Stop the politics

virginiared wrote:
Yes please.

Politics do not belong in games.

I have always thought that politics in games and other forms of entrainment is all part of freedom of expression. There are many things on the public airways and electronic pathways that I don't agree with. I choose not to watch or involve myself in them. For example, I'm a pacifist, and the first-person shooter games aren't exactly high on my list of fun things. I choose not to have anything to do with them.

But...you may if you so choose. I won't judge you.

So, the bottom line is that the developers of this game have a right to express their political opinions. If it rubs you the wrong way, then don't play.

Excruciator69 wrote:

derek1mg wrote:
An equal amount of people identify with the Tea Party politics as they do Obama.

If that was true Mitt Romney would be president. Tea Party Repugs live in a world of make-believe that rivals my nephew's. (He is four.)

I've always thought that they live in a time warp, some time back in the 40s or 50s.

marco_rosa833 wrote:
Is the "Redskins" name freedom of expression? Why does the freedom of expression apply to game developers but not critics of game developers? So the game can say whatever it wants but forum goers shouldn't be able to say what they want about the game? Horrible logic fallacy.

Freedom of expression absolutely means that critics of game developers can say whatever they want ... problem is that this thread was opened by a post that wanted the game developers to stop exercising their freedom of expression, not one that provided an alternative viewpoint.

Having a lively, and responsible debate, means debating what has been said, not trying to stop someone you don't agree with from saying what they want to say.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/d0f13502c83d049b34cd10ac8313e944/tumblr_ms7n3fQ8v51qhs5r9o6_250.gif

marco_rosa833 wrote:

Excruciator69 wrote:

derek1mg wrote:
An equal amount of people identify with the Tea Party politics as they do Obama.

If that was true Mitt Romney would be president. Tea Party Repugs live in a world of make-believe that rivals my nephew's. (He is four.)

I don't understand how people can be against fiscal responsibility.

Now I understand that neither Democrats nor Republicans are actually fiscally responsible; but, I still can't believe how leftists can be so vehemently critical against the Tea Party, grass roots or not, for arguing for it. Fiscal responsibility is just common sense.

Have to agree with that. There isn't a huge grassroots tea party base. Millions of privately funded dollars have crafted an image to create the impression that it is some large movement. Ironically this has in turn helped usher in the demise of the Republican party. Like it or not these are the last days for the party. Only time will tell if it will splinter off into extreme/moderate factions or if it will try a few last ditch attempts at getting non traditionally Republican constituents to vote for them.

marco_rosa833 wrote:
Is the "Redskins" name freedom of expression? Why does the freedom of expression apply to game developers but not critics of game developers? So the game can say whatever it wants but forum goers shouldn't be able to say what they want about the game? Horrible logic fallacy.


Freedom of expression absolutely means that critics of game developers can say whatever they want ... problem is that this thread was opened by a post that wanted the game developers to stop exercising their freedom of expression, not one that provided an alternative viewpoint.

Having a lively, and responsible debate, means debating what has been said, not trying to stop someone you don't agree with from saying what they want to say.

Here,here! I agree. This thread proves freedom of expression. The real problem isn't disagreement on issues. The real problem is lack of tolerance of another's opinion.

Distracty wrote:

tiger10036778 wrote:
If I dont see a decent ragging of my homosexuality soon then I will claim discrimination!!!! I demand an update with homer meeting up with thegay guys he briefly moved in with, or whats-his-face and that fabcar he had

Well, there's always EVERY SINGLE THING Smithers says in the game....

Seriously, the joke used to be that he loves his boss (he just happened to be gay, allowing this). These days the joke seems to be "Smithers is gay!" Hardee har har! :roll:

I thought the "joke" about Smithers was that he is a lickspittle and that this informs how his character expresses himself regardless of whatever else he may be. That the point is that gay people can be flamboyant, discreet, rich, poor, sophisticated, ignorant, charming, asshats, fat, thin, etc, etc, etc, and that Smithers is flawed because he is human and not because he is gay.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/ea960eeb8b663d57548ec9d24e22fef4/tumblr_msh4rhGeze1r2x5hgo1_500.gif

The Simpsons have always been at their best when they are making fun of social and political issues, and that's been since day one. It's a Simpsons game, therefore it will have the content of the show.

I'll take my Simpsons at 100% rather than a Rated PG version.

I guess you don't watch the show either. Good for you :roll: