Jump to content
Gopi Passiflora

How do you feel about religious humor in Second Life?

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 74 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

No one has ever said that. I see you found the consensus dated for Paul’s letters, finding them for the canonical Gospels should be just as easy. Let me know when you’re done editing your posts, thanks.

You know that you could literally be going around in circles like this in an endless loop? On both the religion stuff and the never ending editing of posts? Right? Just checking. :)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I know you've mentioned it a lot, but I missed out on your personal experience. Would be great if you could either do a recap or point me to the thread where you discussed it.

Oh, it's everywhere. I'll try to find some threads where I go into more detail and PM you. I know some people think I overdo it because I'll use other topics as a springboard, but I actually bite back a lot of the attacks I could make. My intention, which I may or may not be succeeding in doing, is to attack Gor often enough for the strength of my feeling about it to be kind of funny in and of itself, but not so much that I become truly tedious. People, if I get it wrong then do tell me. Except for Goreans, of course, because I don't give a monkey's what that lot think.

6 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

It does seem to be very much like a religion for some.

Which is why I think it's relevant here. And it's odd, because in the case of Gor, there really is no question even among the most devout believers that it really was all just made up by a stupid entitled man.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I think maybe we might agree on the value in separating the sin from the sinner (to use an appropriate metaphor for this thread!) here?

Characterizing stupidity as stupidity is one thing, but moving from that to an attack upon the person committing said stupidity is quite another.

Mostly, people who do or believe stupid things do so for a reason. They aren't very clever, perhaps, or they were brought up in a particular way, or they possess character or intellectual flaws that have distinct pathologies. Ridiculing someone for being stupid is frankly like ridiculing someone for being ugly, or disabled: it is what they cannot help. No one actually "chooses" to be stupid, even if they do chose to do stupid things. But that choice is, of course, a function of their incapacity.

I don't find stupidity offensive at all. I have met really not-very-bright people whom I adore, because they are also sweet or kind. What is offensive are the actions, beliefs, and attitudes that an incapacity to understand or empathize causes: those are the proper target, because it is those, rather than the disabilities of the person performing them, that are dangerous and undesirable.

So yes, don't "enable." But be a bit surgical and strategic in what it is that you target instead?

 

Okay, once more unto the breach!

Just for the general record, I think I can safely say I have definitely been "characterizing stupidity as stupidity," but assuredly was never "moving from that to an attack upon the person committing said stupidity." (I merely pushed back against the notion that poking a bit of light-hearted fun at a Jesus-toast, was somehow ppl setting out to hurt others.)

Thing just is, it's beautiful in theory, but the two cannot be truly separated from one another so easily, in practice. For instance, is it possible to say anti-climate 'science' is stupid? Of course it's possible. But can one also say it without, implicitely, also saying something about the person who holds such beliefs? Hmm, that's harder; in fact, impossible, really. Even when you're not saying it, you're still saying it.

Hence, when I say believing in a Jesus-toast is silly, I characterize both the silliness as silliness ('stupidity' may be too harsh a word here), but inevitably am also saying something similar about the ppl to whom the Jesus-toast is sacred -- even though I do not set out to hurt these ppl. Now the question is, is that really so horrible?! Because if it is, then it means you can really never point out silliness any more, ever (And no, even turning it into an 'I-sentence' makes no difference; saying "I think it's silly" is me saying something about those ppl all the same: there's no lame way around that).

Tl;dr: when being discussed, silliness, and the silly person, are inextricably intertwined, I'm afraid. :) 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

 

I sort of agree, in part, with both of you. Wilful ignorance, is either a type of mental illness or a symptom of one. So you might call that "insane" if you're stretching a point. Plain old ignorance is something else. Lack of education, something else. To blatantly be a, for example, flat-Earther today is wilful ignorance, and, well, nuts.

I think 99% (totally made up number) of anti-vaxxers are wilfully ignorant and therefore nuts.

I also think to label the whole group of anti-vaxxers as intelligent and witty and kind and caring is a bit much. Also totally anecdotal, but my experience with these folks, both in RL and more on the Internet, is most of these folks have zero senses of humor, zero empathy, and since they are wilfully ignorant their intelligence is questionable.

