Unpopular Opinions

[Scorpid]

I think that all Balkan countries should be back in the control of Austria Hungary and all those that weren't should be as well. They've done nothing but try to kill each other and fuck up their part of the world and europe by extension. This includes greece.

I also think that there should be a mandatory license to have children. Nothing drastic just something that says you're mentally stable and seem fit to be a parent BEFORE you have the kid not after.

I also think sex ed should be much more up front about sex and honest and that Birth control should have mandatory coverage by insurance. Also alcohol cigarettes and recreational drugs should be banned forever because no good (except music and poetry) has come from these things.

Hey you said they were opinions, not that they had to be feasible.

EDIT: OH And that everything that is Russia or former Russia should be swallowed by a black hole. I despise Russians...

EDIT2: Algeria should be back under French control. last one i swear.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

Bestiality is animal abuse, and I don't care what anyone says about it "not hurting the animal". It's still having sex with a living being against their will, therefore that's rape. Pure and simple. You could make the same argument that child molestation doesn't hurt the child if it doesn't know what's going on, but it'd be equally as retarded.

This is an unpopular opinion? I'm suddenly rather worried about the views of the majority.

Oh, I misconstrued it as being somewhat popular, at least maybe on here, since I've heard a good deal of people claim that it's not animal abuse/rape if it doesn't hurt them, and people only or mainly reject it because it's disgusting.

Spider-Man 3 was an enjoyable film.

Hell, I think it was the best film in the trilogy due to the multiple villains, Venom, dealing with Peter's dark side, Peter and MJ's crumbling relationship (fairly realistic, rather than the typical thing that happens in superhero films where the hero "gets the girl" and they all live happily ever after), etc.

I also think that there should be a mandatory license to have children. Nothing drastic just something that says you're mentally stable and seem fit to be a parent BEFORE you have the kid not after.

I'm not sure I've already said this, but either way, I agree.

 

[Rawne1980]

In other words, rather than attempting to discover the CAUSE of someone's even menial misery and at times relevant/understandable concerns with the world, you shun them in order to selfishly allow yourself to continue living in sunshine and rainbows.

I don't "shun" them in order to continue living in my puppies and kittens world, i'm going to have a big, cheesy grin on my face regardless.

What I detest is when people go out of their way to bring other people down.

But please enlighten me as to why it is selfish to be happy?

I'm genuinely curious to know your reasoning behind that one.

My biggest problem with some of those "concerns" with the world is it's by people that make no attempt to change anything.

As it's well documented I spent many years in the British Army and have been to the back arse of beyond and seen damn near everything a human being is capable of. The difference between people like me and people that complain is we've seen it, we've been there and we got the bloody t-shirt. We did what little we could to make sure shit didn't happen to as many people as we could possibly rescue/save/protect. We didn't sit around and whine about it.

So you will have to forgive me if I do drag every bit of happiness I can get out because, quite frankly, I fracking deserve it.

I do hope you forgive my selfish reasons for being happy. I haven't had much of it so now, as I get older, I take joy in the little things. My kids, my wife, my wifes cats (even though they hate me), my wifes ever growing army of bloody hamsters (seriously, we have 11 of the little fluffballs, she likes cute furry things) and the various other animals that dwell in our petting zoo ... sorry ... house.

I have joy because i'm alive. Morbid reasoning, I made it out of every single shit pit I was sent to when others did not. So yeah, i'm happy. I like life and it's little quirks. Hell I even like you and I don't bloody know you, I like you have the balls to question someone even if it is anonymously over the net.

 

[Rock-nerd]

i think obama is pretty good

I liked spiderman 3

i don't like mass effect that much

i believe johnny depp is better when he plays a normal, respectable role rather than some wacko

I am against the death penalty

I hate it when atheists talk about how "christians shove beliefs down their throat." When they constantly shove their lack of religion down yours."


Please be gentle.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

People who denounce all organize religion and use Westboro Baptist Church as an example of "the evils of religion."

The WBC is a f*cking pack of lunatics. And they are in no way indicative of organized religion as a whole.

 

[Rock-nerd]

Apart from 2-3. i don't like your views. but it's your opinion so it's cool

 

[Woodsey]

Goddamn, you guys are edgy as fuck.

I wish I could be half as cool as most of you.

