#guiltjumping

[arcenciel-par-une-larme]

What I said: "Bullying and abusing random Russians, of whom many have even explicitly condemned the current war, and censoring Russian intellectual properties, even by people who died long before Putin was even born, is fundamentally unjust and borderline orwellian; and no matter how many appeals to emotion you stack one upon another, all this russophobic craze offers absolutely nothing of value to those who suffer the fury of this war first-hand, and constitutes little more than vacuous virtue-signalling."

What they heard: "I believe in Vladimir Putin as my Lord and Saviour. He is anointed by YHVH Himself, and has a divine mandate to win the war. Russia did nothing wrong. I love this war, and I hope Ukraine loses its national sovereignty. I hate Ukrainian civilians with a burning passion. Putin is the reincarnation of Emperor Palaiologos and I want him to win this war so then he can reclaim Constantinople and let us back into the Hagia Sophia. I am willing to abandon God, kin, king, and country if thereby I can gain Putin's hand in marriage."

[arcenciel-par-une-larme]

If there's one thing about the Zutara fandom which infuriates me more than their nonstop tendency to demonise the heck out of Aang and Mai, it's when they insist that any and all hatred of their stupid ship is rooted in...*checks notes* misogyny.

[arcenciel-par-une-larme]

There are very few situations describing the broken mentality of Tunglr-dot-hell better than the observation that there are blogs which literally advocate for violence, suicide-baiting, or even genocide, and nobody bats an eyelash, but you will easily find yourself problematised and promptly "cancelled" (or at least on the verge of "cancellation") in a heartbeat if you DARE make a post claiming that Jesus died for all manner of sinners and that nobody has the right to disparage and marginalise repentant people, and someone decides to eisegete their own bad faith onto it.

[arcenciel-par-une-larme]

What to expect in an argument with a fundy leftist, #3

I think I’m starting to notice a certain pattern with liberals…

As such:

Pro-life person: *tries to explain themselves, that they’re really in favour of all life and not against women’s freedom*

Liberal: “NO. I’m gonna call you anti-choice because you’re just anti-choice. Period.”

Christian: *tries to explain that they’re not actually homophobic and that their beliefs concerning sexuality do not entail hatred for any group, argues that “homophobia” has been rendered effectively little more than a buzzword*

Liberal: “Lol If you don’t want to be called a homophobe then stop having homophobic beliefs!”

Conservative: *argues why gender parity quotas are unjust and practically put identity politics over meritocracy*

Liberal: “Lol why don’t you just admit you hate women so we can get this over with”

In general, ergo: the sentiment that “You are an Enemy, so whatever I say your beliefs are, that’s what they are and I don’t give a s*** what you say.” Aka “You’re a horrible human being because I say so.”

And then those very same people flaunt how “open minded” and “morally superior” they are.

I’m tired of restating the obvious again and again, but it seems I have to:

Debate, pretty much like every other facet of life, presupposes mutual respect and, so to say, being a good sport. You can’t expect to only have rights and privileges while your opponent only has obligations. And if you do…well, at least don’t act surprised when you see that s/he does not take you seriously anymore.

[arcenciel-par-une-larme]

Concerning liberal Christianity

Random commenter on an article concerning homosexuality posted by a liberal Christian page (on Facebook): "I still believe that homosexuality is a sin, but no graver than all those described alongside it in Romans 1. That said, I am in no place to judge anyone but to merely speak the truth. Each person's journey with Christ is primarily their own and I am not here to judge them."

Gets 2 upvotes.

First commenter replying to him: "Translation: 'God hates fags'. You, sir, are part of the problem."

Gets 11 upvotes.

This is liberal Christianity in a nutshell, at least as I have experienced it. I can willingly give a benefit of doubt and believe that their most extreme are also being the most vocal, but these attitudes are worrying nonetheless.

Do you know what I usually see in conversations involving them?

>These nigh-radicals of the movement think that hypersensitivity towards certain issues will help solve them instead of aggravating them and pushing "outsiders" further away. Which is, ironically, pretty much the same as SJWs' way of thinking.

>They think that every conceivable opposition to their ideology (especially their positions on sexual morality and social justice) can only be on grounds of hate and intolerance. Just like SJWs do.

>They think that intellectual dishonesty and misrepresenting their opponents' positions will help solve problems and also make the opposition weaker. Just like SJWs.

>They think that love and tolerance mean being unloving and intolerant towards people you deem a threat to the Narrative. Just like SJWs.

>They think that mockery towards their intellectual opponents is justified by virtue of being right. Just like your typical internet atheist.

And...no big surprise here:

>They sincerely believe that, whenever they see fit, it is right for them to resort to scorn and derision and forgo Jesus' commandment to love our enemies and pray for them, by virtue of having the "right" understanding of God and/or the bible. Just like fundamentalists do.

Once again proving themselves that opposite ends of an ideological spectrum are more like each other than they'd ever imagine.

Now, does anybody perchance want to argue to me that this kind of attitude brings glory to God and his Church? I hope not.

Friends, if any one of you is a liberal Christian opposed to such ways of thought and action, I am sorry that such people tarnish your reputation. Come let us pray for them and for each other. And come let us reason together!