Tell 'em STFU

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:47 pm

Muslims in the Scottish district of Tayside are outraged by the appearance of a wide-eyed, 6-week-old puppy on postcards distributed by the local police force, according to the Daily Mail.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,374564,00.html

Next they'll want nude statues and paintings in the art museums covered up or removed for offense against allah.

grizz · Post by **grizz** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:58 pm

Yeah, It's really disgusting how easily people of specific beliefs get offended by things that run contrary to their beliefs,

http://stkarnick.com/blog2/2007/12/athe ... e_tra.html

Dedman · Post by **Dedman** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:23 pm

Oh snap!

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:40 pm

Lol, A few Christian movies, and everyone gets upset….Nine gazillion anti-Christian movies come out of Hollywood…and nobody says a thing. (atheists)

And yea, enuf is enuf…tell them to STFU.

Cuda68 · Post by **Cuda68** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:48 pm

Spidey wrote:Lol, A few Christian movies, and everyone gets upset….Nine gazillion anti-Christian movies come out of Hollywood…and nobody says a thing. (atheists)

And yea, enuf is enuf…tell them to STFU.

X2

LOL - I needed a good laugh

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:52 pm

Just found out about This I plan on picking up a copy and reading it.

the reviews are interesting too. (all of them)

but yeah. Enough of the PC BS plz.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:58 pm

HAHAHAH

With the mood I'm in right now, you know what I would do...
I would paper the entire Muslim district with brand new cards featuring a new mascot, a bushy eyed curly tailed pig. \"We will gobble up all crime (and drive away all the intolerant religious fanatics too)\".

There is a limit to being politically correct, and Muslims bitching about a picture of a puppy on a post card is way crossing the line.

Also, these atheist parents complaining about a movie trailer containing \"Christian elements\"? Heaven might not exist, but we would like to remind you that Moron Hell is a real place where you will be sent and forced to argue with the religious extremists for all eternity if you don't STFU and quit breeding this moment.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:16 pm

ThunderBunny wrote:
Muslims in the Scottish district of Tayside are outraged by the appearance of a wide-eyed, 6-week-old puppy on postcards distributed by the local police force, according to the Daily Mail.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,374564,00.html

Next they'll want nude statues and paintings in the art museums covered up or removed for offense against allah.

Thats a cute puppy! I can understand outrage by putting "Muhammad: The Crime Fighting Superhero!" as their mascot, but it is a puppy!

grizz wrote:Yeah, It's really disgusting how easily people of specific beliefs get offended by things that run contrary to their beliefs,

http://stkarnick.com/blog2/2007/12/athe ... e_tra.html

Yeah, kind of like that crap Christians pulled for that Golden Compass movie

The wierd thing is, I cannot find any reference anywhere else to the following:
Mothers For United Church & King Eternal Ruling (Cannot find this organization)
Guardian Column by Peri Anderson (searched on Google and on their site, cannot find it)
he Atheist Television and Movie Association (once again, search turns ziltch)
League of Secular Thinkers (cant find it either)
If I search for "Don Billohue", the only link that shows is this.
His name kind of sounds like Bill Donohue, the writer of this!

In fact, it is almost as if it is a fake article!

In fact, in Grizz's link, it has this wierd message at the bottom of the page!

Original Link wrote: It's a satire, apparently too subtle for some. Look at the acronyms of the two "organizations" cited in the original (in Dallas and in the UK).......

It is indeed satire, but as is mentioned above (and is a good rule to live by), the best satire or parody in the world is that which is so close to reality as to be believable.

Posted by: Jeff Emanuel | December 12, 2007 04:27 PM

Funny thing is, all you Christians are rallying behind this fake article pretty well!

I NAILED YOU!

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:30 pm

That’s what I get for skimming the link.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:34 pm

Dakatsu wrote:it is almost as if it is a fake article!

.... all you Christians are rallying behind this fake article pretty well!

Seems like a case of seeing what you want to see, Dakatsu. On your part, too.

For example, you talk about "all you Christians" buying into the fake article ("all" meaning Grizz and who else?), and then link to a page that includes this comment:

Mark wrote:December 10th, 2007 @12:35 am

I think I need to repeat, Pam, that I consider myself an atheist. But these people bitching about the trailer are clearly retarded atheists.

