# 180 The Movie



## caoclan

Has anyone taken the time to watch, or have you heard of Ray Comfort's new film? He is witnessing on the street (surprise, surprise) to several folks. He starts with asking people about Hitler (many did not know who he was) and the holocaust, then he transitions to abortion, then the Gospel. I thought it was great, how about y'all?

"180" - An award-winning documentary!


----------



## caoclan

I caught that, or at least caught his 2 Peter 3:9 quote about the Lord is not willing that any should perish. He is correct in quoting that, if he has in mind that the "any" in any of God's elect. Not the preferable verse to use in evangelism, but maybe Ray's thought is "Hey, I don't know if he is God's elect or not..."


----------



## BobVigneault

Your point was well made Josh, I upped my thumb at you. Well done.


----------



## MarquezsDg

You have to rejoice in the fact that he gets out there for the Lord and is hungry to reach the lost. but i understand what your saying in that theology does matter.


----------



## Grace Alone

caoclan said:


> I caught that, or at least caught his 2 Peter 3:9 quote about the Lord is not willing that any should perish. He is correct in quoting that, if he has in mind that the "any" in any of God's elect. Not the preferable verse to use in evangelism, but maybe Ray's thought is "Hey, I don't know if he is God's elect or not..."



I agree. We offer the gospel to all, but we know that only the elect will come. I thought the movie was very powerful.


----------



## Tripel

Good video.

I'm thankful that it's not just those with perfect theology out there having these types of conversations.


----------



## yoyoceramic

Tripel said:


> I'm thankful that it's not just those with perfect theology out there having these types of conversations.



Ha, if that were the case, none of us would be qualified to evangelize!


----------



## Grace Alone

Josh, I haven't had time to watch it again to record his exact words but I do not doubt your opinion that it could have been better worded. I am sincerely asking you to tell me when he gets to the point of presenting Christ to these people... after he has exposed their sin and had them admit that they might be headed to hell, then what should the script have been?


----------



## Grace Alone

Thanks, Josh! I'll have to watch it again and see how he could have worded it better, because I am certainly reformed in my theology. But I truly believe that some of those people could have truly come to Christ from what he presented if they were elect. Some of the hardest hearts seemed to soften. Those who were not elect would reject Him anyway.


----------



## Rufus

Outside of what Joshua pointed out, I really liked it.


----------



## Kevin

Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be. 

I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.

And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?

I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.


----------



## seajayrice

Would it be mistaken to presume Comfort (great name for an evangelist) applied the John and Peter quotes correctly? As the WCF 3.8 makes clear, election is to be presented with "special prudence and great care." Expounding on election may be more appropriate at one time than another. Jesus as a parachute metaphor was off putting though.

I liked the movie, his line of questioning and that aussielicious accent.


----------



## Servant4Christ

Love to hear other's opinions of Comfort and his theology. As pointed out, he does appear to have misinterpreted some things, but I feel he has an overall good ministry. To be honest, I was introduced to reformed theology from one of his Transformed conference, and have been following his ministry every since. Got to admire his passion for the lost; I can only hope and pray to be as bold as him......


----------



## Andres

Kevin said:


> Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be.
> 
> I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.
> 
> And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?
> 
> I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.



I'm with Kevin here. Comfort took far too long to get to his point. I guess once he finally got there, the parallels of the holocaust and abortion in America drove home a good point - that all life is valuable and it's always wrong to murder. It seemed he could have just explained that though instead of dragging us through an impromptu history lesson.


----------



## Tim

seajayrice said:


> that aussielicious accent



Ray Comfort is from New Zealand!


----------



## regeneratedbobby

Servant4Christ said:


> Love to hear other's opinions of Comfort and his theology. As pointed out, he does appear to have misinterpreted some things, but I feel he has an overall good ministry. To be honest, I was introduced to reformed theology from one of his Transformed conference, and have been following his ministry every since. Got to admire his passion for the lost; I can only hope and pray to be as bold as him......



Very well said, Joshua. None of us have perfect theology. Mr. Comfort was also a catalyst for my present day walk with the Lord. I'm sure Mr. Comfort reaches more in a year of those "that will hear" than we can in a lifetime. We need to be careful how we tear down our brothers and sisters in Christ. I have many friends that are strong believers that do not share the same reformed theology as myself. God uses all kinds of preaching to reach His elect and then after they get their feet wet...He reveals more of His truth. I too can only hope to be as bold as Mr. Comfort.

