Stupid things religious people say

[Tonus]

WTF??

Let's be honest, it's not the craziest shit we've had theists say to us here.

[brewer]

You should look at some of the quackery they did with x-rays. My mother had acne treated with x-rays in her early teens, multiple sessions. We've wondered how much this contributed to her multiple myeloma. When diagnosed she was 63 with stage 4/grade 2, no prior family history.

I’ve always thought it funny that the medical profession insists that x-rays are perfectly safe, but every time I’ve had them, the tech always scurries off to the Shielded Room or dons a lead-lined apron.

But I’m sure it’s nothing to worry about.

Boru

From one of my favorite movies.

[Fake Messiah]

Taylor Swift Mocks Christianity in Her New Album

While it’s no secret that Taylor Swift is not a Christian, she made her hatred for religion known through her newly released album “The Tortured Poets Department.”

The album is full of minor quips that elevate Swift above God while also featuring two songs devoted to tearing down the Christian sexual ethic.

Swift’s elevation of herself over God begins in the song “I Can Fix Him (No Really I Can),” where she sings about dating a “bad boy” whom she – and only she – has the ability to fix.

“They shake their heads sayin’, ‘God help her,’ / When I tell ‘em he’s my man,” Swift sings during the chorus. “But your good Lord doesn’t lift a finger / I can fix him, no, really, I can. And only I can.”

At this point, Swift mocks the power of prayer, revealing how the bad boy she has decided to date remains bad despite her fans praying for their relationship. She then takes the mockery a step further, revealing that even though the Lord cannot fix her man, she can. At the end of the song, however, she reveals that she wasn’t up to the task, singing, “Well, maybe I can’t,” while making no comment on the Lord’s decision not to step in either.

Swift later reiterates that love and relationships are her gods when, in “loml” (love of my life), she calls her lover the “Holy Ghost.” This analogy further reveals her view of the Lord as someone who can be replaced by human relationships.

The singer’s disdain for Christianity, however, is put on full display through “But Daddy I Love Him” and “Guilty as Sin?” where she blasts the Christian sexual ethic and Jesus’ teaching on lust.

“I just learned these people only raise you / To cage you,” Swift sings during the opening of “But Daddy I Love Him.” “Too high a horse for a simple girl / To rise above it / They slammed the door on my whole world / The one thing I wanted.”

Complaining about the “oppressive” nature of the Christian sexual ethic to wait until marriage for sex, Swift sings about rising above the Bible’s teachings.

“Now I’m running with my dress unbuttoned / Screamin’, ‘But daddy I love him / I’m havin’ his baby’ / No, I’m not, but you should see your faces,” she sings during the chorus, continuing to mock the Bible’s teaching and joking about having her boyfriend’s baby.

“I’m telling him to floor it through the fences,” the chorus continues, with Swift pushing the imagery of breaking out of the “oppressive” guards put in place by the Bible.

https://www.movieguide.org/news-articles...-2024.html

[Mister Agenda]

If you really, really want to be persecuted, you can always find a way.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Taylor Swift Mocks Christianity in Her New Album

While it’s no secret that Taylor Swift is not a Christian, she made her hatred for religion known through her newly released album “The Tortured Poets Department.”

The album is full of minor quips that elevate Swift above God while also featuring two songs devoted to tearing down the Christian sexual ethic.

Swift’s elevation of herself over God begins in the song “I Can Fix Him (No Really I Can),” where she sings about dating a “bad boy” whom she – and only she – has the ability to fix.

“They shake their heads sayin’, ‘God help her,’ / When I tell ‘em he’s my man,” Swift sings during the chorus. “But your good Lord doesn’t lift a finger / I can fix him, no, really, I can. And only I can.”

At this point, Swift mocks the power of prayer, revealing how the bad boy she has decided to date remains bad despite her fans praying for their relationship. She then takes the mockery a step further, revealing that even though the Lord cannot fix her man, she can. At the end of the song, however, she reveals that she wasn’t up to the task, singing, “Well, maybe I can’t,” while making no comment on the Lord’s decision not to step in either.

Swift later reiterates that love and relationships are her gods when, in “loml” (love of my life), she calls her lover the “Holy Ghost.” This analogy further reveals her view of the Lord as someone who can be replaced by human relationships.

