# Stupid religious idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 15, 2015, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928 "2015-01-15T20:39:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![GrumpyBunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc8723/32.png) [@GrumpyBunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrumpyBunny)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/61 "2015-01-20T16:28:04Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > I’m talking about things like It’s Super Important That Woman Are Fully Covered At All Times. Really? Society seems to go along just fine without that rule. And the women seem pretty happy. I’m pretty sure that’s just your little believy and I don’t care about your little believy. And I think it’s something you cannot and should not impose on people. > > Even if they want to be fully covered? > You wanna tell others how to dress (especially if they err on the side of caution, i.e. too much clothing)? I mean, not trying to force anyone to do it, but simply be allowed to dress in whatever the fuck way they want for whatever the fuck reason they want? That’s not the issue. I don’t care if women want to wear a full burqa. I don’t care if women want to wear hijab. I don’t care if women want to run around dressed like a flamenco dancer. My problem comes in when some random dude I run across decides that women wearing western clothing are a problem and gives me a hard time for wearing a miniskirt or leggings or whatever. So, if that guy is being a dick, does my boyfriend get to punch him in the nose? Can I punch him in the nose? We need equality in nose-punching, if we’re going to have it. Do I get to blow up his car if he doesn’t stop annoying the non-traditional-clothing-wearing women in the area with him commentary? Now, as I said, I don’t care what women wear. BUT, women need to stop trying to get a drivers license photo or ID, and insisting that their face be covered in the photo. The point of an ID is that you can be identified; you can’t be identified if everything but your eyes are covered. And that’s why people mock religious fundamentalists; they’re unbending and want the world to conform to them. It’s not just fundamentalist Muslims who annoy the hell out of me; I grew up in the Deep South, and trust me, I don’t have any more patience for Christian religious fundamentalists (probably less, TBH; their idiocy affects me and my family more). ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/62 "2015-01-20T17:07:30Z")
> [@Balance](#): > > Can I borrow a cup of what-the-fuck? I thought I had enough to last the week, but I ended up using it all on that article. ISIS is pretty much turning Allah into [Nuggan](http://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Nuggan). ---
**Author:** ![Mollie\_Magill](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mollie_magill/32/20882_2.png) [@Mollie\_Magill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mollie_Magill)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/63 "2015-01-20T17:22:53Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, I don’t recall Jesus carving out a “no Mammas” exception. It’s right there in Luke: [QUOTE=Luke 26] Whoever hits you on the cheek, offer him the other also, unless he says something about your Mama, in which case, his ass is toast. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/64 "2015-01-20T18:22:32Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > I’m not saying “don’t make jokes that offend”. > I’m saying: > a) Don’t be dick (especially to those who are treated as econd-class citizens in your country). Being legally correct doesn’t mean it’s the wisest choice morally. > b) If you’re a dick, even if legally, don’t be surprised that people get angry > > What you think aout the final part about the black neighbourhood? I’m not objecting to people getting angry. People have a right to get angry and anything they want to get angry at. I’m objecting to people killing or hurting other people about it. That applies to all cases. > [@](#): > > Legally wrong? With today’s standards? Absolutley not > Depnding on the specific circumnstances he might’ve been a dick > Arrested? Wrong. The stuff wasn’t even hateful, and IIRC the cop came to the show specifically to be offended. That someone, somewhere can be offended by what you say doesn’t make you a dick saying it. Period. > [@](#): > > But what about Fatima Farach, M. D. from London or Paris? Can she dress whatver the fuck way she wants? I’m all for letting anyone dress the way he or she wants. That’s what we do where I live. Perhaps in some places there is concern that the way to prevent coercion is to limit what can be worn. I don’t agree with that, but it could help the immigrants integrate into society. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/65 "2015-01-20T18:30:43Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > I think we’re getting closer. > I will galdly support anyone who fights the concept of not mocking certain people/ideas, i.e. printing images of Muhammad even if for Muslims it is wrong to do it. It’s imposible to say somthing in public without offending someone. My rant is against specifically mocking for the point of insulting, without irony or intelligence. But, legally, plastering the walls of a mostly muslim neighbourhood with images of Muhammad raping a pig while wiping is ass with the Koran is, to say the least, an uncivil use of your freedom. It is sometimes hard to tell what is insulting. Do you consider the most recent Charlie cover insulting? Yes it has an illegal picture of the prophet, but that prophet is upset about those who murder in his name, which doesn’t seem insulting to me. Sometimes those who don’t get the point see the supposed insult and not the reason why the piece was done. