Am I the only person disgusted by the RAPE scene?? - Sausage Party (2016) Discussion

[–] bthrock 7 years ago

Parents are showing R-rated movies to kids?

reply

[–] oknar1977 7 years ago

in what world do you live in?

R means kids will watch it - with or without parent's permission

reply

[–] strntz (10790) 6 years ago

If your kids have access to R rated movies you aren't doing your job.

reply

[–] Bloodworth79 (5555) 4 years ago

And if your a kid who cant watch an r rated movie without mommy seeing you arent doing your job as well

reply

[–] strntz (10790) 4 years ago

touche'

reply

[–] StinkyPoopyPants (2680) 4 years ago

If kids want to do something bad enough, they will do it. Unless you keep them handcuffed in a chair at home all day and night.

Sadly, this is why it's harder these days. The access kids have to everything is way too easy. The best thing you can do with your kids is teach them what's right and wrong and hope they will make the best choices. And follow thru with a good punishment when they don't.

Take care! :)

reply

[–] strntz (10790) 4 years ago

My wife and I have been extremely fortunate. We have two boys and neither was ever arrested or did drugs. We were both tough but very fair with them.

One can't cover how to raise a child in a post or even a book, but here is one bit of advice I recommend for parents as their kids get a bit older:

Ask their opinion on things. Treat them intellectually like an adult. Even if you don't take their opinion, kids loved to be asked about adult things. Include them in discussions.

Oh, get them started on chores when they start to walk, even if the chores they do are ineffective. Get them to read early and often. Limit TV and internet/phone to a specific time. Give them more if their grades are great.

I could go on for years, but those are some basics.

reply

[–] StinkyPoopyPants (2680) 4 years ago

I agree completely and that is great advice :)

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Don't be too sure about the drugs thing. But don't worry, people need to have private lives.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

Hahaha you really think your kid did none of that 🤣

reply

[–] strntz (10790) 7 months ago

My oldest? Certainly not. He wouldn't even touch a beer until his was in his early 20s. He's a black Hank Hill.. My youngest is more of a free spirit, and he might have smoked a joint or two in college, but he's terrified of anything stronger.

The reason I chose the word "fortunate" when describing our sons is because that's the word that best fits. I know that even despite excellent parenting, some kids just go bad for no rhyme or reason. We've been *very* fortunate, and we don't smugly point to our kids as examples of our superior parenting skills. Again, fortunate.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

Sorry to burst your bubble but unless you have children who require daycare you can rest assured they will do a whole lot of things you don't know of.
It's a healthy thing called gaining independence.

reply

[–] FilmBuff (6679) 7 months ago

That may or may not be true. My parents were fairly strict, and taught me to avoid drugs, etc. and I avoided them. I didn't blindly do everything they told me to do, but I listened and accepted what seemed like wise advice. I was open with them about the things I did do, and kept no secrets from them.

So just because you may have rebelled, or kept secrets from your family, doesn't mean everyone does.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

Sorry to burst your bubble but unless you have children who require daycare you can rest assured they will do a whole lot of things you don't know of.
It's a healthy thing called gaining independence.

reply

[–] strntz (10790) 7 months ago

I am not living in a bubble and even if I did, you certainly haven't burst it. You have zero clue what our family is like. Not all kids act stupid and follow the rest of the sheep - I certainly never did.

reply

[–] k_adelberg 7 years ago

I mean teenage kids. In any case, it should be in the parental guide part.

reply

[–] rufusrawls 7 years ago

if a parent doesn't want their kids of whatever age to see things like this then they need to learn to parent correctly. this movie was made for adults, not kids. Cant blame a movie if kids watch a adult movie having scenes like this. All it takes is for the parent to watch the movie first before letting their kids do so. I grew up with kids whose parents didn't let their kids watch anything past pg without them watching it first.

reply

[–] The_Grither 7 years ago

Here you go:

http://www.pluggedin.com/search/?q=Sausage%20Party&i=titles&p=0&l=20&c=%7B%7D

I'm not criticizing or mocking you, but this movie is rated R which means it's not recommended for anyone under 17. I know plenty of younger kids will watch this but that's on the parents.