I like the sarcasm, but this thread is for the unpopular opinions. There's a reason they're unpopular. So everyone here is going to appear dark and edgy. Sorry bout that.

There's a difference between unpopular opinions and some of the insane shit that's come up in this thread.

 

[Luke3184]

Removed

 

[doggy go 7]

I think medical marijuana is waste of time, and marijuana should be sold, taxed, and regulated like alcohol. That opinion seems to be accepted by about half the country.

But I also think all drugs should be legalized. Yep - morphine, amphetamines, you name it. Studies have shown that current policy doesn't reduce the tendency of people to get addicted to them, and that the major health problems people have as a result is because they're getting low-quality chemicals off the street.
If only cleanly made drugs were sold (and all these drugs have medical uses, so they ARE all produced cleanly by regulated companies as well) I think it would reduce fatalities and take a lot of money out of the black market. It's juvenile for politicians to think that restricting availability will stop people from using. There's really very little different between what we're doing now and what happened during Prohibition, whose only significant lasting effect was to strengthen the black market beyond belief.

dude, I completely agree with legalising all drugs, but I alos think that because it's a great way to get people off of them. The reason why people won't get medical help when they're addicted, is because what they're doing is illegal. If it were legal, it would be a hell of a lot easier to find the addicts, and to help them.

That's of course not mentioning the fact orginised crime would practically die, we'd be bolstering shitty econimies where they grow this shit, and of course, the glorious amount of money that wouldn't be wasted on dealing would people who take drugs, and that would be made by taxing people who take drugs.

And I never plan on taking a drug more serious than alcohol.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

There's a difference between unpopular opinions and some of the insane shit that's come up in this thread.

Insanity is subjective, and they're unpopular for a reason.

 

[Woodsey]

Total democracy was the worst thing to happen to the human race... /hides

What would you suggest instead? Not attacking you, just curious. Some kind of dictatorship presumably, but what? A real meritocracy (where the smartest are literally in charge), a monarchy?

In an ideal world? A strictly regulated state with one figurehead elected by the intelligentsia. I wouldn't trust the majority of people to pack my bag in Tesco, let alone vote for the best person for the country. And the current system implemented, (Looking at England here)the government is crippled with indecision, unable to make major changes due to the blocking processes from the opposition and the Lords or controversial decisions due to most people not understanding the logic behind it and therefore voting them out before it can be passed or successfully implemented. I truly take the opinion that a dictatorship run by intellectuals is the most efficient way to run a country.

As you can imagine this opinion doesn't really go down well with most people.

Well, that's rather an odd example considering the 2010 election wasn't exactly a democratic process.

I seem to have read your example wrong. Anyway:

And no country is truly and totally democratic.

There's a difference between unpopular opinions and some of the insane shit that's come up in this thread.

Insanity is subjective, and they're unpopular for a reason.

Yep, well done. Now read it again and think about why I may have made a distinction when technically there isn't one.

 

[orangeban]

Total democracy was the worst thing to happen to the human race... /hides

What would you suggest instead? Not attacking you, just curious. Some kind of dictatorship presumably, but what? A real meritocracy (where the smartest are literally in charge), a monarchy?

In an ideal world? A strictly regulated state with one figurehead elected by the intelligentsia. I wouldn't trust the majority of people to pack my bag in Tesco, let alone vote for the best person for the country. And the current system implemented, (Looking at England here)the government is crippled with indecision, unable to make major changes due to the blocking processes from the opposition and the Lords or controversial decisions due to most people not understanding the logic behind it and therefore voting them out before it can be passed or successfully implemented. I truly take the opinion that a dictatorship run by intellectuals is the most efficient way to run a country.

As you can imagine this opinion doesn't really go down well with most people.

I'm probably about as opposed to this view as you get, I adore democracy and would want nothing else, so while I don't agree with you, I do see your point and I understand why you hold that view. My main problem with views like yours is that the only people I trust less than the general public are the people who declare themselves "intellectual" enough to run a country.

 

[him over there]

I think my life and the world I live in are great.



OH SHI-

 

[Luke3184]

Total democracy was the worst thing to happen to the human race... /hides

What would you suggest instead? Not attacking you, just curious. Some kind of dictatorship presumably, but what? A real meritocracy (where the smartest are literally in charge), a monarchy?

