Timothy Plan Updates "Do Not Buy List" of Videogames for the Holiday Season

Recommended Videos

inFAMOUSCowZ

New member
Jul 12, 2010
1,586
0
0
How dare he say anything about Alan Wake that game was one of the best I played all year

OT: Well, at least he isn't flat out saying these need to be band
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
SimuLord said:
Thanks Timmy, but we've already got a group warning us about games that are not suitable for children. It's called the ESRB. Steer clear of all the M-rated games and read the ESRB rating descriptors for the T-rated games. In other words, if you're a parent, don't be a complete fuckwit.
The ESRB rating can be vague. That's what this is for, further information.
 

master m99

New member
Jan 19, 2009
372
0
0
my one big problem with this is that it treats homosexuality as a bad thing or a threat,kinda makes them come accross as intolerent fucks also wtf playboy strip quest is less damaging then fable 3?! ,sigh, i guess its not a bad idea its just bad exacution
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
mireko said:
lacktheknack said:
manythings said:
lacktheknack said:
manythings said:
I think the point is that they are just being ignorant and talking about things they don't understand. Someone with a telescope in their backyard shouldn't try to lecture others on the lives of galaxies.
What?

Another person didn't even try to look at the list and reasoning.
I was just analogising (it's not a word) that the fact that you can see something and be aware of it doesn't make you qualified to talk about it. A hobby astronomer isn't someone I will ask about the nature of the universe.
Video games are not as complex as the universe.

They play them (or read parent-guide articles of people who play them) then say what's morally sketchy about them. Not rocket-science.
Homosexuality is not morally sketchy. There is no rational or sane argument that can dispute this fact.

If somebody compiling a list of things that are morally sketchy includes homosexuality, we can reasonably assume that they're either irrational, insane or ignorant (or c: all of the above). The argument against homosexuality is essentially people who are angry at other people for being happy.

And don't argue that it's about sexual content which happens to be homosexual, if that were the case they wouldn't have made an own category for it. They even listed gay adoption as a negative in the Fable series.

This post probably looks very arrogant, but if you genuinely agree with the extreme right-wing Christians at this point you might as well be arguing for the goddamn slave trade.
No I wouldn't.

theSovietConnection said:
We do not invest in any company that deals with the promotion of homosexuality. The Bible is very clear about sexual immorality and homosexuality just as it is about refraining from sex before marriage and adultery. Does this mean that, because we will not invest in companies, which support these things, we hate those who choose this lifestyle or are involved in these practices? Nothing can be further from the truth. When Jesus came to this earth, He came to those who needed Him. All of these sins existed when He was here and He dealt with all of them. He guided, but He loved at the same time.

There are those with different ideas and philosophies and have every right to exercise them. As God?s children, so do we. We have a right to believe in the Word of God. The Word of God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Although we are a company that stands on what we believe as individuals, what we think is not important. What God says is all-important. Those who read and study His Word, come to know His heart. God is not what we try to make Him to be. God is. We at the Timothy Plan earnestly seek on a daily basis God?s Word and His guidance not only to invest morally, but to respond to the hurts and needs of others, just as Jesus did. If we do not show love to those who have different opinions, different lifestyles, different views, then we at the Timothy Plan would be guilty of a greater sin, judging one another.
Thank you, SovietConnection, for the relevant quote.

How much more clear can they get?

EDIT: Here's the <link=http://www.timothyplan.com/ProActive/frame-ProActive-violators.htm>relevant link that you were too self-assured to bother looking for.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
master m99 said:
my one big problem with this is that it treats homosexuality as a bad thing or a threat,kinda makes them come accross as intolerent fucks also wtf playboy strip quest is less damaging then fable 3?! ,sigh, i guess its not a bad idea its just bad exacution
<link=http://www.timothyplan.com/ProActive/frame-ProActive-violators.htm>Again, link to explanation of why they include homosexualtiy as a descriptor.

Come on, ignorant masses who don't bother reading the site! I can do this all evening!
 

geoflo1024

New member
Jun 7, 2010
15
0
0
mireko said:
lacktheknack said:
manythings said:
lacktheknack said:
manythings said:
I think the point is that they are just being ignorant and talking about things they don't understand. Someone with a telescope in their backyard shouldn't try to lecture others on the lives of galaxies.
What?