Personally, I think it's pretty funny satire... but I think it's even funnier to watch people's responses to it, on both sides.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:48 pm

Fox news bashes muslims...

In other news, the sly is blue, water is wet and the air is safe to breathe.

had this been fourty years ago and fox was bashing blacks, people would react the exact same way.

you guys slay me.

MD-1118 · Post by **MD-1118** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 pm

XD XD XD I almost died laughing when I noticed... this:

D allas
A gnostic's
M etroplex
N ative
E nlightenment
D elegation

... but the really funny thing was, I showed my folks the \"Caspian outrage\" link thingus because that's their sort of drivel, and that was when I realised it was a bit hoaxy sounding. Wow, that's some crazy stuff. Sorry, Mom and Dad. Better luck next time.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:05 pm

Lothar wrote:For example, you talk about "all you Christians" buying into the fake article ("all" meaning Grizz and who else?), and then link to a page that includes this comment:
Mark wrote:December 10th, 2007 @12:35 am

I think I need to repeat, Pam, that I consider myself an atheist. But these people bitching about the trailer are clearly retarded atheists.

I admit that was a bad generalization, but I actually saw that comment when I clicked on the page. I really should of said "conservatives" instead of christians, but I won't edit it and instead correct myself here. I am referring more to these kinds of comments:

Now most of us go out of our way not to purposely offend anyione..well I should have said most of y’all..because I will do my best to offend the PC crowd, ragheads, and any sumbitch dumb enough to complain about a movie trailer. SO tell the stupid shits to sue me…

Dear upset atheists: Nanny-nanny boo-boo! Now you know how we Christians feel when the reverse is true. Suck-it up and offer up your suffering…oops, no, you can’t do that since you don’t believe in anything. Just shut up and eat your popcorn. If you raise your kids ‘right’, they won’t be turned by the darkside of Christianity, right??!!! Or are you afraid? I’m not afraid to let my kids read and/or see other religions or non-religions. Why are you? Afraid that there might actually be something to religion? What a bunch of whiney-ass cry babies!

Lothar wrote:Personally, I think it's pretty funny satire... but I think it's even funnier to watch people's responses to it, on both sides.

I do too, however, I find it sad that people can rant on about the atheistic agenda when it is satire.

Lothar wrote:Seems like a case of seeing what you want to see, Dakatsu. On your part, too.

As I said, I saw that beforehand, I just didn't feel I needed to put an asterick saying "Hey, this person disagrees!". Like I said, I apologize about saying "all you christians" when I should of said "all you christian conservatives".

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:27 am

Dakatsu wrote:...Funny thing is, all you Christians are rallying behind this fake article pretty well!

I NAILED YOU!

Well at least you are relatively safe if you are taunting Christians, they are not known for kidnapping and chopping off the heads of those who post pictures of Jesus wearing funny hats.
If you really want to live on the edge with your mischief though, grow a pair, and try taking on Muhammad and his fan club....

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:44 am

Ferno wrote:Fox news bashes muslims...

In other news, the sly is blue, water is wet and the air is safe to breathe.

had this been fourty years ago and fox was bashing blacks, people would react the exact same way.

you guys slay me.

How does the article bash Muslims? I think the Muslims are bashing themselves:
"who believe dogs are "ritually unclean,"

You know what? I find Muslims "ritually unclean", as such I want all reference to them removed. Mods, do your duty and remove all posts with the word Muslim in them. Thank you. May the electronic pixies smile upon thee.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:25 am

Will Robinson wrote:
Dakatsu wrote:...Funny thing is, all you Christians are rallying behind this fake article pretty well!

I NAILED YOU!
Well at least you are relatively safe if you are taunting Christians, they are not known for kidnapping and chopping off the heads of those who post pictures of Jesus wearing funny hats.
If you really want to live on the edge with your mischief though, grow a pair, and try taking on Muhammad and his fan club....

...Muhammad and his fan club are not browsing this forum, otherwise I would of said something to them. I take on Christians because they browse this forum.

