Religion Mocking

Even broaching the question is highly offensive to many, and bound to cause a major stir.

As my edits say, in my experiance, some offense, yes. But bound to cause a stir?

The first being that it was inherently offensive (more than just mocking), and the other being that discussion of religion isn't allowed in the JCC.

As I said, I didn't know all relious talk was banned in JCC. My apologies about that. But I don't feel, and Christians I have talked to don't feel that it was inherintly offensive, or mocking.

 

Ok. Wear a shirt that asks-"Is Jesus a Cannibal?" outside the church. Playing semantics is just an easier way of saying you are wrong. You know you'd get beat down if you wore either shirt. Probably get punched in any mall in America too.

I can't belive that your playing dumb is not considered baiting.

My saying you are gay , after statements you made that seem to lend credence to that assertion, in a thread about Britney Spears, mind you- You feel that that is more offensive than your questioning whether the Saviour, Our Lord Jesus Christ, is a flesh devouring cannibal?

And when you posted it, you really expected all Christians to be amused and entertained by such thoughts? Ok. I believe you.Really.

 

feel that that is more offensive than your questioning whether the Saviour, Our Lord Jesus Christ,

He's not my Lord, Saviour, or any of that crap. Please do not speak for others who do not share your opinions.

 

As my edits say, in my experiance, some offense, yes. But bound to cause a stir?

Certainly. There was no question that many people would take offense to it, and lead to charged discussion centered around religion and other viewpoints.

Can you imagine it ending up as a calm thread with few posts to it?


As I said, I didn't know all relious talk was banned in JCC. My apologies about that. But I don't feel, and Christians I have talked to don't feel that it was inherintly offensive, or mocking.

I can assure you that it's offensive to many Christians, and the element you've left out (without realizing it, I imagine) is that it's particularly offensive to Catholics, the part of Christianity that believes in the literal body and blood of Christ. For most other Christian denominations (excepting Anglicans, Episcopalians, Lutherans and related denominations), it's symbolic of Christ. Cannabalism is actually a charge some Christians use against Catholics and those who believe in transubstantiation, so this may be a little more complex that it initially appears.

 

Stacky, you are right. There is a third possibility if you believe he doesn't really know he's inflaming people, but it is a violation of the TOS for me to tell you what that is.


Edit: As I said earlier, stacky, I'm agnostic. I used a reverential term for him to express how he is admired, and what a great amount of respect and love his followers have for him. This was to show how ridiculous it was to sugest that the idea of him eating the flesh of another human being might be considered offensive. Sorry that slipped past you-

 

PM it, BOBA.

 

Ok. Wear a shirt that asks-"Is Jesus a Cannibal?" outside the church. Playing semantics is just an easier way of saying you are wrong. You know you'd get beat down if you wore either shirt. Probably get punched in any mall in America too.

Why would I wear a shirt like that? So not my style man. I'm too hip for that!

I can't belive that your playing dumb is not considered baiting.

Me debating an issue of censorship in Comms=dumb? ?

Right, I forgot you invented the IQ test.

My saying you are gay , after statements you made that seem to lend credence to that assertion, in a thread about Britney Spears, mind you- You feel that that is more offensive than your questioning whether the Saviour, Our Lord Jesus Christ, is a flesh devouring cannibal?

First you say you are agnostic, then you take Jesus as your savior? I think your just trying to start stuff. Read the thread please.

And when you posted it, you really expected all Christians to be amused and entertained by such thoughts? Ok. I believe you.Really.

I have said not all would be amused before. You would know this if you had read the thread instead of just coming in here trying to get me in trouble, again no less. I expected somebody to have a problem, I never expected people to have such a big issue with it. You are derailing this thread into a discussion of your unfounded problems with me, please, stop side tracking this discussion with your attacks on me.

Cannabalism is actually a charge some Christians use against Catholics and those who believe in transubstantiation, so this may be a little more complex that it initially appears.

I did not know that. I really wish I had folk posting that instead of derailing my thread. Interesting, and the type of thing I wanted to hear.

 

Negative personal commentary on other members will stop now.

Thank you.

 

Thanks KW.