Another person didn't even try to look at the list and reasoning.
I was just analogising (it's not a word) that the fact that you can see something and be aware of it doesn't make you qualified to talk about it. A hobby astronomer isn't someone I will ask about the nature of the universe.
Video games are not as complex as the universe.

They play them (or read parent-guide articles of people who play them) then say what's morally sketchy about them. Not rocket-science.
Homosexuality is not morally sketchy. There is no rational or sane argument that can dispute this fact.

If somebody compiling a list of things that are morally sketchy includes homosexuality, we can reasonably assume that they're either irrational, insane or ignorant (or c: all of the above). The argument against homosexuality is essentially people who are angry at other people for being happy.

And don't argue that it's about sexual content which happens to be homosexual, if that were the case they wouldn't have made an own category for it. They even listed gay adoption as a negative in the Fable series.

This post probably looks very arrogant, but if you genuinely agree with the extreme right-wing Christians at this point you might as well be arguing for the goddamn slave trade.
Morality is relative. According to Christian morality (and doctrine), homosexuality is a sin. There is nothing irrational, insane, or ignorant about it. It is a belief. Much like an opinion. I believe that homosexuality is a sin because I am a Christian who believes the Word of the Bible. I am not angry at homosexuals for being happy. I wish they wouldn't indulge in homosexual practices because I believe it a sin. And while I will agree with you that Christian extremists are something of a problem (if only because they make the rest of us look bad), the Timothy Plan does not seem to fit this criteria. They support the beliefs of the Bible without attacking or censoring or in any way hurting anyone else who believes otherwise.
 

Siberian Relic

New member
Jan 15, 2010
190
0
0
You'se guys are funny. I'll take this over the other, more media-driven extreme [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/03scotus.html] any day of the week.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Siberian Relic said:
You'se guys are funny. I'll take this over the other, more media-driven extreme [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/03scotus.html] any day of the week.
Man has a point. I hadn't even thought about that.
 

master m99

New member
Jan 19, 2009
372
0
0
lacktheknack said:
master m99 said:
my one big problem with this is that it treats homosexuality as a bad thing or a threat,kinda makes them come accross as intolerent fucks also wtf playboy strip quest is less damaging then fable 3?! ,sigh, i guess its not a bad idea its just bad exacution
<link=http://www.timothyplan.com/ProActive/frame-ProActive-violators.htm>Again, link to explanation of why they include homosexualtiy as a descriptor.

Come on, ignorant masses who don't bother reading the site! I can do this all evening!
ok one please dont call me ignorant, its not going to help anything is it? two im strugaling (sorry bad spelling)to find there justifacation for using homosexualtiy as a negative could you provide a quick 1 line sum up of there argument, im genuanly interested to see what they have to say on the subject as i feel i may have the wrong end of the stick.
 

estoria-etnia

New member
Aug 22, 2009
131
0
0
geoflo1024 said:
Morality is relative. According to Christian morality (and doctrine), homosexuality is a sin. There is nothing irrational, insane, or ignorant about it. It is a belief. Much like an opinion. I believe that homosexuality is a sin because I am a Christian who believes the Word of the Bible. I am not angry at homosexuals for being happy. I wish they wouldn't indulge in homosexual practices because I believe it a sin. And while I will agree with you that Christian extremists are something of a problem (if only because they make the rest of us look bad), the Timothy Plan does not seem to fit this criteria. They support the beliefs of the Bible without attacking or censoring or in any way hurting anyone else who believes otherwise.
Actually, the incident of homosexuality being classified as a 'sin' in Christianity is due to a translation error with the Bible. There was a Greek word that was used in the original that didn't have an English translation, so someone slapped in the 'homosexual' bit and viola! Homophobia and prejudice against it is actually a fairly modern conception and idea. It existed and was widely acceptable in Greek times, Roman times are a little more sketchy, and even in Renaissance times a lot of prominent people had lovers of the same sex.

The Christian faith is, let me remind you, divided about this issue. There are Christian churches and sects that have accepted homosexuality and do not promote it as a 'sin'.

I'm not going to tell you off on your opinion, you can hold it if you like, but when you cross that line in telling people that something that does not harm you is 'wrong' and 'sinful' you start wading into some ugly waters. Homosexuality is a NATURAL phenomenon. There are examples and instances of it in nature, which begs the question of why people call it 'unnatural' when, by nature of studying it, we come to the opposite conclusion.