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/66 "2015-01-20T18:31:18Z")
> [@Balance](#): > > Can I borrow a cup of what-the-fuck? I thought I had enough to last the week, but I ended up using it all on that article. Sounds like it’s along the same lines of reasoning the Taliban were fond of using, where _any activity that does not directly contribute to praising Allah_ is inherently blasphemous. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/67 "2015-01-20T18:38:15Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > It is sometimes hard to tell what is insulting. Do you consider the most recent Charlie cover insulting? Yes it has an illegal picture of the prophet, but that prophet is upset about those who murder in his name, which doesn’t seem insulting to me. > Sometimes those who don’t get the point see the supposed insult and not the reason why the piece was done. It is certainly insulting to those that think killing in the prophets name is correct - ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2015, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/68 "2015-01-20T18:41:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Sounds like it’s along the same lines of reasoning the Taliban were fond of using, where any activity that does not directly contribute to praising Allah is inherently blasphemous. Upon observation of the giraffe and the platypus, one cannot doubt that God Almighty has a puckish sense of humor. Therefore, I resolve to conduct my worshipful praise by being a smart-ass. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2015, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/69 "2015-01-21T00:24:49Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > The Pope should win some kind of award for “most quotes misconstrued or misinterpreted by the media and people in general.” He is not speaking _ex cathedra_ every time he says something, or else dogma would dictate that San Lorenzo de Almagro is the Holiest football club. Road & Track had an article about a recent running of the Mille Miglia vintage racer rally. One small photo showed a fellow in papal garb waving at the racers, presumably in blessing. Unfortunately the arm of a monsignor beside him blocked his face so I couldn’t be sure it was Il Papa, and the monsignor looked more like a fat greaser with inappropriate facial hair than a proper priest so it might not have been him. Still, it would not surprise me if Frankie were there. As an Argentinian of a certain age I assume he believes that [Fangio](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Manuel_Fangio), who drove in the Mille Miglia seven times when it was a real race, sits at God’s left hand. I know I do, but he’ll have to shove aside when Stirling Moss arrives. Um, I think I mean Fangio, not God, but I’m good either way. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2015, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/70 "2015-01-21T00:34:43Z")
> [@GrumpyBunny](#): > > That’s not the issue. I don’t care if women want to wear a full burqa. I don’t care if women want to wear hijab. I don’t care if women want to run around dressed like a flamenco dancer. My problem comes in when some random dude I run across decides that women wearing western clothing are a problem and gives me a hard time for wearing a miniskirt or leggings or whatever. Generally agreed. However if you know before travelling that in the country of \*Misogynyland \*they specifically don’t allow skirts higher than the knee AND you still go, it is rational to abide by their laws, as stupid as they may seem to us. > [@](#): > > So, if that guy is being a dick, does my boyfriend get to punch him in the nose? Can I punch him in the nose? We need equality in nose-punching, if we’re going to have it. Do I get to blow up his car if he doesn’t stop annoying the non-traditional-clothing-wearing women in the area with him commentary? If you didn’t get the point I was making about real people in real life and not debates in anonymous message boards, then more explanation ain’t gonna help. > [@](#): > > Now, as I said, I don’t care what women wear. BUT, women need to stop trying to get a drivers license photo or ID, and insisting that their face be covered in the photo. The point of an ID is that you can be identified; you can’t be identified if everything but your eyes are covered. Agreed. I respect someone’s culture and will try to accomodate as much as posible, but certain issues cannot be resolved in a way that is satisfactory to both. > [@](#): > > And that’s why people mock religious fundamentalists; they’re unbending and want the world to conform to them. It’s not just fundamentalist Muslims who annoy the hell out of me; I grew up in the Deep South, and trust me, I don’t have any more patience for Christian religious fundamentalists (probably less, TBH; their idiocy affects me and my family more). Fundamentalism, especially when it’s annoying or, much much worse, violent is not to be tolerated if they want to effect their desired outcomes illegally. However, I’ve been told that we should mock and be dicks freely so fundamentalists get the same rights. > [@Voyager](#): > > I’m not objecting to people getting angry. People have a right to get angry and anything they want to get angry at. I’m objecting to people killing or hurting other people about it. That applies to all cases. Agreed. However, you can see how a few/some/many/most rational, peaceful people have a breaking point where they do things that are wrong. > [@](#): > > The