blackout
Violet.
Gays don't walk around with black foreheads?
OMG! I almost forgot the catholic gays!This is a horrendous assault against catholic gays!
(you can all respond now)
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Punch a Catholic Day
- Thread starter Apex
- Start date
Gays don't walk around with black foreheads?
OMG! I almost forgot the catholic gays!This is a horrendous assault against catholic gays!
(you can all respond now)
Vendetta
"Oscar the grouch"
Well if I were catholic and he did that (punch me in forhead) two things would occur:
1) The navy man in me would probably want to snap his arm in two
2) The human in me would want to reason with him, but most likely I would choose 1) but regardless his comment was out of order
1) The navy man in me would probably want to snap his arm in two
2) The human in me would want to reason with him, but most likely I would choose 1) but regardless his comment was out of order
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Personally, I would rather just pinch their cheeks.
blackout
Violet.
Very good.
You can keep doing that while I pass around the punch... erm... kool aid... erm...
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
That accommodation and confrontation are both needed, but in a certain balance. I believe Phil Plait saw a general trend towards a confrontationalist only type of thinking and behavior among the atheist/skeptic community and he was trying to address that.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
So at what limit does bigotry towards one group of people suddenly become of concern?Yes and I'll bet there would have been even fewer posts than 3 in response if the thread had been called "Punch a Brown-Eyed Person Day". And I bet there would have been an uproar if the title was "Punch a Jew Day".
Gee, I wonder why? Could it be because according to the FBI there were 1,135 victims of anti-Jewish hate crimes, and 1,461 victims of anti-gay hate crimes, vs. 58 victims of anti-Catholic and 0 victims of anti-brown-eyes hate crimes in the U.S. in 2009? Could it be that the "uproar" in response to prejudice against group X is roughly proportional to the magnitude of discrimination which occurs, in practice, against group X? Would that be so unreasonable?
Anyway ... PZ Meyers' blog post was just dumb, in my opinion.I've heard of him, and read a few articles he wrote in which he explained evolution / argued against Creationism. But I have never read his blog and now, after reading the OP and browsing one of Meyers' other posts, I don't want to read anything else he has to say.
That's what makes punching'm in the snoot wrong.Gays don't walk around with black foreheads?
This is a horrendous assault against catholic gays!
(you can all respond now)
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
I wonder, if you punch a Catholic who also happens to be gay, is that a hate crime?Gays don't walk around with black foreheads?
This is a horrendous assault against catholic gays!
(you can all respond now)
Hmm.
I felt that there was a good balance in the skeptic community before Plait's talk, and he called for less confrontationalism... which implies to me too much accommodationalism.
I also disagree with his message that ridicule is never appropriate and never effective. For example, I think that events like the 10-23 protest are the proper response to homeopathy. When a chiropractor says that chiropractic can treat asthma or cancer, I think that it's entirely appropriate to make the person preaching that message as uncomfortable and defensive as possible. If that means that they retreat from discussion, I don't really care, because at that point, it's not about that person; it's about the fence-sitting observer who might've been swayed by the charlatan's sales pitch.
Or take antivax: when I encounter someone who is actively preaching that vaccines cause autism or some other anti-vaccination message, IMO, that individual is usually so much of a zealot that it's a lost cause to try to convince them that this position that they've invested so much of themselves in is wrong. OTOH, the lurkers - the parents who just want to do what's best for their kids and are trying to sort out the facts from the crap - can be communicated to. And sometimes, insulting or ridiculing the anti-vaxxer is effecting at reaching those lurkers.
Yes, insults and ridicule are often not the best choice, but I think that they definitely have their place. Maybe not against the people who have been duped by, say, reiki, homeopathy, or holocaust denial, but against the people who perpetuate these ideas and misrepresent them as supported by fact? Sure.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
I do not accept the premise of your question. Bigotry towards one group of people does not suddenly jump from being of no concern, to being worthy of all our concern. It seems elementary to me that a bigoted statement becomes more and more concerning as its real or potential harm increases.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
I'd say this guy is a real piece of work. I'd also say that anybody who thinks there's nothing wrong with what he has to say is a real piece of work. That includes anybody who has voiced approval for his arrogant, bigoted point of view on this thread.