Thanks again for the post.


----------



## JoyFullMom

It is really too bad that some correctly reformed men don't film their own street witnessing. I always seem to come across discussions where the sharing of the gospel is being picked apart and all the errors pointed out, but I have never seen it *done right*. It sure would be nice for some of you who have a handle on this to create a *training video* for those of us who are becoming so afraid of saying something wrong that we are feeling hesitant to share at all. 

...and I'm not talking about two reformed guys filming a *how to*. I'm talking about an *on the ground* Ray Comfort type thing. 

I will admit that sometimes I wonder if we are stepping over the line in the other direction. We are firm that salvation of the soul is a complete work of God, and not any effort on man's part. But I will admit that sometimes when I read here, I get the impression that I must get the presentation perfect. Is that not the same line of thinking?

If I don't know who is elect and who is not, what is truly the error in saying "Christ died for you"? If the person is elect, it will mean something. If he's not, it won't. 

Maybe I am too childlike in my faith to make a good solid reformed witness. It seems to me that we are trying to make sure the baby understands the process of birth before he even leaves the womb. The truth is, the baby *will* be born when his time has come. Then he will be fed and nurtured and as he grows, he will come to understand how he came to be chosen for his family and born into it. 

Don't get me wrong. I am ALWAYS grateful for discussion that helps me to think properly in regards to sound doctrine. There are many young and newly reformed folk reading this board. I think this is something many struggle with and when we read threads like this, it is intimidating.


----------



## Andres

JoyFullMom said:


> If I don't know who is elect and who is not, what is truly the error in saying "Christ died for you"? If the person is elect, it will mean something. If he's not, it won't.



When sharing the gospel with strangers rather than guessing about whether a person is elect or not, we should instead focus on the absolutes - all persons are fallen in the first Adam and can only be reconciled to a Holy God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ. A sound gospel presentation would include explaining to a person how Christ's death _can _atone for their sins, not that it automatically did and then hope it sticks.


----------



## JoyFullMom

Andres said:


> JoyFullMom said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I don't know who is elect and who is not, what is truly the error in saying "Christ died for you"? If the person is elect, it will mean something. If he's not, it won't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When sharing the gospel with strangers rather than guessing about whether a person is elect or not, we should instead focus on the absolutes - all persons are fallen in the first Adam and can only be reconciled to a Holy God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ. A sound gospel presentation would include explaining to a person how Christ's death _can _atone for their sins, not that it automatically did and then hope it sticks.
Click to expand...


I agree with that. But, when you say "Christ died for sinners" and they admit they are a sinner (as on the video) and ask if Christ died for them...do you truly say "I don't know"? Young people ask hard questions.


----------



## Kevin

Josh, do you believe in the "well-meant" & "free offer" of the gospel?


----------



## Kevin

OK. I agree with your first critique, that RC stated his point poorly. And seemed to state more then he should.

However, I do not agree with the way that you expanded your point into a criticism of the well-meant offer. I practice exactly that in my own evangelism. I tell people that God *is* calling them. And not just that he may be calling them.

Please pray for me this afternoon. In a couple of hours I have a young lady (with her aunt!) coming to see me for our third 1 hour visit to talk about the gospel. She is from a non-xn home (mom is in a same-sex relationship) & she was brought to our church plant by her aunt & uncle. After attending for several months she asked "how can God be a bigger part of my life?"

Talking to a young person with NO training & only 6 months worth of sermons has forced me to get very simple in my presentation of the Gospel. Pray for her that she will put her trust in Christ & pray for me that I will not say or do anything to be a barrier to her understanding.


----------



## Phil D.

Sinclair Ferguson recently gave what I think is a superb presentation of how the gospel should be presented, using the Marrow Controversy as an historic backdrop. His main thrust is to caution Reformed pastors to be careful not to unintentionally separate Christ from his benefits when presenting the gospel by trying to be "oh-so-precise" (my term for lack of a better one) in every detail of what is admittedly true theology. He concludes, along with the Marrow Men, that while one shouldn't indiscriminately say "Christ died for you," it is entirely appropriate and even desirable to evangelize people by saying "Christ is dead for you." Sound like a strange distinction? Read the whole thing here: The Marrow Controversy - Sinclair Ferguson


----------



## Kevin

Thanks Phil i'll check that out. 

