WordWolf

So, it's Human's turn.

We need a bit more.

We seem to need more clues.

The title has to either be the name of a unit or division of an armed force, or- more likely- a period of time, like "Ides of March" or something like that. If it actually turns out to be "Ides of March", I should run and buy a lottery ticket.

That last one should be "SOUTH PACIFIC."

Um, "The Graduate"????????

"Stand By Me"??????

I'll agree conditionally. Mainly, I'd like to add the caveat of actually DOING good works. Plenty of people can claim they do but don't do them. I'm well aware of at least one diehard agnostic who went out of his way to do the right thing, avoid doing the wrong thing, and helped people. In his case, at least, I'm confident this applies. He was rather vocal about doing the right thing because it was right. I would say that, if there is no God, then doing good works and making the world a better place would be laudable in themselves, and worthwhile tasks. I would also say that, if there is a God, then doing the same has the additional benefit of pleasing Him, and He has the ability to reward people for good works. It's also very easy to consider oneself a good person, and so on. Even a demonstrably evil person rarely calls himself such- he spins rationalizations that everyone else is just as evil as he is, and so on, or that there are no such things as real good deeds, and so on. By the time they're done, they've convinced themselves that the only proper thing to do is- whatever evil thing they'd set their heart to do in the first place. If one fills one's heart with lies, that's what one is going to believe and think. The heart knows right from wrong- providing that's what the person has put in their heart.

The section I was thinking of at the time was Matthew 25: 31-46. Let me know if you need me to "enable the help files" on that.

I noticed earlier in the thread, you mentioned growing up Roman Catholic, and that there was a lot of guilt and condemnation served up with everything else. That's a shame, but hardly universal among Christians, let alone Roman Catholics. I do think Catholicism has lost large numbers to other Christian groups without all the condemnation- from those who actually teach the condemnation. (There's other reasons too, but going to church AND feeling bad is a senseless combination.)

We're getting a bunch of part-names here. Maybe wikipedia would fill in some full names. Just so I asked, was "Father Frank" the man known as "FRANK SINATRA?"

Raf declared this "Free Post" to move it along...

I'll take 2 guesses to catch up a bit. The "Booker" I know was played by RICHARD GRIECO, so maybe this is him. If "Walker" isn't Chuck Norris, maybe he's the reboot "Walker", Jared Predeleski or something like that.

You might find it interesting to consider that the Bible says that Jesus recommended that for UNBELIEVERS. (Not that helping others and doing good isn't recommended for believers, but I hardly think that qualifies as news by now.)

"This is the fear Christians must deal with every thought. Not only must a Christian be aware of physical sins they have performed, but also must be aware their God keeps track of every nasty thought they think." I have to deal with this? News to me, and I'm confident it would be news to a LOT of Christians. There's a common saying- "Christians aren't perfect- just forgiven!" I'm sure there's SOME Christians SOMEWHERE who think like this, but I'm confident the majority do not- certainly the majority of GSC posters haven't thought that way. On an unrelated note, we all have to "deal with every thought"- or we should. I like to do my own thinking, thank you, whether or not it matches a particular political party, organization, group, etc. Everyone actually IS responsible for their own actions- responsible to their own selves and responsible to society and societies, whether or not there's anyone above that. As for our thoughts, yes, we should take responsibility for our own thoughts, for good or bad. Our actions are based on our thoughts. Sow a bad thought, reap a bad action. Freedoms comes with responsibility- the freedom to think for yourself and act for yourself comes with the responsibility to think and act responsibly.

Another thing to consider is that Christianity didn't begin with a single authority declaring doctrine by fiat. (No Mohammed nor L. Ron Hubbard on board.) So, there was nobody to declare the "official" positions, modern-style, and converts could end up introducing things, intentionally or not. To the Greco-Roman mind, the idea of a mortal starting as a mortal who was the son of a god who was promoted to a man-god later was routine- with Heracles/Hercules being the most obvious example. Add Constantine in a few centuries later, and there's someone with a vested interest in emphasizing similarities to the Roman religion, and manufacturing more connections whenever possible. Add the incentives for those who went along, and the killings of those who didn't, it's surprising anybody was left who was both alive AND refused to dance to Constantine's tune. After that, the only thing missing is accusing the non-believers in a man-god of coming along afterwards and adding their doctrine, calling them all sorts of names.

Jodie Foster Silence of the Lambs Anthony Hopkins

"Your Honor, every one of these letters is addressed to Santa Claus. The Post Office has delivered them. Therefore the Post Office Department, a branch of the Federal Government, recognizes this man Kris Kringle to be the one and only Santa Claus." "Uh, since the United States Government declares this man to be Santa Claus, this court will not dispute it. Case dismissed!"

I don't think that one's "easy" but I know it anyway.... "APOCALYPSE NOW".

