4 ms·

True, but in this case it is and that’s perfectly fine. CoCs are meaningless anyway.

jqpabc123 4y ago
Yes, perfectly fine. My only complaint is with generically categorizing alternatives as "gibberish". This tends to convey a sense of arrogance and lack of tolerance that I have observed to be quite common among supernaturalists. As evidence of this, I submit the fact that my post was immediately down voted --- despite being virtually identical to the original which wasn't. Thus demonstrating a clear basis for one "gibberish" over another.
- Karunamon 4y ago
  The "your post again but with a word or two changed" thing is usually on the same level as sarcasm. If you have a point, just make it directly rather than using cutesy/childish rhetorical tricks.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    cutesy/childish rhetorical tricks. These "tricks" tend to reveal the reflexive bias that people hold. For evidence, see the posts above.
- veltas 4y ago
  > a sense of arrogance and lack of tolerance that I have observed to be quite common among supernaturalists You are stereotyping religious people (84% of the global population) while preaching about arrogance and lack of tolerance.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    Any stereotyping directly followed the stereotyping that preceded it. The real question is --- why is one acceptable but the other is not?
- PKop 4y ago
  Who cares? Why is everyone obligated to respect or admire your worldview? Why can't (like happens with religion) it get belittled and made fun of, ridiculed etc? We don't all have to like or agree with you. Perhaps some people think it is gibberish, but unlike other types of gibberish, is it off limits from criticism? >As evidence of this, I submit the fact that my post was immediately down voted A lot of stuff people don't like gets down-voted.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    We don't all have to like or agree with you. I never said you did. But which statement/"gibberish" people prefer or disagree with can tend to reveal their own cognitive bias.
- Empact 4y ago
  Christian principles have maintained civilization for thousands of years. We have yet to see whether progressivism can maintain civilization. Is it arrogance to observe that, or to claim they are equivalently gibberish?
  - PrimeMcFly 4y ago
    What an absurd statement. Civilization predates Christianity and there were numerous civilizations that had nothing to do with Christianity while it wasn't even known to them. Religion, all religion, has been a drag on progress, holding us back from where we should truly be.
    - Empact 4y ago
      Which are you referring to? I’m referring to western civilization, which has been broadly Christian since Emperor Constantine (the 300s). > Religion, all religion, had been a drag on progress That’s a bold claim - are you sure that your fast-moving atheistic society would sustain itself? Prominent recent examples such as the USSR have failed spectacularly. Cosmopolitan societies like ancient Persia were overrun by the religious - ie they were outcompeted. Europe too, would have been overrun by Islam, had the Christian kingdoms not banded together in the middle ages. Certainly it’s possible, but the absence of evidence confirming it is stark to my eye.
      - yawaramin 4y ago
        The Western civilization in which most people wipe their butts with wet wipes after pooping, clogging up their drainage systems and leaving poop to dry in areas they couldn't reach? That one?
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    Christian principles have maintained civilization for thousands of years Your observation is false and easily proven so. Most of the world is not Christian. Civilization was maintained for thousands of years before the small Jewish and Christian minority even learned to write. But thanks for further proving my point.
- BizarreByte 4y ago
  In all fairness I categorize all CoCs as useless self fellating nonsense, it’s not a political statement one way or the other for me and I’m not religious (an atheist actually). The upvote/downvote system is increasingly used like on Reddit which is unfortunate.

Yes, perfectly fine. My only complaint is with generically categorizing alternatives as "gibberish". This tends to convey a sense of arrogance and lack of tolerance that I have observed to be quite common among supernaturalists. As evidence of this, I submit the fact that my post was immediately down voted --- despite being virtually identical to the original which wasn't. Thus demonstrating a clear basis for one "gibberish" over another.

Karunamon 4y ago
The "your post again but with a word or two changed" thing is usually on the same level as sarcasm. If you have a point, just make it directly rather than using cutesy/childish rhetorical tricks.
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  cutesy/childish rhetorical tricks. These "tricks" tend to reveal the reflexive bias that people hold. For evidence, see the posts above.
veltas 4y ago
> a sense of arrogance and lack of tolerance that I have observed to be quite common among supernaturalists You are stereotyping religious people (84% of the global population) while preaching about arrogance and lack of tolerance.
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  Any stereotyping directly followed the stereotyping that preceded it. The real question is --- why is one acceptable but the other is not?
PKop 4y ago
Who cares? Why is everyone obligated to respect or admire your worldview? Why can't (like happens with religion) it get belittled and made fun of, ridiculed etc? We don't all have to like or agree with you. Perhaps some people think it is gibberish, but unlike other types of gibberish, is it off limits from criticism? >As evidence of this, I submit the fact that my post was immediately down voted A lot of stuff people don't like gets down-voted.
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  We don't all have to like or agree with you. I never said you did. But which statement/"gibberish" people prefer or disagree with can tend to reveal their own cognitive bias.
Empact 4y ago
Christian principles have maintained civilization for thousands of years. We have yet to see whether progressivism can maintain civilization. Is it arrogance to observe that, or to claim they are equivalently gibberish?
- PrimeMcFly 4y ago
  What an absurd statement. Civilization predates Christianity and there were numerous civilizations that had nothing to do with Christianity while it wasn't even known to them. Religion, all religion, has been a drag on progress, holding us back from where we should truly be.
  - Empact 4y ago
    Which are you referring to? I’m referring to western civilization, which has been broadly Christian since Emperor Constantine (the 300s). > Religion, all religion, had been a drag on progress That’s a bold claim - are you sure that your fast-moving atheistic society would sustain itself? Prominent recent examples such as the USSR have failed spectacularly. Cosmopolitan societies like ancient Persia were overrun by the religious - ie they were outcompeted. Europe too, would have been overrun by Islam, had the Christian kingdoms not banded together in the middle ages. Certainly it’s possible, but the absence of evidence confirming it is stark to my eye.
    - yawaramin 4y ago
      The Western civilization in which most people wipe their butts with wet wipes after pooping, clogging up their drainage systems and leaving poop to dry in areas they couldn't reach? That one?
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  Christian principles have maintained civilization for thousands of years Your observation is false and easily proven so. Most of the world is not Christian. Civilization was maintained for thousands of years before the small Jewish and Christian minority even learned to write. But thanks for further proving my point.
BizarreByte 4y ago
In all fairness I categorize all CoCs as useless self fellating nonsense, it’s not a political statement one way or the other for me and I’m not religious (an atheist actually). The upvote/downvote system is increasingly used like on Reddit which is unfortunate.