A poe is a person posing as an extreme version of a religious viewpoint in order to parody it. Named after one Nathan Poe, who said basically that it is impossible, without other indicators, to tell an extreme religious position from a parody of one. No matter how ridiculously extreme such a position can appear, there is always someone who actually holds that position for real. Pious Paladin was actually mocking you, Randy.

(June 30, 2015 at 9:30 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(June 30, 2015 at 9:22 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: Nope. I do not.

And she was banned because she was a Poe and did not cooperate with staff once she revealed it.

What's a poe and did you see the analogy I added to my post?

A Poe is a person who implements Poe's Law, which states that is impossible to distinguish between a fundamentalist/extremist and a parody without a wink or a smiley.

And the analogy is once again predicated on the belief that heresy is an actual thing. Which it isn't. So the analogy is idiocy, and paints yourself, once again, as a moral relativist. Why don't you get a sniper rifle and start picking off heretics, Randy? If it is for their greater good and prevents them from damning more people to an eternity of hell?

Ah Steel, you added an extra x5 headshot bonus to my analogy. Good show!

I was thinking we need a "terrible analogy" thread. What do you reckon? It seems the top three tactics I see on this forum are:

1) Argument from ignorance/incredulity
2) Tu quoque fallacy
3) Appalling analogy which thoroughly misrepresents the matter at hand

At least people use their imagination a bit for the analogies, in a desperate attempt to make an impossible point.

(June 30, 2015 at 9:35 am)Stimbo Wrote: A poe is a person posing as an extreme version of a religious viewpoint in order to parody it. Named after one Nathan Poe, who said basically that it is impossible, without other indicators, to tell an extreme religious position from a parody of one. No matter how ridiculously extreme such a position can appear, there is always someone who actually holds that position for real. Pious Paladin was actually mocking you, Randy.

Ah. You never can tell with the SSPX.

And you say this person was actually another forum member (now banned presumably) who was using a sock account in order to post these SSPX posts?

(June 30, 2015 at 9:46 am)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(June 30, 2015 at 9:30 am)Randy Carson Wrote: What's a poe and did you see the analogy I added to my post?

A Poe is a person who implements Poe's Law, which states that is impossible to distinguish between a fundamentalist/extremist and a parody without a wink or a smiley.

And the analogy is once again predicated on the belief that heresy is an actual thing. Which it isn't. So the analogy is idiocy, and paints yourself, once again, as a moral relativist. Why don't you get a sniper rifle and start picking off heretics, Randy? If it is for their greater good and prevents them from damning more people to an eternity of hell?

Because today we have the Internet.

Geez.

Matthew 18:6
6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

(June 30, 2015 at 7:58 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Ah. You never can tell with the SSPX.
[...]

You can never tell with any of you, wackos... That's the whole point of Poe's Law.

(June 30, 2015 at 8:05 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote:

(June 30, 2015 at 7:58 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Ah. You never can tell with the SSPX.
[...]

You can never tell with any of you, wackos... That's the whole point of Poe's Law.

Since I frequently quote from the Catechism, you may be sure that may views are anything but extreme.

(June 30, 2015 at 8:00 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(June 30, 2015 at 9:46 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: A Poe is a person who implements Poe's Law, which states that is impossible to distinguish between a fundamentalist/extremist and a parody without a wink or a smiley.

And the analogy is once again predicated on the belief that heresy is an actual thing. Which it isn't. So the analogy is idiocy, and paints yourself, once again, as a moral relativist. Why don't you get a sniper rifle and start picking off heretics, Randy? If it is for their greater good and prevents them from damning more people to an eternity of hell?

Because today we have the Internet.

Geez.

Matthew 18:6
6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

I am really not sure how that answers the question.

I have personally guided two or three of my friends who came to me looking for help to get over the fears instilled in them by the church. Should I be drowned, Randy?

(June 30, 2015 at 8:59 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(June 30, 2015 at 8:00 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Because today we have the Internet.

Geez.

Matthew 18:6
6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

I am really not sure how that answers the question.

I have personally guided two or three of my friends who came to me looking for help to get over the fears instilled in them by the church. Should I be drowned, Randy?

That's ultimately for your creator to decide.

But if you want to examine your own conscience, did you show them how the people who created these fears in them were misinterpreting a handful of the scriptures? Or did you help them to understand the whole of the Bible which is very clear on how much God loves us?

It's easy for you to brush off everything that is harmful about your religion as a bastardization. Yet there is a reason that "Catholic Guilt" is a meme in our lexicon, and has a rich history in our literature. There is a reason that "fire and brimstone" speech is part of our lexicon, there is a reason why fear of hell is nearly ubiquitous among Christians. I'm sorry Randy, but reading through the Bible, you cannot escape the death cult nature of the "believe in me or suffer eternal anguish" bullshit that is rampant throughout. Whether you want to accept it or not, your intellectual honesty is at stake in not acknowledging its pervasiveness.

I listened. I provided support for what they needed rather than what I wanted for them. I asked them questions and allowed them to come to their own conclusions. I allowed them to grieve for a lost part of their life. I was supportive. My conscience is without reservation perfectly clear.

Which brings me to my point: why did you post that verse from Matthew? If you don't believe that I or anyone that leads a person from your concept of Truth, if you can understand the murder of a person that simply doesn't believe the same things about foreverland that you do, why post those verses or that opinion at all?