When Christians stop saying stupid shit, like Spongebob Squarepants is homosexual propaganda aimed at "converting kids to the Evil Gay Conspiracy, then maybe folks like me will stop feeling nervous when you cats are in the room.
But you’re spot on in saying that there’s a double standard here. This stupid bitch (if she’s sincere and not just pulling our legs) is being cut way too much slack just because she claims to be a Muslim. She’s not even a real MENA Muslim or an immigrant who could pass on interesting cultural info about Islam and its traditions; she’s some dumb white kid who decided it would be cool to wear a burka!
A moronic fundie is a moronic fundie, regardless if she picked up her idiocy in a church or a mosque.
And this is the stupidest comment of all; in a free society, one does not allow the government to dictate what forms of expression may be allowed. An “enlightened” society that forbade religion would be an oxymoron–official tyranny exerted over individual freedom of conscience is not in any way enlightened.
People should be free to worship imaginary people in any way they see fit, and I will remain free to laugh at them.
A fair bit of what she believes is repugnant and and she **should ** be pitted for those things. Stoning and the self satisfied way she would casually strip rights away from people are the two best examples. At the same time the thread is about a Muslim woman’s point of view, and we’ve managed to get Angua to post a bit, yBeayf has chimed in and we have pulled some value out of it.
But I think she’s either hopelessly naïve or pulling our collective legs. She seems too much like a bad high school caricature of a mid-western American woman becoming a Muslim to be real.
You’re a mean-spirited bigot and a genuinely hateful example of the smug Christian asshole who revels in his societally superior status; we know that. Pitting you would be pointless in the “teaching a pig to sing” sort of way.
You are very right.
Upon reading it back and your comments, I can see where you are coming from.
I meant it differently though, but I am a bit of a :wally
What I meant was that in an enlightened society religion shouldn’t exist.
.
.
.
.
OK, that also sound really stupid.
You know what : you are right, I am stupid.
Perhaps “wouldn’t” exist is what you’re going for?
Grey is right. Whatever pain we get from engaging in a Born Again zealot is trumped by getting to talk to Angua and yBeayf. That’s a very educational thread.
I agree that in an enlightened society, intelligent people would abandon the childish idea of an invisible man sitting in the clouds who hands out arbitrary suffering for His own amusement, a sort of celestial Saddam Hussein to whom one must make obeisance in the hope that one may avert His wrath through sufficient toadying.
The crucial point is that each person must come to that realization freely, not through government edict. If people want to believe in the supernatural, I’ll mock them but I won’t do anything to prevent them. And if there were some sort of persecution of the kind that Crafter_Man and his ilk like to pretend exists, I would be on his side in the fight. People should be free to hold even the most abhorrent of views.
(Did you ever wonder whatever happened to the 95 seniors at the University of Wittenberg who had Luther for their major professor? I mean, that was a hell of a thing to do with papers they’d worked for months to prepare! :eek: )
Seems to me Carnick was specifically pitting her suggestion that because she finds homosexuality was sinful therefore homosexuals do not deserve equal rights. If you agree with that idea then yes, you deserve pitting, no :rolleyes: involved.
Your belief that homosexuality is inherrently wrongand abhorrent does not deserve pitting…perhaps just a wack upside the head with a cluesick. But that’s another debate.
Well, I would – but telling somebody why they ought to practice the stuff that Christ commanded – you know, like loving others as oneself, not judging lest you be judged, doing unto others as you would have done to you, doing unto “one of the least of these” as you would do unto Him: that kind of stuff – is supposed to go in Great Debates.
So I’ll simply say that “homosexuality” is an abstract concept defining a sexual orientation, often extended to describe practices carried out as a result of that orientation or for other, more reprehensible reasons – and that Jesus had much more to say about Pharisaism than about homosexuality.
She comes across as a grade-a sanctimonious zealous asshole to me. That good enough for ya, Lib? The willingness to torture women to death for daring to get raped (after all, pregnancy is proof of sin), the willingness to deny people of their civil rights for their sexuality or gender identity, the willingness to murder authors of works she doesn’t like–what a fucking tool.
About the best excuse I can offer for her is that it sounds as if she’s joined a cult and been brainwashed. Look at how she’s severed ties with her family, how she trusts the word of her leaders almost absolutely, how she’s full of selfrighteousness–just let us find out that she’s “sharing husbands” with the leader of the sect, and we’ll pretty much be set with full-on cult status.