I remember a class discussion some years ago on the issue of free-offer, well-meant offer ending with a comment from someone that "we are all marrow men today".


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist

Servant4Christ said:


> Love to hear other's opinions of Comfort and his theology. As pointed out, he does appear to have misinterpreted some things, but I feel he has an overall good ministry. To be honest, I was introduced to reformed theology from one of his Transformed conference, and have been following his ministry every since. *Got to admire his passion for the lost; I can only hope and pray to be as bold as him*......



People can have passion for the lost and boldness for Christ for _selfish_ reasons, too (just to let you know). Now, I'm not suggesting Comfort evangelizes for selfish reasons, but there are many so-called Evangelists who have their "passion" for the lost simply because they like the job of preaching to others because it makes them look superior to others (and who wouldn't want to defend their own theology?), and their boldness may well be due to great _self-esteem_ rather than the _fear_ or _love_ of the Lord. Again, I'm not claiming anything about Comfort, I'm just saying there is that possibility of turning Evangelism into a comfortable way of life that helps to satisfy one's selfish needs.


----------



## JoyFullMom

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Servant4Christ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love to hear other's opinions of Comfort and his theology. As pointed out, he does appear to have misinterpreted some things, but I feel he has an overall good ministry. To be honest, I was introduced to reformed theology from one of his Transformed conference, and have been following his ministry every since. *Got to admire his passion for the lost; I can only hope and pray to be as bold as him*......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People can have passion for the lost and boldness for Christ for _selfish_ reasons, too (just to let you know). Now, I'm not suggesting Comfort evangelizes for selfish reasons, but there are many so-called Evangelists who have their "passion" for the lost simply because they like the job of preaching to others because it makes them look superior to others (and who wouldn't want to defend their own theology?), and their boldness may well be due to great _self-esteem_ rather than the _fear_ or _love_ of the Lord. Again, I'm not claiming anything about Comfort, I'm just saying there is that possibility of turning Evangelism into a comfortable way of life that helps to satisfy one's selfish needs.
Click to expand...


I agree with this...but I have *also* seen true laborers accused of this by people who sit at home and share NOTHING with NOONE. Only God knows a man's heart for sure. I think it makes it easier for me to be lazy if I can sit on my stool and question another's motives. Sadly.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist

JoyFullMom said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Servant4Christ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love to hear other's opinions of Comfort and his theology. As pointed out, he does appear to have misinterpreted some things, but I feel he has an overall good ministry. To be honest, I was introduced to reformed theology from one of his Transformed conference, and have been following his ministry every since. *Got to admire his passion for the lost; I can only hope and pray to be as bold as him*......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People can have passion for the lost and boldness for Christ for _selfish_ reasons, too (just to let you know). Now, I'm not suggesting Comfort evangelizes for selfish reasons, but there are many so-called Evangelists who have their "passion" for the lost simply because they like the job of preaching to others because it makes them look superior to others (and who wouldn't want to defend their own theology?), and their boldness may well be due to great _self-esteem_ rather than the _fear_ or _love_ of the Lord. Again, I'm not claiming anything about Comfort, I'm just saying there is that possibility of turning Evangelism into a comfortable way of life that helps to satisfy one's selfish needs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree with this...but I have *also* seen true laborers accused of this by people who sit at home and share NOTHING with NOONE. Only God knows a man's heart for sure. I think it makes it easier for me to be lazy if I can sit on my stool and question another's motives. Sadly.
Click to expand...


Absolutely! This is not an excuse for us to not have passion for the lost or be bold for Christ. It's easy to speculate other people's actions, while doing nothing for the cause of God's glory ourselves. I've got to admit that I very rarely have boldness to initiate discussion about Christianity with people, I often have to be forced to do so by being asked. And of course I may outright reject Christ (like Peter did), but I don't recall ever doing so _publicly_ (like Peter did).


----------



## Andres

This is really good Josh. Thank you.


----------



## J. Dean

Question: did he have them do a "sinner's prayer" in the movie?


----------



## Tim

No, there was no sinner's prayer. Ray Comfort and his colleagues do not believe in that sort of thing. They will tell the individual that they need to "repent and place your faith in Jesus", which is correct.


