A moment of chastisement — Page 2

darth_ender said:

It would be a lot easier if I could just get back to Off Topic, which is continuously a challenge.  But rest assured, it will not be difficult to find how condescending you are when I've got the time to wrestle with this frustrating site.

Note that for some reason, once you're in a topic, it normally is okay.  It's trying to get to the various sub-forums where the greatest overall troubles seem to be.  Don't worry, you've got plenty of dirt that doesn't require much digging.

 I'll do it. By the way imperialscum, it only took a few moments to find these posts. I picked the first three pretentious and disrespectful posts I saw, and it didn't take long to find them, so I'm sure I missed many more loathsome comments that far surpass these three.

Imperialscum's 3 condescending posts:

#1- In response to Warbler's request to keep anti-theist comments out of his Christian thread - "I don't get it. I thought religion was supposed to something very personal. Why would one feel the need to display it like this? You made a thread to display your crap and at the same time you forbade people to debate or give feedback. This is an internet forum, not a parking lot in front of your house where you show off your new car."

#2 - In response to Post Praetorian's attempt to politely explain why Warbler's request was reasonable -"I am afraid "we" shall not try again. I give up on your inability to comprehend extremely simple stuff."

#3 - In response to RicOlie_2 after he stated that he agreed with Jetrell Fo regarding the validity of Warbler's request to keep anti-theist rhetoric out of his christian thread -

"Unfortunately for you, it seems you agree with with him when he is completely wrong."

darth_ender said:

I guess as I've thought about it, though I was defending Warbler, I was also defending Jesus Christ.  You see, to me he is not just some guy.  He is not even some remote supernatural being.  I see him as a very dear friend, someone for whom I have a great deal of love.  You may criticize me, my beliefs, my church, its founder, its leaders, its doctrine, its scripture.  You may criticize similar things for broader Christianity.  But when you actually belittle the Man I love most in this universe, I really cannot take it.  It's not just being thin-skinned.  Most of you wouldn't take me insulting a family member.  This is much like that.  You don't have to believe in him, but please do not disrespect him.

I'm totally down with this.

darth_ender said:

I guess as I've thought about it, though I was defending Warbler, I was also defending Jesus Christ.  You see, to me he is not just some guy.  He is not even some remote supernatural being.  I see him as a very dear friend, someone for whom I have a great deal of love.  You may criticize me, my beliefs, my church, its founder, its leaders, its doctrine, its scripture.  You may criticize similar things for broader Christianity.  But when you actually belittle the Man I love most in this universe, I really cannot take it.  It's not just being thin-skinned.  Most of you wouldn't take me insulting a family member.  This is much like that.  You don't have to believe in him, but please do not disrespect him.

 This is a tricky one in my mind. Shouldn't we turn the other cheek? Shouldn't our conduct be our defense, not our words? It's not like he who was in the beginning, from whom all things were created, without whom nothing was made that is made...needs us to defend him.

darth_ender said:

Turning my cheek is one thing, but should I not defend His? And do you believe my conduct was too out of line? Perhaps you may be right.

 I don't know if it was out of line or not. I really don't.

darth_ender said:

I was also defending Jesus Christ.  You see, to me he is not just some guy.  He is not even some remote supernatural being.  I see him as a very dear friend, someone for whom I have a great deal of love.  You may criticize me, my beliefs, my church, its founder, its leaders, its doctrine, its scripture.  You may criticize similar things for broader Christianity.  But when you actually belittle the Man I love most in this universe, I really cannot take it.  It's not just being thin-skinned.  Most of you wouldn't take me insulting a family member.  This is much like that.  You don't have to believe in him, but please do not disrespect him.

Are you aware that the guy is dead right? You are getting mad for something that is not even intended to make YOU mad, I understand that you actually believe that the dude is somewhere/everywhere listening to everything/everybody making judgement/forgiving us all and etc. and you are defending(?) him but that is exactly the problem.

You see, I understand that everyone has a right to believe whatever they want and still deserve respect but sometimes just the fact of being an atheist is an offense to the believers. Religious people must understand that some of our atheist opinions will inevitable end in mocking, jokes, sarcasm and plain rejection of religious stuff. I know that for people of faith that is blasphemy and a total disrespect that of course it will make them offended but unfortunately and because of the same atheist opinions we hold there is nothing we can do about believers getting offended.