The Timothy Plan is relatively sane and reasonable ? I'll give you that ? but I stand against some of the values that it promotes because I believe it isn't our right to tell people that whether or not they're attract to the same sex is wrong. The state and other people have no place in the bedrooms of others. Since I do have close friends who are homosexual, it hits very close to home for me when people start pushing the idea that who they are is wrong. Stick yourself in their shoes. See how much you like it.

lacktheknack said:
estoria-etnia said:
The Call of Duty: Black Ops entry made me laugh so fucking hard. I don't know but something about 'when killed, enemies bleed' and 'it is common to see people burning when caught in explosions'. Gee, I didn't know that that happened! Also, this made me face palm and laugh at the same time: 'The violence can be turned off, but this is a combat game so people will still die.'
Umm, just because it's obvious to YOU that the game is an intense, gritty death-fest doesn't mean it's obvious to my mother. She knows I like stealth and evasion games, and she knows that "Black Ops" implies espionage and subversion, not FIREEVERYWHEREAAAAAAHHHHHH. She'd probably assume it's about corporate and government espionage, stealth and escape elements, like what the title IMPLIES. But she'd be REALLY pissed when she walked in and saw the screaming burned people.

There is a place for this list, believe it or not.
I think that 'M rated game' should give your mother a bit of a clue that maybe there's going to be violence included in the game. Also, there are warnings on the back of the game that tell you a little bit of what to expect in terms of violence, gore, and sexual content (along with language). If she's thinking of buying you an M rated game ? which, according to the label are for those '17+' (doesn't stop those underage from playing them) ? and you're underage, it's her responsibility to maybe do some research about the game. I don't believe in blind consumerism, look into a game before you buy it ? watch some trailers or something.

This is the Call of Duty franchise, remember? It's all about shooting people and having explosions happen, not so much on the stealth aspect. If your mom only goes by titles and what they imply without asking questions or doing research when buying a game for you (and you're underage and she's still responsible for that) then it's her fault and yours. It's parental discretion to monitor what the kids are playing. My parents monitored our games until they felt we were ready for them; I only started playing a few M rated games when I was in my mid to late teens (mostly Tenchu, some Silent Hill, and Resident Evil).

The system works similar to how movie ratings work and who is and isn't allowed to see them.

That little bit was more about me laughing at some of the things they had listed because anyone remotely familiar with Call of Duty knows that it's pretty much obvious that if you kill people, they're going to bleed. (This happens in real life too; why do games and people deny it? We humans bleed all the time.)
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
master m99 said:
lacktheknack said:
master m99 said:
my one big problem with this is that it treats homosexuality as a bad thing or a threat,kinda makes them come accross as intolerent fucks also wtf playboy strip quest is less damaging then fable 3?! ,sigh, i guess its not a bad idea its just bad exacution
<link=http://www.timothyplan.com/ProActive/frame-ProActive-violators.htm>Again, link to explanation of why they include homosexualtiy as a descriptor.

Come on, ignorant masses who don't bother reading the site! I can do this all evening!
ok one please dont call me ignorant, its not going to help anything is it? two im strugaling (sorry bad spelling)to find there justifacation for using homosexualtiy as a negative could you provide a quick 1 line sum up of there argument, im genuanly interested to see what they have to say on the subject as i feel i may have the wrong end of the stick.
They use the Bible as the moral guideline, Bible says homosexuality is sin, end of. You know, stuff you already knew. The key lies in that, while they can't outright support homosexuality, they're NOT SAYING that homosexuals should all die. Consider this, homosexuality is on the same list of sins as adultery (implying they're similar in severity), and that's probably even more prevalent than homosexuality, and I don't hear a massive call to the stoning of adulterers.

After all, one of the most memorable stories in the Bible was Jesus saving an adulteress from stoning with one sentence. It`s not about the condemnation of homosexuals, and it never was.

(I know that wasn`t one line, but oh well...)
 

RatRace123

Elite Member
Dec 1, 2009
6,651
0
41
master m99 said:
ok one please dont call me ignorant, its not going to help anything is it? two im strugaling (sorry bad spelling)to find there justifacation for using homosexualtiy as a negative could you provide a quick 1 line sum up of there argument, im genuanly interested to see what they have to say on the subject as i feel i may have the wrong end of the stick.
This one got to me a bit too, but they really do a good job justifying it.
They claim that it's against their religion, but they in no way, condemn or demonize it. They say that people have a right to do and believe what they will, and that by trying to criticize or judge would be an even greater sin.

