Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
It's clearly not funny nor intended in a charitable spirit. But you don't give a **** about any of that because you're a fake Christian.
Of course it's meant to be funny.
Also note well that I call myself pejorative names as well.
Do you ever do that?
You were banned because you wouldn't stop insulting gay people despite being politely asked not to. BTW: it's absolutely wild how you treat form rules with more respect than God's own commandments.
1. I am not allowed to address your first sentence.
2. It's absolutely wild that you think I treat forum rules with more respect than God's commandments.
3. That said, there is forgiveness when I violate God's commandments, but there is no forgiveness if and when I violate the mods 'command' for me not to discuss certain topics.
I’m not asking you to discuss your views on sexual purity. I’m saying if you believe Paul’s letters you must accept that Bible bigotry is a real thing and church fathers were guilty of it. Yet you view anyone that calls out biblical bigotry a heathen and leftist pea brain. It seems that according to Acts, Peter and James saw the error in their biblical bigotry. You should t
Calling out bigotry is a wonderful thing.
I disagree that I was engaging in bigotry. (And I can't explain why that is the case, per my agreement with CN.)
So you haven't read their statement, yet you suspect you don't share all of their theological beliefs?
Well, for example, I've heard them talk about gays and I've heard you talk about gays. I see no difference in either of your beliefs, and the chit's not nuanced.
I suspect I don't agree with all their beliefs because iirc they identify as 'Primitive Baptists.'
I think that Paul was mad because they were trying to go by the old covenant, not because he thought they were being bigoted. Famously he said that he hoped the circumcisers would chop off their own dick while circumcising themselves.
I only point this out because Paul is kind of a dick in general so I think the reading of him as being anti-bigotry is overly charitable.
Paul was himself a former Pharisee, and that sect put virtually all emphasis on The Law. He was arguing against their legalism.
Well... up to a point.
Matthew 10:34-36. I'm not sure what it means, and nor is anyone else, but it doesn't mean Kumbayah. Mind, it's unlikely that setting daughters-in-law against their mothers-in-law would require divine intervention.
Many folks have a "Kindergarten Sunday School' view of Jesus.
Trolly thought I was being uncharitable by using the phrase "Leftist Mob of Pea Brains."
So, I'm considering using 'Biblical language' and start calling them "Broods of Vipers."
Lying is another one of those things God has asked you to stop doing, Lag.
You said the opposite. I just pointed the scriptural precedence for calling out bigotry and how central it is in the history of the christian religion.
I disagree that I was engaging in bigotry. (And I can't explain why that is the case, per my agreement with CN.)
Sure. But James and Peter disagreed also.
Paul was himself a former Pharisee, and that sect put virtually all emphasis on The Law. He was arguing against their legalism.
I don’t think it was against their legalism really. I think he was mad at the implication that you needed more than what Jesus promised in the new covenant.
But sure, that could have been a secondary issue.
I’m going to need you to stop misrepresenting our agreement, Chuck.As always, you may choose your own adventure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by geezerchess
"Wokeism" (to me) is imposing a controversial ideology on folks who don't necessarily want it or need it.
A good example of this (although not a government example) is this very forum! I am not even allowed to present and defend a moral argument against the LGBTQ+ agenda. Even though my position was the mainstream position in America until very recently, and still is the mainstream position in most of the world. (I of course am not saying that is an argument for the truth of my position, but that at least it should be allowed to be discussed.)
Wokeism is alive and well in 2p2 in this case.
My position isn't much different from the majority position of the Psychiatric profession just a few decades ago.[/quote]
Crossnerd's response:
I just wanna be really clear here- I will snap-ban you if you go there again with that rhetoric.
Capisce?
I used zero inflammatory rhetoric against the LGBTQ+ community in my post, and was told I'd be 'snapped banned' for using 'that rhetoric'.
What's the 'rhetoric' here?
Seems like a clear unambiguous call to steer clear of the topic to me.
If i'm wrong please correct me.
At the very least I'm getting mixed signals.
addendum: at least I learned in this discussion that posting PM's is permissible.
Maybe I'll post some myself.
