4 ms·
It just doesn’t seem relevant to the topic at hand. We’re commenting on an article about the longevity, and someone comes out of the woodworks to share their as
by DiggyJohnson 3y ago
It just doesn’t seem relevant to the topic at hand. We’re commenting on an article about the longevity, and someone comes out of the woodworks to share their astonishment that we haven’t not discussed the religious beliefs of the founder. It’s astonishing if that doesn’t seem divisive or bizarre to you, at least just a bit.
- jrflowers 3y agoThis is a good point. There’s basically zero current interest in the Scientologist “church” or its involvement in the personal and professional activities of its members. This is evidenced by any cursory googling of the church today. We are all best served by bringing up its equivalence with other churches upon seeing the word online as that serves the best interest of all curious parties.
- DiggyJohnson 3y agoWhat? What we need to do is not turn every discussion into an ideological battlefield at the first possible tangent.
- jrflowers 3y ago[flagged]
- DiggyJohnson 3y agoAre you implying that I’m a shill or something? This is a weird conversation.
- jrflowers 3y agoI have no idea what you’re implying. I know you don’t mean to imply that that religion has shills online and it is an affront that anyone would ever mention Scientology on the web; we’re on the same page there. I’m agreeing with what you have said.