And the site I linked is a good one for sensitive people.

reply

[–] woofagooba 7 years ago

It's pretty clear from what the rating is how you should approach this movie. But you, for some reason, want even more special guidance because you lack the ability to parent? They rate this an R and you think that without knowing the movie that you should just let kids watch it? This is on you. This scene has nothing to do with rape culture. It's presented as it should be with the evil douche making a victim, or trying to, of many. You need to wake up as it appears you don't even understand the context of the scene. SMH

reply

[–] R_Kane (15828) 4 years ago

Oh, for fucksake, “parent” is a noun, not a verb. “To BE a parent” is a verb. A parent knows how to teach her/his child language. You, on the other hand . . .

reply

[–] NDIrishFan1988 (12) 2 years ago

Hey, shithead... it's "fuck's sake." Do not attempt to correct someone else if you are an absolute fucking moron. And yes, "parent" can be used as a verb. You have failed the internet. Pack up your computer and return it to wherever you got it from, you arrogant, useless douchecanoe.

parent
verb [ I or T ]
us/ˈper.ənt/ uk
/ˈpeə.rənt/
to raise a child as their parent:
I think he was parented very well.
Graham has parented about 65 foster children and adopted 11 of them

reply

[–] kya1 7 years ago

In any case, it should be in the parental guide part.

I'm sure any parent will be made aware of the kind of film this is, just by what is already on the parental guide.

________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAIJ3Rh5Qxs

reply

[–] MrFleharty 7 years ago

While I found the movie funny and very good satire, I did think that was a little much. Saw it coming, but was still surprised.

reply

[–] Fledermausmannwagen 7 years ago

Wow... are you one of those 'bright individuals' who thinks that saying "hello" to a woman counts as sexual harassment nowadays? I bet you can be triggered by literally anything. Rape culture... yeah.. ok.

Thanks, at least i had a good laugh from reading your degenerate rant.

reply

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Daenerys-Stormborn 7 years ago

EVERY parent should know about that scene before letting their child watch this trash that attempts to put RAPE into an animated comedy.

And that is exactly why they have rated it R and not PG. Because its not meant for kids...get it?

There lies his crown in water deep, Till Durin wakes again from sleep.

reply

[–] ttgiesler 7 years ago

Yes, you probably are. It's a movie meant to shock, and that's what it did. Parent's shouldn't be letting their kids watch this, hence the R rating.

Lighten up princess. It's just a movie. And a damn funny one at that.

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

It shocked me with childish stupidity. I honestly cannot understand any ADULT enjoying this overly anti-religious nonsensical profanity laced garbage.

reply

[–] mulholland_empire 7 years ago

I cant stand any Adult who teaches their child to worship false hope and any Adult who buys into any of the religious superstitions.

RELIGION-

"they bring in billions, are non taxed and always need a little more while filling and providing false hopes to everyone and anyone, talk about a good bullsh** story, HO-LY SH**!"

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

In the first place, I didn't say I "can't stand" any adult, I said I "cannot understand", it's simply my opinion. How can you say you "can't stand" me if you don't even know me. Secondly how do you KNOW it's false hope and superstition? Oh wait, that's your opinion, you can no more prove that there isn't a God as I can prove that there is a God. I can read from your tag line

"they bring in billions, are non taxed and always need a little more while filling and providing false hopes to everyone and anyone, talk about a good bullsh** story, HO-LY SH**!"

that you're not a religious person but the fact that "churches" bring in money has NOTHING to do with my belief in God. You are confusing greedy men with God. I've also never "understood" why atheists seem to despise people for believing, while I have never despised someone for not believing.

reply

[–] mulholland_empire 7 years ago

Dude, I'm quoting George Carlin (RIP) calm down,  you obviously have no clue.

But uhhh, yea, either way any religious being can go "suck a tail pipe" -Hicks LMFAO like yourself.

try believing in things like instinct, passion, art, YOURSELF! forget about GOD man, look around you.

"Religion literally has the greatest bulls** story of all time, they've convinced almost everyone in the world that there is a giant MAN, in the sky! Whose watching over us..........and has a list of 10 things he does not want us 2 do!"



This is why I said........... "I CAN'T STAND".............

But, go ahead, continue 2 worship your little book of lies or whatever it is and a "GOD that doesn't give a *beep*"

Here are some other books you might enjoy, the three little pigs, little red riding hood, & humpty dumpty.

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

Again PROVE I'm wrong

reply

[–] mulholland_empire 7 years ago

Again, enjoy your little fantasy.

Here ya go, eat your religious abiding soul out,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r-e2NDSTuE

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

Fantasy in your opinion, reality in mine

reply

[–] mulholland_empire 7 years ago

There's all that so called "proof"

Thanks for proving you're just another brain warped religion clone.

