The Upper Room

TRiG

12:02 AM

Actually, I've just seen a documentary on Bennedict. Interesting. They did rather gloss over his disgusting homophobia (they mentioned it for about three seconds).

RTÉ One. Might be available online. I don't know.

Stack Exchange

1:57 AM

0

Q: King James only?

I have a friend who believes the Alexandrian manuscripts (which is apparently what most Bibles, including the NASB, are translated from) are corrupted. He further stated that KJV alone is the least-corrupted translation (or at least the source documents used to create the KJV). Is this true? I...

discussion

Alypius

2:29 AM

@TRiG Have you ever had a bad nickname when you were a kid, or known someone who had? Try not to call Pope Benedict names. He's a person, whatever faults he has.

TRiG

@Alypius I think standards of discourse toward public figures follow different rules. Namecalling, as such, isn't clever or useful (except, perhaps, to clear the air), but nor is it hurtful or damaging. As such, it's a matter of personal expression. The Pope is not a part of this community. If he were, I would express myself differently.

(Compare Greta Christina's comment policy.)

> I also draw a distinction between criticism of public figures and criticism of other commenters in this blog. If you want to call Rick Warren a bigot or Richard Dawkins a fascist, Ted Haggard a hypocrite or Sam Harris a fucking asshole, that’s more or less okay. ... But if Warren or Dawkins or Haggard or Harris were to show up in this blog and start commenting, I would ask people to stop that sort of language immediately.

Alypius

He's one of my favorite people. It's not the sort of attitude that one might have to a famous actor to Catholics, but the sort of attitude you might have to a person who keeps paying off your loans and sending you gifts at Christmas for no reason.

While the policy you link is nice, it probably provides you with too good of an excuse to trash people. It doesn't matter if he's here, he's human. Treat him with respect.

TRiG

@Alypius What?

Alypius

Did I stutter? He's human. He's a person. Treat him with respect.

TRiG

@Alypius It was the first of your two comments there I was confused about. I'm honestly not sure what you're saying in it.

Alypius

2:42 AM

Imagine the sort of affection you might have for someone who you don't quite know, but who you believe does very nice things for you, and takes care of you.

TRiG

@Alypius And there are levels of respect. Yes, every human deserves a certain amount of respect, but Bennedict, by being an utterly despicably bigoted piece of homophobic trash, not to mention his various other moral failings, has squandered most of his.

Bizarre. I didn't think I'd be alerted to flags on my own comments.

(Also, the alert included the name of the person who flagged it, which is surely a privacy violation. I may take that up on Meta SO.)

Alypius

I'm not going to argue about the definition of "homophobia" with you. You're on a site where there are many different types of people, not just "free thinkers", so the rules are different.

TRiG

@Alypius The rules? Which rules?

Let's put it this way: I feel no obligation to be polite to (or about) horrible people.

Alypius

"Civility is required at all times; rudeness will not be tolerated."

Are you offended by people using rude language towards homosexuals?

TRiG

@Alypius In which case the disgustingly rude things Bennedict said about gay people would have got him banned, would they? Oh no, I forgot. We've had that discussion and found that on religious SE sites, gay people are an exception, and you're allowed to be as rude as you like. And then I got a bit bothered by that, and the community moderator Shog9 went out of his way to mock me and make me more annoyed when I was already clearly feeling upset.

And since then I've regarded myself as someone who hangs out here sometimes; not as a member of this community.

But meh. These things happen.

Hmm. Is there any way to search all chat rooms associated with a specific SE site? I know I once had a long conversation here with someone else about the "requirement" to be polite to people who don't deserve it. It was in a side-room on this site.

in Discussion between TRiG and David Morton, Sep 14 '12 at 16:31, by TRiG

On the other hand, I don't see any reason to go out of my way to be polite to people working against my rights. Let's get that clarified now.

Alypius

2:54 AM

Pope Benedict (it's one N, for the sake of ctrl-f and searchability in general) is not on this site. I don't think it's a good thing for anyone to be rude, to homosexuals or to popes. All it takes is not calling him rude names. You can say his positions were disgusting, or homophobic. You don't need to call him trash, or compare him to Darth Sidious.

@TRiG It's not a matter of "going out of your way". It's a matter of not being rude. For all you know, I may be working against your rights - I'm Catholic, after all. That doesn't excuse anything, though.

TRiG

@Alypius And why not be rude, in response to that?

Alypius

To what?

TRiG

@Alypius I'm just curious to know why you think politeness is more important than, y'know, not being a bigot.

Or, as Fred Clark put it, You can't take away people's rights and be nice about it.

patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/06/11/…

Gay rights is not a nice little theoretical abstraction, which we can all sit down over a cup of tea and discuss. It's my life.

> How can I not take that personally?

And no, I'm not going to be polite about it. And I see no reason why I should be.

in Discussion between TRiG and David Morton, Sep 15 '12 at 12:21, by TRiG

If you're standing on my foot, I don't really care about your motives. I just want you off my foot.