All of that aside, however, telling these folks, "You're nuts!" is like saying here "I think people should stop posting Taylor Swift gifs" in that both statements will make the target audience dig in more to their stance.  After going 50 rounds with them, beating your head against the wall, as they deny anything scientific contrary to their beliefs, sure, it is human to throw up your hands, yell loudly, "YOU'RE NUTS!" and stomp off for your favorite beverage. If you're a wild-eyed optimist, and your intent is to have a sincere dialogue, then yeah, starting out with "you're nuts" probably isn't the best strategy. In my experience, the other party is rarely interested in a sincere dialogue.

I hear what you are saying and I'm listening but haven't had the chance to read this thread yet for at least 4 or 5 pages.

The gifs really are flashing in the eyes but I said be yourself and express yourself.  

But, as far as Christianity.  I don't believe in Biblical Christianity.  I think it was written to control people.  Jesus message of love being the fulfillment of the law, I agree with though.  I think we can fulfull many things through love.  The rest of organized Christianity, I don't want anything to do with.  

Rose is a friend.  She's a dear heart.  Not all of Christianity is bad but it is a mess but it has a lot of money and control, more than is told out in the open.  Is it time for a change beyond Puritanical Church of England Christianity which was really only started so clergy men could be married and not have to be celibate whilst it makes the rest of us suffer with this ignorance and things taken out of context.  

I think church reform is needed badly for certain people so as not to be duped by things Jesus never said nor was The Letters of Paul in stride with the Gospel message.  However, there are those who do not need church reform because we can live without it...but for others, it's spreading needless hate over things Paul said.   

 

Edited by FairreLilette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

You know that you could literally be going around in circles like this in an endless loop? On both the religion stuff and the never ending editing of posts? Right? Just checking. :)

Yes. She asked me if I could back up what I said, then edited her post to do exactly that. I think I’m being trolled.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kiramanell said:

(I merely pushed back against the notion that poking a bit of light-hearted fun at a Jesus-toast, was somehow ppl setting out to hurt others.)

For you. But for others the opportunity to shame another, belittle them, make them appear the most stupid thing the world has even seen, is the motive. These people are sadistic, and cruelty energizes them. They exist.  I fear you might be so kind that you have a hard time imagining this reality.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Yes. She asked me if I could back up what I said, then edited her post to do exactly that. I think I’m being trolled.

Sorry, you think I'm trolling you because I'm not.  I actually didn't read the Wiki but glanced at it.  Then upon reading it...it's not how I remember things and says Paul The Apostle.  Paul said:  Am I not an apostle too? as far as I remember.  Paul was never one of the original 12 Apostles.  So, I took the Wiki out.  It did have some errors in it but I do tend to edit sometimes...I have typos and have left words out.  The Wiki after actually reading it, seemed a bit off.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Yes. She asked me if I could back up what I said, then edited her post to do exactly that. I think I’m being trolled.

Welcome to the ever growing club. We have cookies and various beverages, hot/cold, adult/boring. :)  Btw, it is an old club, full of members distinguished and goofy, for there's no discrimination for membership...except the permanent dent on your forehead from the repeated connection with your desktop.

Edited by Gatogateau
emphasis in quote
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gatogateau said:
7 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Yes. She asked me if I could back up what I said, then edited her post to do exactly that. I think I’m being trolled.

Welcome to the ever growing club. We have cookies and various beverages, hot/cold, adult/boring. :)  Btw, it is an old club, full of members distinguished and goofy, for there's no discrimination for membership...except the permanent dent on your forehead from the repeated connection with your desktop.

If you have to create a club via ganging up on others & trashing them it's not a very good club. A good club is inclusive and attempts to help others who might not understand certain things. Unfortunately, it's very much instilled in us...to bond with others via trashing those we don't understand or who frustrate us. It's the nature of war. But mature people don't get their strength from division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

For you. But for others the opportunity to shame another, belittle them, make them appear the most stupid thing the world has even seen, is the motive. These people are sadistic, and cruelty energizes them. They exist.  I fear you might be so kind that you have a hard time imagining this reality.

 

Why, this thread has been moving entirely way too fast for my poor brain as it is. :) So, haven't read everything yet. But for me -- and you're right to remind me, really, I can only speak for me -- I really just saw some gifs of a Jesus toast, and thought that was funny. Peeps seeing a toast with Taylor Swift in it would have been even funnier (but that's likely too soon; maybe that will start to happen in 50 years or so); but to me, honestly, it was just about the usual light-hearted fun we were having. Sorry if I offended someone in the process.