----------



## Josh Williamson

J. Dean said:


> Question: did he have them do a "sinner's prayer" in the movie?



No, Ray is very against the sinners prayer.


----------



## jwithnell

> Sinclair Ferguson recently gave what I think is a superb presentation of how the gospel should be presented


Phil, do you know if the recording is available somewhere: WTS? His church website?


----------



## Phil D.

jwithnell said:


> Phil, do you know if the recording is available somewhere: WTS? His church website?



The audio is available here (3rd one down)


----------



## Zach

Theological issues aside, I finally got around to watching it and thought it made some good points. However, the thought process was kind of disconnected and didn't flow that well. The link between the Nazis and abortion drove home the point powerfully, but I couldn't pick up on any kind of purpose statement for the documentary.


----------



## RobertPGH1981

I don't have any issues with the way it was presented. However, I would have presented certain things differently, but I would present certain things differently even when a reformed preacher is presenting the gospel. You do not have to be 100% perfect in presenting the Gospel to be effective. It's God's holy spirit that circumcises the heart at his choosing, and he chooses our folly to show his glory. 

Great Job, Ray!


----------



## calgal

It was really long. Then again my attention span is short for videos online. Good thought but it might be more effective if it was comparing hitler's actual views on mental and physical handicaps with abortionists views on life.


----------



## Romans922

Phil D. said:


> Sinclair Ferguson recently gave what I think is a superb presentation of how the gospel should be presented, using the Marrow Controversy as an historic backdrop. His main thrust is to caution Reformed pastors to be careful not to unintentionally separate Christ from his benefits when presenting the gospel by trying to be "oh-so-precise" (my term for lack of a better one) in every detail of what is admittedly true theology. He concludes, along with the Marrow Men, that while one shouldn't indiscriminately say "Christ died for you," it is entirely appropriate and even desirable to evangelize people by saying "Christ is dead for you." Sound like a strange distinction? Read the whole thing here: The Marrow Controversy - Sinclair Ferguson



Saying "Christ is dead for you." It says in the link, "But can speed throughout the Earth and say with the Marrow, "Christ is dead for you." That is to say, "There is a savior and in his death and resurrection, he is sufficient to save all and every man that comes to him by faith. There is fullness of grace in Christ crucified. And you too may find salvation in his name.""

How does this go with the fact that Christ is not dead? Won't this be confusing to say Christ is 'dead'...?


----------



## Damon Rambo

Andres said:


> Kevin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be.
> 
> I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.
> 
> And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?
> 
> I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm with Kevin here. Comfort took far too long to get to his point. I guess once he finally got there, the parallels of the holocaust and abortion in America drove home a good point - that all life is valuable and it's always wrong to murder. It seemed he could have just explained that though instead of dragging us through an impromptu history lesson.
Click to expand...


Did you not realize the point of the history lesson, when he was questioning people at the beginning and no one knew who Hitler was, or what the holocaust was? I have also noted this; very few young people even known anything about it. It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools...


----------



## Tim

Damon Rambo said:


> It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools



Is this really happening? Serious question. Hitler has always been the "go to" evil example in apologetics. Even if nothing else, people would always agree that Hitler was evil....


----------



## Damon Rambo

Tim said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this really happening? Serious question. Hitler has always been the "go to" evil example in apologetics. Even if nothing else, people would always agree that Hitler was evil....
Click to expand...


Really? Don't be so sure. You would be amazed. And yes it is happening. If you watch the beginning of the movie in question, you will see a host of people who could not tell Ray who Hitler was, nor recognize a picture of him.


----------



## Tim

I am amazed.


----------



## Andres

Damon Rambo said:


> Andres said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be.
> 
> I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.
> 
> And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?
> 
> I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm with Kevin here. Comfort took far too long to get to his point. I guess once he finally got there, the parallels of the holocaust and abortion in America drove home a good point - that all life is valuable and it's always wrong to murder. It seemed he could have just explained that though instead of dragging us through an impromptu history lesson.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you not realize the point of the history lesson, when he was questioning people at the beginning and no one knew who Hitler was, or what the holocaust was? I have also noted this; very few young people even known anything about it. It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools...
Click to expand...