👏

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

Not sure what you're talking about but you are just another anti religious clone that feels the need to ridicule others for THEIR beliefs. Why can't atheists mind their own business and stay out of mine. Somehow atheists have convinced themselves that since they believe in nothing they are smarter than believers yet they cannot prove their beliefs. Sounds to me like you are the one that's brainwashed.

reply

[–] mulholland_empire 7 years ago

First of all, dnt put a label on me. Atheist, WTF??? Who even said I give a *beep* 2 even bother about what I'm considered. Religion does not exist in my universe. Atheist, Agnostic, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, Christian, Morman, & my personal fav Scientology😩. I think LRH and David Miscavage have proved IMHO that any religion is "stunningly & embarrassingly full of *beep*

Im a human being, I rely on myself, my instincts, my passions, and I am not afraid 2 call out *beep* on anyone when I see or hear it. I am more in tune w existential thoughts and meta-physical ponderings in my life. This gives me enough 2 think about without having 2 add some made up god 2 the equation whose rules I should follow 2 become a better person, LMFAO. More ppl should be like this instead of going somewhere once a week 2 donate money and "compare clothing" This country might actually make something of itself instead of just spewing mindless garbage left and right, front 2 back, side 2 side, day in-day out. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn16DsftSjI

Goodbye, robot

😴

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

Goodbye idiot

reply

[–] REPetzoldt 7 years ago

You try to act so enlightened, but I bet you have never checked the evidence at all. The evidence of the resurrection of Christ to any unbiased individual should be incontrovertible. Only people in denial deny it. Something like 500 people who testified to seeing him even though that testimony could cost them their lives. Many were the same people who had denied even knowing him when he was being arrested and put to death. What caused this change in them other than seeing Jesus resurrected from the dead. Seriously do you have any explanation for the change in these people. Oh yeah must be mass hysteria or they were all hypnotized.

reply

[–] janis_bananis 7 years ago

Seriously do you have any explanation for the change in these people.

Yes. They never existed. Your "evidence" holds no weight because we can't simply assume that those 500 people you talk about were real in the first place.

https://www.youtube.com/gallifreyeantrailers

reply

[–] REPetzoldt 7 years ago

What I stated is the historical records. Sure you can choose to ignore them. If premises are not accepted nothing is provable. Nothing. What possible reason do you have for thinking the historical records are false? The people I'm talking about all existed and you are choosing to bury your head in the sand to the facts. If you choose to dismiss all the evidence then sure you can say Jesus didn't really rise from the dead. I can do that to any argument you want to make also. However, to do so is absurd.

reply

[–] janis_bananis 7 years ago

What I stated is the historical records.

The Bible is not a "historical record". It is the holy text of your particular religion. Are all religious texts historical records to you? What then of the Qur'an? The Tripiṭaka and the Dhammapada? The Guru Granth Sahib and the Dasam Granth Sahib?

The people I'm talking about all existed and you are choosing to bury your head in the sand to the facts.

This statement is based of faith, not on evidence. Faith is not knowledge, it is belief without support, without evidence. It is useless when trying to find truth. Please demonstrate these people existed or i'll say you're the one burying your head in ignorance.

If you choose to dismiss all the evidence then sure you can say Jesus didn't really rise from the dead. I can do that to any argument you want to make also. However, to do so is absurd.

It is not absurd to dismiss NONE or BAD evidence. To find truth and facts it is crucial to be sceptical of ANY claim, especially claims of the supernatural. What you WANT to believe does not matter.

Not only do i say Jesus didn't rise from the dead, i am also not convinced he was any more real than Hercules or Beowulf.

https://www.youtube.com/gallifreyeantrailers

reply

[–] REPetzoldt 7 years ago

1: The Bible is a strong historical record, but I wasn't using it at all in this argument. What is the New Testament other than being a historical documentation of the life of Jesus and his followers. When Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote their accounts of Jesus's life they had no clue what they wrote was going to be placed in a compilation of books making the New Testament. They were simply documenting the life of Jesus.

2: I wasn't taking anything by faith in this argument.

3:I agree with you that is is important to dismiss bad evidence. The historical documents of people seeing Jesus after he was risen from the dead meet the criteria for accuracy just as well as those that state that George Washington lived. Not bad evidence unless you want to claim that George Washington is no more real than Beowulf.

4: I think you start with the premise that people can't rise from the dead, therefore you reject all evidence that Jesus did. Not very scientific. Just biased.