Scarlett Johansson Iron Man 2 Robert Downey Jr

That sounds good. It's sometimes tricky to know for sure what goes on in insulated communities. We hear that Amish communities are squeaky-clean and abhor technology. From what I've heard, they avoid "the grid" but don't mind locally generating their own power and using power tools. Also, some of them are definitely not as squeaky-clean as they are meant to be (primarily during their time to consider the outside world instead.) If these Hutterites take care of each other as a community, that's incredibly rare and a very nice thing. I don't mind IMAGINING people without barriers, but it's endemic to the human condition- people form societies and define them by who is "us" and who is "them." Without eliminating that (which isn't possible for us), people will come up with things to kill and die for, some will remain greedy and so on. There are people in society that don't need constant reminders to do the right thing, but most of them DO have the law there to remind them where the lines are in their culture/society. Statistically few people will continue to do the right thing just because it's the right thing without the law defining the lines (5%, IIRC, 1 in 20.)

The show took place in Phoenix, Arizona, and centered around Mel's Diner. Mel was the owner/cook, and was played by Vic Tayback. Star Trek mavens may remember him from "A Piece of the Action", where he played one of the mob bosses. Vera was one of his waitresses. She was a nice person but a little easily confused, so he called her a "dingy broad" (pronounced DING like a bell plus E.) Mel and Flo (another waitress) often were sharp with each other- and with impolite patrons. Flo's go-to phrase to shut people down was "Kiss my grits!". Vera was a tap-dancer and was related to Art Carney. Alice herself was the single mother raising a kid, not the most common character to head a sitcom, but not completely unprecedented.

CORRECT! (Forgot to reply.) The show was "ALICE."

"Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for" "Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world" I've never been a fan of the song. As a thought experiment, to "IMAGINE", it's not bad by itself. When trying to make it happen, it doesn't even work on paper. All previous attempts have failed drastically, all due to human nature. Communism is allegedly based on Karl Marx' ideology- his "philosophy"- and in this context, I consider it no different from any other DOGMA, any religion included. SUPPOSEDLY, people would agree to work together- but every time someone tries to put these ideas into practice, they've failed miserably. Part of that is that Karl Marx never articulated HOW to get there and how to MAINTAIN this society, and human nature runs at cross purposes with this. Allow everyone to work on "the honor system" and there will always be those who try to cheat- who consider themselves above a "fair share". Two countries have allegedly been large "communist" countries- China and Russia, and both countries CLAIM to be communist but are in reality both OLIGARCHIES, where a handful of people have seized all the money and all the power. Humans will organize themselves into societies, and those societies will organize(eventually) into countries. People do that. They also come up with things to kill over, even if it's just "more food" or "the best food" or "the best houses." And that increases as the societies increase- societies where nobody has ANYTHING seem to be the happiest and least jealous. Add ANY resource into the mix, and the party is over. Having no possessions has always appealed to the have-nots. Societies that have allegedly agreed to that have a handful of people at the top who control all the possessions, and pay lip service to the party line. People who actually have some possessions won't agree so loudly to the "we share everything" concept. That's been mentioned over and over in different cultures. In fact, different comedians have outlined why in terms of their own culture. (My favorite was Paul Rodriguez. "Mexico CAN'T be Communist. I'd like to see a Bolshevik go down to el barrio, and explain to some guy named Little Frog, that now, under Communism, The State now owns his CHEVY. 'Let me get this straight, vato...you're saying ANYONE can drive my turbo?' *opens switchblade* I don't think so. Communist Manifesto this.' ") No greed? Seriously? I think there's MORE greed where those claims are made. There's certainly more hoarding and shortages- caused by greed and hoarding at the top. Sharing all the world? The first countries that really dismiss their military over that will probably be the first countries annexed overnight by greedier neighbors who don't want to "share." Hey- in the Jesus People days, there were people who tried this. They had to stop. Many of the hippies were cooperative, but there's always someone who will ruin something nice for everyone. Someone who doesn't want to work and wants a place to stay, free food, etc. That was the undoing of some noble, well-intentioned home experiments. For that matter, those welcoming people welcomed vpw, and that was an even bigger disaster. One doesn't have to look for RELIGIOUS reasons for people to be selfish, greedy, blood-thirsty, self-centered.... these are endemic to the human condition. Josef Stalin wiped out his own farmers to steal their food. The USSR had some amazing bloody pogroms. (For that matter, you don't have to look back in history all the way to Stalin, there's more recent examples.) As a science fiction fan, I can IMAGINE magickal places and wonders of super-technology. I can IMAGINE societies where this works. But these imaginings don't ring true, and even the fiction I read doesn't try to convince me of them.

This was a sitcom. Among the primary cast was someone who appeared in an episode of "Star Trek." (THE ORIGINAL SERIES of "STAR TREK,", aka "TOS.") Also among the primary cast was a character who was related to Art Carney, which led to an appearance BY Art Carney as someone wanted him to endorse a chili for mass production- "Chili Con Carney." The same character once tried to break the Guinness World Record for continuous tap-dancing. We also had a single parent raising a kid. Most sitcoms I'm familiar with tend to either be set in major cities (NYC, Los Angeles, Chicago), but this series was actually set in a smaller city away from both US coasts, and both borders, for that matter. The principal cast (except for the kid) all worked together, in the same location. (Their characters did, that is- obviously the cast were all on-set together.) At least two of the main characters were known for being blunt and up-front with everyone, as well as each other. AFAIK, this show introduced the insult "dingy broad" to the viewing public, among its colorful character-specific phrases.