Stein wrote:DaveDodo007 wrote:Seraph wrote:Stein wrote:Maybe when the webmasters of the Sarah Palin web site put crosshairs on an Arizona map over Congressman Gifford's district, they intended no bodily harm. But the world of the web today is a crowded theater, and they were yelling "Fire", and it does matter, even if you're yelling it with a grin on your faces.
That is a most excellent point, and having been reminded of it, I will now no longer even make jokes along the lines you object to because of it. Not here, and not anywhere else. Thank you.
And thank you. Deeply appreciated.
DaveDodo007 wrote:Seraph wrote:Lastly, anyone who says that once one is a believer, one is no longer a human, (which I emphatically don't) needs their head read.
Yeah Seraph, you pussy. So were not even allowed to mock cunts who throw acid in schoolgirls faces and make women wear burqas in 50 degrees heat. Shoot abortion doctors or excommunicate them for saving women's lives. Hanging homos no problem in Uganda c/o USA.
Of course, there's no problem at all with your mocking them. And no one here said anything different. But mocking them versus making jokes about mass killings are two very different things.
Stein
I think you made a good point, too, Stein ... but you may be missing the intended irony. This thread is satirising the old stereotypical notion theists have of atheistic immoral/amoral "baby eating" evil.
FBM, regarding legislating against such humour, I'd be against it ... and, by the same token, I'm against limiting anyone's right to express their objection to humour (or anything). I much prefer the discussion where a person who objects, as Stein has done here, makes a case for why they disapprove and would like people to consider changing what they're doing.