 

i think people need to sit back and take a deep breath before continuing on this subject. i'm a Christian and have been for 15 years. i know trell and i know he's not one to purposely be offensive. i've gotten into LOTS of debates with him before on Christianity and never ONCE has he EVER said anything to insult me or my faith, even unintentionally. yes, i realize not everyone would know that about him, but just please take my word that i know he wasn't trying to offend.
it was a serious question. he told me that, and i could even see that because, surprise, even as a Christian it's something that i've mulled over before. maybe it was posed in a less than serious way, but he even that didn't offend me.
i would also like to say, bobafettish, that you have no right to speak for the opinion of Christians, seeing as you're not one. and also it seems like you're holding a grudge against trell right now. you've been a jerk to him for the past week or more and in fighting with him now, it honestly seems petty on your part.

 

Something to keep in mind is that intent sometimes doesn't stop a thread or post from being highly or somewhat offensive to a significant number of people here.

You can have the best intentions possible, but if people perceive it differently than you thought possible, it doesn't change the end result.

 

I think Sha is just trying to point out that I personally didn't/wouldn't/won't go into a thread, or topic, with the intent to offend as I am being accused of.

Sha=

 

I am agnostic. I used the Our Savior(capitalized) as one of his many names, to indicate how sacred he is to many and how stupid and ludicrous the idea that he is a cannibal would not be an offensive idea is.

Personnally, It doesn't bother me a lick, if you had read your own thread. I just object to your professed innocence. I don't understand how you feel I am getting in trouble. Surely if all you are saying is true than everything will be fine.

 

Where as allowing any group with an axe to grind to hold threads hostage by bitching loudly is okay?

 

BOBA, I don't care. I find it offensive that people inconsiderately call Jesus 'Our' Lord and Saviour, etc. Implying that for some reason, I must also pay homage to him. He had good ideas, yeah. But, he's not my Lord, Saviour, Whatever.

Oh, and Sha = indeed.

And I'm still waiting on that PM, BOBA.

 

Ok, sorry Stacky. He's not mine either, so sorry if you were offended by that.



See how easy that is Trell? I saw how what I said could be construed as offensive, apologised, and moved on.

No more personal commentary.

 

I am agnostic. I used the Our Savior(capitalized) as one of his many names, to indicate how sacred he is to many and how stupid and ludicrous the idea that he is a cannibal would not be an offensive idea is.

Stop with the personal commentary.

Not even sure what I said... (Bad memory it seems) sorry if I did...

Well, I wouldn't wear that shirt, and the "is" thing is taking my original comment out of context. I believe that was the core of my point.

Personnally, It doesn't bother me a lick, if you had read your own thread. I just object to your professed innocence. I don't understand how you feel I am getting in trouble. Surely if all you are saying is true than everything will be fine.

Can you please reiterate that, didn't quite get your meaning.

See how easy that is Trell? I saw how what I said could be construed as offensive, apologised, and moved on. You should try it some time.

As I have told you time and again, read this thread. I said in my frist post in it "sorry if I offended anybody."

 

I said to stop with the negative personal commentary.

Except it wasn't, really, it was truthful.

 

Sorry Trell, but you saying sorry but then arguing that it was non-offensive kind of negates the apology.

Earlier, I meant to ask how you I was trying to get you in trouble? Surely if you aren't playing dumb, there's nothing wrong and you aren't baiting.

Lastly, did I get something edited out of my last post, or was that an accident?

 

Sorry Trell, but you saying sorry but then arguing that it was non-offensive kind of negates the apology

Add in the word 'intent' after non-offensive, and you'll have his argument.

 

I made an edit to three posts, one of which was yours.

 

trell apologized. i say end of subject. whether or not he chooses to change his opinion on whether what he posted was offensive or not should NOT be an issue anymore! that's a personal issue with him and him alone. the thread itself is what concerns the boards and well, HE APOLOGIZED!

 

Sorry Trell, but you saying sorry but then arguing that it was non-offensive kind of negates the apology.

I said I was sorry that I offended. Then I said I didn't feel it was all that offensive. How does that negate an apology?

Earlier, I meant to ask how you I was trying to get you in trouble? Surely if you aren't playing dumb, there's nothing wrong and you aren't baiting.

Just with that, you are baiting in my opinion with comments such as "Surelly you aren't playing dumb." Anything like that seems to me like you want me to say something directed at you.

 

Good call. I'm not getting perm banned for this junk.

Edited out

 

If you believe that, you are an intelligent person.

(If you believe that I did not intend to bait/flame/inflame, what have you that is.)

I would like to point out that Sha is my friend, why would I come here and try ot offend my friend?