Comments on: Left Behind (but not far enough) http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/ You already know you're being watched. Do you know you're being scored? Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:20:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: franklin institute philadelphia http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-92867 franklin institute philadelphia Fri, 15 Jun 2007 23:57:24 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-92867 <strong>franklin institute philadelphia</strong> shit-happens 5095703 homepage of franklin institute philadelphia franklin institute philadelphia

shit-happens 5095703 homepage of franklin institute philadelphia

]]> By: toyota corona mark ii http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-57771 toyota corona mark ii Tue, 27 Mar 2007 20:08:45 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-57771 <strong>toyota corona mark ii</strong> Good information about toyota corona mark ii. toyota corona mark ii

Good information about toyota corona mark ii.

]]> By: aqhsrkfiwy http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-50883 aqhsrkfiwy Sat, 17 Mar 2007 05:41:33 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-50883 male strippers getting money from women male strippers getting money from women

]]> By: Lauren http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-29741 Lauren Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:47:37 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-29741 In your own link, SJR, is a statement from arstechnica.com that reads: "the game makes it clear that shooting is the last resort." Okay, so "as a last resort" you can shoot people in the name of Christ. Excellent. In the same link is a quote from IGN, which reads: "Your units will definitely fight back in a life or death situation but, for the most part, you want to either avoid your enemies or have a ready plan to convert to your side using musicians and disciples." Believe me, SJR, I have no interest in stopping you and your company from distributing this game. I think it's hilarious. Moreover, even if it were more violent, I wouldn't have a problem with it. I don't have a problem with violence in video games any more than I have a problem with violence in movies. It's not my thing, but I understand that there is a huge difference between game violence and actual violence. I'm sorry you and your PR team have to deal with what you call "misinformation" but which seems to me more like "slight exaggerations." But please, have some perspective here, SJR. You work for a company distributing a Christian video game of religious conversion based on one of the most soundly lampooned book series of all time. Did you honestly think you'd come out of it without a heavy dose of satire? In your own link, SJR, is a statement from arstechnica.com that reads: “the game makes it clear that shooting is the last resort.” Okay, so “as a last resort” you can shoot people in the name of Christ. Excellent.

In the same link is a quote from IGN, which reads: “Your units will definitely fight back in a life or death situation but, for the most part, you want to either avoid your enemies or have a ready plan to convert to your side using musicians and disciples.”

Believe me, SJR, I have no interest in stopping you and your company from distributing this game. I think it’s hilarious. Moreover, even if it were more violent, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. I don’t have a problem with violence in video games any more than I have a problem with violence in movies. It’s not my thing, but I understand that there is a huge difference between game violence and actual violence.

I’m sorry you and your PR team have to deal with what you call “misinformation” but which seems to me more like “slight exaggerations.” But please, have some perspective here, SJR. You work for a company distributing a Christian video game of religious conversion based on one of the most soundly lampooned book series of all time. Did you honestly think you’d come out of it without a heavy dose of satire?

]]> By: SJR http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-29657 SJR Fri, 19 Jan 2007 06:51:20 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-29657 This statement is posted from an employee of Left Behind Games on behalf of Troy Lyndon, our Chief Executive Officer. There has been in incredible amount of MISINFORMATION published in the media and in online blogs here and elsewhere. Pacifist Christians and other groups are taking the game material out of context to support their own causes. There is NO “killing in the name of God” and NO “convert or die”. There are NO “negative portrayals of Muslims” and there are NO “points for killing”. Please play the game demo for yourself (to at least level 5 of 40) to get an accurate perspective, or listen to what CREDIBLE unbiased experts are saying after reviewing the game at www.leftbehindgames.com/pages/controversy.htm Then, we’d love to hear your feedback as an informed player. The reality is that we’re receiving reports everyday of how this game is positively affecting lives by all who play it. Thank you for taking the time to be a responsible blogger. This statement is posted from an employee of Left Behind Games on behalf of Troy Lyndon, our Chief Executive Officer.

There has been in incredible amount of MISINFORMATION published in the media and in online blogs here and elsewhere.

Pacifist Christians and other groups are taking the game material out of context to support their own causes. There is NO “killing in the name of God” and NO “convert or die”. There are NO “negative portrayals of Muslims” and there are NO “points for killing”.

Please play the game demo for yourself (to at least level 5 of 40) to get an accurate perspective, or listen to what CREDIBLE unbiased experts are saying after reviewing the game at http://www.leftbehindgames.com/pages/controversy.htm

Then, we’d love to hear your feedback as an informed player.