The singer’s disdain for Christianity, however, is put on full display through “But Daddy I Love Him” and “Guilty as Sin?” where she blasts the Christian sexual ethic and Jesus’ teaching on lust.

“I just learned these people only raise you / To cage you,” Swift sings during the opening of “But Daddy I Love Him.” “Too high a horse for a simple girl / To rise above it / They slammed the door on my whole world / The one thing I wanted.”

Complaining about the “oppressive” nature of the Christian sexual ethic to wait until marriage for sex, Swift sings about rising above the Bible’s teachings.

“Now I’m running with my dress unbuttoned / Screamin’, ‘But daddy I love him / I’m havin’ his baby’ / No, I’m not, but you should see your faces,” she sings during the chorus, continuing to mock the Bible’s teaching and joking about having her boyfriend’s baby.

“I’m telling him to floor it through the fences,” the chorus continues, with Swift pushing the imagery of breaking out of the “oppressive” guards put in place by the Bible.

https://www.movieguide.org/news-articles...-2024.html

This almost - not quite, but almost - makes me want to rush right out and buy a Taylor Swift album.

Boru

[Silver]

This almost - not quite, but almost - makes me want to rush right out and buy a Taylor Swift album.

Boru

Do eeet~

[Fake Messiah]

God also helped her make that poster

[Tonus]

She's got a point-- remember that time when god covered everyone (with lots and lots of water)?

[The Architect Of Fate]

Gods cover seems pretty selective and spotty I'll stick with the masks thank you. Also no masks work they aren't perfect but they work.

[Fake Messiah]

Jordan Peterson gave the interview recently and I'm trying to make some sense from his word salad.

Science (or the proxy words he uses for scientists like "empiricists" and "postmodernists") and facts are wrong, but the fairytales in the Bible are right because they have a better story:

One of the strange intellectual events in the past 60 years is that the presumptions of the Enlightenment have been demonstrated to be false. The empiricists, or really the data-oriented people, believed for a long time that we could arrange the world around us merely as a consequence of the facts. The problem with that presumption is that there are an infinite number of facts. If they just lie there, unorganised, value-free and in no hierarchy, they can’t serve as a guide. You have to organise them and prioritise them in your attention and your actions. A description of the way facts are prioritised – that is a story.

This is a revolutionary realisation because it means ‘the story’ is inescapable. The postmodernists concluded, erroneously and precipitously, that the story that orients us is one of power. That’s wrong because power is an unstable basis for psychological integration and for social unity. Biblical stories make the insistence that the fundamental story is one of unity and also one of voluntary sacrifice. That is a very different story than that of power or its twin, a kind of demented hedonism, which also leads to psychological and social disintegration.

God in the Bible is not evil because that's what the communists are saying (you know, poisoning of the well). And patriarchy is not oppressive.

Richard Dawkins, for example, characterises the God of the [Old Testament] as a kind of a fascist terrorist. What Dawkins doesn’t realise is that he’s making the same argument as the postmodern leftists. He’s making the argument that the fundamental spirit of the patriarchy is oppressive. I don’t know, Richard, it isn’t obvious to me that you want to side with those people. You can see what they’re doing to your own discipline and to the universities, much to your horror.

Supernatural forces exist because of his personal incredulity and the god of the gaps:

supernatural and the natural are constantly operative in our lives. If we’re diligent materialists and we delve into the bottom of the world, we find at the end of our striving an impenetrable mystery – the mystery of the quantum world, where things behave in a manner that’s so unlike the way they behave at our natural level that we can’t even understand the phenomena.

Democrats are Marxists and trans people are part of Marxism (too bad he doesn't know that Communists are very much into macho culture like him and his Christian ilk. Eg when communists came to power in Cuba, Che Guevara persecuted boys he deemed efeminite and was throwing men into macho camps to man them up).
But not to worry, Elon and Vivek will save us:

The Democrats can’t provide that at the moment because they’re so fractured and so demented in their postmodern neo-Marxism that they think that men can become women. You can’t be any more confused than that. Hopefully they’ll sort themselves out. They have in the past.

We’ll see what happens with [Elon] Musk and [Vivek] Ramaswamy and [Tulsi] Gabbard and Vance. They’re remarkable people: very diverse in their viewpoints and their personalities. The question is whether they can unify or whether we’ll see a continual clash of titans.

And so on

https://archive.ph/cHcrw