I sometimes get offended (as a human being) by religion because it manipulates people on how they should live their lives and push them to convince and/or impose their views in our social system (government, education, health, etc) where it should be a consensus and not an imposition of any kind. I also get offended when people tell others that they need Jesus in their heart or else they'll burn endlessly in hell. I get offended when religion takes the ability of people to stand on their own because of fear of imaginary tales written in many ages of our world that have minimum-to-none connection with the reality of how the world really works both socially and scientifically... and still I don't think that religious people should keep it shut because I may feel offended.

I want to clarify that I'm not saying all of this because of a specific comment, situation or person and is just to clarify what I'm trying to say here but bottom line it goes like this: if you say you are entitled to some respect for getting mad because of insults to a imaginary friend that you and many others believe in because an ancient book tells you so without no real sustainable evidence outside the book then I'm entitled to some respect as well when expresing my opinion about all religious tales being plain bullshit, for example I find hilarious when you said ''but please do not disrespect him'' when I don't even believe in the guy and therefore is obvious I'll keep expressing that in many ways .

Please don't get me wrong here, I genuinely like you and I'm not trying to insult you in any way but if my opinions insult you then I can't do anything about it, there is a difference between someone being offensive and you finding something offensive and when it comes to religious people that line is very thin. If you demanding respect means that I can't express what I really think about a particular subject then you're being disrespectful towards others who disagree with you and unfortunately I can't comply with that request.

I'm just being honest here ;)

moviefreakedmind said:

Imperialscum's 3 condescending posts:

#1- In response to Warbler's request to keep anti-theist comments out of his Christian thread - "I don't get it. I thought religion was supposed to something very personal. Why would one feel the need to display it like this? You made a thread to display your crap and at the same time you forbade people to debate or give feedback. This is an internet forum, not a parking lot in front of your house where you show off your new car."

#2 - In response to Post Praetorian's attempt to politely explain why Warbler's request was reasonable -"I am afraid "we" shall not try again. I give up on your inability to comprehend extremely simple stuff."

#3 - In response to RicOlie_2 after he stated that he agreed with Jetrell Fo regarding the validity of Warbler's request to keep anti-theist rhetoric out of his christian thread -

"Unfortunately for you, it seems you agree with with him when he is completely wrong."

I would agree that first one might have been a little bit disrespectful, merely because I sometimes use word "crap" instead of "stuff" for describing some generic items. The last two are completely okay. As an honest person I am, I was just stating the truth.

darth_ender said:

I love how Christians are bigots who believe that perhaps it is against God's will that homosexuality is an acceptable practice in his eyes, though they still defend the rights of homosexuals.

I can't help myself but point out this technical issue.

Christians who believe that homosexuality is against God's will don't believe in omnipotence of God, which is basically equal to not believing in God at all.

If it was against God's will then it wouldn't exists, would it?

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

I love how Christians are bigots who believe that perhaps it is against God's will that homosexuality is an acceptable practice in his eyes, though they still defend the rights of homosexuals.

I can't help myself but point out this technical issue.

Christians who believe that homosexuality is against God's will don't believe in omnipotence of God, which is basically equal to not believing in God at all.

If it was against God's will then it wouldn't exists, would it?

 This is basically the same as asking: "If God didn't want Eve to taste the apple, why didn't he create her in a way that she wouldn't want to taste it?" I'm sure this was answered a long time ago and probably has something to do with free will. You could find this out by yourself, instead of using your ignorance as an excuse to belittle people here.

Frank your Majesty said:

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

I love how Christians are bigots who believe that perhaps it is against God's will that homosexuality is an acceptable practice in his eyes, though they still defend the rights of homosexuals.

I can't help myself but point out this technical issue.

Christians who believe that homosexuality is against God's will don't believe in omnipotence of God, which is basically equal to not believing in God at all.

If it was against God's will then it wouldn't exists, would it?