The reality is that we’re receiving reports everyday of how this game is positively affecting lives by all who play it.

Thank you for taking the time to be a responsible blogger.

]]> By: Avi Bar-Ze'ev http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-23947 Avi Bar-Ze'ev Wed, 20 Dec 2006 19:34:49 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-23947 Um, back to the original topic and Lauren's assertion that this is a terroristic game, the game is admittedly meant as a recruiting tool for a particular world view that says, in effect, "well, fella, you didn't make the cut for round 1 of the Rapture. But go get your gun and kill everyone who doesn't believe what they're supposed to believe and maybe we'll reconsider." So people are told to kill infidels and their reward is a late (as in post-death, not as good as rapture) trip to heaven. Tell me how that's different from an al Queda game in which the objective is to kill as many infidels as possible to earn a trip to heaven with 72 virgins? [And don't say the difference is the virgins, because no one believes there are _that_ many virgins in heaven, and even if they are, they _still_ won't have sex with you...] Um, back to the original topic and Lauren’s assertion that this is a terroristic game, the game is admittedly meant as a recruiting tool for a particular world view that says, in effect, “well, fella, you didn’t make the cut for round 1 of the Rapture. But go get your gun and kill everyone who doesn’t believe what they’re supposed to believe and maybe we’ll reconsider.”

So people are told to kill infidels and their reward is a late (as in post-death, not as good as rapture) trip to heaven. Tell me how that’s different from an al Queda game in which the objective is to kill as many infidels as possible to earn a trip to heaven with 72 virgins?

[And don't say the difference is the virgins, because no one believes there are _that_ many virgins in heaven, and even if they are, they _still_ won't have sex with you...]

]]> By: Lauren http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-23829 Lauren Wed, 20 Dec 2006 09:49:56 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-23829 We agree on the general badness of an ever-expanding central government, Rocketeer. Here's where your logic evades me: other than higher taxes, how do socialized medicine and social security impinge on my freedom? Does Bush's recent statement that he wants to expand the military fall under the umbrella of creeping socialism? I quote: "I'm inclined to believe that we do need to increase our troops, the Army, the Marines. And I talked about this to Secretary Gates and he is going to spend some time talking to the folks in the building, come back with a recommendation to me about how to proceed forward on this idea." What if proceeding forward on the idea of a expanded military includes the draft? Would you consider that a freedom-crushing creep of socialism? Or is it only health care and retirement funding that frightens you? I ask these questions because I suspect we have stumbled upon a core difference between liberals and conservatives. Whereas liberals tend to define freedom as an individual's right to live without the interference of government in his or her private life, conservatives seem to define freedom as the ability to pay lower taxes. But then, the military (which is a socialist institution) does not pay for itself. We agree on the general badness of an ever-expanding central government, Rocketeer. Here’s where your logic evades me: other than higher taxes, how do socialized medicine and social security impinge on my freedom? Does Bush’s recent statement that he wants to expand the military fall under the umbrella of creeping socialism?

I quote: “I’m inclined to believe that we do need to increase our troops, the Army, the Marines. And I talked about this to Secretary Gates and he is going to spend some time talking to the folks in the building, come back with a recommendation to me about how to proceed forward on this idea.”

What if proceeding forward on the idea of a expanded military includes the draft? Would you consider that a freedom-crushing creep of socialism? Or is it only health care and retirement funding that frightens you?

I ask these questions because I suspect we have stumbled upon a core difference between liberals and conservatives. Whereas liberals tend to define freedom as an individual’s right to live without the interference of government in his or her private life, conservatives seem to define freedom as the ability to pay lower taxes. But then, the military (which is a socialist institution) does not pay for itself.

