3 ms·

Aside from what I called out in my sibling comment these two are pretty snide: "A fortune built on the sales of sewing notions and glitter has paid for many of

Aside from what I called out in my sibling comment these two are pretty snide: "A fortune built on the sales of sewing notions and glitter has paid for many of the country’s most influential megachurches and scriptures delivered to the most remote corners of the world. A careful calculation of potential proselytized souls drives every financial decision." "Perhaps the Greens, in their inexperience, did not understand the magnitude of their actions. Perhaps the Greens just didn’t care. Maybe when you believe that human souls are on the line, it’s easy to unshackle yourself to the ethical and legal trade guidelines that shackle secular academics. Maybe the money saved and the ancient items procured were powerful enough to make the risk worthwhile. "

alabastervlog 2y ago
Well. Those sure are incredibly mild. This entire thread is among the most bizarre things I've ever seen on HN.
- themaninthedark 2y ago
  They are mild in the context of an internet flame war or rap fight sure. There might be real discussion to be had on Hobby Lobby and their actions however it is hard to get there because you are trying to pick through pure conjecture and speculation with the style of writing makes it look more like an opinionated hit piece.
- EnergyAmy 2y ago
  When you get this level of people jumping in to deflect based on tone, you know you're doing something right. The person you're responding to isn't acting in a curious manner, they're trying to poison the well.
settsu 2y ago
> Aside from what I called out in my sibling comment these two are pretty snide to me - "Snide" is subjective. - It's a blog post not a news article or scholarly report. - The topic is a business run by people who ostensibly make decisions based on their faith to justify actions which cause various harm to others. Taking a critical view of those actions and the motivations is reasonable.
- themaninthedark 2y ago
  A snide comment is one that disparages or belittles another person, so I don't think it can be subjective. Edit add: I find this entire line of reasoning to be odd: >It's a blog post not a news article or scholarly report. - The topic is a business run by people who ostensibly make decisions based on their faith to justify actions which cause various harm to others. Taking a critical view of those actions and the motivations is reasonable. I am being asked to take a critical look at Hobby Lobby, the reasons are outlined in the linked Substack. However, if I have any questions or criticisms of the Substack article, please note that it is not a professional work it is just a guy with a microphone. If I can't trust the source material, how can I trust the claims?
  - settsu 2y ago
    One person's "disparagement" is another's valid criticism. You can see this come up constantly in lawsuits. All I'm saying is it's a random site on the internet for a person who is a "Certified Bonafide Expert of Miscellanea"—no one is asking you to "trust the source material". If you think that aspects of the post bring into question the validity of the point being made, that's your right. I just think it's a weird expectation. The author even speaks to that: https://substack.com/@meghanboilard/note/c-102976235 https://substack.com/@meghanboilard/note/c-102976235

alabastervlog 2y ago

Well. Those sure are incredibly mild. This entire thread is among the most bizarre things I've ever seen on HN.

themaninthedark 2y ago
They are mild in the context of an internet flame war or rap fight sure. There might be real discussion to be had on Hobby Lobby and their actions however it is hard to get there because you are trying to pick through pure conjecture and speculation with the style of writing makes it look more like an opinionated hit piece.
EnergyAmy 2y ago
When you get this level of people jumping in to deflect based on tone, you know you're doing something right. The person you're responding to isn't acting in a curious manner, they're trying to poison the well.

settsu 2y ago

> Aside from what I called out in my sibling comment these two are pretty snide to me - "Snide" is subjective. - It's a blog post not a news article or scholarly report. - The topic is a business run by people who ostensibly make decisions based on their faith to justify actions which cause various harm to others. Taking a critical view of those actions and the motivations is reasonable.

themaninthedark 2y ago
A snide comment is one that disparages or belittles another person, so I don't think it can be subjective. Edit add: I find this entire line of reasoning to be odd: >It's a blog post not a news article or scholarly report. - The topic is a business run by people who ostensibly make decisions based on their faith to justify actions which cause various harm to others. Taking a critical view of those actions and the motivations is reasonable. I am being asked to take a critical look at Hobby Lobby, the reasons are outlined in the linked Substack. However, if I have any questions or criticisms of the Substack article, please note that it is not a professional work it is just a guy with a microphone. If I can't trust the source material, how can I trust the claims?
- settsu 2y ago
  One person's "disparagement" is another's valid criticism. You can see this come up constantly in lawsuits. All I'm saying is it's a random site on the internet for a person who is a "Certified Bonafide Expert of Miscellanea"—no one is asking you to "trust the source material". If you think that aspects of the post bring into question the validity of the point being made, that's your right. I just think it's a weird expectation. The author even speaks to that: https://substack.com/@meghanboilard/note/c-102976235 https://substack.com/@meghanboilard/note/c-102976235