stuff wasn’t even hateful, and IIRC the cop came to the show specifically to be offended. That someone, somewhere can be offended by what you say doesn’t make you a dick saying it. Period. Some people, even if it could be argued they had some sort of point. just want to be ofended. They are the dicks. I don’t go to nudie bars (it’s for me, an inmoral activity), but if adults go there freely and legally it’d be wrong for me to go to the bar and start annoying people telling them about their sins or whatever or suing the bar for not respecting my beliefs. > [@](#): > > I’m all for letting anyone dress the way he or she wants. That’s what we do where I live. Perhaps in some places there is concern that the way to prevent coercion is to limit what can be worn. I don’t agree with that, but it could help the immigrants integrate into society. I see the minor point of integration, but it’s like forcing migrant to learn the national language a year after arriving. It’s a very good idea, but’s certainly an imposition. [QUOTE] > [@Voyager](#): > > It is sometimes hard to tell what is insulting. Do you consider the most recent Charlie cover insulting? Yes it has an illegal picture of the prophet, but that prophet is upset about those who murder in his name, which doesn’t seem insulting to me. It’s not an illegal picture. It’s, at least for muslims, blasphemous. 🙂 As a non-muslim I don’t think it was insulting, and most muslims would consider it like that. There is, I know, a continuum from 100% non-insulting to 100% insulting, and it’s not alwyas easy to know where the line is broken. The cover it’s intelligent, transgressive stuff. Much, much better than, say, Muhammad ass-raping a pig while wiping his ass with the Koran; that’s simply insulting and stupid. > [@](#): > > Sometimes those who don’t get the point see the supposed insult and not the reason why the piece was done. I agree, but most of the time with the anti-muslim CH cartoons, all explanations are simply handwaving or thinking that saying “art” excuses everything. They were unimaginative, childish, and insulting simply to be insulting. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2015, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/71 "2015-01-21T06:13:31Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Sounds like it’s along the same lines of reasoning the Taliban were fond of using, where _any activity that does not directly contribute to praising Allah_ is inherently blasphemous. I get something similar to that from Jehovah’s Witnesses, although (bless their blessed hearts) they don’t get all into violence about it. What I hear from JW’s is that they don’t celebrate most Christian holidays because _Jesus didn’t command it_ (yes, they use the word _command_ this way); they don’t celebrate birthdays because _Jesus didn’t command it_ and so forth. Their rule seems to be: Do everything that Jesus _commands_ and _only_ that which Jesus commands. (Reminds me of Li’l Abner, who once swore to do everything Fearless Fosdick does, and not to do everything Fearless Fosdick doesn’t do. It was his specific plan, knowing that Fosdick would _never_ marry Miss Pimpleton, to assure that he himself would never get married. But due to a serious misunderstanding, it then appeared that Fosdick went ahead and married Miss P. – Turned out, it was all just a bad dream, but by the time that became known, Abner had done gone and married Daisy Mae.) Well, the JW’s give other reasons as well for not observing birthdays: They claim to find only a scant few Biblical passages in which birthdays are mentioned, but with unfortunate circumstances surrounding each case. Hence, birthdays = evil. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2015, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/72 "2015-01-23T21:51:09Z")
Two-dad family?? [Not in this god’s house.](https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/kids-rejected-from-private-school-because-they-108932018787.html) > [@](#): > > "The letter he posted — which explains that “homosexuality” is a “lifestyle conduct which is in opposition to the mission” of the school — > > … > > It (the school) has since been identified as Davidson Academy in Nashville, described on its website as “an interdenominational, college-preparatory school serving students age three through 12th grade.” It continues, “Our school maintains a distinctly interdenominational, Christian environment in which students and faculty/staff can learn and grow in Christ-likeness.” Way to turn the other cheek there, fascist fuckwads. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2015, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/73 "2015-01-23T21:58:14Z")
[A baker faces a civil rights complaint for refusing to decorate cakes with anti-gay slurs on the cake face.](http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/baker_who_would_not_decorate_a_cake_with_anti_gay_slurs_faces_civil_rights/?utm_source=maestro&utm_campaign=weekly_email&utm_medium=email&job_id=150121AQ) The man who ordered them claims about anti-religious discrimination. > [@](#): > > "Colorado officials are again dealing with a baker refusing a customer’s request for a cake having to do with same-sex relationships, but with a different twist. A suburban Denver man has complained that by not agreeing to decorate a cake with anti-gay slurs and images, a baker engaged in religious discrimination against him, the Associated Press reports. > > Marjorie Silva, owner of Azucar Bakery in Denver, says she is the subject of a confidential review by Colorado’s Civil Rights Division on the complaint. Silva told the AP that her bakery took an order for some Bible-shaped cakes for a customer. Then the man handed her a list of anti-gay phrases and slurs he wanted written on the cakes, and asked her to create an image on it with two men holding hands but crossed over by an “X.” Silva said the man would not allow her employees to copy the list, and refused to read the words out loud." Why is this even being reviewed by anyone? If I don’t like your face, I don’t have to make a cake for you if I don’t want. What happened to “We have the right to refuse service?” Or is that only for drunks in bars?? ---
