One of the few things I’ve noticed the entire board agrees on is paedophilia is really, really, really icky.
We’ve had at least one out-and-out paedophile, though I think he was banned. Cesario or something like that.
I think the board members would agree that we are not in agreement about what we do and do not agree about.
I disagree.
Until he was turned into an antagonist to Bugs.
A Daffy/ Bugs rivalry was a natural development given their respective career paths.
The later Daffy vs Speedy Gonzalez stories made no organic sense.
I’m on the fence about this…I think some would agree what we agree or disagree about but others would disagree about what we agree or disagree about and some really annoying people would be on the fence…
:eek:
…er, that didn’t come out quite right. :smack:
Regards . . . is . . . .
Ginger is definietly hotter than Mary Ann. But I’d rather live with Mary Ann.
I’ll agree provisionally. I reserve the right to change my mind if for some bizarre reason I ever actually watch it.
We agree on Oreos, but not how to eat them.
We agree that it’s best to stop for traffic lights.
We agree that Hitler was bad.
We agree that Pope Francis is a refreshing change in leadership for the Catholic Church.
We agree that it’s best to keep the shower curtain inside the surround while showering.
We agree that chimpanzees are not to be trifled with. . . also Gurkhas.
We agree that George R. R. Martin needs to hurry the ^*@($ up with Winds of Winter.
Asking for things literally everyone here agrees on is probably only going to yield things like “most people have two hands”.
If we lower the bar a bit and ask “What ideas are accepted by 95%+ of regular GD posters, that are not so broadly accepted on a global basis?”, I think we could identify a general agreement that democracy, freedom of speech, and separation of church and state are all good things.
Why is extinction bad? If the vast majority of us agree that we, as a species, evolved from other forms of life, then some life has to die off to let other forms exist. So that we, eventually, could exist and you, subjectively, could treasure your own life. The life forms that can pass, to their offspring, better ways of living to produce more offspring take over the niches of life forms that pass less useful ways of living to those offspring. The inefficient die out – and this is not bad. If no species dies out, then nothing is changing and nothing is evolving – and our species does not exist.
It is obvious that I do not treasure all living things. This is because I believe that to make room for more/other/different something has to die. Humans have to die to make room for other humans. Again this is not bad. While there are people that I, subjectively, wish did not die - my father for example - I know his life had a value to me and the people who knew him, but was not of value to humanity as a whole.
I seem to recall a thread a few years ago about the Mamas and the Papas. There was a universal agreement that the Mamas and the Papas were a good group.
This is a common misconception of evolution – evolution does not require that ‘precursor species’ go extinct for their forebears to evolve into a new species. For example: suppose some rats are isolated on an island for whatever reason. Those rats may evolve into a new species specialized for the island conditions, while their cousins on the mainland essentially remain the same as the island rats’ ancestors. This sort of speciation has happened (and still is happening) many, many times in Earth’s history.
Jar-Jar sucks.
I guess I’d count as part of the 5%, then.
You have to know that somewhere in our crowd there is somebody who likes Jar-Jar. It’s the law.
Blue Bloods is smarmy and overrated. NCIS’s credibility is hurt by Abby, but she’s the heart of the show so there’s nothing to be done about it. Chicks dig Tony Stark more than Namor.
Yeah, but an equal or greater number of people profess that the movies featuring him never happened, so it balances out.