Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

California: a world gone nuts?


NipkowDisc

Recommended Posts

It is my understanding that the laws regarding attempted suicide were created to provide justification for police to hold a person. It is the law in this area that police may send a person for a twenty-four-hour evaluation based solely upon their actions but a person under arrest may be sent for seventy-two-hour evaluation. The difference is that it would be very much more difficult for a person to mask suicidal ideation for several days while they may be sufficiently cool and calculating to mask their intent for one day only.

Link to post
Share on other sites
To maintain a semblance of remaining on-topic:
 
It is my understanding that California has long been a haven for religious nuts.
 
I have watched a video clip in which Johnny Carson told of a man in Los Angeles who had a nightmare and his thrashings caused him to fall out of the open window beside his bed. The window was so far from the ground that he could not climb in again. It was fortunate that he dragged his sheet out with him because he slept in the buff and so was able to wrap it around for the sake of modesty while he went to his front door. The walk around his house to his door was sufficient time for him to gain six disciples. I apologize that I had to paraphrase but I do not have the video at hand. I can assure you that it is wildly funny when he tells it.

 

To make that information credible it would be necessary to make a

number of unusual assumptions: that one individual is knowledgable

about what the leading scholars in a number of disciplines say about

the definition, that there is agreement across these disciplines about

the definition of religion, and that the leading persons in these disciplines

are in agreement about the definition. Those conditions seem very

unlikely, so I don't consider the proposition to be very likely. So I have

no trouble retaining my definition, not only because I have no reason

not to think that there is as much of a chance that these scholars agree with

my basic definition as they disagree with it, but also because it is a

very common definition that would be understandable to most people

when the word religion is used.

 

"nontheistic 
"Syllabification: non·the·is·tic
"Pronunciation: /ˌnänˌTHēˈistik    /
"ADJECTIVE
"Not having or involving a belief in a god or gods."
 
"Nontheistic religion" is a standard term in anthropology, sociology and philosophy. 
 
I believe that even a person of limited wit can understand that a term does not become standard in several disciplines if its meaning lacks a consensus.
 
Hinduism and Buddhism are major religions and neither require belief in God or gods or supernatural.. 
 
I do not understand how any person can expect their opinions on an issue to be taken seriously when they fail to learn the most fundamental aspects of that issue.
 
It is for this reason that I do not speak of allegories in john Ford westerns, Egyptian neo-realism films of the 1960s or symbolism in Mexican snuff-movies. I might express my personal taste but I know that I do not know of these topics sufficiently to state an opinion which any person should take seriously.
 
I will suggest for any who are interested in this type of subject to read: A Confusion of the Spheres: Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein on Philosophy and Religion by Genia Schönbaumsfeld (2007 Oxford Press). It is as interesting to read as it is informative.
 
This is my last post in this thread regarding this subject. I feel such discussions are inappropriate for this forum even although this is: "Off-Topic" board. I apologize to all for allowing myself to be drawn so far off-topic by a single poster.
 
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a sign of nuttiness that the California legislature made Ursus californicus -California grizzly bear or California Golden bear- the state animal thirty-one years after it became extinct?

 

It is a sign of nuttiness that the: California Medical Association had as its president in 2008: Dr. Richard S. Frankenstein?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good that you added that there smiley->   :lol: , ND.

 

'Cause the concept that ANY Californian would be "jealous of New Jersey", is probably THE funniest thing I've read in a long long time!

 

(...not that The Garden State doesn't have its charms of course, but when it will possess a city as beautiful as San Francisco, a coastline as strikingly diverse as the sandy year-round sunlight beaches of Santa Monica to the grandeur of Big Sur and/or a place as wondrous as Yosemite, THEN we'll talk, duuuuuuuude!) LOL

http://oi57.tinypic.com/ao6rgm.jpg

 

A couple of years back, the SF Giants WS. They had some lady with a very large and incredible stupid looking hat singing during the festivities. I heard she also confused the Giants with the Forty-Niners. It pretty much summed up the ridiculousness that is SF.

 

P.S. I heard you can't buy goldfish there either....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the California nuts shtick. I'd guess the stereotype

predates him, but Archie Bunker at least gave it more publicity

in the 1970s. For him, Cali was a place for both "fruits" and

nuts, who seemed to collect there for some unnamed reason.

Then twenty five years later Frank Barone came along and

had the same complaint about California as Bunker did. Maybe

it's a Long Island thing.

The "fruits and nuts" are one of the reasons I love this state. 

 

It's the "normal" people you have to watch out for. :)  

Link to post
Share on other sites

California is one of the states I've never visited, but I've got some high school and college classmates that live there, and they love it.  It's probably one of the few places in the U.S. where you can go hiking, fishing, surfing, snow skiing, and sunbathing all in one day!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention simple-minded.

