or unintended pregnancy.

The difference between me and the "pro-life" movement as I see it is how we work towards that outcome. Especially when "pro-life" gets all tangled up in unhealthy religious attitudes about sex, abstinence, and birth control as it so often does. I've said many times here that if "pro-life" meant more and better sex education, easier access to birth control, a system of support for single teen mothers that would keep them in school rather than doom them to a life of poverty and a lack of education, and a better support system for parents who choose to give their child up for adoption then I would proudly self-apply that label. To me, the pro-life side of the debate has been twisted into a quest for ideological purity rather than working to minimize abortion. For the pro-life side it's become far more about punitive consequences and abstinence and moralizing about sexuality than about actually reducing the number of abortions.

If you make abortion illegal, there will still be abortions. That's been true for centuries. On the other hand, if you minimize unwanted pregnancies through education and birth control and simultaneously improve the outcomes for choosing to keep an unwanted baby or give it up for adoption, you might actually see the number of women choosing abortion start to dwindle.

I don't buy the standard pro-choice "it's not a life, it's a bunch of cells" thing. I think it's too pat an answer to a complicated moral question. I also won't flat out say "it's a person and it's murder to kill it even before it's born," because I think that's also an oversimplification. More importantly, I don't think that distinction really matters if what you want is to reduce the number of abortions.

To me the essence of "pro-choice" is understanding that allowing someone the choice doesn't mean approving of it. If the pro-life movement had separated themselves from the religious right's medieval attitudes about sex and spent the time, effort, and money they've put into fighting to make abortions illegal into making abortions less attractive as a choice, there would be far fewer abortions every year. Just as I find it morally disgusting when disaster relief missions waste money and resources on distributing bibles or proselytizing after a natural disaster, I find it morally reprehensible for organizations who are ostensibly worried about preventing the "murder of innocent babies" to waste their resources fighting a pointless and unwinnable war to change the law rather than trying to save some of those lives.
30 
 Thumb up
7.57
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ray Comfort makes pretty videos presenting pretty shallow views of pretty much everything he talks about. This isn't much different.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josiah Fiscus
United States
Pittsburgh (Monroeville)
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
djgutierrez77 wrote:
Josiah, I couldn't watch the whole video because it's too long, but I skimmed it and then read an interview with the filmmaker to get a sense of the whole thing.

My beef with this, as someone who is both adamantly pro-choice and staunchly opposed to abortions, is simply a matter of method. There are many similarities between me and your average pro-lifer. We both think abortions are sad, horrible things. We both think that the world would be better off without abortion. We both think it's sad that so many young women choose that path with an unwanted or unintended pregnancy.

The difference between me and the "pro-life" movement as I see it is how we work towards that outcome. Especially when "pro-life" gets all tangled up in unhealthy religious attitudes about sex, abstinence, and birth control as it so often does. I've said many times here that if "pro-life" meant more and better sex education, easier access to birth control, a system of support for single teen mothers that would keep them in school rather than doom them to a life of poverty and a lack of education, and a better support system for parents who choose to give their child up for adoption then I would proudly self-apply that label. To me, the pro-life side of the debate has been twisted into a quest for ideological purity rather than working to minimize abortion. For the pro-life side it's become far more about punitive consequences and abstinence and moralizing about sexuality than about actually reducing the number of abortions.

If you make abortion illegal, there will still be abortions. That's been true for centuries. On the other hand, if you minimize unwanted pregnancies through education and birth control and simultaneously improve the outcomes for choosing to keep an unwanted baby or give it up for adoption, you might actually see the number of women choosing abortion start to dwindle.

I don't buy the standard pro-choice "it's not a life, it's a bunch of cells" thing. I think it's too pat an answer to a complicated moral question. I also won't flat out say "it's a person and it's murder to kill it even before it's born," because I think that's also an oversimplification. More importantly, I don't think that distinction really matters if what you want is to reduce the number of abortions.

To me the essence of "pro-choice" is understanding that allowing someone the choice doesn't mean approving of it. If the pro-life movement had separated themselves from the religious right's medieval attitudes about sex and spent the time, effort, and money they've put into fighting to make abortions illegal into making abortions less attractive as a choice, there would be far less abortions every year. Just as I find it morally disgusting when disaster relief missions waste money and resources on distributing bibles or proselytizing after a natural disaster, I find it morally reprehensible for organizations who are ostensibly worried about preventing the "murder of innocent babies" to waste their resources fighting a pointless and unwinnable war to change the law rather than trying to save some of those lives.


I agree with almost everything you are saying. Thanks for a thorough and well-thought-out post.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Ku
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
"You can spend all your time making money / Or you can spend all your love making time."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ah, Ray Comfort...he's the guy who did the Nightline Face-off as Kirk Cameron's partner. I think they embarrassed themselves in the debate, and after that, I have a hard time taking anything else he does seriously.

