Krebs' Free form/Chaos Thread

[gregod]

Actually, there was a post that referred to a zombie Jesus and I objected to it. I don't come in here promoting my religion, or trying to convince anyone of anything. I do however find offense with such blatantly offensive posts because their only point is to be offensive. If you are an atheist, I would kindly request that you don't come in here promoting your beliefs either. If you want to evangelize about your atheism or religion, go stand on a street corner.

thanks for the explanation. but in what way was it offensive? is "zombie" a bad word? it is the living dead, no? which is an oblique description of jesus' existance, no? therefore it is a natural combination and therefore funny to combine undead brain eaters with the undead savior to make a joke, no?

zombies aren't real, you know.

 

[usedtobefast]

thanks for the explanation. but in what way was it offensive? is "zombie" a bad word? it is the living dead, no? which is an oblique description of jesus' existance, no? therefore it is a natural combination and therefore funny to combine undead brain eaters with the undead savior to make a joke, no?

zombies aren't real, you know.

and that is a conundrum for all of us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0ZMj5RksbE

 

[gregod]

and that is a conundrum for all of us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0ZMj5RksbE

kinky! awesome, thanks

"wash you hands and pray 'cuz germs and jesus are everywhere"

 

[Anonymous]

thanks for the explanation. but in what way was it offensive? is "zombie" a bad word? it is the living dead, no? which is an oblique description of jesus' existance, no? therefore it is a natural combination and therefore funny to combine undead brain eaters with the undead savior to make a joke, no?

zombies aren't real, you know.

In what way was admonishing Christians for believing in a "zombie savior" offensive? I don't know, let me count the ways...

I don't generally balk at much of the atheist content posted here. Krebs posts something occasionally, and that is fine. I was an atheist, and quite frankly, there are many times I still struggle with my faith. If you want to discuss that in a rational manner by PM, I'm totally fine with that. I never hide from an honest discussion of faith or atheism. I have a piece of each within, and it would be cowardice for me to hide from legitimate questions and content that challenges my beliefs.

What was posted was not that. What was posted was a picture of Jesus as a zombie and a condescending question to Christians.

I am very careful to never question the beliefs of someone else. I am very careful to never question the atheism of someone. I don't come in here preaching about saving your soul. I don't come in here preaching about my faith. I do feel within my rights to object when something is blatantly offensive in relation to faith or lack there-of. I assure you that were some Christian to come here and start posting pictures of crosses with bible verses and condemning anyone's religion or atheism, I would be the first to object and take offense. I am more hard core about the separation of church and state (this is not that) than anyone you will ever meet. I detest much of the legacy of Christian missions. I loathe evangelicals who believe their answer is the only right one and that because of that, they have the right to tell you about how wrong you are. I also sincerely love Christ.

I am the last person many people would peg as a Christian. I am proud of that. My faith is a very personal thing.

I started this thread as a place for random, chaotic posts. A place where surreal content and abstract thought are the point. It isn't a place for commentary on religion. If you guys want to have a thread like that, I am totally cool with it, and would be happy to debate. That is not what this thread is about.

How would you feel if I took the most sacred thing to you personally, (be it family, your dog, or whatever) and I insulted it in what you would term a vile manner in a thread that had nothing to do with that?

You don't believe in God, fine. I honestly couldn't care less. It is as important to me as the lent in my dryer. It is your inherent right as a human to do with your life as you wish.

 

[Anonymous]

And if you guys do want to light this place up with religious debate, fine, I will strap on my flam thrower and freely and eloquently explain why I find your denial of a deity as equally illogical as belief in a deity because infinity extends both ways.

 

[Rip:30]

And if you guys do want to light this place up with religious debate, fine, I will strap on my flam thrower and freely and eloquently explain why I find your denial of a deity as equally illogical as belief in a deity because infinity extends both ways.

LOL. Please do.

 

[gregod]

...

How would you feel if I took the most sacred thing to you personally, ....

i understand your position. but i think you are reading too much into it. i only have a vague recollection of the post, but it was not condescending. it was meant as a joke. but even if it were meant in the spirit of condescension, you can only be condescended to if you put yourself in a position of inferiority.

let me explain. sarah palin often attempts to condescend to those with whom she disagrees. however, few are offended and most are amused because they are secure in their position.

on the quoted part: i hold nothing sacred. there are things i hold dear, but you or anybody else having a joke about it (geez, the number of jibes i've taken over cycling!) won't really change my feelings about it.

 

[Anonymous]

LOL. Please do.

Start a thread, and lets do this thing.

 

[Rip:30]

 

[Anonymous]

i understand your position. but i think you are reading too much into it. i only have a vague recollection of the post, but it was not condescending. it was meant as a joke. but even if it were meant in the spirit of condescension, you can only be condescended to if you put yourself in a position of inferiority.

let me explain. sarah palin often attempts to condescend to those with whom she disagrees. however, few are offended and most are amused because they are secure in their position.

on the quoted part: i hold nothing sacred. there are things i hold dear, but you or anybody else having a joke about it (geez, the number of jibes i've taken over cycling!) won't really change my feelings about it.

