Recent comments in /f/videos

boot20 t1_j65kjsw wrote

Reply to My old, deaf dog likes to sleep outside. Because she's deaf, we can't call for her, and I don't feel like going out to get her in the cold/snow. So we taught our younger dog to go get her. by Admiral_Hakbar

Similar thing here. My deaf cat ends up getting locked in closets and shut into the pantry, because she gets behind stuff or on top and you can't see her.

Anyway, we've trained our dog to not only find her, but to alert us if she's shut up somewhere. We had to close our bedroom door because we were having some construction done and it was dusty, well, our little pup was FREAKING out because our cat was locked in the room. It was the cutest damn thing. We had to let that cat out and our pup didn't leave her side for like 48 hours.

46

NeonRedHerring t1_j65729m wrote

Reply to comment by wwarnout in Pope Francis says homosexuality is not a crime in a new interview by onedirection8888

All vast institutions that span millennia are going to have done both good and evil. Institutions consist of people, and people are flawed. The idea that we judge institutions based only on the evil they have done is all the rage as critical theory spreads, but viewing history through the lens of hyper-criticism is as myopic as viewing history based only on the good things institutions have done. Institutions, like people, are mixed bags of good and evil. Focusing on evil to the exclusion of good is not only unproductive, it’s also detrimental to society. What message do we send people knowing no matter what they do in the future, one sufficiently evil act will taint them forever? We all do evil over the course of our lives. When we are at our worst, is that evil the only thing worthy of mention for the rest of our lives? Not only as an asterisk, but to the exclusion of anything good a person might accomplish in their life? This is true for institutions as it is for people.

When someone like the pope does something good, can we not look at the merits of that action alone, or does every action he makes, no matter how meritorious, ultimately have to end in condemnation?

Also, I think you’ve missed the point about the phrase “he who casts the first stone. Pope Francis isn’t throwing a stone by saying homosexuality isn’t a crime. In fact he is lowering the arm of some Catholic stone-throwers. That’s a good thing. Why not celebrate good, just as we condemn evil?

4

ZenBowling t1_j654kmh wrote

Reply to comment by ConsistentLog4353 in Ke Huy Quan (Everything Everywhere All at Once) and Brendan Fraser share a touching moment by fibz

Your original post does come across as bitter.

It isn't just what you are saying, but how you said it with your word selection. The acting profession is not the end of civilization.

But also to counter, I disagree with some points. Actors and movies dont contribute nothing to society. Some of the stuff they produce is art and is meaningful and helpful to people.

I think often of that line from EEAAO by Ke Huy Quan's character about, in another life, how he would love to do laundry and taxes with Michelle Yoeh's character. It is such a sweet and real concept to keep with me and help me cherish my relationship. It has affected me positively. To me that does have value.

2