If you like. :)

 

"Because we just keep on a-comin'. We're the people that live.

 

They can't lick us and they can't beat us because...we're the people." -Jane Darwell  :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those keeping score at home.. we've had one poster here claiming that "normal" people should be "watched out for" ,  to which someone else replied that it was because they were a "no-nonsense" bunch. To which A THIRD person felt inclined to add, "Not to mention simple-minded".

 

Nice.. what a tolerant and open-minded thing to say. To quote a line from a well-known classic movie (Oh.. and for the record, it was spoken from someone who was also considered "simple-minded too!) "Now that's getting personal, lion" 

 

And may I just add.. if someone from the "normal" point of view were to hurl such an insult at the supposedly more open-minded, more complex thinkers here... well.. the public outcry on this board would never end.

 

Just an observation...

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those keeping score at home.. we've had one poster here claiming that "normal" people should be "watched out for" ,  to which someone else replied that it was because they were a "no-nonsense" bunch. To which A THIRD person felt inclined to add, "Not to mention simple-minded".

 

Nice.. what a tolerant and open-minded thing to say. To quote a line from a well-known classic movie (Oh.. and for the record, it was spoken from someone who was also considered "simple-minded too!) "Now that's getting personal, lion" 

 

And may I just add.. if someone from the "normal" point of view were to hurl such an insult at the supposedly more open-minded, more complex thinkers here... well.. the public outcry on this board would never end.

 

Just an observation...

 

To me your only seeing what you wish to see.   The first intolerant comment was related to fruits and nuts.   Do I have to explain what a fruit is and how that was an intolerant comment?     So someone says they like fruits and nuts and it is the 'normal' people that they are afraid of.    This JOKE was meant to provide some balance.     Just an observation....

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those keeping score at home.. we've had one poster here claiming that "normal" people should be "watched out for" ,  to which someone else replied that it was because they were a "no-nonsense" bunch. To which A THIRD person felt inclined to add, "Not to mention simple-minded".

 

Nice.. what a tolerant and open-minded thing to say. To quote a line from a well-known classic movie (Oh.. and for the record, it was spoken from someone who was also considered "simple-minded too!) "Now that's getting personal, lion" 

 

And may I just add.. if someone from the "normal" point of view were to hurl such an insult at the supposedly more open-minded, more complex thinkers here... well.. the public outcry on this board would never end.

 

Just an observation...

 

WAIT a sec here, rohanaka my friend!

 

Soooo, after the FIRST reply in this thing, MY fracturing of that Beach Boys song in which I poke fun at "East Coast snobs", "Southerners and their drawl makin' 'em sound 'dim'", "Midwesterns bein' 'boring'", AND our friends to the North "freezin' their collective a$$es off every Winter", you're suddenly NOW gettin' your ire up here????

 

(...dude, where ya BEEN???!!!!) 

 

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

you're suddenly NOW gettin' your ire up here????

(...dude, where ya BEEN???!!!!

 

Well Dargo.. Dude.. Please do not take my former silence as any sort of criticism or snub on your witty parody of a much beloved beach tune.. (or an endorsement of it, for that matter).

 

To be honest. and since you asked, it takes a lot to get my ire up. (at least enough to dive into a thread conversation of this nature where I am clearly not going to win any friends with my "alternate" point of view.) I have often found a lot of hostility here in the ole "off topic" area (and other places) towards folks who tend to hold a more traditional point of view (on all sorts of subjects) so most of the time.. I figure hey.. why jump in where I am clearly not welcome?  

 

But I think the main reason that I first spoke up (earlier in the thread.. with regard to topic of Church and State) is similar to my reasons for speaking now.. I just felt led to speak.

 

It happens. 

 

And I hope the record shows that when I do feel so led, I try my best to be as respectful as possible toward others and their perfect right to hold their own opinion.. and at all costs, I do my best to refrain from name-calling (in jest or otherwise). It is something I try very hard to do.. because I appreciate it when others show the same courtesy toward me.

 

You know.. We are all just "people" here.. none of us is like the other.. and yet we are all the same in that we all have our good points AND our bad ones. We all have faults, and I certainly claim mine because I know them well. So I don't expect others to be perfect either, and I don't even expect people to agree with me. But I guess what I am just trying to point out here is.. it would be refreshing if we all just tried a little harder to be respectful when we don't see eye to eye.  

 

And with that.. I really do think I have said pretty much all I need to say (or care to) for the last time in this thread. 

 

So to quote another, less "classic" but still perhaps appropriate movie line... 

 

"Party on, dudes"  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that no person who knows me would ever state that I am: "normal." I feel as if that would be an insult because: "normal" people are so mundane. 

