|
If you were referring to my post, I wasn't mocking Christianity at all. Furthermore, the responses I got actually did surprise me in that they were not mocking either.
So, I can only assume you were NOT referring to my post, but I don't see what you could have been referring to.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: So, I can only assume you were NOT referring to my post, but I don't see what you could have been referring to
He is referring to your post  Specifically to your reference to "gods" - lowercase g, and the plural form. Not guessing here btw, the OP did mention it in a response.
|
|
|
|
|
If you posted this in response to my reply to Marc, I've just posted a response[^] that may help you see there was no intent to mock.
Best wishes,
David
|
|
|
|
|
David, it was not your post, it is the general timbre of the Lounge and it is often repeated, despite the Lounge posting rules specifically requesting that it NOT be posted.
When someone posts about Christianity and then reference 'gods' (plural, lowercase), then it isn't about Christianity at all, it is a not-too-well-subtle mocking despite claims to the contrary.
Believe or don't, but don't mock other's beliefs.
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Carmichael wrote: Believe or don't, but don't mock other's beliefs.
If we do mock christianity, are you gonna go all crusader on us? (I would have said jihad, but I'm trying to keep the violence references aligned with the appropriate religion.)
BTW, what do the jews call their version of jihad/crusades?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: BTW, what do the jews call their version of jihad/crusades?
Hollywood.
|
|
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I did not read Marc's post as mocking Christianity. I suspect the pretty and evocative nature of Steiner's poem resonated with him so much that he simply did not see the "gods'" as a problem, and wanted to share that prettiness with us.
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Carmichael wrote: When someone posts about Christianity and then reference 'gods' (plural, lowercase), then it isn't about Christianity at all, it is a not-too-well-subtle mocking despite claims to the contrary.
So, you claim a personal right, based on your religion, to judge, and regulate, other people's use of the English language, and to define, absolutely, what is "respectful," and what is "mocking," based on the use of plural noun-forms, and upper- and lower- case ?
That's a form of intolerance that well fits the current term "political correctness;" and, for me, that's the very opposite of the Christianity I respect.
I believe that Marc's post was well intentioned, and expressed no disrespect towards anyone, or any belief system.
I wonder why the phrase "cast the first stone" comes to my mind in this context.
“I speak in a poem of the ancient food of heroes: humiliation, unhappiness, discord. Those things are given to us to transform, so that we may make from the miserable circumstances of our lives things that are eternal, or aspire to be so.” Jorge Luis Borges
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: So, you claim a personal right, based on your religion, to judge, and regulate, other people's use of the English language, and to define, absolutely, what is "respectful," and what is "mocking,"
Well that's religion all over, isn't it? See also the reaction of Muslims to anything that doesn't fit into their approved usage of language regarding their important figures.
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: So, you claim a personal right, based on your religion, to judge, and regulate, other people's use of the English language, and to define, absolutely, what is "respectful," and what is "mocking," based on the use of plural noun-forms, and upper- and lower- case?
He claimed no personal right - he invoked the rules of the forum.
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: He claimed no personal right - he invoked the rules of the forum.
Are you claiming the rules of this forum prohibit a member quoting a poem by Steiner in which he uses the term "gods" ?
“I speak in a poem of the ancient food of heroes: humiliation, unhappiness, discord. Those things are given to us to transform, so that we may make from the miserable circumstances of our lives things that are eternal, or aspire to be so.” Jorge Luis Borges
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Are you claiming the rules of this forum prohibit a member quoting a poem by Steiner in which he uses the term "gods"?
Are you claiming that Barack Obama condones the use of a microwave to dry wet kittens?
^ Oh look, I can be intentionally obtuse as well.
You probably thought I was going to go after your reading comprehension - but then you'd find a grammatical mistake in my post and mock that and then before we were through the term 'Nazi' and 'Hitler' would come up a few times.
I know your next move before you even play it.
Let me know when you get some fresh material.
|
|
|
|
|
I pause in the act of flagellating myself for the infinity of sins I have forgotten to forgive you this act of petty revenge, and pray your soul attain the inner peace that sees all things sub specie aeternitatis, Brother MehGerbil.
In the words of Kahlil Gibran:
"Keep me away from the wisdom which does not cry, the philosophy which does not laugh and the greatness which does not bow before children."
“I speak in a poem of the ancient food of heroes: humiliation, unhappiness, discord. Those things are given to us to transform, so that we may make from the miserable circumstances of our lives things that are eternal, or aspire to be so.” Jorge Luis Borges
|
|
|
|
|
It's possible that you noticed the Christianity posts because you are sensitive to it, but other religions are bashed far more in the Lounge than Christianity is - specially Islam. There have also been mass generalizations of all Indians (that's an entire nationality) as cow-worshippers
So, it's not just your religion, people in the Lounge mock all religions equally I would say.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're Indian I'd like to apologize for my post about peanut butter on hamburgers.
I'll try to be more sensitive in the future. 
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: If you're Indian I'd like to apologize for my post about peanut butter on hamburgers.
I'll try to be more sensitive in the future.
Well, you are going to have to find a different Indian to apologize to This particular Indian is a passionate meat eater.
|
|
|
|
|
Indians who are passionate meat eaters are known as Cannibals.
^ I just wanted to let you know we have a stereotype to cover every single one of you.
|
|
|
|
|
That is so considerate of you
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Carmichael wrote: Are Christians supposed to simply ignore the jabs and taunts?
Well, we are supposed to turn the other cheek... 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
That's the first thing I thought, but had to read the whole thread to make sure someone else hadn't said it... alas, you had!! 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with John Simmons in that I think all religion absurd. However, I was raised in a conservative religion by devout parents so am ironically rather well versed in the bible and religion (though am a bit rusty in the former.) Back when I did believe, I quickly determined that the freedom to believe meant that others had the freedom to criticize. In fact, anything worth believing in is worth criticizing and if can't tolerate that, then it isn't worth believing.
In answer to your question:
Tim Carmichael wrote: Are Christians supposed to simply ignore the jabs and taunts?
The answer is an emphatic YES. It's a major point in Jesus' sermons and in the epistles. I cannot remember the specific reference now (I believe the one I am thinking of is in Romans), but I liked the advise to early Christians to live their religion quietly and patiently, live by example and let everything else roll of their backs. (There is also the classic, "Turn the other cheek.")
Tim Carmichael wrote: but history has shown that anyone who believes will be attacked.
History has also shown that those who don't believe will also be attacked. It also shows that when beliefs becomes a dogmatic force, bad things happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Woodbury wrote: The answer is an emphatic YES. It's a major point in Jesus' sermons and in the epistles.
"To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either."
Sorry, I ain't wired that way.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: <layer>from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either."
Sorry, I ain't wired that way.
That is a relief. I, for one, would not wish to see you without your tunic. 
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
That got my vote ! I don't want to see JSOP wearing his weapons, either.
“I speak in a poem of the ancient food of heroes: humiliation, unhappiness, discord. Those things are given to us to transform, so that we may make from the miserable circumstances of our lives things that are eternal, or aspire to be so.” Jorge Luis Borges
modified 22-Apr-14 11:18am.
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong forum.
Wrong web-site.
Wrong line of work.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