5:If you seriously don't believe Jesus was real you are beyond help when it comes to understanding historical documentation.

reply

[–] janis_bananis 7 years ago

The Bible is a strong historical record

No, it is not. And you dodged my question about whether other religious texts also are "historical records".

but I wasn't using it at all in this argument.

Then what "historical record" were you using?

What is the New Testament other than being a historical documentation of the life of Jesus and his followers.

An anthology of religious texts pertaining to the christian religion, written in the first and second century and whose "final dogmatic articulations of the canons were made at the Council of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for Calvinism, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Eastern Orthodox." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon#Canons_of_various_Christian_traditions

I wasn't taking anything by faith in this argument.

Then please provide good evidence for the existence of the 500 witnesses. I'm not holding my breath, tho.

I agree with you that is is important to dismiss bad evidence.

Good. Stop using it.

The historical documents of people seeing Jesus after he was risen from the dead meet the criteria for accuracy just as well as those that state that George Washington lived.

That is a lie.

We have fossil evidence of George Washington. We have his speeches. We have many contemporaneous accounts of him from other disinterested parties. We have record of his progeny and his ancestry. We have portraits of him commissioned during his lifetime for which he posed. We have news reports of his speeches and actions written shortly after these events.

For JC of the NT, we have none of this.

I think you start with the premise that people can't rise from the dead, therefore you reject all evidence that Jesus did.

I don't, actually. I reject almost any claim if no, or bad, evidence is provided.

But not all claims are equal. Let's say you told my you bought a dog yesterday. Even though you are a complete stranger to me, i'd have no real reason to doubt you. There's nothing strange about buying a dog. People all over the world buy dogs every day.

But you're not telling me you bought a dog. You're telling me to take your word, i.e. what is written in your holy text, for someone actually rising from the dead. That is not someting that happens every day. It is an extraordinary event, and as such requires extraordinary evidence.

The bible can not prove itself. We can not verify the validity of the bible. It is bad evidence.

Not very scientific.

I'm not a scientist. I'm a sceptic and a humanist.

Just biased.

Definitely not. I would gladly accept your claim as true if you provided convincing evidence. You will not be able do that.

You, however, are clearly biased to belive. But then, that is what faith is.

If you seriously don't believe Jesus was real you are beyond help when it comes to understanding historical documentation.

I'm actually quite happy to believe there might have been a historical figure called Jesus. I simply reject the claims of his miraculous acts.

https://www.youtube.com/gallifreyeantrailers

reply

[–] REPetzoldt 7 years ago

Do you think that by making long drawn out answers your arguments are good. Every point you made was false. I don't feel like making long drawn out answers to you. Read Josh McDowell evidence that demands a verdict.

I used to be as wrong about all this as you are. I used to make fun of the Jesus Freaks at my school. They challenged me to look into their claims and then decide for myself. You clearly have not looked into this more than just superficially. I can't do the work for you. You need to do it yourself. I don't care whether you are happy or sad to acknowledge that Jesus was a real historical figure. I simply state that anybody who tries to deny that is ridiculous.

Neither you or I were there to witness what Jesus did or didn't do during his time on this Earth. The Bible whether you like to accept it or not is a VERY STRONG historical record of Jesus in every way that ancient historical records are accepted. They weren't written to be a Holy Text. The New Testament was just written to be an account of what Jesus and his followers did. A lot of it was just letters to various persons. Eventually these writings became the Holy text you are referring to.

The witnesses to Jesus's resurrection are not just documented in the Bible. There is very strong documentation besides the Bible. You can choose to reject all the evidence if you want, but none of it that I based my conclusions on was bad.

reply

[–] janis_bananis 7 years ago

So, since you think my answers are too long (which is pretty silly), i'll skip quoting most of your drivel and keep this short and sweet.

The witnesses to Jesus's resurrection are not just documented in the Bible. There is very strong documentation besides the Bible.

Please provide links to these documents, or at least tell me what these documents are. Just saying they exist is not enough.

https://www.youtube.com/gallifreyeantrailers

reply

[–] wonkothesane-280-13184 7 years ago

Again PROVE I'm wrong

I think the onus for proof lies with the person making a claim that god exists rather than proving something doesn't exist, For what it's worth i can't prove beyond all doubt that there isn't a large fire breathing dragon in the room with me but i can happily live with the belief that it doesn't.

