RE: Your thoughts on Satanism and the petition for a Satanic statue.
September 11, 2015 at 1:45 pm
(This post was last modified: September 11, 2015 at 2:29 pm by TheRocketSurgeon.)
Cath - We get that you are personally unoffended by the religious displays of other faiths. And that's great. The reason I say you show a shocking lack of introspection is that you seem unable to look beyond the attack against your faith (as you perceive the Satanists' effort, and rightly so, I believe) and see what their reason for doing so is. Can you truly not grasp that putting your religion's symbols up, especially when the people doing so are saying out loud that their reason for doing so is "to show this is a Christian nation, Under God", is a slap in the face to everyone who believes in secular, pluralistic society? That it is Dominionism? You're okay with it because you're not personally threatened, since you belong (however loosely) to the dominant group that is doing the threatening. That's a shocking inability to really look inside and question the motives of your fellow faithful.
Here's how introspection might work for you: If the roles were reversed, and we lived in a philosophically atheistic society, and atheists put up a monument in front of a courthouse that symbolized the domination of atheism over religion, saying "And this nation has abolished belief in god!" when they did it, you would be screaming your head off as a member of the believing minority. If Catholics then got together to put up a religious statue, and the atheists got furious as a result, you would rightly point out that their own choice to put up an anti-religion monument opened the door for anyone's monument... and you would be bewildered by me if I could not understand that the issue is the monument itself, not whether or not I was okay with other groups putting up monuments of their own. The only offense occurring here is the attack on the secularism of the nation. And the fact that you can't see it is a baffling lack of introspection about your own religion's history and about the motives of the faithful, in this case.
Since you reply quickly when someone quotes you, but haven't seen this one in half an hour, I'm suspecting that you're using the "Notifications" tab to do your navigation. Consequently, I'm "tagging" you through this quote of your previous statement.
Here's how introspection might work for you: If the roles were reversed, and we lived in a philosophically atheistic society, and atheists put up a monument in front of a courthouse that symbolized the domination of atheism over religion, saying "And this nation has abolished belief in god!" when they did it, you would be screaming your head off as a member of the believing minority. If Catholics then got together to put up a religious statue, and the atheists got furious as a result, you would rightly point out that their own choice to put up an anti-religion monument opened the door for anyone's monument... and you would be bewildered by me if I could not understand that the issue is the monument itself, not whether or not I was okay with other groups putting up monuments of their own. The only offense occurring here is the attack on the secularism of the nation. And the fact that you can't see it is a baffling lack of introspection about your own religion's history and about the motives of the faithful, in this case.
(September 11, 2015 at 1:08 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(September 11, 2015 at 1:00 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Here's the thing: if you have to limit your statue-building to just "those statues that won't offend anybody," then you would never ever build a religious monument at all.
The only thing about it that I find offensive is the fact that is was meant to offend, Esq. That's what I'm trying to say. And I know you don't believe that it was meant to offend, but I do. Otherwise, I think it's petty to be "offended" by other people's religious symbols. It's only when it's meant to be offensive and hateful that it's offensive and hateful lol.
So how about just limiting them to the ones that aren't deliberately meant to be hateful towards a group of people? That's where I stand on this.
Since you reply quickly when someone quotes you, but haven't seen this one in half an hour, I'm suspecting that you're using the "Notifications" tab to do your navigation. Consequently, I'm "tagging" you through this quote of your previous statement.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.