Edited by kiramanell
Will I ever make a post without typos?!
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kiramanell said:

 

Why, this thread has been moving entirely way too fast for my poor brain as it is. :) So, haven't read anything. But for me -- and you're right to remind me, really, I can only speak for me -- I really just saw some gifs of a Jesus toast, and thought that was funny. Peeps seeing a toast with Taylor Swift in it would have been even funnier (but that's likely too soon; maybe that will start to happen in 50 years or so); but to me, honestly, it was just about the usual light-hearted fun we were having. Sorry if I offended someone in the process.

Who is to say this is NOT Taylor Swift on a grilled cheese? Hm. I see Taylor.    btw, fwiw, should I just flag "subtext" these days? LOL

image.png.3858e0c94aff44ab0b12fdd569d2f8db.png

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Who did they see on toast 50 BCE? Asking for a friend.

Only 392 to go... sigh

Edited by Gatogateau
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Who did they see on toast 50 BCE? Asking for a friend.

The speaking burning bush burned up all the toast, so we'll never know.

burning bush.jpg

Edited by Luna Bliss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

If you have to create a club via ganging up on others & trashing them it's not a very good club. A good club is inclusive and attempts to help others who might not understand certain things. Unfortunately, it's very much instilled in us...to bond with others via trashing those we don't understand or who frustrate us. It's the nature of war. But mature people don't get their strength from division.

Well, I felt someone needed to say something in regards to that hateful stuff on those billboards because Jesus never said that nor did Jesus ever exclude anyone.

But, you know, The Episcopalian church is right.  There is nothing in the Gospels nor the Gospel message of "whomsoever shall believe, has ever lasting life" that excludes anyone.  The admonishment against homosexuality, against women is in The Letters of Paul not from Jesus.

So, at least the church is reforming is some ways but The Episcopalians are actually correct and truer Christians than any others I've ever met as they allow gay clergy, gay marriage, women clergy.  I'd like to hear more of what they have to say some time but I need to bow out and attend to some rl stuff.  

p.s.  Luna, a SL California sim to live in sounds fun maybe.  I'd love to live in central cali too.  So, let's not totally rule it out.  

Edited by FairreLilette
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Who is to say this is NOT Taylor Swift on a grilled cheese? Hm. I see Taylor.    btw, fwiw, should I just flag "subtext" these days? LOL

image.png.3858e0c94aff44ab0b12fdd569d2f8db.png

Well I don't know about it being Taylor to begin with but I can "see" facial features and long hair draped in front of shoulders. It doesn't remind me of anyone in particular other than it appearing feminine rather than masculine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Who is to say this is NOT Taylor Swift on a grilled cheese? Hm. I see Taylor.    btw, fwiw, should I just flag "subtext" these days? LOL

image.png.3858e0c94aff44ab0b12fdd569d2f8db.png

 

Behind that burning bush, you mean? 😁

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

 It's the nature of war. But mature people don't get their strength from division.

Irony alert! "Mature people don't get their strength from division" she says divisively. LoL

And war? Good grief,  it's a forum not Syria. War... pish posh and piffle

Our club was formed by the actions of others, and we do not discriminate (as stated).  Membership is entirely at the discretion of others, and from there purely voluntary. We're a fun bunch with plenty of tea and honey to go around.

War... bless your heart.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Who is to say this is NOT Taylor Swift on a grilled cheese? Hm. I see Taylor.    btw, fwiw, should I just flag "subtext" these days? LOL

image.png.3858e0c94aff44ab0b12fdd569d2f8db.png

Don't be so absolutely ridiculous. It's clearly Gal Gadot.

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Amina Sopwith said:

Well, it is! 

Gal_Gadot_cropped_lighting_corrected_2b.jpg

Jesus (too soon?), it really is!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

Don't be so absolutely ridiculous. It's clearly Gal Gadot.

 

Why, I'm not a 100% sure it is really Taylor Swift, but the toast is definitely hers. She even wrote a song about it:

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent many hours this week reading the archives of the old SLU, particularly from around March 2016.

“Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds” (vv. 14–15).”

- 2 Corinthians 11:12–15

Satan is working hard in this thread, as she does, across the years from forum to forum, using the same tactics.

Beware false prophets and their alts.

  • Haha 3
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Jesus (too soon?), it really is!

 

OMG! (too soon?), I think you're right!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 74 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...