 

It has been said of me that it is a waste of effort to: "watch out for me" because it is my nature to spring from ambush demonstrate my idiosyncrasies only when my victims friends are not looking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rohanaka, you neglected the mention that prior to the 'normal people' remark, there was the exceedingly salient remark about 'nuts' and 'fruits' that someone leaped to the fore to correct you on, thereby reminding us that balance has been restored. There might even have been a couple of other brilliant repartees in that cute little series of look-how-funny-I-am rejoinders, so many in fact that the thread of what was actually being said was lost, not that it matters because nothing was really being said anyway. And as another poster remonstrates, you (like come on, Dude ... oops, scuse me, I mean ma'am) only mention this latest skirmish in a thread that has had, well at least a few, all of them replete with brilliant repartees and all kinds of clever stuff, once again in the style of 'I said something funnier than you did, bleah!; What we have here really is a talent show. You refer to those who might be keeping score. I'm surely not and glad of it because it would just be to difficult to declare a winner, everyone is just doggone clever and gosh so funny 'round here. 'Course I'm no different than the main, my little contribution was the screenshot regarding suicide in California where I so cleverly refer to this thread as having been 'conscientiously' started meaning of course that any off-topic chit-chat community who doesn't have at least one thread bashing California is like, I mean, worthless. I thought that was funny even though no else probably did. I don't think my funnies are as good as other's funnies, and I'm quite sure that whoever is keeping score has got me in last place, which is okay by me.

I now think it was a mistake for me to focus in on California in the thread title. Prongs who refuse to let cable subscribers unsubscribe are everywhere.  :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, I hope this isn't to be my first brouhaha!

 

I made the comment about "normal" (certainly open to interpretation!) people being the ones to watch out for as a joke, and added the smiley face to underscore that.  

 

Many of my friends are eccentric, many are gay. For whatever reason (and partly due to Mr. Gay D's occupation in the arts), these are the people I know and often gravitate toward.  I also know so-called "normal" people, but sometimes have a little trouble communicating with them as freely as with other friends.  

 

I meant no offense in my comment, and am sorry if it hurt anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I now think it was a mistake for me to focus in on California in the thread title. Prongs who refuse to let cable subscribers unsubscribe are everywhere.  :D

 

Is it possible that you are construing my post to be a jab at you for for starting this thread? Rereading it, I can see to my horror where it could be so construed. But I didn't mean that.. Though I'm a Californian, I have certainly been around long enough to know that "California bashing "is as American as apple pie and besides I'm not sure that the thread is technically bashing at all---the tongue-in-cheek factor seems to be quite evident from the beginning, and frankly I'm proud of myself for being able to see that.

 

No, my big hang up for this week is that there is so much talk on the boards about just everything besides movies themselves and that folks tend to get caught up on making jokes and trying to out-clever whoever made the last joke, etc. Never mind that I do it as well, don't bother me with facts ;-) like I say, it's my hang up of late. That was the subject of the post. But it's all BS, I was even thinking that the off-topic Chit-Chat portion might have been a bad idea, it's so much fun to come down here and chatter away and it takes away from the movie talk.

 

Getting over myself is always a refreshing experience, probably because I have to do so often. I'm deleting the post and would like to urge the group to continue on, now that I'm over all this who-is-funnier-than-who nonsense, I have to admit that much of what has been said here has been quite funny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, I hope this isn't to be my first brouhaha!

 

I made the comment about "normal" (certainly open to interpretation!) people being the ones to watch out for as a joke, and added the smiley face to underscore that.  

 

Many of my friends are eccentric, many are gay. For whatever reason (and partly due to Mr. Gay D's occupation in the arts), these are the people I know and often gravitate toward.  I also know so-called "normal" people, but sometimes have a little trouble communicating with them as freely as with other friends.  

 

I meant no offense in my comment, and am sorry if it hurt anyone.

 

At the risk of being presumptuous, I would like to say that I, for one, was not offended by any remark you or anyone else has made on this thread. I say that in view of my post of earlier this afternoon that may have inadvertently suggested otherwise, a post that I have deleted. As a straight man (you see, I have to clarify that, just like a straightee), and as a person who has lived in California most of my life, there has been nothing said here that I have deemed offensive. I just don't know how to make myself properly understood in a simple post (i.e., the one I deleted).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nooo! You don't say?  Here I was thinkin' she had been playin' Mary Poppins.  :P

 

The Tea and Cakes of Wrath?  :lol:

 

So you do understand the difference between words spoken by a fictional character in a fictional movie (and novel) and words spoken by a real live person in her real live life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you do understand the difference between words spoken by a fictional character in a fictional movie (and novel) and words spoken by a real live person in her real live life.

Did you understand by my quote that I was drawing a comparison between the common people to the elite progressive self-professed mental giants of today?  :)

 

What did you do?

 

"I talked back."

 

 

2zi3dw8.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...