In an ideal world? A strictly regulated state with one figurehead elected by the intelligentsia. I wouldn't trust the majority of people to pack my bag in Tesco, let alone vote for the best person for the country. And the current system implemented, (Looking at England here)the government is crippled with indecision, unable to make major changes due to the blocking processes from the opposition and the Lords or controversial decisions due to most people not understanding the logic behind it and therefore voting them out before it can be passed or successfully implemented. I truly take the opinion that a dictatorship run by intellectuals is the most efficient way to run a country.

As you can imagine this opinion doesn't really go down well with most people.

I'm probably about as opposed to this view as you get, I adore democracy and would want nothing else, so while I don't agree with you, I do see your point and I understand why you hold that view. My main problem with views like yours is that the only people I trust less than the general public are the people who declare themselves "intellectual" enough to run a country.

I personally don't consider myself smart enough to run a country, I have some issues with decisions made but doubt I could do better. My preference would be an application process, maybe requiring the said applicant to be able to answer several questions. Re-reading my response, I now realise I was unclear. By intellectuals I mean educated people, preferably with some knowledge of politics and the various parties' core beliefs. Or in the case of my ideal world, what the applicant the role of dictator would want to pass through.... It's much easier to explain in person and I begrudgingly accept that I might be coming of as a bit of a loon. So my apologies if I am, I'm sane, honest.

 

[DJ_DEnM]

I think Fallout isn't all that good.

Please don't kill me.

 

[him over there]

Total democracy was the worst thing to happen to the human race... /hides

What would you suggest instead? Not attacking you, just curious. Some kind of dictatorship presumably, but what? A real meritocracy (where the smartest are literally in charge), a monarchy?

In an ideal world? A strictly regulated state with one figurehead elected by the intelligentsia. I wouldn't trust the majority of people to pack my bag in Tesco, let alone vote for the best person for the country. And the current system implemented, (Looking at England here)the government is crippled with indecision, unable to make major changes due to the blocking processes from the opposition and the Lords or controversial decisions due to most people not understanding the logic behind it and therefore voting them out before it can be passed or successfully implemented. I truly take the opinion that a dictatorship run by intellectuals is the most efficient way to run a country.

As you can imagine this opinion doesn't really go down well with most people.

I'm probably about as opposed to this view as you get, I adore democracy and would want nothing else, so while I don't agree with you, I do see your point and I understand why you hold that view. My main problem with views like yours is that the only people I trust less than the general public are the people who declare themselves "intellectual" enough to run a country.

I personally don't consider myself smart enough to run a country, I have some issues with decisions made but doubt I could do better. My preference would be an application process, maybe requiring the said applicant to be able to answer several questions. Re-reading my response, I now realise I was unclear. By intellectuals I mean educated people, preferably with some knowledge of politics and the various parties' core beliefs. Or in the case of my ideal world, what the applicant the role of dictator would want to pass through.... It's much easier to explain in person and I begrudgingly accept that I might be coming of as a bit of a loon. So my apologies if I am, I'm sane, honest.

Your explanation there seems more to me less like you want a dictatorship and more like you want voters to have to qualify themselves as knowledgeable about what they are voting for to vote.

 

[LookAtYouHacker]

In other words, rather than attempting to discover the CAUSE of someone's even menial misery and at times relevant/understandable concerns with the world, you shun them in order to selfishly allow yourself to continue living in sunshine and rainbows.

I don't "shun" them in order to continue living in my puppies and kittens world, i'm going to have a big, cheesy grin on my face regardless.

What I detest is when people go out of their way to bring other people down.

Sorry, wrong context. Understood.

 

[Luke3184]

Removed

 

[Da Orky Man]

*ahem* born and raised in California and still live there. It is the proper spelling of the words. My mum got on my case about it the other day when she looked at the recipes that she had me type up for her. Because Microsoft Word told her it was wrong and I told her that Word was wrong. I got told that a lot in high school too.

Doesn't matter. Anyone who spells those words like that is a Brit, regardless of where they were born .

Welcome to the family.

 

[geK0]

Forum atheists are the scourge of the internet.

You know, those ones who jump on the "I hate Christianity" bandwagon and think they're cool, edgy and smart. Just ignore religion in silence like most of the rest of the developed world does.


Capcha:

anyone else see it?