akbogert

@Dredeuced: I will say this once, and I will not bother to debate it in any way henceforth, but the fact of Jesus' physical existence is absolutely beyond historical question. While the details and deity of that man's life are open to interpretation, the actuality of a Jesus who was well-known in that territory at that time, and who was executed, is simply not open for debate.

I'll ignore any responses, here or via PM, that seek to undermine or disprove that, so save your time. One thing I have wondered about, though, and would be open to reading, is an explanation (written at least a hundred years ago, because I don't want popular or modern relativism skewing the facts) as to why the demarcation between BC/AD exists. I know it's all trendy to say current era and before current era, but it's pretty clear that we mark our entire measure of historical time around something that happened then, and all the tombstones I've seen say "Before Christ" and "In the Year of our Lord." If that's mere coincidence or hijacking of history by the church, that's cool, but it seems pretty ingrained in historical consciousness regardless.

Welp. I'm impressed that this thread is not locked yet. And my prior assertion, that a real person beats a comic book character, still stands. For that matter, I beat Darkseid. Because again, I am real. Which brings up the question of how this thread is in any way legitimate? Is this Darkseid versus comic book depictions of Jesus? Because I have never read a Jesus comic so I don't know what the fictionalized Jesus is like (and inb4 "all versions of Jesus are fictional;" non-comic literature should still not apply to this "battle"). That said, if we are comparing him to the Biblical Jesus, y'all seem to have come to the story in medias res and forgotten that the "easy" death he allowed himself was merely a ruse to gain the upper hand on Death itself and the powers of darkness. And to answer the pacifists, I'll refer to another portrait we have of Jesus, after his believers have finished turning the other cheek. Revelation 19:11-16:

I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean.Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

king of kings and lord of lords.

I'm pretty sure real people beat fictional characters every time, right? Like... Darkseid does nothing without writers & artists, but Jesus actually, you know, existed. And that's true even if you write off any religious implications whatsoever (which, agreed, render this whole thread at best a troll-magnet, at worst actual trolling).

@joshmightbe: Well I should certainly hope we all want that. Seeing it actually happen, on the other hand...

I've never read a comic with her as Oracle, but I still feel like that's what she ought to be. Nevermind how remarkably convenient her recovery was. Having followed Gail Simone on Twitter and Tumblr for a while now, I've seen just how much having a handicapped, powerful character meant to a lot of people, and that alone is reason enough to hate the change. That said, if she's going to be up and about, it makes sense that she would want to be in on action again. So from a character perspective, it makes sense that she would want to be Batgirl again. I will acknowledge that her seemingly never having been Oracle is a little troubling; nothing particularly brilliant or hackerish has presented itself in her New 52 run.

As stupid as paralyzing her was (even Alan Moore has apparently admitted that was short-sighted, and I am fully with those who call it fridging because it was done to affect her father with no regard to what effect it might have on Barbara herself), they managed to make something great from that, and I think it's a shame that after all these years they cast that aside.

So, I guess: I wish she were still wheelchair-bound Oracle, but I accept the new Batgirl version of her.

@joshmightbe: Actually, only the first paragraph was a response to you, and the other 75% was simply a statement of my political outlook.

And while you may not be biased towards Democrats, your post unquestionably was. Your "con" for Democrats was simply that they wouldn't actually do what they say they will do -- implying that, at the core, you want them to be doing what they say, which means you agree with their goals. Likewise, your "con" for Republicans was that they unequivocally prevent progress from happening. The only way to interpret that is as I did: that if Republicans are the barrier to progress, then a force outside Republicans is attempting progress and being thwarted. The only meaningful force outside Republicans is Democrats; ergo, Democrats = progress. Moreover, the implication is that Republicans are antithetical to progress, that they would never do anything on their own that could be considered a move in the right direction.

Like I said, perhaps you just chose very poor words. But the words you chose are absolutely biased in favor of Democrats.

@CapFanboy: That's fair, but I still think it's worth encouraging them to stick with it.

You know, I really identified with the eponymous hero of Kick-Ass, up until the point wherein he survived getting hit by a car.

Most of the non-powered heroes have other outrageously unrealistic things going for them, like beyond-real military training or access to preposterous quantities of money with seemingly no oversight on how they use that wealth. Interestingly, I tend to feel a little sad that the battles between good and evil aren't as obvious in real life as they are in comics, movies, and the like. Powered or not, coming down from a comic-reading spree can make real life seem painfully mediocre. Envy of abilities comes and goes, but the desire to have a life that seems super-important will probably always linger beneath the pages of any heroic fiction.

@kuonphobos: Well, I'll tell you what. I acknowledge not having a great deal of expertise on this subject. A friend of mine highly recommended I watch a film...I think it was called Born into Brothels, or something of that sort. I guess it's time I do. And maybe I'll watch that documentary as well. For now, though, I stand by what I said: I want to hear it from them. I don't want any guys telling me that prostitution is good, as they have a historical (if not personal) bias in the question. If the desire of empowered women is to be paid for sleeping with them, then leave it to them to make that a legal reality. Meanwhile, this is one case in which I'm comfortable with having "archaic" views.

@kuonphobos: While I appreciate that a woman (or man, but I'm just being historical here) who wishes to use her body for money should probably be allowed to do so, it's far too common in places where prostitution is legal for women to be denied benefits because of their refusal to pursue that "legitimate" avenue of work. The evil of mandatory or proverbially forced prostitution (in addition to the whole trafficking thing, which I'm not optimistic enough to believe would be lessened or maybe even changed by legalization), outweighs (in my mind) the potential benefits.

When you come down to it, I guess I just don't believe there are too many women out there in need of money thinking, "Man, I sure wish I could legally be a prostitute." Maybe there are? But I guess I'd need to hear it from them.