]]> By: The Rocketeer http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-23744 The Rocketeer Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:59:45 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-23744 You are right, of course, about creeping socialism and some socialist endeavors are inevitable in any organized polity. But that does not mean that you or I should surrender in the wake of its relentless march during our time. And, should it come to bear, socialized medicine will be a disaster and a danger to anyone who prefers freedom. On my darkest days, I am deeply saddened by the recognition that there is almost nothing you or I can do to stem the steady but inexorable growth of the central government and, every time the central government gets larger, we get less free by the minute. Every choice that is taken away from us makes us less free. Take social security, it is practically taboo (and certainly a political death wish) to suggest that it be abolished but the fact that so many citizens depend on social security for their primary source of retirement funds makes us all less rather than more free. And, when your civil liberties ultimately erode to nothing, it will not be because some born again Christian had the President's ear in 2006 but rather because the Government in some future decade demands that you trade your important personal rights for your retiremend dole. You are right, of course, about creeping socialism and some socialist endeavors are inevitable in any organized polity. But that does not mean that you or I should surrender in the wake of its relentless march during our time. And, should it come to bear, socialized medicine will be a disaster and a danger to anyone who prefers freedom. On my darkest days, I am deeply saddened by the recognition that there is almost nothing you or I can do to stem the steady but inexorable growth of the central government and, every time the central government gets larger, we get less free by the minute. Every choice that is taken away from us makes us less free. Take social security, it is practically taboo (and certainly a political death wish) to suggest that it be abolished but the fact that so many citizens depend on social security for their primary source of retirement funds makes us all less rather than more free. And, when your civil liberties ultimately erode to nothing, it will not be because some born again Christian had the President’s ear in 2006 but rather because the Government in some future decade demands that you trade your important personal rights for your retiremend dole.

]]> By: Lauren http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-23731 Lauren Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:48:52 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-23731 We already live in a socialist society, Rocketeer. Every time you drive on a road, turn on your lights, turn on the faucet, obtain a public education, call the police, go to the library, walk home by the light of a streelight, or do any number of things, you can thank socialism. Any modern society is comprised of a matrix of different organizing principles--socialism, capitalism, conservatism, liberalism, and many others. There is a robust and on-going debate about which aspects of our lives should be brought under the organizing principle of socialism (i.e., health care) and which should be subject to the natural efficiencies of the free market (i.e., monetizing natural resources). Undoubtedly there are Americans who want to convert more aspects of life to socialism than I would approve of. But I'm not aware of any fringe socialist movement that has the ear of the White House the way evangelicals do. The only potential increase in socialism I can see on the horizon is socialized medicine. We can argue about whether or not it would work here but I find it hard to be scared of it. It certainly doesn't scare me as much as the evangelical playbook. And if you want a litany of things to fear courtesy of our god-fearing neighbors, go read the Union of Concerned Scientists' <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/10600-scientists-condemn.html" rel="nofollow">statement</a> I mentioned above. I'm curious why so many republicans support or at least downplay the corrosive influence of evangelicals. They have perverted your party. They are the standard-bearers of big government and paternalism. We already live in a socialist society, Rocketeer. Every time you drive on a road, turn on your lights, turn on the faucet, obtain a public education, call the police, go to the library, walk home by the light of a streelight, or do any number of things, you can thank socialism. Any modern society is comprised of a matrix of different organizing principles–socialism, capitalism, conservatism, liberalism, and many others. There is a robust and on-going debate about which aspects of our lives should be brought under the organizing principle of socialism (i.e., health care) and which should be subject to the natural efficiencies of the free market (i.e., monetizing natural resources). Undoubtedly there are Americans who want to convert more aspects of life to socialism than I would approve of. But I’m not aware of any fringe socialist movement that has the ear of the White House the way evangelicals do. The only potential increase in socialism I can see on the horizon is socialized medicine. We can argue about whether or not it would work here but I find it hard to be scared of it. It certainly doesn’t scare me as much as the evangelical playbook. And if you want a litany of things to fear courtesy of our god-fearing neighbors, go read the Union of Concerned Scientists’ statement I mentioned above.

I’m curious why so many republicans support or at least downplay the corrosive influence of evangelicals. They have perverted your party. They are the standard-bearers of big government and paternalism.

]]> By: The Rocketeer http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/2006/12/14/left-behind-but-not-far-enough/comment-page-1/#comment-23675 The Rocketeer Tue, 19 Dec 2006 14:24:01 +0000 http://www.laurenmclaughlin.net/wordpress/?p=117#comment-23675 I find little difference between the evangelicals' attempts to turn "our secular democracy" into a Christian theocracy and the far left's attempts to turn our secular democracy into a socialist state. Why does one bother you so much and the other not at all? Arguably, the creeping socialism that is so much a part of significant factions of the Democratic Party is a far greater danger to our secular democracy than anything that any evangelical is trying to do to you or me. I find little difference between the evangelicals’ attempts to turn “our secular democracy” into a Christian theocracy and the far left’s attempts to turn our secular democracy into a socialist state. Why does one bother you so much and the other not at all? Arguably, the creeping socialism that is so much a part of significant factions of the Democratic Party is a far greater danger to our secular democracy than anything that any evangelical is trying to do to you or me.

]]>