I can see it now, eh?

[Hopper]

I don't see why, other than bigotry. By comparison, Debra Winger and Richjard Gere really disliked each other when making An Officer and a Gentleman. I've never heard anyone say that turns the movie into a farce because the leads had no sexual chemistry off-screen.

Ya know, Eric, I don't think usin Richard Gere is a good example. I aint never seen that flick, and here's why....

A Babe I know said she heard that flick was good and wanted me to rent it so we could watch it together. Normally I woulda said "Sho, Darlin." But this was after the news come out that Richard Gere showed up at an emergency room one night to have a hamster (or gerbil, or sum kinda furry animal, mebbe a rabbit, I forget, exactly) surgically removed from his anal cavity. Turns out that him and one of his gay friends was "playin around" and the damn thang got stuck up there.

So I just said: Caint do it, Sweet Thang. The onliest thang I would be able to think about if I seen that flick would be that poor little hamster.

 

[sirkickyass]

Thank you for admitting that your use of the word bigot is very liberal, if not flat out wrong. Any use of the word bigot, or any derivative thereof, by you in the future should be null and void. Those that cannot responsibly use words which carry such strong stigmatization deserve no credibility when trying to articulate their position.

You have failed magnificently in this regard.

Letting the irony sink in.

 

[One Brow]

I aint never seen no crackdown on 'rudeness" round these here parts.

Perhaps you should pay more attention, then. Among other things, the very existence of a profanity filter, and awarding of infractions for its circumvention, is a crackdown on one type of rudeness. Just because some types of rudeness are tolerated doesn't mean they all have to be.

What are the 3-4 religions you can name?

I find it hard to believe you don't think such religions exist. I find it unlikely that you can't already name a couple yourself. I find it almost impossible ot believe you can't discover such information on your own. So, it seems to me like you're just trying to call me out.

Thank you for admitting that your use of the word bigot is very liberal, if not flat out wrong.

I am unaware that "not the most common" use was a synonym for "liberal" use. If you judge people by whether they like Star Wars or not, that's bigotry (per a strict reading of the definition), even though it's not the sort of bigotry we generally discuss. I see my usage as falling within a strict interpretation of the definiton.

Any use of the word bigot, or any derivative thereof, by you in the future should be null and void.

So, your opinion on the value of what I say hasn't changed during the last 4 years. Got it.

 

[moevillini]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7haod9JdmOI


"Here is the rainbow I've been praying for...."

talk about IRONY, LOL!

 

[Hopper]

Just because some types of rudeness are tolerated doesn't mean they all have to be.

If it aint, then it's not "rudenesss" you're crackin down on, it's sumthin else. If routine ridicule and denouncment of, say, religious beliefs, is permitted, encouraged and even required while any such behavior toward atheists is disallowed, discouraged and strictly forbidden, then it would be absurd to say that a crackdown on comments unwelcomed and disapproved of by atheists was a crackdown on "rudeness."

Of course the atheists probably wouldn't see it that way. For many people, rudeness is only rudeness if they think someone is being "rude to" them. As rude as they may be to others, well, that aint rudeness, it's just "fact." Furthermore, they often think it is "rude" for you to fail to share, approve of, and promulgate their opinions and values.

Sayin "no one can be rude to Johnny, but everyone else is fair game," can NOT be a "crackdown on rudeness." It can be an elevation of Johnny to special, protected and favored status, but not a "crackdown on rudeness." The explanation cannot really be "because it's rude." The only credible "explanation" (such as it is) is that it's "because it is Johnny."

I find it hard to believe you don't think such religions exist. I find it unlikely that you can't already name a couple yourself. I find it almost impossible ot believe you can't discover such information on your own. So, it seems to me like you're just trying to call me out.

I didn't say I believed anything. I done told ya I aint no religious scholar, or nuthin. I am interested in passages in holy scripture from religions worldwide which say morality is dependent upon skin color. Is this the "voodoo" religion, or sumthin?

Needless to say, I'm axin you for more than just: "OK; 1. Buddism 2. Judaism 3. Islam, and 4. Christianity.

I'm interested in your basis for making such claims more that I am the mere assertion and enumeration of of your claims.

 

[Scat]

Letting the irony sink in.

Yeah, I caught it last night just after I hit submit. I tried to edit but as the edit function seems to be out of order I gave up and went to bed.

 

[One Brow]

If it aint, then it's not "rudenesss" you're crackin down on, it's sumthin else. If routine ridicule and denouncment of, say, religious beliefs, is permitted, encouraged and even required while any such behavior toward atheists is disallowed, discouraged and strictly forbidden, then it would be absurd to say that a crackdown on comments unwelcomed and disapproved of by atheists was a crackdown on "rudeness."

A side note: atheists have no religious beliefs to ridicule. Outside of that, I believe I understand what you are trying to say.

Attempting to relate this to the current topic of whether homophobic comments will be tolerated, are there any heterophobic comments you feel have tolerated? Or, are you expressing that heterophobic comments might be tolerated in the future?

For many people, rudeness is only rudeness if they think someone is being "rude to" them.

For many, yes.

I am interested in passages in holy scripture from religions worldwide

I don't recall claiming the beliefs were written down directly as such in various holy scriptures.

Is this the "voodoo" religion, or sumthin?

To my knowledge, the larger voodoo religions don't say much about skin color and morality. I could be mistaken.

You can find a list of a few different religions here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity#Groups

 

[VINYLONE]

Another incredibly pathetic thread of back and forth between Jazzfanzz' two resident hacks.

 

[Hopper]

I see, eh, Eriic, so now you're equatin the KKK and other white supremacist groups with the Christian religion, eh? This notwithstandin that your own source explicitly says: "Christian Identity believers reject the beliefs of most contemporary Christian denominations."


Should I have guessed this is what you had in mind when you referred to "lots of religions?"

Once again, even your own source does not call the beliefs of these violent extremists "religious" It explains their "ideology." If racist ideology is a "religion" then so is atheist ideology, which you deny. Go figure, eh?

 

[C l u t c H 385]

94% of atheists are racists.

 

[C l u t c H 385]

87% of atheists are homophobes.

 

[Hopper]

You can find a list of a few different religions here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity#Groups

For those (intelligent) posters who didn't bother clickin on this citation, here are some of the "few different religions" Eric is referrin to:

1 & 2: The Order and The New Order

Robert Jay Mathews formed a clandestine cell in part from members of Aryan Nations called The Order (1983–1984) which committed a number of crimes, including the murder of Alan Berg. While the group had a number of Christian Identity adherents, Mathews himself followed Odinism, as did several other Order members. Dennis McGiffen, who also had ties to the AN, formed a cell called The New Order, over a decade later, in imitation of The Order, the members were arrested before they could follow through on their plans to attack the Southern Poverty Law Center.

3: Aryan Nations

The Aryan Nations (AN) is a group that adheres to the Christian Identity belief system. The group espouses dislike towards Jews, blacks and other minorities, as well as the United States federal government. The original ultimate goal of the AN is to forcibly take five northwestern states – Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington and Montana – from the United States government in order to establish an Aryan homeland. This particular ideology is known throughout the White power movement as the Northwest Territorial Imperative. The AN was headquartered at Hayden Lake, Idaho from the late 1970s until February 2001.

A little more insight, provided by Eric's citation, about these "religions""

"Most Americans are unaware of the Christian Identity Movement. Despite its low profile, Christian Identity has influenced many white supremacist and extreme anti-government movements...The Christian Identity movement first received widespread attention by mainstream media in 1984, when the white nationalist organization known as The Order embarked on a murderous crime spree before being taken down by the FBI."