Alypius

3:11 AM

@TRiG They're both important. In any case when someone mentions a pope, this isn't the start or end of any discussion about homosexuality. I'm not being extra nice to anyone because I did something bad recently, like Jack did in that movie.

TRiG

@Alypius Well, bear in mind that he was and is a very divisive figure. He said and did some utterly despicable things.

In my lifetime, in my country, the Catholic Church had slaves.

Alypius

Every single one of us has done utterly despicable things. But we're not involved in that discussion, nor in any discussion about the pope and homosexuality. Even if we were, we shouldn't trash other people. I don't actually believe that it's a form of effective social activism. It's just a way to incite anger in one's own self.

At least, it is for me.

TRiG

@Alypius (a) What is and what is not effective social activism is actually quite an interesting study. (b) Anger isn't always bad.

Alypius

I can't imagine it feeling ultimately good. Benedict, who you feel wronged by, can't hear you, and the people that do are liable to dismiss you. But this isn't about social activism, because neither you nor I can do that on this site.

TRiG

@Alypius No. It's not about social activism. It's about expressing my opinions. I like to be frank.

Most of the time.

Alypius

3:24 AM

Well, you want what you say and think to be heard. I hear you, seriously. You have a really hard time and don't get nearly the compassion from others that is appropriate to you, as a human being.

TRiG

@Alypius Meh. I'm alright, really. I'm in a weird demographic group, but a reasonably privileged one, and now that I'm no longer a Witness, am very rarely personally affected by overt homophobia.

Alypius

I'm not sure how to change that, though I'd like it if that wasn't so. But I don't think it would involve Star Wars.

TRiG

(I'm also as "out" as I know how to be. Seriously. Rainbow wristband; T-shirts; annoying my housemates watching sport by picking out the cute players.)

In the aftermath of Enda Kenny's speech in the Dáil on the Cloyne Report, I thought this country might be changing, that we might get the politicians a little less under the thumb of the bishops, but progress seems to have stalled. It'll be a long slog.

Alypius

Well, they shouldn't be annoyed if they make similar remarks regarding women, unless you're doing it in a sexually suggestive way or something.

TRiG

in The Library, Jan 6 at 2:20, by TRiG

Here's Enda Kenny on the Cloyne Report.

@Alypius Those housemates were pretty cool. I've moved house a bunch of times since then, and shall probably be moving again soon.

Alypius

3:43 AM

By the way, are you familiar with the Church's views regarding sexual ethics? It explains some of the positions it takes in a way that might make the Church seem less... I guess inexplicably hostile and homophobic.

TRiG

@Alypius Reasonably familiar, yes.

Alypius

You know the mutual connection between contraception, homosexuality, premarital sex, and the thing about procreative+unitive, yeah?

TRiG

I don't quite think that excuses him for comparing the very existence of gay people to the destruction of the rainforests, though.

(Though I suppose I can give the Catholic Church some props for admitting that destroying the environment is a bad thing, unlike much of the American Religious Right, which apparently takes its theology from oil companies.)

Alypius

whoa whoa, important point:... actually, I gave an answer recently addressing this. See christianity.stackexchange.com/a/14445/3941

TRiG

@Alypius Yeah, bunch of utter bullshit.

:8252567 I usually use the "reply to" function in chat. If you hover over the little arrow, it'll show you which comment I'm replying to.

Alypius

3:51 AM

Yeah, I just did that :)

TRiG

As for the identity/desire/behaviour thing ... it's complicated.

I think that an attempt to divorce these is bound to fail somewhere along the line, and is also bound to lead to suffering somewhere along the line.

Alypius

You don't get to separate the person from their desires until death. And Catholics have similar problems of suffering when they try to separate themselves from (what they consider to be) sin.

TRiG

Anyhoo. Time for bed.

Alypius

Peace.

Stack Exchange

7:04 AM

0

Q: About the answers on this question?

Can Heaven and/or Hell Really Exist? I think the question is okay. Might need a little work, especially clarifying a preferred opinion to answer with, but it is still good and belongs on the site. I am very disappointed in the answers. It seems everyone* has given their sort of opinion answer....

discussion answers

fredsbend

4:31 PM

0

Q: From where do Jehovah's Witnesses derive the doctrine that Jesus was and now is Michael the Archangel?

According to some Watchtower literature, it is taught that Michael the Archangel is Jesus and that Jesus, after He ascended into heaven, resumed the name of Michael. "It proves Michael the archangel is no other than the only begotten son of God, now Jesus Christ. The very name Michael means...

jesus doctrine nature-of-god jehovahs-witnesses

@TRiG Maybe you would like a crack at this one?

wax eagle

5:04 PM

I'm seriously wondering what it's going to take to get real content from JWs.

TRiG

7:09 PM

@fredsbend Interesting. Nice to see a proper theological question about the Witnesses. But no.

Yes, they still believe it. No, I'm not sure I can explain why. (I've forgotten a lot since leaving.) — TRiG 48 secs ago

Transcript for