there are environmental re-education facilities? who runs them?
EDIT: so you are saying we should ignore the fact that these wackos are allowed to act, because every group has a few? I thought the idea was to throw the bad apples out?
[Rant] WTF, Mormons? Seriously?
- Thread starter DarkAudit
- Start date
- Status
EDIT: so you are saying we should ignore the fact that these wackos are allowed to act, because every group has a few? I thought the idea was to throw the bad apples out?
S
Soliloquy
No, I agree with throwing them out. I just don't agree that their existence means that the entire broad idea of organized religion should be discarded.
And while I'm not aware of any re-education facilities, I am aware of kidnappings, fire bombings, and attempted murder in the name of environmentalism. But the existence of groups such as the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front doesn't mean that organized environmentalism is a bad thing.
Yes there are, we call them Environmental Learning Centers, or ELCs for short, and they're usually run by environmental watchdog groups or (when required to do so) electric companies. Also, Boy Scouts and possibly Girl Scouts (if you find a GS troop that does more than go to malls and do makeovers, my wife's still bitter).
S
Soliloquy
That's an... interesting comparison. I guess a parent can force their kid to go to one of those as much as they could force them to go to that Christian re-education place, but... somehow it doesn't seem the same.
Mostly because of the "tie-them-up-and-force-them-to-go" aspect.
I never said it was a bad thing, I just said that shit like that is why I, ME, BONES, will never support it. however in line with your last post environmental terrorism groups are not the same thing as forced environmental re-education. I am sure as an environmental scientist I feel the same way as anyone from another religious group would feel about their radicals. however, thankfully we don't USUALLY get bunched in with the loonies who have no conception of the importance of some of the more messy facets of science like animal testing. if someone asks do I like feeding rats chemicals to build a approximation of lethality and other effects I would respond, no I don't, but their sacrifice is better than the sacrifice of even 1 in a million human lives in order to quantify the effects of chemicals in the environment long-term.
Yes it's nice that people are not lumping you in with environmental crazies, the way you do with religious crazies.
I don't believe I ever said all people that believe in organized religion were crazy, I just don't agree with the idea of it. I would appreciate you not making such accusations without proof of my behavior.
At the internet can be counted on for a measured, tasteful response:
alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com
alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com
S
Soliloquy
You know, I don't think the baptism thing is as horrible as everyone's making it out to be...
...but I still think that's hilarious.
EDIT:
Here's the thing though: by doing this, have they actually changed the Mormons' sexuality? Have they made them any less devout in their own beliefs, or any less eligible for their afterlife if they're actually (however unlikely) correct?
Or is this just inconsequential nonsense, which is exactly what I believe the Mormon practice to be?
The main difference is: the post-death Mormon baptism is done out of a genuine (though I believe misguided) concern for the souls of the deceased. That site, however funny of a point it makes, is done out of malice.
If we want to be a tolerant nation, we need to not be malicious towards harmless beliefs that we don't agree with. The ones that actually affect people (aka: the homosexuality thing) sure, but nonsensical inconsequential religious rituals? What does that do other than promote hatred between groups?
- Status