Meme Thread for Both Posting and Discussing Memes
- Thread starter Captain X
- Start date
honestly that's the best outcome your going to get, just take your bread and take it as a win.
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
Last edited:
You know what this guy looks like to me?
He looks like these corrupt roman bureaucrats and senators you see in pretty much every story about Rome. The people who did little of value, were rewarded with a cushy position, and now stuff their faces with everything edible and force themselves on slaves or indentured servants if we want the modern definition.
He looks like these corrupt roman bureaucrats and senators you see in pretty much every story about Rome. The people who did little of value, were rewarded with a cushy position, and now stuff their faces with everything edible and force themselves on slaves or indentured servants if we want the modern definition.
I've never before heard of lobotomy being considered a treatment for homosexuality, but then, Western psychiatry did go through a phase where they were using all sorts of things as an excuse to poke people's brains out, so it's hardly incredible.
But if you're going to pretend that all Christians everywhere are like your "good old boys" in Alabama, then don't complain if the same sort of stereotyping gets used back on you.
I could say a few things you wouldn't like about gays, if I wanted to.
He's not saying all Christians everywhere are like that. No where did he make that claim.
Rather, he's attacking that exact logic because that's the logic the meme is utilizing, and it is far from accurate. Pointing out why it's inaccurate because it uisusing flawed logic, doesnt mean we are saying all Christians do this. We are saying that plenty do not follow the philosophy demonstrated in that meme, and do in fact want to use government control to enforce some of their beliefs. That's an undisputable fact, with mountains of evidence behind it. It doesn't mean ALL of you want to do that. It simply means that the meme is based on a false premise.
Last edited:
As @Rocinante said, I'm not. I'm pointing out that the pretense of Christians in general being above using force to stop what they consider sin is just that, a pretense. They are a diverse bunch of people, united really only by considering Jesus their savior and a few other things. They have groups quite willing to use force to enact their vision, and we know this because they have (I gave a number of examples).
I know that some amount of gays do fucked up things like drag queen story hour/grooming and the like. I acknowledge it and oppose it. I'm asking even less of you here: just stop pretending that Christians are some passive people that never use force to stop what they believe is sin. Because large groups of them absolutely do.
As for lobotomy, just for an example of how prevalent it was, the Father of Lobotomy, Walter Freeman, did >3k lobotomies. About 40% were on gays for being gay.
If they had the option they did. They voted for the DA in Texas who fought for the sodomy law. The current DA in Texas is hinting that he might try to enforce that same law.
But let's use a real example: Scott Lively. Scott Lively went to Uganda and managed to get a death penalty for gay sex law enacted there. He also wrote the Pink Swastika, which called the nazis gay, and that's why they did the holocaust. Relevantly, he also ran for governor in a US state, and got 98k votes in the republican primary, or 36%. That state? Massachusetts. So yeah, I quite frankly don't believe you. There is a significant amount of Christians who are quite fine voting for horrible things. Just like there's a significant number of LGBTs quite fine with voting for socialism/communism. Just be honest and admit it. I'm not saying all Christians do X. I'm saying Christians are a diverse bunch of people who do a lot of things, and pretending they are all good (or all bad) is dumb.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
See, there's a key factor here, what does the Bible actually teach Christians about how to deal with homosexuality?
And the answer is 'if a Christian is practicing it, and refuses to stop doing so when called to account within the church, to put them out of the church, and Love and pray for them from afar. That's it. That's what Christianity actually teaches about it. I can go through and quote the various passages in the New Testament on it if you'd like.
I am not, and have not been pretending 'all christians are good' or 'no christians do this.' I've been stating directly that the experience portrayed in the meme image is a lot more common, especially among the younger generations, than christians trying to use government to force their sexual ethics on others.
So, this Scott Lively fellow got 98k votes in the Massachussetts Republican primary. Was homosexuality one of the leading issues he campaigned on? Was it even mentioned in his campaign at all? My guess is that it would be mentioned, but not as a salient issue.
Let's take a look at the other end of things though.
This man was made the president of the Southern Baptist Convention Convention in 2018, and held the post until 2021. Note that's 4 years after he delivered this message, and I've seen no sign he recanted on it. I can also tell you that it directly fits to what is taught about sexual ethics throughout the New Testament.
Again, if you're going to say that because a small portion of people within a very large community (tens of millions of Christians in the USA) try to use political power to force their heterosexuality on others, that the whole community is responsible for such, then you'd better start owning up to the grooming that the LGBTQs have in their community, especially because of how often government power is used to implement it, protect it, or both.
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
A brief look at his platform shows his #1 campaign issue is abortion, #2 is gun rights, and #3 is small government. Anything that can be remotely taken as anti-gay is somewhere around 5th place behind giving parents more control over their children's education and auditing and prosecuting corrupt government officials. It's a bit disingenuous to claim that voting for Scott Lively was purely from some wicked desire to do horrible things to gay people.
Zyobot
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
You forgot the most important of them all, otherwise known as...