 This is basically the same as asking: "If God didn't want Eve to taste the apple, why didn't he create her in a way that she wouldn't want to taste it?" I'm sure this was answered a long time ago and probably has something to do with free will. You could find this out by yourself, instead of using your ignorance as an excuse to belittle people here.

That is not the same at all.

It is the same. "Why are people doing things against God's will if he could have created them in a way that they would not act against it?"

Frank your Majesty said:

It is the same. "Why are people doing things against God's will if he could have created them in a way that they would not act against it?"

What I am aiming at omnipotence paradox. So far, no argument that tried to solve/explain it convinced me.

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

I love how Christians are bigots who believe that perhaps it is against God's will that homosexuality is an acceptable practice in his eyes, though they still defend the rights of homosexuals.

I can't help myself but point out this technical issue.

Christians who believe that homosexuality is against God's will don't believe in omnipotence of God, which is basically equal to not believing in God at all.

If it was against God's will then it wouldn't exists, would it?

 Yeah, "against God's will" might not be the best way to say it. I think it's more accurate to explain this way:

• God does allow people to sin, even if it's wrong. That's probably a concept you're familiar with? Like, you know we believe it?
• People come in all ways. Some of my grandparents had problems with alcohol. Some people have problems with anger. Other with pride, etc.
• Not all desires are good.
• Not all sexual desires are good.
• Some people have problems with not-good sexual desires (see above).
• Some of those bad sexual desires are homosexual in nature.
• Modern concepts of identity have made those desires into an immutable part of a person's identity, which they believe they can not and should not forsake.
• Many Christians disagree with that last part.

Very well said, Tim.

darth_ender said:

dclarkg said:

darth_ender said:

I was also defending Jesus Christ.  You see, to me he is not just some guy.  He is not even some remote supernatural being.  I see him as a very dear friend, someone for whom I have a great deal of love.  You may criticize me, my beliefs, my church, its founder, its leaders, its doctrine, its scripture.  You may criticize similar things for broader Christianity.  But when you actually belittle the Man I love most in this universe, I really cannot take it.  It's not just being thin-skinned.  Most of you wouldn't take me insulting a family member.  This is much like that.  You don't have to believe in him, but please do not disrespect him.

Are you aware that the guy is dead right? You are getting mad for something that is not even intended to make YOU mad, I understand that you actually believe that the dude is somewhere/everywhere listening to everything/everybody making judgement/forgiving us all and etc. and you are defending(?) him but that is exactly the problem.

You see, I understand that everyone has a right to believe whatever they want and still deserve respect but sometimes just the fact of being an atheist is an offense to the believers. Religious people must understand that some of our atheist opinions will inevitable end in mocking, jokes, sarcasm and plain rejection of religious stuff. I know that for people of faith that is blasphemy and a total disrespect that of course it will make them offended but unfortunately and because of the same atheist opinions we hold there is nothing we can do about believers getting offended.

I sometimes get offended (as a human being) by religion because it manipulates people on how they should live their lives and push them to convince and/or impose their views in our social system (government, education, health, etc) where it should be a consensus and not an imposition of any kind. I also get offended when people tell others that they need Jesus in their heart or else they'll burn endlessly in hell. I get offended when religion takes the ability of people to stand on their own because of fear of imaginary tales written in many ages of our world that have minimum-to-none connection with the reality of how the world really works both socially and scientifically... and still I don't think that religious people should keep it shut because I may feel offended.

I want to clarify that I'm not saying all of this because of a specific comment, situation or person and is just to clarify what I'm trying to say here but bottom line it goes like this: if you say you are entitled to some respect for getting mad because of insults to a imaginary friend that you and many others believe in because an ancient book tells you so without no real sustainable evidence outside the book then I'm entitled to some respect as well when expresing my opinion about all religious tales being plain bullshit, for example I find hilarious when you said ''but please do not disrespect him'' when I don't even believe in the guy and therefore is obvious I'll keep expressing that in many ways .

Please don't get me wrong here, I genuinely like you and I'm not trying to insult you in any way but if my opinions insult you then I can't do anything about it, there is a difference between someone being offensive and you finding something offensive and when it comes to religious people that line is very thin. If you demanding respect means that I can't express what I really think about a particular subject then you're being disrespectful towards others who disagree with you and unfortunately I can't comply with that request.