No, I guess I didn't realize the point he was making. I, like Tim, assumed anyone over the age of 16 knows who Hitler is. When I see clips like those in the video where young people have no clue about a crucial point in world history, my first reaction isn't that schools aren't teaching these things anymore, but rather that those few people are really, really stupid.


----------



## TimV

I turned it off in disgust after about 2 minutes. My take on it: "Hi, I'm a Jew and you can see by the woman I just interviews that no one's heard of Hitler in the English speaking world. Germany and Austria are wonderful because if you deny my version of the holocaust the State puts you in jail".


----------



## RobertPGH1981

Andres said:


> Quote Originally Posted by Damon Rambo View Post
> Quote Originally Posted by Andres View Post
> Quote Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
> Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be.
> 
> I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.
> 
> And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?
> 
> I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.
> I'm with Kevin here. Comfort took far too long to get to his point. I guess once he finally got there, the parallels of the holocaust and abortion in America drove home a good point - that all life is valuable and it's always wrong to murder. It seemed he could have just explained that though instead of dragging us through an impromptu history lesson.
> Did you not realize the point of the history lesson, when he was questioning people at the beginning and no one knew who Hitler was, or what the holocaust was? I have also noted this; very few young people even known anything about it. It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools...
> No, I guess I didn't realize the point he was making. I, like Tim, assumed anyone over the age of 16 knows who Hitler is. When I see clips like those in the video where young people have no clue about a crucial point in world history, my first reaction isn't that schools aren't teaching these things anymore, but rather that those few people are really, really stupid.



I am sure there is a mixture of youth that know about Hitler, and some that don't know anything about him. To make the documentary effective, Ray Comfort may have edited a lot of people out of the footage to make a point. Just like Michael Moore does this in his documentaries. There were a lot of young people who had a general idea of who he was, but couldn't explain in detail what really happened. 

Why would schools want to eliminate the purpose of WWII out of secular schools? Is it because they teach evolution and the primary byproduct of evolution is Eugenics? For those of you who don't know, Eugenics is the study to improve the genetic population of humanity. It coincides with the survival of the fittest in the sense that if we eliminate the weak (e.g. Mentally Retarded, according to Nazi Germany anybody not Aryan, or genetic defects) it would create a perfected master race. Anybody not Aryan, or has genetic defects, wouldn't be able to pass their bad DNA onto others since they would be eliminated.


----------



## Bill The Baptist

Damon Rambo said:


> Andres said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be.
> 
> I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.
> 
> And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?
> 
> I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm with Kevin here. Comfort took far too long to get to his point. I guess once he finally got there, the parallels of the holocaust and abortion in America drove home a good point - that all life is valuable and it's always wrong to murder. It seemed he could have just explained that though instead of dragging us through an impromptu history lesson.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you not realize the point of the history lesson, when he was questioning people at the beginning and no one knew who Hitler was, or what the holocaust was? I have also noted this; very few young people even known anything about it. It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools...
Click to expand...


I tend to agree with Andres, I don't think it is being purged from the history books, I just think there are a lot of really stupid kids out there today.


----------



## Zach

Bill The Baptist said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andres said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Josh is correct about the poor theology. But other then that I thought that it was a terrible movie. I am not sure what the point was supposed to be.
> 
> I had it referred to me as a pro-life movie. But it seemed more like a stream of consciousnesses evangelism workshop.
> 
> And 1/3 of the movie is about hitler. enough already with the hitler clips & footage of dead people. Do we not know how to recognize something as morally wrong without painting a swastika on everything?
> 
> I would have enjoyed 30 minutes af examples of street evangelism. Or 30 minutes of clips talking to people about abortion. But I didn't get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm with Kevin here. Comfort took far too long to get to his point. I guess once he finally got there, the parallels of the holocaust and abortion in America drove home a good point - that all life is valuable and it's always wrong to murder. It seemed he could have just explained that though instead of dragging us through an impromptu history lesson.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you not realize the point of the history lesson, when he was questioning people at the beginning and no one knew who Hitler was, or what the holocaust was? I have also noted this; very few young people even known anything about it. It is almost scary the way it is being systematically purged from history books and schools...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I tend to agree with Andres, I don't think it is being purged from the history books, I just think there are a lot of really stupid kids out there today.
Click to expand...


That's what it is. We're seeing the byproduct of kids raised by big kids who were raised by big kids. People are not only uneducated, they don't care because it doesn't impact their own little world.


----------