(*Drum roll for effect.*)
I really don't care what it preaches. I'm pointing out quite clearly what Christians actually do, which is all I care about. And what they do is a variety of things, not all good or bad.
Groups of Christians force not just their sexual ethics, but other ethics as well on others. You are arguing using anecdotes from your life, where, given you aren't the type to force your beliefs on others, the people you interact with are the same way.
You are also missing that for many non-Christians (in which I'll include people who give lip service but don't go to church), their biggest interaction with christianity is going to be the laws enacted because of christianity. And these laws have real, harmful, impact.
Finally, the meme acts like the secular person has no reason to complain, and is not being restricted by religious people, when he very much is, just not by some religious people. And these restrictions and laws take all kinds of shapes, not just anti-gay stuff. From banning booze, blue laws, weed bans, teachers leading prayer in schools, etc. there are many places some of the religious force their morality on others. They aren't unique in this, but to pretend that christians never do this is just absurd.
Imagine I posted the reverse: with LGBTs dealing with people complaining about grooming, while the LGBTs arguing that they aren't grooming kids. It'd be absurd as well. And yes, I could point out that the vast majority of LGBTs aren't, and everyone I've dealt with thinks its abhorrent. But that would ring hollow, as there's a real problem that not enough LGBTs are standing up against. And those LGBTs who do harm kids are the ones with the most effect on outsiders, and so, like it or not, are the image we portray to the world. And it's necessary to take an active stand against it.
First, this was in response to this claim:
I pointed out that a third of the republican voters in Massachusetts were willing to 4 years ago.
Also, again, when the guy actually for gays to be locked up and got it enacted in Uganda, I'm quite comfortable going WTF at the voters, even if it was like his 5th platform. It's like voting for a person who 'just happens' to be a known klukker. Some things ought to be disqualifying.
I also pointed out numerous other examples that aren't about gays.
Last edited:
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Well that's fair. So, given I linked to his platform, where did he say he was going to pass such laws?
Actually where did he even do that in Uganda? He didn't pass the Ugandan laws, nor did he promote them. In fact his speech centered around Grooming and Gays in schools preying on children, which doesn't seem all that far out there.
Lively expressed disappointment that "the legislation was so harsh." "Lively says he recommended an approach rooted in rehabilitation, not punishment and says an anti-gay bill being considered by the Ugandan Parliament goes too far":
My advice to the parliament was to go the other direction from what they did to actually go on a proactive positive message promoting the family, promoting marriage, etcetera, through the schools, and that if they were going to continue to criminalize homosexuality that they should focus on rehabilitation and not punishment. And I was very disappointed when the law came out as it is written now with such incredibly harsh punishments.
In March 2010, Lively wrote:
In my view, homosexuality (indeed all sex outside of marriage) should be actively discouraged by society -- but only as aggressively as necessary to prevent the mainstreaming of alternative sexual lifestyles, and with concern for the preservation of the liberties of those who desire to keep their personal lifestyles private.
This looks a lot more like you've had an unhealthy serving of Kool-Ade and gotten your opinions from some smear campaign against him. I want to see your sources for your claims that he's promoted such laws.
Floridaman
Well-known member
To be clear, I don't trust a word he said after the law was passed. He has a history of inventing history, given his authorship of the Pink Swastika.
For example, according to this report from ABC, he'd support the bill if it dropped the death penalty portion:
Anti-Homosexual Bill In Uganda Causes Global Uproar
A proposed bill in Uganda would punish gays and lesbians for marrying with a life sentence in prison
abcnews.go.com
Which, again, I believe is just CYA behavior, but, still shows he's in favor of laws that criminalize such behavior. He also consistently ends up having meeting with lawmakers.
Then in his Letter to the Russian People, he publicly recommends that they "Third, criminalize the public advocacy of homosexuality." He goes on to say that he doesn't like criminalizing what people do in private, but bluntly, I don't believe him. The Pink Swastika either shows him to be hopelessly dumb (and he's quite competent at what he does, so I doubt it) or a liar. Notably, this contradicts what he said in the ABC interview.
Floridaman
Well-known member
Zyobot
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
The president America needed, but didn't deserve.
In fact, even if he were president, I'm still inclined to think @Circle of Willis's outline in the AH thread is more realistic than a counterfactual where Paul inherits a cooperative federal government and makes his minarchist wishlist a reality. That's already what happened to Trump IOTL, and we all know how how his presidency wasn't nearly enough to drain The Swamp and bring Washington aboard, when there's already mountains of evidence that the Establishment doesn't play by the rules (and in fact, rarely, if ever did for reasons other than to save face).
Floridaman
Well-known member
No doubt, although if the American public were willing and able to put Ron Paul in then that would at least mean more people were awake and aware of the problem whereas now the people are only awake to their partisan causes.... I give Trump credit for trying to fix things, which hasn't happened in a long time, and means quite a lot. But many times his diagnosis was just plain wrong and strengthened those he wanted to fight, which is why he couldn't make headway. Make no mistake, I am not in doubt that if Ron Paul had reached the office he would have been martyred by it.