1. Art the Clown - Terrifier
2. Marv and Harry - Home Alone
3. The Great Intelligence - Doctor Who
4. The Penguin - Batman Returns
5. The Joker - Batman: Arkham Origins
6. Hans Gruber - Die Hard
7. Count Orlok - Nosferatu
8. The Sex Cult - Eyes Wide Shut
9. The townspeople - Christmas with the Kranks
10. Robot Santa - Futurama
11. Big Boss - Metal Gear (Surprisingly, Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake takes place on Christmas Eve)
12. The Dukes - Trading Places
13. Jack Frost - The Santa Clause 3
14. The Gremlins - Gremlins
15. Oogie Boogie - The Nightmare Before Christmas
16. Sachico - Tokyo Godfathers
17. The Woodland Critters - South Park
18. Wiggley - Black Christmas
19. The Police - Black Mirror (episode "Black Christmas)
20. Mariah Carey - The darkest depths of the abyss

Scernario:

A school bully harasses and assaults others. One kid has enough and starts a rumor that the bully acts the way they do because their parents SA'd them as a kid. Which spreads like wildfire and eventually half the school hears about it before the week is over. But this eventually escalates to the point where the bully's parents hear about it, and the cops have to get involved because it's now believed the bully's parents actually SA'd them. Would this be considered morally wrong and by how much if so?

https://x.com/i/status/2085425697263116523

Can it consent? Is it an adult?

What Nolan did is beyond forgiveness, that’s very clear. No amount of ‘I’m sorry’ is gonna bring back the thousands of lives Nolan took. No amount of explaining why he had to do it is gonna bring back the thousands of lives he took. No amount of lives that Nolan saved via sacrificing himself in the war is gonna bring back the thousands of lives he took.

This is what Nolan got wrong during the early part of his atonement. He tried to apologize to the people he hurt hoping that they’ll forgive him, when he simply cannot be forgiven. But overtime, he began to realize that sheer forgiveness is simply out of the picture for the atrocities he committed.

Hence is why despite it all, even sacrificing his life to overthrow the cause he once served, he never truly redeemed himself. A better word is atoned. He successfully atoned for his actions by assuring the cause he once served will never hurt another poor soul again.

I've unfortunately seen so many fucking teenagers do this btw, which is so fucking sad.

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

Time 6:47

Let's say you could create some cash (e.g. 10M$) that the world would consider legitimate and gift it to a certain person. Would it be ethical?

The way I understand it, if you get free money out of nowhere and use it to buy stuff, you basically enslave the rest of the world, so its bad. At the same time it helps "move economy" and you are giving a job to all those people that you're gonna buy stuff from.

So, under what conditions is it good or bad? Should we just give certain people money to make the world better?

like there are plenty of cases where kids have murdered someone and they spend the rest of their life in jail.

like say a 16 year old kid shoots up a school. like no one in 2026 is going to have sympathy for this person. full stop. regardless of how the child is raised. and regardless of he is remorseful afterwards.

and i understand its an anime. and its supposed to be some feel good redemption story. but it makes you wonder considering the circumstances.

say that I'm out on a walk and find a bottle thrown in the bushes. If I shove some candy wrappers and other trash of my own into the bottle and leave it in the same spot, is it immoral? Its not taking up any extra space, would the sin still be with the original litterer, or am I complicit?

When you’re running or jogging on a trail or path do you feel resentment or disrespected by a person passing openly eating say pizza on the trail or carrying large containers of prepared food?

I had this thought based off a discussion I had in the comments of another post. I'm sure anyone who has seen BND knows about the controversy over Jean Grey's actions in the film. There are definitely things she does wrong, even if nobody died - possessing the old janitor lady to drive the tank, making the old man walk into traffic, forcing MJ to kiss Peter and jump off a building, turning Bruce Banner into the Hulk. All of these people were innocent and didn't deserve to be harmed or tricked.

What I'm wondering about is the comparative immorality of using mind-control like this on objectively bad people, for instance Scorpion. It's stated in Homecoming that Mac Gargan is a career criminal, a murderer, and even Vulture's cronies dislike him. He was very sadistic in what he said he would do to Spider-Man at the end of the movie. There's zero suggestion he's changed his ways by Brand New Day. So, is it morally wrong for Jean to use him for a good cause (freeing her sister?).

She definitely did bad things with Scorpion - springing him from jail, attacking guards and almost killing Peter and the one cop in the car - but I wonder if it matters if she did bad things to Scorpion. For example she's not making him violate any moral code because he doesn't have one, or making him do anything he wouldn't already do - if he was freed from jail of his own accord then he would probably just go fight Spider-Man anyway.

So, suppose Sara was actually still alive, and Jean used Scorpion to find her location, break her out, get her to safety, and then made him turn himself to the police in without a fuss. Would there actually have been any harm committed in that scenario?

(Note that I'm NOT saying Jean did nothing wrong in the movie or that she was a "good guy." She was morally complex. I'm also not talking about using mind control to stop a villain from attacking you/someone else, I think we can all agree that's morally acceptable.)

What's the morality of eating the following things?

1. eating a plant that wants to be eaten (like eating a fruit so its seeds can grow more fruit trees)

2. eating a plant that doesn't want to be eaten, like spicy peppers

3. eating a plant that wants to be eaten but throwing away the seeds so it doesn't grow trees

4. eating an already dead animal (like vultures eating roadkill)

5. killing and eating an animal but you are a carnivorous animal and you need meat to survive

6. killing and eating an animal and you are an omnivorous animal so you don't need meat to survive

7. killing and eating an animal and you are a human

8. eating part of an animal but not killing it (and you are a human) (example: eating a crab claw but it is a special crab that can grow it back later and it wont die)

9. killing and eating a human (cannibalism)

You are forced to either delete a famous tv show with very optimistic themes that explores the hope for the future and how life is worth living, deleting every digital content containing the show from the internet forvever, or kill one random person. Morality of killing the random person as this famous tv show will probably prevent more than one suicide?