I gots some really kewl one's. 😀
Crossnerd's response:
I used zero inflammatory rhetoric against the LGBTQ+ community in my post, and was told I'd be 'snapped banned' for using 'that rhetoric'.
What's the 'rhetoric' here?
Seems like a clear unambiguous call to steer clear of the topic to me.
If i'm wrong please correct me.
At the very least I'm getting mixed signals.
These posts pre-date our PM exchanges. The issue was clarified to you repeatedly.
You are doing this thing where, for example, you want to discuss topics about race but only if you can use the N word. And then when you’re told you can’t use the N word, you tell everyone you’re not allowed to discuss race. That’s not how it’s going to work.
You can discuss your beliefs regarding homosexuality, you may not use slurs to do so. The second you start using slurs, you will be gone. And again, I do not care if you disagree that the term “sodomite” in its modern context vs biblical is a slur. That ruling is final.
So go ahead and discuss what you want, but if you call anyone a sodomite or imply in any way that they are a lesser human being for their sexuality, that will cross the boundaries of belief into bigotry and it will not be tolerated here.
OMG Geezer stop
These posts pre-date our PM exchanges. The issue was clarified to you repeatedly. You are doing this thing where, for example, you want to discuss topics about race but only if you can use the N word. And then when you’re told you can’t use the N word, you tell everyone you’re not allowed to discuss race. That’s not how it’s going to work. You can discuss your beliefs regardin
Thank you for clarifying.
I'll keep it simple for everybody by avoiding the topic IN THIS FORUM.
I'll discuss it with anyone who wants to in RGT.
That’s fine. But it’s untrue that you may not discuss it here.
That is entirely your choice. You are not banned from the topic; you are banned from using slurs regarding that topic.
I appreciate the clarification.
Somehow I remembered the post I just posted but did not remember our PM from just a few days later.
That said, I assume it is permissible to quote PM's in this Forum?
(It obviously is, since you just did it; but seeking clarification.)
I appreciate the clarification.
Somehow I remembered the post I just posted but did not remember our PM from just a few days later.
That said, I assume it is permissible to quote PM's in this Forum?
(It obviously is, since you just did it; but seeking clarification.)
I’m not entirely sure there is an official ruling.
Normally I don’t think it’s acceptable, but in this instance an exception was made for clarity. I apologize if there was any embarrassment.
Lol, dude. Unless you have some form of dementia that makes you forget only select things that have been told to you at least every month (i.e., you can talk about all topics but just don't be a fukktard about it), you know exactly wtf you're doing so spare everyone the indignant routine.
Lol, dude. Unless you have some form of dementia that makes you forget only select things that have been told to you at least every month (i.e., you can talk about all topics but just don't be a fukktard about it), you know exactly wtf you're doing so spare everyone the indignant routine.
I don't have dementia, but I (stupidly) listened to and believed so-called "Mental Health Professionals" in 1994 who put me on psychotropics for almost 25 years.
My brain never fully recovered.
I'm faring much better than many folks who were also victims of the Medical-Industrial Complex.
Utlimately, I take full responsibility for being too naive to recognize how evil (or at best misguided) those folks were and are.
I'm too forgetful to be a good liar.
That said, when I was a kid I lied all the time. I had a better memory back then though.
Problem with a bad memory is that you forget who you lied to and what you lied about.
I don't have dementia, but I (stupidly) listened to and believed so-called "Mental Health Professionals" in 1994 who put me on psychotropics for almost 25 years. My brain never fully recovered.I'm faring much better than many folks who were also victims of the Medical-Industrial Complex.Utlimately, I take full responsibility for being too naive to recognize how evil those folk
Okay, so to be clear, you're blaming: mental health professionals, medications, and big pharma execs for the reasons why you can't remember to not use slurs when discussing different lifestyles?
Okay, so to be clear, you're blaming: mental health professionals, medications, and big pharma execs for the reasons why you can't remember to not use slurs when discussing different lifestyles?
No, I ofc remembered I wasn't supposed to use disparaging rhetoric.
What I forgot about was the PM's that CN and I had after the post when she told me to avoid that topic altogether.
Please try to pay attention. Maybe any psychotropics you are taking are making it difficult for you to track the conversation? Who knows the answer?