**Author:** ![EPoch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f6c823/32.png) [@EPoch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EPoch)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2015, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/74 "2015-01-24T05:13:10Z")
> [@Locrian](#): > > [A baker faces a civil rights complaint for refusing to decorate cakes with anti-gay slurs on the cake face.](http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/baker_who_would_not_decorate_a_cake_with_anti_gay_slurs_faces_civil_rights/?utm_source=maestro&utm_campaign=weekly_email&utm_medium=email&job_id=150121AQ) The man who ordered them claims about anti-religious discrimination. > > Why is this even being reviewed by anyone? If I don’t like your face, I don’t have to make a cake for you if I don’t want. What happened to “We have the right to refuse service?” Or is that only for drunks in bars?? This case is being compared, by others, to the one with the baker who refused a homosexual couple a cake, with some using it to bash gay people for “forcing” others to do accept something they don’t want and how people should refuse services, even if they discriminate, or people to do what the customer says due to his religion. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2015, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/75 "2015-01-24T08:25:33Z")
> [@EPoch](#): > > This case is being compared, by others, to the one with the baker who refused a homosexual couple a cake, with some using it to bash gay people for “forcing” others to do accept something they don’t want and how people should refuse services, even if they discriminate, or people to do what the customer says due to his religion. Which I believe is different. The case you mention is about the baker refusing to bake the cakes in the first place, this one is about the cakes being baked but the icing will not contain anti-gay slurs. The owner offered the icing and an icing bag to the man who ordered the cakes and told him to decorate the phrases himself. A judge in the article I posted said they were not the same claim. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaptics](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Sinaptics](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaptics)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2015, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/76 "2015-01-24T15:26:17Z")
> [@Locrian](#): > > Two-dad family?? [Not in this god’s house.](https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/kids-rejected-from-private-school-because-they-108932018787.html) > > Way to turn the other cheek there, fascist fuckwads. I don’t know why I always read comments on these articles. Makes me lose faith in humanity’s intelligence. It’s like nobody was ever taught critical thinking. I was just reading another thread where someone was complaining that Obama didn’t say something or other about radical Islam in the SOTU. My thought was, perhaps they don’t invoke Islam because when you deal with religion, even the nasty aspects that nobody agrees with, you get defenders jumping on board because they feel their religion is being attacked. Perhaps it’s better to just label them terrorists by their actions, rather than due to their religion. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2015, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/77 "2015-01-24T17:23:58Z")
Richard Dawkins[spoiler][reads his mail](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7607YiBso) NSFBreakfast[/spoiler] ---
**Author:** ![TheSeaOtter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ed655f/32.png) [@TheSeaOtter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheSeaOtter)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2015, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/78 "2015-01-28T22:04:07Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Richard Dawkins[spoiler][reads his mail](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7607YiBso) > > NSFBreakfast[/spoiler] Fucking amazing. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2015, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/79 "2015-01-29T02:22:59Z")
> [@TheSeaOtter](#): > > Fucking amazing. What’s amazing? It’s run-of-the-mil. Making fun of scientifically ignoratn people on a topic that’s been debated to death is sooo easy. Janitor John Dawkins could’ve done it. Atheists and their fawning over Dawkins gets annoying, especially when easy layups are treated as 60 feet buzzer beaters ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928/80 "2015-02-06T23:21:51Z")
[Better lock the barn, now that the horse is gone](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/26/1234055/-Anti-vaccine-megachurch-hit-with-measles-epidemic-now-offering-free-vaccinations) Kenneth Copeland’s church is now offering measles vaccinations after having been hit with an outbreak. Copeland has been an outspoken anti-vaxxer, I guess the faith in jehovallah and prayer to him came up a little short. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-religious-idea-of-the-day/709928.md?page=5)