I don't agree with their stance on homosexuality, but they take a decidedly "live and let live" approach to it, and that's commendable.
 

Alucard832

New member
Sep 6, 2010
82
0
0
Lol'ing at all the butthurt and rage ITT. It's a list of games that you probably shouldn't be buying your preteens, and it's a reasonable list with that in mind.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
This_ends_now said:
Boobies were created by satan. Truefact.
How dare the Prince of Darkness give our women functional mammaries and men natural instincts to be drawn to healthy-looking breasts!
Sex is EVIL! Children would NEVER do anything EVIL unless they were shown how!

[sub]...except for every human child ever[/sub]

OT: By making an object or concept a "Forbidden Fruit", and not explaining it to your child you are in fact, setting them up for failure later on. We want our children to mature so they can become well balanced adults. If you lock a child in a social crypt for 16 years and then let him/her out, s/he's going to be even more of a freak than if s/he just adapted as normal.
 

Dioxide20

New member
Aug 11, 2009
639
0
0
"This is not an attempt to ban video games, or dictate whether people should play them," the website reads. "This is purely meant to inform parents who are concerned with the moral content/issues contained in video games and make available to them information which is not easily found."

This was all i needed to read. I wish more people were like this, rather then "LETS HAVE A GOOD OLD FASHIONED VIDEOGAMING BURNING!" This doesn't actually bring the industry any harm.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
estoria-etnia said:
it's her responsibility to maybe do some research about the game.
That's not helping any case on this list being bad. This list is for the aforementioned research.

mireko said:
lacktheknack said:
No I wouldn't.
You really would.
Just one thing to say to this - I've heard your exact argument hundreds of times. How many times have you properly considered the one I gave? If the answer's "Less than one", then actually weigh the good and bad before automatically assuming I'm evil.
 

Sporky111

Digital Wizard
Dec 17, 2008
4,009
0
0
"This is not an attempt to ban video games, or dictate whether people should play them," the website reads. "This is purely meant to inform parents who are concerned with the moral content/issues contained in video games and make available to them information which is not easily found."
It's actually very easy to find. It's a little box on the front of every game, and there's also a website with this detailed information. It's called the ESRB, and it has the advantage of being unbiased. Though, I'm sure Timothy Plan would argue whether or not that's an advantage.
 

master m99

New member
Jan 19, 2009
372
0
0
lacktheknack said:
master m99 said:
lacktheknack said:
master m99 said:
my one big problem with this is that it treats homosexuality as a bad thing or a threat,kinda makes them come accross as intolerent fucks also wtf playboy strip quest is less damaging then fable 3?! ,sigh, i guess its not a bad idea its just bad exacution
<link=http://www.timothyplan.com/ProActive/frame-ProActive-violators.htm>Again, link to explanation of why they include homosexualtiy as a descriptor.

Come on, ignorant masses who don't bother reading the site! I can do this all evening!
ok one please dont call me ignorant, its not going to help anything is it? two im strugaling (sorry bad spelling)to find there justifacation for using homosexualtiy as a negative could you provide a quick 1 line sum up of there argument, im genuanly interested to see what they have to say on the subject as i feel i may have the wrong end of the stick.
They use the Bible as the moral guideline, Bible says homosexuality is sin, end of. You know, stuff you already knew. The key lies in that, while they can't outright support homosexuality, they're NOT SAYING that homosexuals should all die. After all, homosexuality is on the same list of sins as adultery (implying they're similar in severity), and that's probably even more prevalent than homosexuality, and I don't here a massive call to the stoning of adulterers.

After all, one of the most memorable stories in the Bible was Jesus saving an adulteress from stoning with one sentence. It`s not about the condemnation of homosexuals, and it never was.

(I know that wasn`t one line, but oh well...)
right, ok i think i understand where there coming from now, i dont nessisarily (again yay spelling) agree with it but i see what they mean, i think my biggest surprise is that a game such as saw is by this method less damaging to children then say wow, which granted can be a huge time black hole (must not buy cata befor my january exams =S) but so far as i know is not based off a bunch of movies centered abound grosomly punishing people and very often killing them. of course that my opinion and you and everyone else in the world have every right to think of it as you may its just that i personally dont see this acting as a great aid, that being said i dont think its particularly damaging ether , man thats alot of text =P