You don't have to explain anything to me tiger, my understanding of simple to complex ideas is pretty acute.

The offense was not the condescension, it was the depiction of the center of my belief system being degraded in an offensive manner. I can't draw a picture of nothing in an offensive manner, so I wouldn't expect you to understand.

So to depict your children in an offensive manner would not move the needle? (if you have children). Excuse me if I tell you that I smell vegetable matter that has been processed by a bovine digestive system.

 

[krebs303]

I post atheist content? I post points of view I find interesting. Please don't get the idea I am promoting any religious or political cause. Sometimes TFF, I am only looking what kind of reaction people will have. You might be surprised that I attend an Evangelical Christian Church in the States. Don't assume anything from that either. I stopped drinking and going to bars and this church had the best single network I met some really wonderful, kind and compassionate people who I am proud to call my friends.
My friend ran for California Congress on the Peace & Freedom Party ticket. I don't agree with most of their platform but she asked me to be treasurer of her campaign. Which I gladly did because she is my friend.

You are correct that poster was not meant to be humorous it was an attack.

And TFF everyone struggles with their faith.

 

[Anonymous]

See, that isn't offensive in the slightest. The problem is that belief in a deity didn't originate withe the Jews. So your time line is off.

 

[Rip:30]

Start a thread, and lets do this thing.

i'm interested to hear your POV is all, not get in a big argument--although i do like arguing.

 

[Anonymous]

I post atheist content? I post points of view I find interesting. Please don't get the idea I am promoting any religious or political cause. Sometimes TFF, I am only looking what kind of reaction people will have. You might be surprised that I attend an Evangelical Christian Church in the States. Don't assume anything from that either. I stopped drinking and going to bars and this church had the best single network I met some really wonderful, kind and compassionate people who I am proud to call my friends.
My friend ran for California Congress on the Peace & Freedom Party ticket. I don't agree with most of their platform but she asked me to be treasurer of her campaign. Which I gladly did because she is my friend.

You are correct that poster was not meant to be humorous it was an attack.

And TFF everyone struggles with their faith.

Sorry if I mischaracterized your posts. The actual point is that I find you a fascinating person, and the posts you made that seemed atheist did not offend me in any way. I did assume you were atheist, and if you are, that doesn't really matter to me at all. Quite frankly, I find my atheist friends much more interesting than most of my Christian friends because group think that creates a contunity of belief devoid of imagination and self questioning breads really boring people.

 

[gregod]

And if you guys do want to light this place up with religious debate, fine, I will strap on my flam thrower and freely and eloquently explain why I find your denial of a deity as equally illogical as belief in a deity because infinity extends both ways.

i personally don't wish to start a religious debate, but feel free to make fun of atheism all you wish.

 

[krebs303]

Start a thread, and lets do this thing.

There is a thread.
Choosing a Religion

 

[Maxiton]

Actually, there was a post that referred to a zombie Jesus and I objected to it. I don't come in here promoting my religion, or trying to convince anyone of anything. I do however find offense with such blatantly offensive posts because their only point is to be offensive. If you are an atheist, I would kindly request that you don't come in here promoting your beliefs either. If you want to evangelize about your atheism or religion, go stand on a street corner.

I saw the deletion and vaguely remembered that something interesting had been there. When it finally came back to me I was shocked. Shocked that a provocative but thought provoking post should be deleted. Shocked that someone (I didn't know who) was thin-skinned enough to complain. Shocked that the spirit and integrity of the Free Form/Chaos thread had been violated. Shocked that something not unsafe for work had been deleted. And now I'm shocked again, to find that the thread's originator, and someone I regard as a free thinker, was the thin-skinned complainer in question.

Starting this thread was brilliant. It serves basically as the Speakers' Corner of the Cycling News forums. The tacit agreement has been that you could post whatever you wanted, so long as it was nominally "safe for work", and one of the things I most liked about it is that moderators seem to take a hands off approach (as long as the "safe for work" dictum is adhered to).

The "Zombie Jesus" post was sharp in its critique, and in subjecting fundamental Christian theology to the pragmatic test of common sense. For Christianity one could easily substitute Judaism, Islam, or even quantum physics. Such a test can serve to strengthen one's conviction in the process of confronting and coming to grips with it. If the believer's understanding and indeed faith are injured by a sharp tweaking, how will it withstand life's true tests, and of what use will it be?

Now that the thread's originator has succeeded in getting a post deleted merely because he found it offensive, it's open season on the thread, and anyone can complain about anything they're offended by. Now, it's "avoid religious themes." Next, someone will complain and perhaps it will be avoid political themes or avoid sexual/sexist innuendo. Eventually we'll forget why the thread existed in the first place and when it finally peters out no one will care.

And I just have to point out that the complainant is among the first to complain otherwise about prudishness and censorship. Give me a break!

 

[Anonymous]

i'm interested to hear your POV is all, not get in a big argument--although i do like arguing.

The problem is that delineation of my thoughts on the subject would require more time and space than I currently have. What I will tell you is that I generally begin by discussing abstract concepts like beauty, and more specifically the existence of the number 1 and the effect the infinite has on the faith people have in computation. I move to other subjects after that.