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

I don't think the onus lies with either side. I think we are entitled to believe what we want to, without the burden of proof one way or the other. I only asked the other member to prove me wrong because that seems to be what it always comes down to with non believers. Again, people are entitled to feel how they wish, I just never understood why it bothers non believers so bad that I believe in God. More specifically (at least in my case) Jesus Christ, who only taught to have love and compassion for one another.

reply

[–] NurNodesinNil 7 years ago

Actually I got to agree with tk1891. Its strange how atheists become as intolerable as many religions. Do atheists make a strong case that most if not all religions could be BS? yes. very much. But is that enough reason to mock, ostracize and condemn those with beliefs entirely?

Plus dont overlook the need religion provides in the first place. People dream of a happier place and a way past death and suffering. Perhaps humans should themselves create this solution we seek. It sounds corny sure but when cancer starts eating you up or water fills your lungs (rip el) some solution will be desired i am sure. It could be enlightenment, nirvana , human compassion or perhaps technology that provides it. perhaps all.

Like silly bits of food we can surely argue in our tiny bubble of a world about whether the insight of atheism or the passion of religion is better, or we could work like crazy to find a way to kick deaths ass and have it so we can just drink tequilas on the beach and chill. It can happen. It is happening. Things can get better.

we shook our fists at the punishing rain
& WE CALLED UPON THE AUTHOR TO EXPLAIN!!!!!

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 7 years ago

Religion should never, for any reason, be tolerated. religion needs to be scorned and removed from society. Only then we can improve as humans. Sadly, many mistake ostracizing religion with ostracizing religiuos people, and the religiuos themselves does not make it any better by being militant idiots most of the time.

------------------------------------------------
The spirit of abysmal despair

reply

[–] NurNodesinNil 7 years ago

aren't you becoming a militant idiot yourself then? If you do not tolerate people's beliefs then that is as bad as not tolerating them.

I agree that the delusion of religion can cloud people from the truth . But when combined with science (in a ying/yang sort of way), it can help.

Plus nihilism also prevents people from improving and may also cloud ones vision.

we shook our fists at the punishing rain
& WE CALLED UPON THE AUTHOR TO EXPLAIN!!!!!

reply

[–] SHADO (82) 7 years ago

yin/yang, FWIW. :)

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 7 years ago

You are mentally abusing your children by indoctrinating them into religion. That is enough knowledge for me to know that you are person deserving of my hatred.

I've also never "understood" why atheists seem to despise people for believing, while I have never despised someone for not believing.

Because believing is irrational stupidity that is harmful for the person and those around him while not believing is not harmful.

------------------------------------------------
The spirit of abysmal despair

reply

[–] nicademis32 7 years ago

Ahhh,always great to met a fellow athiest who can't see past their own seething hatred. You are not athiest you are antitheist.

I don't care what anyone else belives as long as it doesn't include hurting anyone. If beliving that some act or idea is gonna save a person makes it easier to get through the day,then good for them

reply

[–] tk1891 7 years ago

Wow, so me believing in something that is good is harmful to those around me??? I'm not concerned with whether or not you hate me (you don't know me), unlike you I don't hate people just because they don't share in my beliefs.

Because believing is irrational stupidity that is harmful for the person and those around him while not believing is not harmful.

Explain to me how believing in something that YOU cannot disprove is irrational or harmful, while not having the courage to believe in anything is rational. I don't blame you for being so bitter. If I thought this world was all there is I would be bitter as well.

It's ironic your intolerant, judgemental comments proves my point. You claim I'm harmful to those around me, yet you are the one full of hate. Go figure.

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 7 years ago

Ill stop you at the first sentence. Religion is not good, so you are not believing in something that is good. Furthermore, you are indoctrinating your children into this belief, which constitutes child abuse.

I dont have to disprove anything. Gods nonexistence is default state until proven otherwise. Given that despite their best efforts noone managed to do this the ONLY logical assumption is that it does not exist.

Yes, im full of hate for people like you that is the reason this world is bad to begin with.

------------------------------------------------
The spirit of abysmal despair

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

Well, you can't prove me that god exists and on my side he never showed me any reason to believe in him. Case closed.

reply

[–] mochteam 7 years ago

I can't stand any scientist that tries to push an unproven theory into fact and has schools teach it to young children who dont' know any better. You know like the Big Bang "Theory" or the "Theory" of Evolution...

reply

[–] milo44 7 years ago

Agree .. but that's what men like .

"A man that wouldn't cheat for a poke don't want one bad enough".

reply