Woodchip wrote:How does the article bash Muslims? I think the Muslims are bashing themselves:
"who believe dogs are "ritually unclean,"

Actually, Fox News is bashing puppies, calling them "unclean".

That said, Fox News sucks immensely

Bet51987 · Post by **Bet51987** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:04 am

woodchip wrote:
Ferno wrote:Fox news bashes muslims...

In other news, the sly is blue, water is wet and the air is safe to breathe.

had this been fourty years ago and fox was bashing blacks, people would react the exact same way.

you guys slay me.
How does the article bash Muslims?...

It doesn't.

You know what? I find Muslims "ritually unclean", as such I want all reference to them removed. Mods, do your duty and remove all posts with the word Muslim in them. Thank you. May the electronic pixies smile upon thee.

Nah.. I want the word to remain as a reminder.

Bee

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:49 am

Dakatsu wrote:
Lothar wrote:Personally, I think it's pretty funny satire... but I think it's even funnier to watch people's responses to it, on both sides.
I do too, however, I find it sad that people can rant on about the atheistic agenda when it is satire.

Almost as sad as you ranting on about "all you Christians" and then backpedaling to say that you really meant "conservatives" and then "Christian conservatives"... as if it's only them that rant like morons sometimes. I didn't see you finding it "sad" when some of our forum members were strawmanning Foil in the Golden Compass thread, ranting on about Foil being "scared".

When it comes right down to it, there are a lot of idiots from a lot of worldviews who get upset about anything that contradicts theirs (though the Narnia article was satire, there are atheists who are offended/upset about the movies.) What makes the original post in this thread even worse is that people aren't upset about attacks on their beliefs, they're upset about puppy dogs. Talk about sad...

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:17 pm

Lothar wrote:...when some of our forum members were strawmanning Foil in the Golden Compass thread, ranting on about Foil being "scared".

Ha, I wondered when that thread would come up.

(I'm sure someone will probably necro it now, lol).

It was interesting at first, responding to the way a simple statement about not seeing a movie turned into accusations of "scaredy-cat" and "paranoid" and "closed-minded" and such.

I wasn't protesting the film, or worried it would hurt my faith, or making claims about conspiracies, or even saying I wouldn't like it (I'm sure I would)... but after four or five pages of being told I was "afraid" when I was taking a simple stance of non-support because of the author's intent, it got old.

Lothar wrote:What makes the original post in this thread even worse is that people aren't upset about attacks on their beliefs, they're upset about puppy dogs. Talk about sad...

Exactly!

The presence of the puppies in those postcards are not at all intended to be anti-Islamic, yet people are getting upset about it. It's the intent that makes the difference, and there's nothing intentionally antagonistic there at all.

TIGERassault · Post by **TIGERassault** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:09 pm

Y'know, I always notice it when a thread like this gets made, but it still always makes me laugh: nearly everyone in this thread is angry over people complaining over dogs on postcards and saying they should shut up, but every time you never seem to notice that you're complaining about people complaining over dogs on postcards!
And considering it was 'Muslims on a Scottish district', I'd say that there are about as many people here complaining as there was Muslims.
(and yes, I do spot the irony of this entire post)

Also, damn you Dakatsu! I was happier when I thought that everyone spotted that the Prince Caspian article was a mock-article and their replies were sarcasm. That should've been obvious straight away, half because Prince Caspian wasn't really a Christian-themed movie at all (other than that there are gods involved), and half because very few Atheists actually don't like religious references at all.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:18 pm

Lothar wrote:Almost as sad as you ranting on about "all you Christians" and then backpedaling to say that you really meant "conservatives" and then "Christian conservatives"... as if it's only them that rant like morons sometimes.

There are many people here who open their threads with "Liberals" or related phrases, so I felt that it was sufficient. So, I will create a new phrase, that should not cause controversy:
"A group of people, mainly christian conservatives, but also one atheist who feels the same way"
Also, if not understood that the phrase "all you" was not referring to the people on this board, but said group in the blog.

Lothar wrote:I didn't see you finding it "sad" when some of our forum members were strawmanning Foil in the Golden Compass thread, ranting on about Foil being "scared".