I'm just being honest here ;)

 See, I just don't see how even the most extreme Christian statements like an atheist will burn in a hell he doesn't even believe in could really be that offensive.

If a neighbor might believe (that is truly and honestly believe--and not even necessarily desire) that all Mormons were destined for Hell would it not at the very least make exchanging daily pleasantries a bit awkward?

For the atheist may claim pragmatic principles, but underneath he has no less a desire to be valued as integral to society. To consider that a large subset of said society might adhere to a credo that imagines him being in everlasting torment after death is a slight set back in relations. To imagine that said misery is purportedly to be brought about by the express judgement of their god is a further such slight...but paramount is the concept that the good Christian might still love such an entity with all their heart whom they truly believe will righteously torment the disbeliever...an entity that must, by its very description, be incapable of doing wrong, to be eternally noble, kind, just, and loving...well that, my dear Ender, is something that tends to give one pause...

But mocking someone special to me in as disrespectful language as possible, as Darth Id insisted on doing in particular, is very hurtful.  I am always respectful towards atheists' reasons for lacking belief.  I believe in the rights of atheists and do not condemn them or criticize them for their lack of belief.  But if that respect cannot be reciprocated, I get irritated.  If you don't think it would be hurtful to criticize Jesus Christ to a Christian, then clearly you've never loved.  If you want to say you don't believe, you still don't have to call him bull****.

In the mind of the atheist, the mocking of God (who might be hated) is not necessarily to be equated to the mocking of the Christian (who might be loved) any more than the accepting of an eternal hellfire for atheists might be wished to be confused with the acceptability of same...

timdiggerm said:

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

I love how Christians are bigots who believe that perhaps it is against God's will that homosexuality is an acceptable practice in his eyes, though they still defend the rights of homosexuals.

I can't help myself but point out this technical issue.

Christians who believe that homosexuality is against God's will don't believe in omnipotence of God, which is basically equal to not believing in God at all.

If it was against God's will then it wouldn't exists, would it?

 Yeah, "against God's will" might not be the best way to say it. I think it's more accurate to explain this way:

• God does allow people to sin, even if it's wrong. That's probably a concept you're familiar with? Like, you know we believe it?
• People come in all ways. Some of my grandparents had problems with alcohol. Some people have problems with anger. Other with pride, etc.
• Not all desires are good.
• Not all sexual desires are good.
• Some people have problems with not-good sexual desires (see above).
• Some of those bad sexual desires are homosexual in nature.
• Modern concepts of identity have made those desires into an immutable part of a person's identity, which they believe they can not and should not forsake.
• Many Christians disagree with that last part.

Well if an event can happen then there are two possible scenarios.

1. God allows it to happen, which basically means it is God's will as God must have designed the possibility for such event to occur.

2. God has no control over it, which would negate omnipotence.

If I make a simple computer program that randomly outputs either 0 or 1, then I let computer to decide which one it will generate in each iteration. However, it was me who purposely designed the possibility for either number to appear, which means I was in control and therefore it was my will.

If I design a program that would only output 1 and somehow 0 appeared, then it means it happened against my will, which further means that I wasn't in the control of the program.

Seriously people, whatever happened to the concept of "You have your beliefs, I have mine, no more needs to be said or debated." Mutual respect motherfuckers.

Neglify said:

Seriously people, whatever happened to the concept of "You have your beliefs, I have mine, no more needs to be said or debated." Mutual respect motherfuckers.

 Good luck with that in a completely  unmoderated forum.

I find off topic to be recklessly unmoderated, but i think that is what some people find fun about it.

Again it is Jay's site not mine, but i have never seen another place do this.  Everywhere else i have been online you need to be screened before posting and are banned immediately for troublemaking or trollery.

I think that the place is unsafe sometimes, it can become a free for all for bullies in the virtual world but none of this stuff is real. I hope it does not effect peoples real lives.

Unfortunately online posts do really hurt people.

Wonder why Frink never updates his classic lol moments in original trilogy history page.  I know this post will probably go up there.

I apologize to Darth Ender if i have ever said anything that was offensive in any way.