It is an effective piece of propaganda, though. It's certainly a "pretty" video clip.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josiah Fiscus
United States
Pittsburgh (Monroeville)
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:

This will only appeal to those who already believe. Because it never actually bothers to ask the question that's at the center of the debate - it just presumes that the answer the host/director/writer wants is the one and only right answer.


Agreed, and admittedly so in my comment under the video.

perfalbion wrote:
happyjosiah wrote:
...because it at least encourages self-reflection and consistency of belief.


It does? I haven't watched the whole video, but then I really don't have any motivation to do so because it seems like a pretty horrid piece of work. Gotcha questions. Begging the question. Arguments from authority. I skipped around a bit and there isn't much there. Particularly from a consistency perspective.

perfalbion wrote:

The only thing this strikes me as encouraging is improving history education and critical thinking in class. So when kids run in to such blatant and horrible propaganda they can recognize it for what it is and react accordingly.


You may be right about some of this. There's a sense in which a "gotcha" question is a totally ineffective way of changing someone's mind because they think "well, obviously that's not what I really meant" and just adjust. Still, it seemed to me like there were plenty of people being interview who basically just said "sure, I'm pro-choice" without really giving it any thought. In fact, I would say that on most political issues, this describes the vast majority of voters. I hate to sound cynical, but in RSP we have a subset of the population who enjoys brainy pursuits, are generally well-educated, are interested in political/religious issues, and can make arguments as well as defend them. This is a rarity in most of the voting population. Whether someone watches this and is convinced or watches it and rejects the logic used, I would just be happy that they took the time to think about it at all. Whatever your stance is on the issue, it is undeniably complex and extremely important.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josiah Fiscus
United States
Pittsburgh (Monroeville)
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
futhee wrote:
Ah, Ray Comfort...he's the guy who did the Nightline Face-off as Kirk Cameron's partner. I think they embarrassed themselves in the debate, and after that, I have a hard time taking anything else he does seriously.

It is an effective piece of propaganda, though. It's certainly a "pretty" video clip.


He's a prominent Young Earth Creationist and we really don't see eye to eye on a lot of things. I generally agree with his views on this issue though.

I know some people object to the Holocaust comparison, and that's fair, I think. I don't really see the Holocaust as directly comparable, but it is useful as a rhetorical device. In other words, you should be able to articulate (or at least understand) WHY they are different in your own mind.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DCAnderson wrote:
djgutierrez77 wrote:
The difference between me and the "pro-life" movement as I see it is how we work towards that outcome. Especially when "pro-life" gets all tangled up in unhealthy religious attitudes about sex, abstinence, and birth control as it so often does. I've said many times here that if "pro-life" meant more and better sex education, easier access to birth control, a system of support for single teen mothers that would keep them in school rather than doom them to a life of poverty and a lack of education, and a better support system for parents who choose to give their child up for adoption then I would proudly self-apply that label. To me, the pro-life side of the debate has been twisted into a quest for ideological purity rather than working to minimize abortion. For the pro-life side it's become far more about punitive consequences and abstinence and moralizing about sexuality than about actually reducing the number of abortions.


I'm totally going to tip you for this after I make my post, as this is one of those rare, but most precious things in RSP: somebody making me see something I hadn't considered before.

I kind of take it for granted that pro-life and religious moralizing are mutually exclusive, I just think of the pro-life movement itself as religious moralizing.

This actually in a way makes it clearer in my mind why the Culture Wars appears as such an unwinnable cesspit: the religious right might have some good points, but for the totally wrong reasons.

I'm still totally Pro-Choice, but your post scrapes away a layer of nonsense that makes it harder to understand others.


And to be fair, "our" side does it too. I saw an absolutely horrible article last year that makes the argument that a stance like mine, the idea that abortion is disturbing and should be rare, undermines women's rights. It's a nod toward the same problem of ideology over practicality. Reducing the number of abortions isn't a counter movement to women's rights, it's a parallel and unrelated issue. If we (pro-choicers) can't acknowledge that this is a thorny issue with many complicated emotional components, we're no better than the other side.
11 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kevin C wrote:
happyjosiah wrote:
I know some people object to the Holocaust comparison, and that's fair, I think. I don't really see the Holocaust as directly comparable, but it is useful as a rhetorical device. In other words, you should be able to articulate (or at least understand) WHY they are different in your own mind.


I don't object to the holocaust comparison. I object to using dishonest rhetorical tricks to manipulate people.


I agree with this take. As I said above: wasted money, time, resources, and effort on an attempt to make people look foolish rather than to do something about the actual issue.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
happyjosiah wrote:
I know some people object to the Holocaust comparison, and that's fair, I think. I don't really see the Holocaust as directly comparable, but it is useful as a rhetorical device. In other words, you should be able to articulate (or at least understand) WHY they are different in your own mind.


I actually don't think the holocaust comparison is unfair, given a specific view on the issue. What I do think however is that using the holocaust comparison side steps the real issue (when does the right to life of a developing human being begin to outweigh the right of women to control their own body) and is unfair if it really doesn't have that equivalence when it comes to your own actions.

For example, if I thought that a holocaust was going on in my own country, voting for a different person would be the least possible action to take. If you want to make a holocaust comparison, don't down play how one should react to it.

Many of his other rhetorical devices are much more annoying to me personally, but concluding an argument where you've made a direct moral equivalence between an event happening to the worst event in human history with 'that's why you should vote differently', doesn't come off well to me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
happyjosiah wrote:
Still, it seemed to me like there were plenty of people being interview who basically just said "sure, I'm pro-choice" without really giving it any thought.


Then it would be better to get them to ask that question rather than turn this in to "by the way, here's the answer."

I don't think that I agree with you that people's positions are sort of casual, though I agree that many may not be able to justify their positions in depth a la RSP. But then I don't think this question is central all but a few people to begin with, so this doesn't surprise me.

Ask most people why they're Democrats or Republicans and I'll bet you get more than a few answers that make you scratch your head. We don't always think deeply on topics that aren't relevant to use every day unless we're interested in thinking deeply. The neo-nazi with the blue mohawk strikes me as a perfect example of this - I'd bet a decent amount that he fell into his beliefs because of his drinking buddy/buddies without really questioning any of it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
DCAnderson wrote:
djgutierrez77 wrote:
The difference between me and the "pro-life" movement as I see it is how we work towards that outcome. Especially when "pro-life" gets all tangled up in unhealthy religious attitudes about sex, abstinence, and birth control as it so often does. I've said many times here that if "pro-life" meant more and better sex education, easier access to birth control, a system of support for single teen mothers that would keep them in school rather than doom them to a life of poverty and a lack of education, and a better support system for parents who choose to give their child up for adoption then I would proudly self-apply that label. To me, the pro-life side of the debate has been twisted into a quest for ideological purity rather than working to minimize abortion. For the pro-life side it's become far more about punitive consequences and abstinence and moralizing about sexuality than about actually reducing the number of abortions.


I'm totally going to tip you for this after I make my post, as this is one of those rare, but most precious things in RSP: somebody making me see something I hadn't considered before.

I kind of take it for granted that pro-life and religious moralizing are mutually exclusive, I just think of the pro-life movement itself as religious moralizing.

This actually in a way makes it clearer in my mind why the Culture Wars appears as such an unwinnable cesspit: the religious right might have some good points, but for the totally wrong reasons.

I'm still totally Pro-Choice, but your post scrapes away a layer of nonsense that makes it harder to understand others.


I have never seen this guy before - Ray Comfort. Rhetorical tricks aside, the video was compelling, if only for the simple reason that he proved you can get people to examine their own morality on a deeper level than some would have us believe. Not all people are stupid and thoughtless, even if they have cigarettes in their ears or are painted silver.

As for Dave's stance, I used to think he was pro-abortion for pretty much the same reasons he sees pro-life as being intertwined with religion. Dave is more liberal than conservative and rejects religious moralism while being pro-life. I am more conservative than liberal and reject religious moralism while being pro-life.

I don't have a single problem with the video's message. Not a one. Why does it matter if a person wants to be moral so they won't go to hell or wants to be moral because they have empathy for those around them? Yes, the RR may have made tactical errors in conflating God with the sanctity of the womb, but so has the decidedly non-empathetic pro-abortion crowd made similar errors in conflating religion with scientific stupidity. Not getting an abortion doesn't mean you're only carrying the child because you think God will burn your ass. And getting an abortion doesn't mean you have the moral high ground because it's just a bundle of cells that you saved from a life of suffering.

If something good happens, are you less of a person because it happened for reasons you don't like? That seems to be the main complaint about this sort of video and message - yeah, the theme is good, but it's ruined by being tied up with religion. I say bullshit. Good is good. The message here was good. These people asked themselves some deeper questions and only good can come from that. Except maybe the neo-Nazi with the blue Mohawk. I recommend you younger kids invest in the laser tattoo-removal market segment. It's the boom market of the next 30 years.

4 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kevin C wrote:
I don't object to the holocaust comparison. I object to using dishonest rhetorical tricks to manipulate people.


I don't particularly see a difference between these two. Comparing a voluntary act taken by an individual with organized genocide that targeted specific ethnic groups or genetic traits is about as dishonest you can get.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
I have never seen this guy before - Ray Comfort. Rhetorical tricks aside, the video was compelling, if only for the simple reason that he proved you can get people to examine their own morality on a deeper level than some would have us believe.


No he didn't.

He showed that you can get someone to accept a completely opposite shallow view from the shallow view they already had (for at least a few minutes for them to appear in a film) by setting up a string of leading questions.

Any half rate dodgy surveying group knows that.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:


As for Dave's stance, I used to think he was pro-abortion for pretty much the same reasons he sees pro-life as being intertwined with religion. Dave is more liberal than conservative and rejects religious moralism while being pro-life. I am more conservative than liberal and reject religious moralism while being pro-life.




This is one of only a very small handful of issues where I think you and I have remarkably similar opinions. If I remember right Darilian is also in very much the same camp, although I apologize to him if I have that wrong.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
djgutierrez77 wrote:

And to be fair, "our" side does it too. I saw an absolutely horrible article last year that makes the argument that a stance like mine, the idea that abortion is disturbing and should be rare, undermines women's rights. It's a nod toward the same problem of ideology over practicality. Reducing the number of abortions isn't a counter movement to women's rights, it's a parallel and unrelated issue. If we (pro-choicers) can't acknowledge that this is a thorny issue with many complicated emotional components, we're no better than the other side.


Both sides of the argument are loath to give any ground to the other side by even acknowledging a smidgen of credence to any facet in their position. They are so scared of the "slippery slope" that is hiding under their bed to entertain any ideas that "weaken" their position. It is the poster child for unreasonable partisanship.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:


I have never seen this guy before - Ray Comfort. Rhetorical tricks aside, the video was compelling, if only for the simple reason that he proved you can get people to examine their own morality on a deeper level than some would have us believe. Not all people are stupid and thoughtless, even if they have cigarettes in their ears or are painted silver.


This part I disagree with. It was well made, but not particularly compelling in that it doesn't really change anyone's mind about anything. I could trick Average Joe on the Street into agreeing with all kinds of things with the right trick questions, but I wouldn't convince them of anything. This is the same kind of half-wit "gotcha" stuff that Michael Moore pulls, and I find it just as boring and distasteful.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcel
Netherlands
Den haag
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
happyjosiah wrote:
I know some people object to the Holocaust comparison, and that's fair, I think. I don't really see the Holocaust as directly comparable, but it is useful as a rhetorical device. In other words, you should be able to articulate (or at least understand) WHY they are different in your own mind.

I actually think that it is a completely wrong comparison, for several reasons, the most simple one being that I do not consider a foetus a person.


I actually think that this film is the ultimate Godwin. It managed to Godwin itself before it got to the subject, which is an impressive feat off course, but not really a thought provoking feat.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
chaendlmaier wrote:
What always irks me about the pro-life argument is its arbitrariness. There's even inconsistency in its own ranks, some equate aborting a fertilized egg with murder, others view contraception as such. But the latter are just as right in principle - every time a couple has protected sex they are in effect preventing a possible life from coming into being. It can be extended further to even include abstinence: You're a perfectly healthy adult human being, so why aren't you birthing babies already? Get cracking.

If fertilization is the beginning of life, what follows is that it's already the end for millions of other potential humans - sperm which could've made it to the egg but didn't. So every life is effectively born out of a genocide. Even the state of pregnancy denies the potential existence of babies one could've carried to life after aborting the first foetus. On the other hand, everyone probably acknowledges a healthy baby as human after birth. So why do certain people spend more effort on campaigning against abortion instead of for measures to reduce the still abysmally high child mortality rates in third world countries?

Hardly anyone remembers the first years of their lives anyway, so why should we give fuss about babies dying at the age of two, if it wasn't for the fact that they're so damn adorable and for the emotional attachment of the parents? What would maybe make most sense to our society is if we applied here as well, the same market principles which influence the rest of our lives so greatly, by valuing personhood in terms of investment cost and defining the beginning of life as when a person starts earning revenue.


This shit is so seriously fucked up that I know you must be joking.

On the other hand, if you aren't, then I'm going to extrude a gun from my new 3-D printer and come shoot you in the face. You ain't putting any bacon on my table, so fuck ya!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcel
Netherlands
Den haag
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
chaendlmaier wrote:
What always irks me about the pro-life argument is its arbitrariness. There's even inconsistency in its own ranks, some equate aborting a fertilized egg with murder, others view contraception as such. But the latter are just as right in principle - every time a couple has protected sex they are in effect preventing a possible life from coming into being. It can be extended further to even include abstinence: You're a perfectly healthy adult human being, so why aren't you birthing babies already? Get cracking.


Pretty cool straw men, dude.

Considering that a straw man video was the origin of this thread, not a bad post then.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul DeStefano
United States
Long Island
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's a Zendrum. www.zendrum.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Anyone else offended by the bait and switch in the video?

If anyone here in RSP tried any of these logic lines, they would be pounded for weaks.

This guy is disgusting and seems to enjoy making people look like idiots.

Doesn't matter what the stance is - this jerk is a bully.
7 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.