What am I supposed to do, run around with a cape, visiting every thread in the name of all that is likable by me? I made one initial post commenting on the article, and generally if it looks like this:

No one you might know wrote:OH MY GOD NOES!!! THEY IS SHOWNING MUHAMAD!!! TERRISTS MIGHT ATTACK!!! AARRRGGHHHH!!!!!

That means I really didn't expect a reply, and did not feel the thread was worth my time and/or did not give too large of an intrest in the subject. If I was scanning the thread and saw that happening, I would of most likely reacted. Chances are, however, that I most likely didn't feel like reading it after it got past three pages. If you would like, I could react to that now, after I actually read the thread.

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:40 pm

Dakatsu wrote: ...Muhammad and his fan club are not browsing this forum, ...

How do you know?

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:42 pm

Dakatsu wrote:...generally if it looks like this:
No one you might know wrote:OH MY GOD NOES!!! THEY IS SHOWNING MUHAMAD!!! TERRISTS MIGHT ATTACK!!! AARRRGGHHHH!!!!!
That means I really didn't expect a reply, and did not feel the thread was worth my time and/or did not give too large of an intrest in the subject.

I've always found it's much better to simply stay out of threads I don't find interesting, rather than just random sarcasm.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:09 pm

dissent wrote:
Dakatsu wrote: ...Muhammad and his fan club are not browsing this forum, ...
How do you know?

I haven't as of yet seen a Muslim post on this board. If they are lurking in the shadows or something, it is unknown to me

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:13 pm

At any given time, there are many more people browsing this forum, than are actually logged in. (or posting)

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:31 am

man oh man looks like I have to point out the obvious, don't i.

Fox news reports muslims being outraged at a puppy. Sicne they don't try and differentiate and it plays into their bias, they talk as all muslims would be outraged and run with it. also known as 'bashing'

turn that crap off. no one cares. stop buying into the manufactured demons.

this is retarded.

TIGERassault · Post by **TIGERassault** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 5:12 am

Ferno wrote:Fox news reports muslims being outraged at a puppy. Sicne they don't try and differentiate and it plays into their bias, they talk as all muslims would be outraged and run with it. also known as 'bashing'

What the- holy crap, there's someone else on this forum who doesn't like how people classed in a religion are treated as having the exact same beliefs! I never thought I'd see the day...

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 6:23 am

WTF ?!?!?! MSNBC and the NY times didn't report this story?!?!?!?! left wing bias feckers

get off the News bias sniveling diatribe. they all have their agenda. and if you wish to believe otherwise your a either an Idiot or a liar.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:58 am

Ferno wrote:man oh man looks like I have to point out the obvious, don't i.

Fox news reports muslims being outraged at a puppy. Sicne they don't try and differentiate and it plays into their bias, they talk as all muslims would be outraged and run with it. also known as 'bashing'

turn that crap off. no one cares. stop buying into the manufactured demons.

this is retarded.

But it is OK for MSNBC to bash the religious christian conservatives and lump them into a undifferentiated melange of prayerful kooks?

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:43 pm

I see what you did there woody. trying to pigenhole me huh? not gonna work man.

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:57 pm

First off Dogs are considered bad and unclean by Muslims, MmmmKaaay... A black dog is extra bad, MmmmKaaay, and the Scots train the cute puppies to knaw on the Muslims Brothers Nads when they grow up and get trained, MmmKaaay...

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 6:08 pm

Canuck wrote:the Scots train the cute puppies to knaw on the Muslims Brothers Nads when they grow up and get trained, MmmKaaay...

WTF!!!! Dogs need to eat too ya know

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:10 pm

Canuck wrote:First off Dogs are considered bad and unclean by Muslims, MmmmKaaay... A black dog is extra bad, MmmmKaaay, and the Scots train the cute puppies to knaw on the Muslims Brothers Nads when they grow up and get trained, MmmKaaay...

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:21 am

Ferno wrote:
Canuck wrote:First off Dogs are considered bad and unclean by Muslims, MmmmKaaay... A black dog is extra bad, MmmmKaaay, and the Scots train the cute puppies to knaw on the Muslims Brothers Nads when they grow up and get trained, MmmKaaay...

Tell 'em STFU

Tell 'em STFU

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: