I mean, if you want actual trolling:
You meet them every day. You just assume that theyāre not Christian, because theyāre not bothering people.
Donāt pretend that I tried to censor you. Open discourse is what weāre both doing right now.
I wonder how I got this horrible opinion of Christians, especially with two uncles that are ministers (one a missionary) and a great-grandmother who was an evangelist that founded that Nazarene denomination. Just happened in a vacumn, no influence from family or popular cultureā¦
I donāt care what the quiet ones are doing. I care about the ones that keep trying to pass laws to, say, ban gay marriage (since I am here in California) with the financial backing of their churches. If they left the rest of us alone, a large and growing chunk of America wouldnāt associate Christianity with hypocrisy and crypto-fascism.
cough
āCould you please not say thatā is not censorship. āYou shouldnāt be allowed to say thatā is censorship.
Good! You should care, and you should fight against them. Fuck those people. I wish them every failure.
Today, a majority of American Christians support gay marriage. (Catholics rate among the most supportive, which even surprised me.) The ones who donāt are entrenched and well-organized, and the fight against them will not be easily won. But thereās more people on our side than theirs.
Your focus on the word ācensorshipā is goal post moving. I never used any form of that word.
I simply disagreed with your self appointed role of what was acceptable conversation on this thread and your calling out when I didnāt fall in line with your demand.
Catholics and Mormons in California were the primary political and financial backers of Prop 8 to ban gay marriage. This was actively encouraged from the pulpit to the point that lawsuits were threatened against the churches and a lot of uncomfortable news stories (for the churches) discussed this.
Sorry, I did not want to imply any judgement (or even any observation) on American culture here. Strike the āpart of the gameā choice of words, Iāll say āa fact of lifeā instead. I was just trying to make a point about how some of the bad things weāre trying to protect young people from are also done by young people to other young people, and we probably donāt want to make them a crime.
Nothing. I did not want to imply that it was.
But there remains the political/ideological decision of what āriskā to take. As in, do you set the age when 90% are mature enough, or at the age when 50% are mature enough, or would you rather wait for 99%?
I suspect Iām guilty of not only arguing against what you actually said, but also against perceived cultural biases/differences. I might have read too much between the lines in some cases.
I thank you as well. Iād love to say more but I was away for the weekend and time is running out.
As for Austria/Australia: Thatās a known problem when referring to the country in English (or any of a number of other languages, including Japanese, but not, for example, German, French or Chinese). We wonāt be offended unless weāre mistaken for Germans ;-).
Atheist here. As an atheist in a reasonably-secularized part of Europe I can confirm that we do lord it over others with our perfectly rational value system that is derived from Enlightenment philosophy and forms the basis of everything that makes living today better than the Middle Ages. At least we sometimes do, in places where weāve got the numbers to get away with it. Much like most Christians Iāve known. Pretty nice most of the time, but impossible once you get them involved in an us-vs-them religious discussion.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.