 

[Rip:30]

See, that isn't offensive in the slightest. The problem is that belief in a deity didn't originate withe the Jews. So your time line is off.

yea i hear you... people should come to their own conclusions based on the evidence--especially when it's about something that may just be beyond the realm of human understanding. but i guess a lot of us in the scientific community shake our heads at the use of easily refutable evidence from these judeo christian stories of old that are so often the basis of faith.

 

[gregod]

I...

What was posted was not that. What was posted was a picture of Jesus as a zombie and a condescending question to Christians.

...

...

The offense was not the condescension, it was the depiction of the center of my belief system being degraded in an offensive manner. I can't draw a picture of nothing in an offensive manner, so I wouldn't expect you to understand.

So to depict your children in an offensive manner would not move the needle? (if you have children). Excuse me if I tell you that I smell vegetable matter that has been processed by a bovine digestive system.

i assumed because you brought up condescension, that this is what was offensive.

if someone were mean-spirited enough to depict my children offensively, what do you suggest that i do? i would ignore it. most people would be offended on my behalf and those that aren't are not worthy of my attention.

 

[Rip:30]

 

[Anonymous]

I saw the deletion and vaguely remembered that something interesting had been there. When it finally came back to me I was shocked. Shocked that a provocative but thought provoking post should be deleted. Shocked that someone (I didn't know who) was thin-skinned enough to complain. Shocked that the spirit and integrity of the Free Form/Chaos thread had been violated. Shocked that something not unsafe for work had been deleted. And now I'm shocked again, to find that the thread's originator, and someone I regard as a free thinker, was the thin-skinned complainer in question.

Starting this thread was brilliant. It serves basically as the Speakers' Corner of the Cycling News forums. The tacit agreement has been that you could post whatever you wanted, so long as it was nominally "safe for work", and one of the things I most liked about it is that moderators seem to take a hands off approach (as long as the "safe for work" dictum is adhered to).

The "Zombie Jesus" post was sharp in its critique, and in subjecting fundamental Christian theology to the pragmatic test of common sense. For Christianity one could easily substitute Judaism, Islam, or even quantum physics. Such a test can serve to strengthen one's conviction in the process of confronting and coming to grips with it. If the believer's understanding and indeed faith are injured by a sharp tweaking, how will it withstand life's true tests, and of what use will it be?

Now that the thread's originator has succeeded in getting a post deleted merely because he found it offensive, it's open season on the thread, and anyone can complain about anything they're offended by. Now, it's "avoid religious themes." Next, someone will complain and perhaps it will be avoid political themes or avoid sexual/sexist innuendo. Eventually we'll forget why the thread existed in the first place and when it finally peters out no one will care.

And I just have to point out that the complainant is among the first to complain otherwise about prudishness and censorship. Give me a break!

And flagging it for offense was a tough decision. But I ask you this, if a forum is to be open, should it entertain posts that demeans its members in a finite manner, or should the debate be done to engender thoughtful self appraisal? Because, contrary to your portrayal, it was not a post that was meant to open debate or make point of pragmatic common sense. It was meant to be offensive.

I understand your protestation. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe I should have looked at the picture and moved on never to view it again. If I made a mistake, it was a mistake of sincere pain in seeing the center of a belief system that took a gun out of my mouth and gave me a reason to hope that the next morning was worth waking up for degraded in a way that seemed meant only do belittle. Maybe I need thicker skin sometimes. I have been told that and I thought I was being told water is wet. Do I believe Jesus was all that concerned, no I don't. I don't cater to the petulant child version of God promoted by modern Christianity.

If I offended you by objecting then I apologize. It was a reflexive reaction. If you have never had one, then you are a lucky man indeed.

 

[Anonymous]

yea i hear you... people should come to their own conclusions based on the evidence--especially when it's about something that may just be beyond the realm of human understanding. but i guess a lot of us in the scientific community shake our heads at the use of easily refutable evidence from these judeo christian stories of old that are so often the basis of faith.

And my faith isn't based on events and stories I was not there to experience. Mine is based on what I have experienced personally, and if that experience is the result of an inferior intellect or disfunctional brain chemistry, then I am fine with that. I am still happier today (and in the past 20 years) than I ever was as an atheist. But I know atheists who are happier than am I, so I guess I just have to hoe the row I am on.

 

[krebs303]

Arizona High School Bans Cheerleaders’ Breast Cancer Awareness T-Shirts

Arizona’s Gilbert High School has told its cheerleaders that they can’t wear their pink t-shirts to raise money for breast cancer awareness to school football games, dubbing them “out of bounds” for what’s appropriate in a school setting. The girls say they just want to wear the shirts, which say “Gilbert Cheer” on the front and “Feel for lumps, save your bumps” on the back, to raise money for a good cause, and don’t consider them inappropriate. And frankly, we find it a lot more offensive to ban a discussion of women’s health from high schools than to use the word “bumps.”

 

[Anonymous]

i personally don't wish to start a religious debate, but feel free to make fun of atheism all you wish.

I don't make fun of atheism because there is no object to ridicule. You guys are comedic Teflon.