case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2015-01-14 06:42 pm

[ SECRET POST #2933 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2933 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Lovely Complex]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Giada De Laurentiis/John Mayer]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Dragon Age 2]


__________________________________________________



05.
[John Finnemore's Souvenir Programme]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Robert Smith of The Cure]


__________________________________________________



07.
[WWE]


__________________________________________________



08.
(Agents of Shield)


__________________________________________________



09.
[Rookie Blue]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Star Trek: The Next Generation]


__________________________________________________



11.
[Dragon Age Inquisition]


__________________________________________________



12.
[Sailor Moon]


__________________________________________________



13.
[Stargate: Atlantis]


__________________________________________________



14.
[Pern]












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #419.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 12:14 am (UTC)(link)
I guess I'm using the term less to denote evil, and more to refer to the ridiculous pettiness, and the arbitrary, whimsical, random annoying crap that Q does.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 12:31 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah. But God once killed a good, righteous man's entire family, decimated his wealth and afflicted him with gross oozing sores just because Satan dared him to. It's the Book of Job. That's not even counting the time he destroyed the whole world-- animals, babies included-- with a giant flood except for one dude's family. Or that time he struck Egypt with diseases and plagues that killed all the Egyptian firstborn children and animals just to show Pharaoh that Moses meant serious business.

Q's annoying. But if Q was an asshole version of God, I suspect he'd be a lot more than simply a thorn in the Enterprise crew's side.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 12:36 am (UTC)(link)
I said jackass. To me, jackass and asshole have very, very different connotations, to the point where I think it's basically a completely different argument depending which you use. 'Jackass' is what I meant and 'asshole' just really isn't. It's, again, more about selfishness and pettiness and just being a big goofy ass, not about being mean or evil. What I was saying was that Q was essentially what would happen if you had a being who was totally omnipotent but basically only interested in idiotic pranks and being a pain in the ass.

Also, I am hugely uninterested in doing the whole 'God is totally evil' conversation, I don't think it's an interesting topic, and I don't think it's germane to the point I was making. Please stop trying to prove to me that God is evil.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 04:23 am (UTC)(link)
"Also, I am hugely uninterested in doing the whole 'God is totally evil' conversation, I don't think it's an interesting topic, and I don't think it's germane to the point I was making. Please stop trying to prove to me that God is evil."

I thought it was germane in the sense that you were likening Q to a more asshole version of God. I'm not saying God is evil, I'm merely pointing out that his deeds are arguably much worse than Q (and that they also fit some of the words you used to describe Q, i.e. "petty" and "arbitrary"), so it seems an odd comparison to make. Of course, I didn't realize you working off your own unique, personalized meanings for jackass vs. asshole...?

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 04:50 am (UTC)(link)
And you're using a definition of God which relies on a specific and dubious traditional canon.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 08:31 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not sure how you think these things are usually handled, but in the context of a religious discussion about the Judeo-Christian God, citing what the Bible says is perfectly legit. I am not making up my own wholly unconnected definition of God according to my super special needs, the way you did with definitions of "jackass" and "asshole".

I'm very sorry if my examples of God's unpleasant actions offended you, but I don't think your problem is really with me unless you wish to shoot the messenger. Again, I didn't make those up, they're all in the Bible.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 08:56 am (UTC)(link)
You're the one who brought the Judeo-Christian god into the discussion, though.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 10:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Okay, but, no one said anything about Judaism or Christianity until you. You saw the word "God" and, because you apparently either lack imagination or really wanted a chance to trot out some internet atheist talking points, you immediately assumed that anon MUST be talking about the God of the Bible and MUST be starting a discussion about it.

You're a tool.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 08:30 am (UTC)(link)
Oh Lord, shut up.

(DA)

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 02:34 am (UTC)(link)
Maybe the OT is full of crap, just saying.

(Anonymous) 2015-01-15 10:51 pm (UTC)(link)
Why are you coming at this from the POV that god is real and that god is the Judeo-Christian version?